Luck vs Locker this weekend.
There are 207 users in the forums
Locker v. Luck, The Great QB Debate
Locker v. Luck, The Great QB Debate
Oct 25, 2010 at 1:12 PM
- ChaunceyGardner
- Q46 Draft Winner
- Posts: 21,944
Oct 25, 2010 at 2:38 PM
- hondakillerzx
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,098
as far as scrambling ability locker is better but if you look around the league most of the top QBs dont move much. our line should be better next year with a year of experience for the two rookies so i would take Luck.
Oct 25, 2010 at 3:41 PM
- Shifty
- Veteran
- Posts: 23,424
Definitely Luck for me. Locker I don't think would be a bad consolation prize.
Oct 25, 2010 at 6:29 PM
- OnTheClock
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 36,347
Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
as far as scrambling ability locker is better but if you look around the league most of the top QBs dont move much. our line should be better next year with a year of experience for the two rookies so i would take Luck.
You have to actually consider the reason why they don't move much. Why? Because they don't have to -- their lines protect so well, all they have to be able to do is shift a little in the pocket. When you're immobile and being pressured the way our offensive line allows opposing defenses to.. you better get yourself some extra padding and pray to God you don't get the snot knocked out of you, or your shoulder ripped to shreds.
I would never get my hopes up too much in expectation of our line to dramatically improve and do a complete 180. Hopefully we make an effort to improve the line at least through depth and perhaps an upgrade at RG, but all in all, I want to see a mobile QB on this team for two reasons:
1) Superb escapability is extremely important because we can't expect to have a tremendous line for our QB forever. Some years, that athleticism will be needed even more than other times.
2) Even a great line makes mistakes and doesn't hold up sometimes, especially against outstanding defenses. When that happens, an immobile or less-than-average mobility QB is toast. A complete non-factor. Totally ineffective. (ex: Brady and the undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl vs. the Giants, losing the perfect season). A mobile QB who can make plays both with his arm and feet helps even more to keep the defense honest because he can hurt you with his running ability. It takes a defender out of coverage and forces him to key in on the QB. Steve Young would rush teams to death if they were going to fall back and just try to take the pass away from us. I want that element on our team. I want our QB to be able to roast opposing defenses in that way as well.
I want our QB to be able to take off for that game-winning score when we need it, or break free for that crucial third or fourth down conversion.
Oct 25, 2010 at 6:36 PM
- Sunshine
- Veteran
- Posts: 3,508
Originally posted by OnTheClock:Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
as far as scrambling ability locker is better but if you look around the league most of the top QBs dont move much. our line should be better next year with a year of experience for the two rookies so i would take Luck.
You have to actually consider the reason why they don't move much. Why? Because they don't have to -- their lines protect so well, all they have to be able to do is shift a little in the pocket. When you're immobile and being pressured the way our offensive line allows opposing defenses to.. you better get yourself some extra padding and pray to God you don't get the snot knocked out of you, or your shoulder ripped to shreds.
I would never get my hopes up too much in expectation of our line to dramatically improve and do a complete 180. Hopefully we make an effort to improve the line at least through depth and perhaps an upgrade at RG, but all in all, I want to see a mobile QB on this team for two reasons:
1) Superb escapability is extremely important because we can't expect to have a tremendous line for our QB forever. Some years, that athleticism will be needed even more than other times.
2) Even a great line makes mistakes and doesn't hold up sometimes, especially against outstanding defenses. When that happens, an immobile or less-than-average mobility QB is toast. A complete non-factor. Totally ineffective. (ex: Brady and the undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl vs. the Giants, losing the perfect season). A mobile QB who can make plays both with his arm and feet helps even more to keep the defense honest because he can hurt you with his running ability. It takes a defender out of coverage and forces him to key in on the QB. Steve Young would rush teams to death if they were going to fall back and just try to take the pass away from us. I want that element on our team. I want our QB to be able to roast opposing defenses in that way as well.
I want our QB to be able to take off for that game-winning score when we need it, or break free for that crucial third or fourth down conversion.
Do you see Luck being mobile enough to do those things you mention? Or are you saying you'd prefer a guy like Locker?
Oct 25, 2010 at 7:15 PM
- OnTheClock
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 36,347
Originally posted by SourdoughDan:Originally posted by OnTheClock:Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
as far as scrambling ability locker is better but if you look around the league most of the top QBs dont move much. our line should be better next year with a year of experience for the two rookies so i would take Luck.
You have to actually consider the reason why they don't move much. Why? Because they don't have to -- their lines protect so well, all they have to be able to do is shift a little in the pocket. When you're immobile and being pressured the way our offensive line allows opposing defenses to.. you better get yourself some extra padding and pray to God you don't get the snot knocked out of you, or your shoulder ripped to shreds.
I would never get my hopes up too much in expectation of our line to dramatically improve and do a complete 180. Hopefully we make an effort to improve the line at least through depth and perhaps an upgrade at RG, but all in all, I want to see a mobile QB on this team for two reasons:
1) Superb escapability is extremely important because we can't expect to have a tremendous line for our QB forever. Some years, that athleticism will be needed even more than other times.
2) Even a great line makes mistakes and doesn't hold up sometimes, especially against outstanding defenses. When that happens, an immobile or less-than-average mobility QB is toast. A complete non-factor. Totally ineffective. (ex: Brady and the undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl vs. the Giants, losing the perfect season). A mobile QB who can make plays both with his arm and feet helps even more to keep the defense honest because he can hurt you with his running ability. It takes a defender out of coverage and forces him to key in on the QB. Steve Young would rush teams to death if they were going to fall back and just try to take the pass away from us. I want that element on our team. I want our QB to be able to roast opposing defenses in that way as well.
I want our QB to be able to take off for that game-winning score when we need it, or break free for that crucial third or fourth down conversion.
Do you see Luck being mobile enough to do those things you mention? Or are you saying you'd prefer a guy like Locker?
I would actually prefer a player like Locker. Luck may not be stone-legged, but it's no question he's nowhere near the athlete Locker is. I think with our team, we really would be better off to have a QB like Locker -- keyword is LIKE. Again, I'm not saying we need Locker, but a scrambler who can evade the constant pressure we've been experiencing this year would be a tremendous help to us and to a young offensive line still growing into this NFL game.
We are a team known for having guys that can run, in our history. From Young to Garcia to Smith and Hill. We don't do well with immobile players (remember Stentstrom? Dilfer? and now Carr?).
Oct 25, 2010 at 7:33 PM
- Shifty
- Veteran
- Posts: 23,424
I'll admit i don't watch much college football, but the way people are talking about Locker slipping you'd swear he is having a terrible year. His stats don't look half bad.
Oct 25, 2010 at 7:42 PM
- ChaunceyGardner
- Q46 Draft Winner
- Posts: 21,944
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
I'll admit i don't watch much college football, but the way people are talking about Locker slipping you'd swear he is having a terrible year. His stats don't look half bad.
Watch him play. The oline looks terrible, the receivers drop the ball, he misses wide open receivers, he is not very accurate, running game carries the offense and he is inconsistent. Coincidence? Sound eerily familiar?
Oops and I forgot, they have to run a vanilla offense.
[ Edited by ChaunceyGardner on Oct 25, 2010 at 19:43:11 ]
Oct 25, 2010 at 8:04 PM
- TheGoldDiggerrrr
- Veteran
- Posts: 5,073
Originally posted by ChaunceyGardner:Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
I'll admit i don't watch much college football, but the way people are talking about Locker slipping you'd swear he is having a terrible year. His stats don't look half bad.
Watch him play. The oline looks terrible, the receivers drop the ball, he misses wide open receivers, he is not very accurate, running game carries the offense and he is inconsistent. Coincidence? Sound eerily familiar?
Oops and I forgot, they have to run a vanilla offense.
Why replace one alex smith with another in locker. I rather watch luck throw it up 50 times like bradford. I'm sick of s**tty qb, we should have gone with rodgers in the first place.
Oct 25, 2010 at 9:32 PM
- MaliCali
- Veteran
- Posts: 3,400
You know, I'm one of the less optimistic folks in regards to Luck actually coming out this year after claiming he wouldn't until he gets his degree..
but man, every time i watch him play (i just went sifting through highlight videos) i just get the hugest boner for this guy to be OUR guy..
its just too perfect of a situation, especially if we ended up with the 1st overall pick again...as how often does a quarterback get to enter the league as a 1st overall pick to a team that is playoff ready straight from the get go? AND gets to play in the area of his school which would actually allow him to continue going to his school (slowly sure, but still)..
Niner fans who are going to Stanford games this year need to start woo'ing the kid..
IWANTHIMIWANTHIMIWANTHIM
(also, I'm an Alex supporter)
but man, every time i watch him play (i just went sifting through highlight videos) i just get the hugest boner for this guy to be OUR guy..
its just too perfect of a situation, especially if we ended up with the 1st overall pick again...as how often does a quarterback get to enter the league as a 1st overall pick to a team that is playoff ready straight from the get go? AND gets to play in the area of his school which would actually allow him to continue going to his school (slowly sure, but still)..
Niner fans who are going to Stanford games this year need to start woo'ing the kid..
IWANTHIMIWANTHIMIWANTHIM
(also, I'm an Alex supporter)
Oct 25, 2010 at 11:15 PM
- hondakillerzx
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,098
Originally posted by OnTheClock:Originally posted by SourdoughDan:Originally posted by OnTheClock:Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
as far as scrambling ability locker is better but if you look around the league most of the top QBs dont move much. our line should be better next year with a year of experience for the two rookies so i would take Luck.
You have to actually consider the reason why they don't move much. Why? Because they don't have to -- their lines protect so well, all they have to be able to do is shift a little in the pocket. When you're immobile and being pressured the way our offensive line allows opposing defenses to.. you better get yourself some extra padding and pray to God you don't get the snot knocked out of you, or your shoulder ripped to shreds.
I would never get my hopes up too much in expectation of our line to dramatically improve and do a complete 180. Hopefully we make an effort to improve the line at least through depth and perhaps an upgrade at RG, but all in all, I want to see a mobile QB on this team for two reasons:
1) Superb escapability is extremely important because we can't expect to have a tremendous line for our QB forever. Some years, that athleticism will be needed even more than other times.
2) Even a great line makes mistakes and doesn't hold up sometimes, especially against outstanding defenses. When that happens, an immobile or less-than-average mobility QB is toast. A complete non-factor. Totally ineffective. (ex: Brady and the undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl vs. the Giants, losing the perfect season). A mobile QB who can make plays both with his arm and feet helps even more to keep the defense honest because he can hurt you with his running ability. It takes a defender out of coverage and forces him to key in on the QB. Steve Young would rush teams to death if they were going to fall back and just try to take the pass away from us. I want that element on our team. I want our QB to be able to roast opposing defenses in that way as well.
I want our QB to be able to take off for that game-winning score when we need it, or break free for that crucial third or fourth down conversion.
Do you see Luck being mobile enough to do those things you mention? Or are you saying you'd prefer a guy like Locker?
I would actually prefer a player like Locker. Luck may not be stone-legged, but it's no question he's nowhere near the athlete Locker is. I think with our team, we really would be better off to have a QB like Locker -- keyword is LIKE. Again, I'm not saying we need Locker, but a scrambler who can evade the constant pressure we've been experiencing this year would be a tremendous help to us and to a young offensive line still growing into this NFL game.
We are a team known for having guys that can run, in our history. From Young to Garcia to Smith and Hill. We don't do well with immobile players (remember Stentstrom? Dilfer? and now Carr?).
i like the fact that a QB can scramble. im just saying that if you look back at the top QBs in history, most of them werent considered to be super athletes. peyton manning and tom brady arent fast guys, all they have to do is step up and evade a rusher. pocket presence and awareness are more important than wheels on a QB. if mobility is the only reason we take locker over luck it wouldnt be a good idea. Luck can move a little too, hes not steve young or anything but he can move when he needs to. we drafted smith for his scrambling ability and he doesnt scramble much.
Oct 25, 2010 at 11:19 PM
- Tru2RedNGold25
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,972
To bad Luck has decided for quite a while to stay in school to get his degree
WE ARE F*CKED AT QB next season unless he changes his mind & comes out early
WE ARE F*CKED AT QB next season unless he changes his mind & comes out early
Oct 25, 2010 at 11:21 PM
- Tru2RedNGold25
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,972
Does anybody know if the kid (Luck) is a 49ers fan?
Oct 25, 2010 at 11:30 PM
- SanDiego49er
- Veteran
- Posts: 47,925
Originally posted by ChaunceyGardner:Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
I'll admit i don't watch much college football, but the way people are talking about Locker slipping you'd swear he is having a terrible year. His stats don't look half bad.
Watch him play. The oline looks terrible, the receivers drop the ball, he misses wide open receivers, he is not very accurate, running game carries the offense and he is inconsistent. Coincidence? Sound eerily familiar?
Oops and I forgot, they have to run a vanilla offense.
The team he is on is terrible. Talent around you matters (Locker and WA). And no it's not familiar. Smith dominated at Utah and went undefeated. Check your history here. We are talking about college vs. college. You can't compare pro because he hasn't played a down yet.
This idea that Locker = Smith is the most absurd theme I see day in and day out on the WZ. Locker is 10 times the athlete that Smith is. He has a stronger arm. His as accurate or more so. He has better pocket presense. He has confidence where Smith plays scared. There is no comparison at all.
[ Edited by SanDiego49er on Oct 25, 2010 at 23:31:42 ]
Oct 25, 2010 at 11:34 PM
- dtcomposer
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,417
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:Originally posted by ChaunceyGardner:Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
I'll admit i don't watch much college football, but the way people are talking about Locker slipping you'd swear he is having a terrible year. His stats don't look half bad.
Watch him play. The oline looks terrible, the receivers drop the ball, he misses wide open receivers, he is not very accurate, running game carries the offense and he is inconsistent. Coincidence? Sound eerily familiar?
Oops and I forgot, they have to run a vanilla offense.
The team he is on is terrible. Talent around you matters (Locker and WA). And no it's not familiar. Smith dominated at Utah and went undefeated. Check your history here. We are talking about college vs. college. You can't compare pro because he hasn't played a down yet.
This idea that Locker = Smith is the most absurd theme I see day in and day out on the WZ. Locker is 10 times the athlete that Smith is. He has a stronger arm. His as accurate or more so. He has better pocket presense. He has confidence where Smith plays scared. There is no comparison at all.
You are wrong. Locker is not a good QB right now. He is NOT as accurate. HE does have better physical tools, especially his mobility. Smith had confidence in College too. There is no doubt in my mind that Locker will need time to develop. He might turn in to a good player, but if you bring him in to this mess we will see a repeat of the last several years. I think Luck has a better chance at overcoming that stuff, but still... it is alot to overcome for any rookie.
Of course depending on who the new coach is things could improve quickly I suppose...