Locker v. Luck, The Great QB Debate

Originally posted by Kolohe:

1. Andrew Luck
2. Ryan Mallet
3. Ricky Stanzi
4. Jake Locker
5. Christian Ponder
6. Pat Devlin

mallett at the second? no thx, no athleticism and has poor accuracy....dont get the hype about stanzi at all...the guy isnt bad but played against poor defenses so far.

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Where did I say he didn't??? IMO, it just seems Locker relies more on his athleticism more than trying to sit there and read a defense or go through his reads. People can sit there all they want and tell me hes a good pocket passer, but I'm not the only one that sees when dropping back and his first or second read isn't there hes off and running.

if u see coming pressure right in the front of your face, u would start running, too.

lets see what luck did in his first year in the harbaugh-system which seems to be westcoast offense:
162 288 2575 56.3 8.94 63 13 4 6 143.47
not much better than luck so far...so i could say here that luck has also struggled at the beggining of his pro-style career in college.

But he has improved by miles already, and hes already surpassed his freshman numbers in less than half the games.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Where did I say he didn't??? IMO, it just seems Locker relies more on his athleticism more than trying to sit there and read a defense or go through his reads. People can sit there all they want and tell me hes a good pocket passer, but I'm not the only one that sees when dropping back and his first or second read isn't there hes off and running.

if u see coming pressure right in the front of your face, u would start running, too.

lets see what luck did in his first year in the harbaugh-system which seems to be westcoast offense:
162 288 2575 56.3 8.94 63 13 4 6 143.47
not much better than luck so far...so i could say here that luck has also struggled at the beggining of his pro-style career in college.

But he has improved by miles already, and hes already surpassed his freshman numbers in less than half the games.

and locker will reach his numbers in a new offensive style...surrounded by nothing at all. stay tuned the next weeks.

Originally posted by znk916:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by kstolai:
Luck does alot to make the oline look good as well. He has a very quick release.

i disagree with this its not that e makes the oline look good his o line is good

im not saying he doesnt have a quick release but he rarely has to face pressure and ive seen him with a prefect pocket after 4 seconds with the ball

i would also like to point out that stanford has much more weapons as well as the o line and a much better coach

locker weapons are blow avg at best and his o line i s also below avg

This.

I don't know if it's ever a good thing when you have to make excuses for a QB

Alexcuses anyone?

that makes no sense its either sending a guy who produces in college with less talent a not teh best coach in the world

or bringing in a guy who has an nfl ready coach along with great wepons and protection

Has there ever been any other QB in college football history that every time he has a bad game all you ever here is " It is not his fault, the players around him suck"

I wouldn't dismiss Mallett just yet. To me he has proven more than Locker has.

Originally posted by miked1978:
I wouldn't dismiss Mallett just yet. To me he has proven more than Locker has.

he has proven that he hasnt no accuracy at all, compared to lucker.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
I'd just hate to make the same mistake in choosing athleticism over Football IQ and mechanics.

When all is said and done, I just hope we either traded up for Luck or stood pat and drafted Ricky Stanzi.

I agree 100%

Those are the two QB's I really like.

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Where did I say he didn't??? IMO, it just seems Locker relies more on his athleticism more than trying to sit there and read a defense or go through his reads. People can sit there all they want and tell me hes a good pocket passer, but I'm not the only one that sees when dropping back and his first or second read isn't there hes off and running.

if u see coming pressure right in the front of your face, u would start running, too.

lets see what luck did in his first year in the harbaugh-system which seems to be westcoast offense:
162 288 2575 56.3 8.94 63 13 4 6 143.47
not much better than luck so far...so i could say here that luck has also struggled at the beggining of his pro-style career in college.

But he has improved by miles already, and hes already surpassed his freshman numbers in less than half the games.

and locker will reach his numbers in a new offensive style...surrounded by nothing at all. stay tuned the next weeks.

YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2007 155 328 2062 47.3 6.29 98 14 15 17 105.01
2008 50 93 512 53.8 5.51 48 1 0 10 103.55
2009 230 395 2800 58.2 7.09 51 21 11 28 129.75
2010 93 168 1145 55.4 6.82 57 8 3 6 124.75

Dude you've got to be kidding me! You really are trying to say Luck struggled in his FIRST year of playing college football when his QB rating was 20 points better than Lockers is as a SENIOR. That's great that he'll reach his numbers in his second year in the system...if Luck reached those same "numbers" it'd be considered an extremely disappointing season.

with a lock out looming why would luck come out

Originally posted by SourdoughDan:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Where did I say he didn't??? IMO, it just seems Locker relies more on his athleticism more than trying to sit there and read a defense or go through his reads. People can sit there all they want and tell me hes a good pocket passer, but I'm not the only one that sees when dropping back and his first or second read isn't there hes off and running.

if u see coming pressure right in the front of your face, u would start running, too.

lets see what luck did in his first year in the harbaugh-system which seems to be westcoast offense:
162 288 2575 56.3 8.94 63 13 4 6 143.47
not much better than luck so far...so i could say here that luck has also struggled at the beggining of his pro-style career in college.

But he has improved by miles already, and hes already surpassed his freshman numbers in less than half the games.

and locker will reach his numbers in a new offensive style...surrounded by nothing at all. stay tuned the next weeks.

YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2007 155 328 2062 47.3 6.29 98 14 15 17 105.01
2008 50 93 512 53.8 5.51 48 1 0 10 103.55
2009 230 395 2800 58.2 7.09 51 21 11 28 129.75
2010 93 168 1145 55.4 6.82 57 8 3 6 124.75

Dude you've got to be kidding me! You really are trying to say Luck struggled in his FIRST year of playing college football when his QB rating was 20 points better than Lockers is as a SENIOR. That's great that he'll reach his numbers in his second year in the system...if Luck reached those same "numbers" it'd be considered an extremely disappointing season.

i recommend you to learn reading...someone said locker struggles in the new offense and i answered that luck wasnt better in his first year at stanford. yeah, locker has more experience but it doenst guarantee u that your qb will work well with a new style after 5 games, especially if he hasnt any help at all.
i argue that locker will play better behind that o-line, even if the guys played solid yesterday, and with the talent on our offense. but i dont trust luck here yet.

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SourdoughDan:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Where did I say he didn't??? IMO, it just seems Locker relies more on his athleticism more than trying to sit there and read a defense or go through his reads. People can sit there all they want and tell me hes a good pocket passer, but I'm not the only one that sees when dropping back and his first or second read isn't there hes off and running.

if u see coming pressure right in the front of your face, u would start running, too.

lets see what luck did in his first year in the harbaugh-system which seems to be westcoast offense:
162 288 2575 56.3 8.94 63 13 4 6 143.47
not much better than luck so far...so i could say here that luck has also struggled at the beggining of his pro-style career in college.

But he has improved by miles already, and hes already surpassed his freshman numbers in less than half the games.

and locker will reach his numbers in a new offensive style...surrounded by nothing at all. stay tuned the next weeks.

YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2007 155 328 2062 47.3 6.29 98 14 15 17 105.01
2008 50 93 512 53.8 5.51 48 1 0 10 103.55
2009 230 395 2800 58.2 7.09 51 21 11 28 129.75
2010 93 168 1145 55.4 6.82 57 8 3 6 124.75

Dude you've got to be kidding me! You really are trying to say Luck struggled in his FIRST year of playing college football when his QB rating was 20 points better than Lockers is as a SENIOR. That's great that he'll reach his numbers in his second year in the system...if Luck reached those same "numbers" it'd be considered an extremely disappointing season.

i recommend you to learn reading...someone said locker struggles in the new offense and i answered that luck wasnt better in his first year at stanford. yeah, locker has more experience but it doenst guarantee u that your qb will work well with a new style after 5 games, especially if he hasnt any help at all.
i argue that locker will play better behind that o-line, even if the guys played solid yesterday, and with the talent on our offense. but i dont trust luck here yet.

I "learned reading" years ago, thank you. I suggest you look at the numbers and realize what you're saying is asinine. Locker is digressing in his new offensive style. Which style do you suggest he WOULD work in? And Luck hardly struggled for a first year quarterback in a pro style offense, without a ton of help. The talent at Stanford is not amazing. Name a draftable player on their offense other than Luck.

Originally posted by SourdoughDan:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SourdoughDan:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Where did I say he didn't??? IMO, it just seems Locker relies more on his athleticism more than trying to sit there and read a defense or go through his reads. People can sit there all they want and tell me hes a good pocket passer, but I'm not the only one that sees when dropping back and his first or second read isn't there hes off and running.

if u see coming pressure right in the front of your face, u would start running, too.

lets see what luck did in his first year in the harbaugh-system which seems to be westcoast offense:
162 288 2575 56.3 8.94 63 13 4 6 143.47
not much better than luck so far...so i could say here that luck has also struggled at the beggining of his pro-style career in college.

But he has improved by miles already, and hes already surpassed his freshman numbers in less than half the games.

and locker will reach his numbers in a new offensive style...surrounded by nothing at all. stay tuned the next weeks.

YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2007 155 328 2062 47.3 6.29 98 14 15 17 105.01
2008 50 93 512 53.8 5.51 48 1 0 10 103.55
2009 230 395 2800 58.2 7.09 51 21 11 28 129.75
2010 93 168 1145 55.4 6.82 57 8 3 6 124.75

Dude you've got to be kidding me! You really are trying to say Luck struggled in his FIRST year of playing college football when his QB rating was 20 points better than Lockers is as a SENIOR. That's great that he'll reach his numbers in his second year in the system...if Luck reached those same "numbers" it'd be considered an extremely disappointing season.

i recommend you to learn reading...someone said locker struggles in the new offense and i answered that luck wasnt better in his first year at stanford. yeah, locker has more experience but it doenst guarantee u that your qb will work well with a new style after 5 games, especially if he hasnt any help at all.
i argue that locker will play better behind that o-line, even if the guys played solid yesterday, and with the talent on our offense. but i dont trust luck here yet.

I "learned reading" years ago, thank you. I suggest you look at the numbers and realize what you're saying is asinine. Locker is digressing in his new offensive style. Which style do you suggest he WOULD work in? And Luck hardly struggled for a first year quarterback in a pro style offense, without a ton of help. The talent at Stanford is not amazing. Name a draftable player on their offense other than Luck.

While Washington has two mid round prospects on their O-line. Yah Stanford's O-line is sooo much better when Washington only gave up 3 more sacks. And Chris Polk is averaging 5.5 yards behind Washington's O-line, while Stefan Taylor is only averaging 4.9. Some of you make it sound as if Washington has a bad OL or something.

Lets also keep in mind that Stanford's defense is horrible and doesn't give that much help to Luck either.

Originally posted by SnakePlissken:
Andrew Luck = NFL Ready

-Plays a sophisticated NFL-Pro WCO-vertical at a high level, and excelled fast (which is difficult for even actual NFL starting QBs).
-Exceptional footwork/drops/hitches (typical pedigree of a QB under WCO-training/philosophy).
-Incredible awareness in the pocket.
-Vocal leader.

Jake Locker = NFL Project

-Played his first 2 years out of the spread.
-Struggling in his second year under pro-system with audibles/protection adjustments.
-Is dependent of the shotgun.
-Post-snap posture slanted/jolted.

This entire debate is somewhat adjacent to the Alex Smith vs Aaron Rodgers draft argument back in 2005. One is ready to play/succeed fast in any sophisticated Pro system, while the other needs a good QB coach/OC to iron out the quirks with.

This is like Smith vs Rodgers allover again.

Luck

i was impressed after the SC game that was really the 1st time i seen him in live action

ive seen Locker & he doesnt impress me like Andrew Luck