Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: UFC 146 Results: Junior dos Santos TKO's Frank Mir

How Much Stock Should We Put into Pro Days? None. Here's Why...

The last 48 hours has been abysmal for someone like me who relies on Twitter for breaking news.  Of the 500 or people I follow, 95% of those tweets have involved Tiki Barber, Charlie Sheen, or the rising draft stock of Cam Newton and Ryan Mallett. Really people? For those that haven't heard, both Cam Newton and Mallett shined on their Pro Days, as they should, since agents pay big money to coach up their clients for a bigger pay day (Yes, it's the agents that pay for all this pre-draft training). I could give you quotes from scouts or NFL Network analysts on Cam Newton's Pro Day, but what's the point? Instead, let me give you some quotes from Jamarcus Russell's Pro Day:

"Obviously, I'm very impressed," [Raiders Coach Lane] Kiffin said. "We were very impressed. He had a great day. He seems very first class, very easy to get along with. No doubt he was a great leader here. That's why everybody wants him now....He was 265 at the combine. Dropping nine pounds knowing this was a big day shows his commitment and shows that his mind's in the right place."

Oh, Jamarcus. I am not in any way saying that Cam Newton and Mallett will dip into Dante Inferno's 8th circle of hell, but the fact so many experts, losers like me  say that his Pro Day has vaulted him into a "top 3 pick" or in Mallett's case "the first round" baffles me. These are kids that have agents paying big money to train them to do and say what scouts want to see and hear. Jamarcus Russell's agents even hired him a "throwing stylist" in the lead-up to his Pro Day. The Pro Day is rehearsed and is a waste of time in my point. Perhaps they can step up their 40, great, but Mike Mayock says it best:

"The tape work and the body of work in college has to take precedence."  

This quote makes so much more sense when you apply it to Mark Schlereth's analysis of why the Shanahan-McNabb experiment failed so miserably:

Star-divide

Kevin: There's ten years of game film on McNabb throwing these worm balls. How did Shanahan not see that he was a bad fit?

Schlereth: "I can put on any game film this year of Donovan and there's six or seven balls a game where he throws them into the dirt where nobody has an opportunity [to make the catch]. Where you're like, "Really?" It's a 7-yard throw and you threw it four yards short in the dirt. How can that be? And, the problem with coaches in general is they really feel like they can cure or fix anybody. From the inaccuracy, they'll say, "Oh, it's his footwork. Under my expert tutelage I'll get him to setup a different way. I'll get his knees bent a little bit more. I'll get his weight distributed more evenly. And I'll fix this issue."

The problem comes under duress you revert back to schoolyard and bad habits. Anytime you got a little bit of stress or pressure, inevitably you revert back to what you've always been. Coaches think they can fix people mechanically. It comes down to ego. They think they can fix a guy who's an absolute terd everywhere he's been and they think they can take that guy under their expert tutelage they're going to go play."

This is the main reason I'm so anti-Jake Locker. As for Cam Newton and Ryan Mallett, they no doubt have 1st round talent, but their leadership and background risks do not warrant passing on a stud guy in another position. Out of the 32 teams in the NFL, there's maybe 12 teams that have a franchise QB, and it took a decade or more to find that guy. Chris Ponder is the only guy I see in this draft that encompasses all the attributes a leader requires. I still hold firm that this draft will end up like the 2007 draft that currently has zero starting QBs.

Comment 23 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

The main reason you're anti-Locker is because you don't think he can learn?

And will revert back to “schoolyard habits”, under duress, according to a former offensive lineman.

by SSBlitz on Mar 9, 2011 9:36 AM EST reply actions  

exactly

We’re talking about accuracy. At the combine nothing he did made me feel he was learning. I’m not opposed to Locker…but definitely not anywhere in the first round.

Hogs Haven. On Twitter. And Facebook.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Mar 9, 2011 9:48 AM EST up reply actions  

How much stock should we put into the combine?
How Much Stock Should We Put into Pro Days? None.

by SSBlitz on Mar 9, 2011 9:58 AM EST up reply actions  

All the Cerrato posts get you all pissy?

I had multiple articles combine week saying film should be all the all-tell sign. But the fact he had no pass rush and was still throwing balls behind and over WRs is all I’m saying.

Hogs Haven. On Twitter. And Facebook.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Mar 9, 2011 10:24 AM EST up reply actions  

I watched the Combine on the nfl.com live feed and thought he threw it well.

AJ Green agrees with me.

I think there’s 5 or 6 quarterbacks that could be starters, depending on the situation they get drafted into. I never think a quarterback should start right away, so it will depend on their dedication to getting better and learning the intricacies of an elite level offense behind the starter. I think Locker and Gabbert have the best approach to self-improvement, and are my favorites to succeed at the next level.

by SSBlitz on Mar 9, 2011 10:44 AM EST up reply actions  

I never think a quarterback should start right away.

Marino, Bradford, Matt Ryan, Big Ben, Flacco all agree with you. But yea, none of these QBs are polished enough to start day 1.

As for the combine, when I came back to the media room after watching them all throw, everyone was talking about how poor Mallett did, and I was like “huh?” People there said the NFLNetwork showed 2 of his passes that were overthrown, but in reality, every single one of his other 30 throws were on the $ which were never aired. I didn’t realize just how little the NFLN actually shows. There were a ton of commercial breaks but the drills never stop…so be careful evaluating from TV. It’s all fluff either way.

Hogs Haven. On Twitter. And Facebook.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Mar 9, 2011 10:58 AM EST up reply actions  

I actually agree with the 'never start a quarterback right away' mentality

Sure there are exceptions to the rule, but the vast majority of quarterbacks who started more than half a season as a rookie end up as busts. I researched this last year and I only started with the P. Manning draft since that is when the obsession with QB’s really took off If you replace Manning with Marino above, you will have named every successful Rookie QB since 98 (Josh Freeman and Eli stared 9 and 7 games so they are in the mix as well.

The real issue I believe with starting QB’s right away is putting them in a good situation. If you look at every team with these guys who started basically full seasons, they had talent, both offensively and defensively that masked their growing pains. Even if a guy like Newton or Locker were closer to the quarterbacks we’ve seen in the past their is no guarantee that they would succeed in Washington.

Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com

by Steve Shoup on Mar 9, 2011 12:35 PM EST up reply actions  

The nfl.com live feed and the NFLN were different.

The live feed showed mostly the drills, while the NFLN had the analysts, background info, interviews, and all that other filler.

by SSBlitz on Mar 9, 2011 1:06 PM EST up reply actions  

ok thanks

Didn’t know about the .com feed.

Hogs Haven. On Twitter. And Facebook.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Mar 9, 2011 1:24 PM EST up reply actions  

agreed

they might know the drills, but they are run by the teams and in a brand new environment. Plus things like inaccuracy can’t be compensated by knowing your receivers.

Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com

by Steve Shoup on Mar 9, 2011 12:18 PM EST up reply actions  

It's all about Control vs Chaos

With so much money on the line there must be huge collusion between what the owners and coaches want to see and what the athlete’s camp wants to show off. So instead of a “twist and shout” on Pro Day everyone contrives to get a Tango. That way, when it doesn’t work out, no one’s to blame. Although I’ll take a hit on some pretty mangled metaphors. :)

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

by Scott E on Mar 9, 2011 9:38 AM EST reply actions  

are you saying.....

That a coach should draft on need not potential? hmmmm… thats like taking a quarterback and coaching around what the player or team can do really well..you know..strengths. But when are you going to learn that its the system that makes a player better. I mean come on. Get the player in a system and they will become superstars because the system works to perfection as long as any dumb monkey works it!

What ever happened to blocking and tackling. Something tells me that Vince L could come in and wipe everyone out today. Because he had a system! lol

by RiggoPosse on Mar 9, 2011 9:45 AM EST reply actions  

excellent post Kevin

I agree the Pro Days just reaffirm things, that you should already know about the player. The only major thing it can really do is hurt a player, if he is out of shape for it, or lazy.

Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com

by Steve Shoup on Mar 9, 2011 12:21 PM EST reply actions  

Just had this debate in the gym yesterday

I can’t understand why people consider McNabb a top 5 QB.

by TheUberest on Mar 9, 2011 12:38 PM EST reply actions  

Your point - that coaches always think they can cure a weakness

is probably true, and applies to Locker. He looks awesome, except for the accuracy problem (demonstrated many times through the years), which, according to Tiller, can be improved with coaching. There must be some doubt that his accuracy can be improved. But I still would like to have him (but not in the first round), because the accuracy issue is a matter of degree – and maybe outweighed by other factors. Ponder in the second or later round looks like the best bet to me. Gabbert looks good, too, but we’d have to use the #10 pick on him, and that doesn’t seem smart, because he is not that much better than two guys we can possibly get later – Locker and Ponder. By the way – a discouraging note -almost all the mock drafts I saw on Mockingthedraft.com had Locker going in the first round (usually to Seattle at #25), and a few had Ponder going early, too.

by Donnio1234 on Mar 9, 2011 1:23 PM EST reply actions  

I can't believe you pulled a quote from Lane Kiffen

The guy is the biggest idiot as a HC i’ve ever seen. I’ll give him this though, he has a hot wife.

Parks, can you find me a pic of Kiffen’s wife?

Are you not entertained?

by Tiller56 on Mar 9, 2011 3:58 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Media Requests please email hogshaven@gmail.com

Managers

Superbowl_small Kevin Ewoldt

Riggins_small Ken Meringolo

Editors

Sb_small Parks Smith

Small Steve Shoup

Chalkboard_football-opt403x300o00s403x300_small UkRedskin

Washington_redskins_helmet_small Redskins News

Authors

Badshirt2__2__small fatpickle

Family_in_disney_small Tiller56

Rg3super_small HTTR4LIFE

Hh_small Ronnie Adkins