Your vote for Top QB in 2011 (for the 49ers)

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by nickbradley:

Originally posted by mayo49:
I don't think Luck is coming out, so it has to be between Mallett, Locker and Ponder in that order.

The only reason Luck would stay would be to avoid going to a really sad franchise like Buffalo or Cleveland (if they're picking #1).

What does he have left to accomplish at Stanford?

He said he wanted to get his degree.

If he were smart he'd have got it in 2 years. Alex did.

At this point I think Luck or Mallet would be the best choices. Mallet has some maturity issues from what I hear, but he looks legit to me.

Originally posted by bigtony2tone:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by nickbradley:

Originally posted by mayo49:
I don't think Luck is coming out, so it has to be between Mallett, Locker and Ponder in that order.

The only reason Luck would stay would be to avoid going to a really sad franchise like Buffalo or Cleveland (if they're picking #1).

What does he have left to accomplish at Stanford?

He said he wanted to get his degree.

If he were smart he'd have got it in 2 years. Alex did.

Good for him. He's going to need it next year when he's working in a cubicle like the rest of us!

Originally posted by saniner:

Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
If we end up picking up a veteran QB. I think we should draft this guy and let him sit for a while

Stanzi? He's pretty average until his team is down, then he does his best Joe Montana impersonation. I think using a later pick on him would be a great idea

He has been pretty damn good this season, 5th in passing efficiency, 10tds 2 ints.

Originally posted by teeohh:

Originally posted by Go49erss:
Luck is probably not going to declare, so we should go with Cutler 2.0/ LOCKER!!!

Cutler? Is that a good or bad thing, I'm confused how are they comparable? Serious question

Both have rocket arms, iffy accuracy, and force throws into coverage which results in a lot of INT.

Originally posted by Go49erss:

Originally posted by teeohh:

Originally posted by Go49erss:
Luck is probably not going to declare, so we should go with Cutler 2.0/ LOCKER!!!

Cutler? Is that a good or bad thing, I'm confused how are they comparable? Serious question

Both have rocket arms, iffy accuracy, and force throws into coverage which results in a lot of INT.

Locker is far from Cutler, Cutler is more of a pocket passer to Michael Vick 2.0.

Originally posted by KezarLivin:

Originally posted by bigtony2tone:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by nickbradley:

Originally posted by mayo49:
I don't think Luck is coming out, so it has to be between Mallett, Locker and Ponder in that order.

The only reason Luck would stay would be to avoid going to a really sad franchise like Buffalo or Cleveland (if they're picking #1).

What does he have left to accomplish at Stanford?

He said he wanted to get his degree.

If he were smart he'd have got it in 2 years. Alex did.

Good for him. He's going to need it next year when he's working in a cubicle like the rest of us!

lolumad Alex Smith makes more money per game than you do per year?

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Go49erss:

Originally posted by teeohh:

Originally posted by Go49erss:
Luck is probably not going to declare, so we should go with Cutler 2.0/ LOCKER!!!

Cutler? Is that a good or bad thing, I'm confused how are they comparable? Serious question

Both have rocket arms, iffy accuracy, and force throws into coverage which results in a lot of INT.

Locker is far from Cutler, Cutler is more of a pocket passer to Michael Vick 2.0.

Locker has a better arm and more accuracy than Michael Vick. And he's more clutch at the the end of games too BTW.

And even if Vick is your comparison. How is he doing this year? Compared to our situation?

Originally posted by bigtony2tone:
If he were smart he'd have got it in 2 years. Alex did.

First, Utah is NOT Stanford (academically speaking). Secondly, all his intellect...has not
translated to success on The Gridiron. Of the QB' I've seen play this season, I like Mallet.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Go49erss:

Originally posted by teeohh:

Originally posted by Go49erss:
Luck is probably not going to declare, so we should go with Cutler 2.0/ LOCKER!!!

Cutler? Is that a good or bad thing, I'm confused how are they comparable? Serious question

Both have rocket arms, iffy accuracy, and force throws into coverage which results in a lot of INT.

Locker is far from Cutler, Cutler is more of a pocket passer to Michael Vick 2.0.

Locker has a better arm and more accuracy than Michael Vick. And he's more clutch at the the end of games too BTW.

And even if Vick is your comparison. How is he doing this year? Compared to our situation?

Im thinking more along the lines of a Right handed Tebow probably not as accurate. How can you even say he is more accurate than any NFL QB when he went for 4 for 20 in a game?

Personally I would take Stanzi, just something about the guy. He is tough and you have to like senior QBs. I wouldn't mind Luck either but I dont think he is coming out this season. I would prefer someone that wins since thats what its all about. Locker has been a loser from what I can recall

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Go49erss:

Originally posted by teeohh:

Originally posted by Go49erss:
Luck is probably not going to declare, so we should go with Cutler 2.0/ LOCKER!!!

Cutler? Is that a good or bad thing, I'm confused how are they comparable? Serious question

Both have rocket arms, iffy accuracy, and force throws into coverage which results in a lot of INT.

Locker is far from Cutler, Cutler is more of a pocket passer to Michael Vick 2.0.

Locker has a better arm and more accuracy than Michael Vick. And he's more clutch at the the end of games too BTW.

And even if Vick is your comparison. How is he doing this year? Compared to our situation?

How is Locker more accurate, right now he has a 53.8 comp/pct to Vick's 2000 year in college with a 54.0. As of right now the accuracy is spot on in terms of comparison, and I won't even count his first year starting 12 games which ended up being a 47.3 comp/pct. Lockers decision making isn't all that great either, INT's as of right now in his college career hes 43-29 TD/INT, that's pretty bad for a QB that runs a lot, and he only played in 4 games in 2008.

And speaking of clutch, what games was he clutch in, certainly not the first game against BYU or the Nebraska game, and I'm pretty sure its not his 4 games losing streak he was clutch in, in 2009.

But in terms of the Locker to Vick comparison, I think its pretty spot on. Well the Mike Vick of old, before 2010 at least, I don't know where the pocket passer Vick came from, but kudo's to Vick for learning how to pass (after what 8 or 9 years in the league).

Originally posted by valrod33:
Sngs contract is not up he signed a 4 year deal

I don't care if he signed a 20 year contract, if the Yorks don't rip that contract to shreds at the end of the year they risk losing the players who bought in to trying to establish a winning environment.

nobody likes Greg McElroy?? at Alabama

Originally posted by saniner:

Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
If we end up picking up a veteran QB. I think we should draft this guy and let him sit for a while

Stanzi? He's pretty average until his team is down, then he does his best Joe Montana impersonation. I think using a later pick on him would be a great idea

indeed. Focus first round on CB/OLB/Speed and pick up stanzi in the 3rd/4th and sign a vet QB in FA.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Go49erss:

Originally posted by teeohh:

Originally posted by Go49erss:
Luck is probably not going to declare, so we should go with Cutler 2.0/ LOCKER!!!

Cutler? Is that a good or bad thing, I'm confused how are they comparable? Serious question

Both have rocket arms, iffy accuracy, and force throws into coverage which results in a lot of INT.

Locker is far from Cutler, Cutler is more of a pocket passer to Michael Vick 2.0.

Locker has a better arm and more accuracy than Michael Vick. And he's more clutch at the the end of games too BTW.

And even if Vick is your comparison. How is he doing this year? Compared to our situation?

How is Locker more accurate, right now he has a 53.8 comp/pct to Vick's 2000 year in college with a 54.0. As of right now the accuracy is spot on in terms of comparison, and I won't even count his first year starting 12 games which ended up being a 47.3 comp/pct. Lockers decision making isn't all that great either, INT's as of right now in his college career hes 43-29 TD/INT, that's pretty bad for a QB that runs a lot, and he only played in 4 games in 2008.

And speaking of clutch, what games was he clutch in, certainly not the first game against BYU or the Nebraska game, and I'm pretty sure its not his 4 games losing streak he was clutch in, in 2009.

But in terms of the Locker to Vick comparison, I think its pretty spot on. Well the Mike Vick of old, before 2010 at least, I don't know where the pocket passer Vick came from, but kudo's to Vick for learning how to pass (after what 8 or 9 years in the league).

The Locker-Vick comparison is pretty fair I'd say. I'm a UW football nut so I've pretty much watched every game of Lockers. I'm not a homer, but I can definitely see both sides of the argument when it comes to Locker. I can see why all the scouts are blowing their loads watching this guy, and I can see why critics hate on him.

He is inaccurate, but I think it comes more from a fundamental standpoint. From his high school days (running wing t option) up until last year, Locker had been a straight option qb. Last year, Sark brought in USC's offense and Locker responded pretty well (58% completion percentage, not great but a hell of a lot better than it was before that). If you take out his Nebraska game, he is completing exactly 60% of his passes.

Speaking of Nebraska, if you guys watched the game you would see it was not ALL his fault. The entire UW team got manhandled. Physically and schematically. He was not put into a position to succeed, although I will admit that he made some very poor decisions.

The biggest thing Locker has going is POTENTIAL. If you knew anything about UW football, you would know that up until last year Locker has been on basically some of the worst teams talent-wise in Pac 10 history. If you flipped Locker for Tebow, I would bet my soul that he would have had even more success if thats even possible. And Locker is clutch. Sure you could point out the games that he didnt lead the dawgs to victory (BYU this year for instance) but he can only do so much. His two biggest games were against USC, and he willed his teams to victory.

In summary, Locker's tools (speed, arm strength, "it factor") can be either overlooked or appreciated compared to his negatives (shaky accuracy, questionable decision making). Personally, I believe that the only way Locker would succeed in the NFL is that he would have to go to a QB minded coach and sit behind a veteran for a couple years and work on fundamentals.

Under these conditions, then yes: He would be a Steve Young type player. I'm not saying that I would take him #1 overall, but it is very clear that if he can reach his POTENTIAL he is easily the best player in the draft.