Mallett or Newton

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Ok, if you want to play that game. Washington St. Clearly has the worst talent in the Pac 10, but even their sophomore QB (Katz) has a better completion % (59.8) than Locker (56.6).

Btw, the Huskies do have some pretty decent talent on their team...they're not all-Americans, but Jermaine Kearse (62 catches, 12 TDs - 1st in the Pac 10), D'Andre Goodwin (42 catches - 15th in the Pac 10) and Devin Aguilar (28 catches) are more than adequate.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Ok, if you want to play that game. Washington St. Clearly has the worst talent in the Pac 10, but even their sophomore QB (Katz) has a better completion % (59.8) than Locker (56.6).

Btw, the Huskies do have some pretty decent talent on their team...they're not all-Americans, but Jermaine Kearse (62 catches, 12 TDs - 1st in the Pac 10), D'Andre Goodwin (42 catches - 15th in the Pac 10) and Devin Aguilar (28 catches) are more than adequate.

You gotta admit Newton has more talent.

Auburn overall talent vs. Washington overall talent.

Who has more?

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Ok, if you want to play that game. Washington St. Clearly has the worst talent in the Pac 10, but even their sophomore QB (Katz) has a better completion % (59.8) than Locker (56.6).

Btw, the Huskies do have some pretty decent talent on their team...they're not all-Americans, but Jermaine Kearse (62 catches, 12 TDs - 1st in the Pac 10), D'Andre Goodwin (42 catches - 15th in the Pac 10) and Devin Aguilar (28 catches) are more than adequate.

You gotta admit Newton has more talent.

Auburn overall talent vs. Washington overall talent.

Who has more?

Auburn has more talent....AND Locker is an inaccurate passer.

Originally posted by ninerlifer:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Ok, if you want to play that game. Washington St. Clearly has the worst talent in the Pac 10, but even their sophomore QB (Katz) has a better completion % (59.8) than Locker (56.6).

Btw, the Huskies do have some pretty decent talent on their team...they're not all-Americans, but Jermaine Kearse (62 catches, 12 TDs - 1st in the Pac 10), D'Andre Goodwin (42 catches - 15th in the Pac 10) and Devin Aguilar (28 catches) are more than adequate.

You gotta admit Newton has more talent.

Auburn overall talent vs. Washington overall talent.

Who has more?

Auburn has more talent....AND Locker is an inaccurate passer.

This same exact Auburn team was 7-5 last year....talk about a difference maker.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Ok, if you want to play that game. Washington St. Clearly has the worst talent in the Pac 10, but even their sophomore QB (Katz) has a better completion % (59.8) than Locker (56.6).

Btw, the Huskies do have some pretty decent talent on their team...they're not all-Americans, but Jermaine Kearse (62 catches, 12 TDs - 1st in the Pac 10), D'Andre Goodwin (42 catches - 15th in the Pac 10) and Devin Aguilar (28 catches) are more than adequate.

You gotta admit Newton has more talent.

Auburn overall talent vs. Washington overall talent.

Who has more?

Auburn has more talent....AND Locker is an inaccurate passer.

Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
I'd take Mallett, Locker or Stanzi over Newton.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by TexasNiner84:
I'd take Mallett, Locker or Stanzi over Newton.

I agree. Newton would be the last of those choices.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Ok, if you want to play that game. Washington St. Clearly has the worst talent in the Pac 10, but even their sophomore QB (Katz) has a better completion % (59.8) than Locker (56.6).

Btw, the Huskies do have some pretty decent talent on their team...they're not all-Americans, but Jermaine Kearse (62 catches, 12 TDs - 1st in the Pac 10), D'Andre Goodwin (42 catches - 15th in the Pac 10) and Devin Aguilar (28 catches) are more than adequate.

You gotta admit Newton has more talent.

Auburn overall talent vs. Washington overall talent.

Who has more?

Auburn has more talent....AND Locker is an inaccurate passer.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy Locker = accurate...

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

That said, I would pass on Locker (at least in the first 2 rounds), given how much he struggles to complete passes at a decent rate (even for college). I just can't see a team willing to invest that much money/that high a pick on someone who has a hard time doing the basics as a QB (completing passes). That's just my take.

you are talking about locker's percentage as if it is clearly under 50%...

Originally posted by Jcool:
^^^^ Locker has more to work on then even Tebow and you just cant invest to much money into him when he is at lest 3 years away from being ready to see game action. What QB has been successful when he couldn't complete 60% of his passes in college??

what does the completion pct have to do with someones success in the nfl???

I'm talking about Locker's inability to complete passes at a respectiabe clip (rule of thumb in college is, anything below 60% is flat-out bad), which speaks to his draft status/stock. I'm not saying he's a bum or that he'll never amount to anything...I'm just saying, I wouldn't select him with a high pick.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy he's pretty accurate. He just tried to tough it out this year.

But he was at 58.2 all of last year when he was healthy, and at 53.8 in 2008 before his season-ending injury. That's just not good, no matter how you slice it.

Look at the talent level on WA. It's probably the lowest in the PAC 10. Or 2nd lowest? WA st? He's a 1 man team.

Come on now. You're saying they can't even find someone to catch a football? don't be silly....

His WR's are garbage. Newton has talent around him. Those are SEC guys with good hands and speed. Locker's WR's / TE's are scrubs.

Ok, if you want to play that game. Washington St. Clearly has the worst talent in the Pac 10, but even their sophomore QB (Katz) has a better completion % (59.8) than Locker (56.6).

Btw, the Huskies do have some pretty decent talent on their team...they're not all-Americans, but Jermaine Kearse (62 catches, 12 TDs - 1st in the Pac 10), D'Andre Goodwin (42 catches - 15th in the Pac 10) and Devin Aguilar (28 catches) are more than adequate.

You gotta admit Newton has more talent.

Auburn overall talent vs. Washington overall talent.

Who has more?

Auburn has more talent....AND Locker is an inaccurate passer.

Broken rib + deep thigh bruise. When healthy Locker = accurate...

Locker was healthy all of last season...his completion % was 58.2 (that was ranked 68th in the country).