What is the Gap between Luck and Barkley & Jones?

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
i think kellen moore might have the best NFL career out of all the qbs

His problem is size and you cant really improve that.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
i think kellen moore might have the best NFL career out of all the qbs

His problem is size and you cant really improve that.

He's the same size as Drew Brees.

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
I see Luck as far superior to any other QB in this draft. To me, it is really Luck, and then a big drop to the Landry, Barkley, Tennehill and another drop to Griffin and Weeden.

It is a very strong crop of players if they all come out. Right now, I would guess that Luck is the sure fire number one pick, and the next three go to the next series of QB-starved teams (the list is beginning to shrink). If the draft played out today, I could see QB's going at 1, 2, 8, 9, 10.

1 Indianapolis 0-8 .546 Luck
2 Miami 0-7 .566 Landry
3 Arizona 1-6 .478
4 St. Louis 1-6 .553
5F Carolina 2-6 .504
5F Jacksonville 2-6 .504
7 Minnesota 2-6 .578
8 Seattle 2-5 .504 Barkley
9 Denver 2-5 .579 Tannehill
10 Washington 3-4 .439

You dont think Griffin has more upside than Barkley MD? I dont know but whenever i see a hyped USC QB, I think of Leinart. I wasnt high on Sanchez, not on Leinart and not on Barkley.

How high can Tannehill go? I dont see him as a top 10 pick, not a 1st rd guy.

Originally posted by AB83Rules:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
I see Luck as far superior to any other QB in this draft. To me, it is really Luck, and then a big drop to the Landry, Barkley, Tennehill and another drop to Griffin and Weeden.

It is a very strong crop of players if they all come out. Right now, I would guess that Luck is the sure fire number one pick, and the next three go to the next series of QB-starved teams (the list is beginning to shrink). If the draft played out today, I could see QB's going at 1, 2, 8, 9, 10.

1 Indianapolis 0-8 .546 Luck
2 Miami 0-7 .566 Landry
3 Arizona 1-6 .478
4 St. Louis 1-6 .553
5F Carolina 2-6 .504
5F Jacksonville 2-6 .504
7 Minnesota 2-6 .578
8 Seattle 2-5 .504 Barkley
9 Denver 2-5 .579 Tannehill
10 Washington 3-4 .439

You dont think Griffin has more upside than Barkley MD? I dont know but whenever i see a hyped USC QB, I think of Leinart. I wasnt high on Sanchez, not on Leinart and not on Barkley.

How high can Tannehill go? I dont see him as a top 10 pick, not a 1st rd guy.

Barkley is much better than Leinhart and more like Sanchez who has had some success.

Originally posted by AB83Rules:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
I see Luck as far superior to any other QB in this draft. To me, it is really Luck, and then a big drop to the Landry, Barkley, Tennehill and another drop to Griffin and Weeden.

It is a very strong crop of players if they all come out. Right now, I would guess that Luck is the sure fire number one pick, and the next three go to the next series of QB-starved teams (the list is beginning to shrink). If the draft played out today, I could see QB's going at 1, 2, 8, 9, 10.

1 Indianapolis 0-8 .546 Luck
2 Miami 0-7 .566 Landry
3 Arizona 1-6 .478
4 St. Louis 1-6 .553
5F Carolina 2-6 .504
5F Jacksonville 2-6 .504
7 Minnesota 2-6 .578
8 Seattle 2-5 .504 Barkley
9 Denver 2-5 .579 Tannehill
10 Washington 3-4 .439

You dont think Griffin has more upside than Barkley MD? I dont know but whenever i see a hyped USC QB, I think of Leinart. I wasnt high on Sanchez, not on Leinart and not on Barkley.

How high can Tannehill go? I dont see him as a top 10 pick, not a 1st rd guy.

Griffen may have a higher upside but Barkley is the safer pick and will be picked higher. I agree on Tannehill. From what I have seen I would not put him as a first round pick. He may go at the end but I would be shocked if he was a top 10 pick.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
i think kellen moore might have the best NFL career out of all the qbs

His problem is size and you cant really improve that.

not a problem for brees

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by valrod33:
MaioccoCSN Matt Maiocco
Kudos to Phil Simms for being a voice of reason. I agree with everything he has said about Andrew Luck. bit.ly/sZL8oC

Maiocco is a moron if he agrees with Simms.

I agree. I also think that Simms is just jealous that his sons were garbage as QBs yet a scrub like Oliver Luck has a son who is the #1 QB prospect in a decade. LOL

I actually got into a debate with Maiocco on Facebook about their opinions on Luck. I don't want to brag, but I pretty much schooled him. It doesn't seem that Maiocco really follows college football at all for him to make an assessment like that. He started talking about how Landry Jones makes more big time NFL-throws than Luck. Uhhhh, with the shotgun system they run at Oklahoma, OF COURSE he has more of an opportunity than Luck does. I brought up the fact that Stanford is a RUN FIRST, west coast-type offense, where Luck doesn't have to carry the whole team on his shoulders. His mechanics are out of this world, strong arm, extremely accurate, and makes quick reads. Maiocco never responded after that.

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
i think kellen moore might have the best NFL career out of all the qbs

His problem is size and you cant really improve that.

not a problem for brees

Yes lets compare him to the ONE guy that has worked out. Name one other QB 5'10"- 6' that has done anything in the NFL.... And no Mike Vick doesn't count unless Kellen Moore is suddenly going to be able to run a 4.3 40.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
i think kellen moore might have the best NFL career out of all the qbs

His problem is size and you cant really improve that.

not a problem for brees

Yes lets compare him to the ONE guy that has worked out. Name one other QB 5'10"- 6' that has done anything in the NFL.... And no Mike Vick doesn't count unless Kellen Moore is suddenly going to be able to run a 4.3 40.

Just off the top of my head. Steve Young 6'1". And Drew Brees 6'0". Moore is about 6'0".

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Just off the top of my head. Steve Young 6'1". And Drew Brees 6'0". Moore is about 6'0".

Moore is listed at 190. Brees is listed at 210. Big difference.

Originally posted by dhp318:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Just off the top of my head. Steve Young 6'1". And Drew Brees 6'0". Moore is about 6'0".

Moore is listed at 190. Brees is listed at 210. Big difference.

And he can't put on 15 - 20 lbs. of muscle over time in a good weight training program because of why?...

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Just off the top of my head. Steve Young 6'1". And Drew Brees 6'0". Moore is about 6'0".

sorry Steve Young is 6'2"

Originally posted by SF69ers:
I actually got into a debate with Maiocco on Facebook about their opinions on Luck. I don't want to brag, but I pretty much schooled him. It doesn't seem that Maiocco really follows college football at all for him to make an assessment like that. He started talking about how Landry Jones makes more big time NFL-throws than Luck. Uhhhh, with the shotgun system they run at Oklahoma, OF COURSE he has more of an opportunity than Luck does. I brought up the fact that Stanford is a RUN FIRST, west coast-type offense, where Luck doesn't have to carry the whole team on his shoulders. His mechanics are out of this world, strong arm, extremely accurate, and makes quick reads. Maiocco never responded after that.

At the same time, it's not necessarily a good thing where Stanford is a run first offense... he'll certainly be more pro ready, and obviously is a prospect with a very high floor and good ceiling, but how many times have we seen him where he has to carry the load by himself, a la Cam Newton? I think it's ridiculous that people view Luck as a perfect prospect, because no prospect is perfect. That doesn't mean that he'll be great, because every great player used to be a prospect, but there are and should be questions asked about Luck if you do your due diligence.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
And he can't put on 15 - 20 lbs. of muscle over time in a good weight training program because of why?...

ask Manny Lawson. A lot of it depends on your frame, it's not like you can just gain 15-20 pounds of muscle if you don't have the frame for it. Most of those NFL guys do... like Aldon Smith. Maybe he has the frame for it, I don't know. You also don't want to get bulked up like Tim Tebow where it might affect your throwing motion, that's why you don't see super jacked QBs. I'm sure Drew Brees could gain more weight, but he doesn't want to for his frame.

I'm not saying Kellen Moore can't be good, but he doesn't have prototypical height or weight, and might not necessarily ever have it.

Originally posted by nickbradley:
Clearly, Luck is the best QB prospect to come around in quite some time. However, I feel that Matt Barkley and Landry Jones are also #1 overall pick material in a normal year -- AND I think that Barkley and Jones are better prospects than Stafford and Bradford were.

As a result, I don't think any teams are going to 'sell the farm' in order to trade up for Luck when they could just as easily take Barkley or Jones elsewhere in the Top 5.

Thoughts?

Better prospects than Bradford perhaps, but not Stafford. Stafford was pretty prototype coming out of school. Big arm, accurate, pretty solid base of fundamentals etc etc.