Locker v. Luck, The Great QB Debate

Originally posted by nickbradley:
I'm pretty confident that Luck will declare, and he and Jake Locker form the top tier of the QB class. Mallett, Ponder, and Stanzi for the second tier but are late 1st Round - Early 2nd round talents. People may say that Mallett is in the first tier, but teams will be frightened by his lack of accuracy, character, lack of work ethic, and his "yo yo" eminem-on-stilts demeanor -- one website referred to him as a "retard with retard strength" (sorry if that offended anyone).

I think it comes down to who our coach is. If we have an offensive coach who is excellent with quarterbacks (e.g. Gruden, Brian Schottenheimer) we go with Locker. If we have a defensive-mided coach, we go with Luck.

That is because I feel that even though Luck is less experienced, he is more ready for a pro-style NFL offense and the NFL game. But if Locker gets decent coaching, he will be the next Steve Young.

Where's this lack of work ethic bulls**t about Mallet coming from? I have never heard that before. This isn't Matt Jones we are talking about here. Now, Mallet's consistency is a real problem. I think he has the talent, but he has to get his footwork down and make better decisions.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

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.

perhaps washington gave up only 3 more sacks because locker knows how to avoid them??? and i dont care what the RBs run behind these o-lines because even the raiders' o-line can run support well but the pass protection is horrible...
washington got mid-round prospects in their o-line? walterfootball says no and cbs mention seniors only. could u give me your source plz.

Originally posted by SourdoughDan:

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.

i dont have to name any draftable player because especially at college it's a lot about the system...look at colt mccoy for an example.

[ Edited by communist on Oct 12, 2010 at 03:24:35 ]

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

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.

perhaps washington gave up only 3 more sacks because locker knows how to avoid them??? and i dont care what the RBs run behind these o-lines because even the raiders' o-line can run support well but the pass protection is horrible...
washington got mid-round prospects in their o-line? walterfootball says no and cbs mention seniors only. could u give me your source plz.

Originally posted by SourdoughDan:

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.

i dont have to name any draftable player because especially at college it's a lot about the system...look at colt mccoy for an example.

Where does Walterfootball say anything about the mid-rounds? He's only been covering the first two rounds so far.

Why wouldn't you name any draftable players? The NFL loves looking at NFL ready prospects and Stanford runs a pro-style offense and a base 4-3 defense. But when I look at Stanford's o-line, no one jumps out to me till probably that later rounds.

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

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.

perhaps washington gave up only 3 more sacks because locker knows how to avoid them??? and i dont care what the RBs run behind these o-lines because even the raiders' o-line can run support well but the pass protection is horrible...
washington got mid-round prospects in their o-line? walterfootball says no and cbs mention seniors only. could u give me your source plz.

Originally posted by SourdoughDan:

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.

i dont have to name any draftable player because especially at college it's a lot about the system...look at colt mccoy for an example.

OH come on now. If you are going to argue that Stanfords Oline is soooo much superior, then you certainly should be able to name some 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds prospects from it shouldn't you?

Better yet how about admitting that you have lost this debate miserably and re-visit it later when you have some actual facts to back up your argument.

I believe J. Harbauh will depart for NFL come next off-season. with that said A. Luck will follow suit and depart. but then I'm taken back few years to what happened to us when we had the 1st overall pick. during that off-season a well known USC qb was projected to come out and would have been taken #1 overall. but at that time the world knew the deep sh!t this organization was in and the usc qb decided to stay put and play another college season losing out on millions. that line of thinking used to be reserved for the lions, browns, bengals, bills, seahawks, raiders, to name a few.

i'm a big A. Luck fan...but with our state of depression and LUCK, Andrew will reconsider and stay put for another season in the college game and lose millions which will not bother him much.

Originally posted by Negrodamus:
I believe J. Harbauh will depart for NFL come next off-season. with that said A. Luck will follow suit and depart. but then I'm taken back few years to what happened to us when we had the 1st overall pick. during that off-season a well known USC qb was projected to come out and would have been taken #1 overall. but at that time the world knew the deep sh!t this organization was in and the usc qb decided to stay put and play another college season losing out on millions. that line of thinking used to be reserved for the lions, browns, bengals, bills, seahawks, raiders, to name a few.

i'm a big A. Luck fan...but with our state of depression and LUCK, Andrew will reconsider and stay put for another season in the college game and lose millions which will not bother him much.

I want the Luck Harbauh connection to continue in SF

I don't understand how this is a real conversation. Luck is far better in everything but mobility, and even then he's got enough to spare.

Originally posted by WINiner:

Originally posted by Negrodamus:
I believe J. Harbauh will depart for NFL come next off-season. with that said A. Luck will follow suit and depart. but then I'm taken back few years to what happened to us when we had the 1st overall pick. during that off-season a well known USC qb was projected to come out and would have been taken #1 overall. but at that time the world knew the deep sh!t this organization was in and the usc qb decided to stay put and play another college season losing out on millions. that line of thinking used to be reserved for the lions, browns, bengals, bills, seahawks, raiders, to name a few.

i'm a big A. Luck fan...but with our state of depression and LUCK, Andrew will reconsider and stay put for another season in the college game and lose millions which will not bother him much.

I want the Luck Harbauh connection to continue in SF

I doubt Harabaugh will come to the NFL, I thought he just signed an extension with Stanford??

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by WINiner:

Originally posted by Negrodamus:
I believe J. Harbauh will depart for NFL come next off-season. with that said A. Luck will follow suit and depart. but then I'm taken back few years to what happened to us when we had the 1st overall pick. during that off-season a well known USC qb was projected to come out and would have been taken #1 overall. but at that time the world knew the deep sh!t this organization was in and the usc qb decided to stay put and play another college season losing out on millions. that line of thinking used to be reserved for the lions, browns, bengals, bills, seahawks, raiders, to name a few.

i'm a big A. Luck fan...but with our state of depression and LUCK, Andrew will reconsider and stay put for another season in the college game and lose millions which will not bother him much.

I want the Luck Harbauh connection to continue in SF

I doubt Harabaugh will come to the NFL, I thought he just signed an extension with Stanford??

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

You are disrupting the reality of my world........

Originally posted by SF69ers:


Where does Walterfootball say anything about the mid-rounds? He's only been covering the first two rounds so far.

Why wouldn't you name any draftable players? The NFL loves looking at NFL ready prospects and Stanford runs a pro-style offense and a base 4-3 defense. But when I look at Stanford's o-line, no one jumps out to me till probably that later rounds.

walter has got a prospects' corner for every position...

no one jumps out but luck has still a lot of time to throw...i dont know how they do it but thats a fact. why should i care about draftable players? i SEE that the o-line can pass protect well and thats enough to argue that with the time luck got in the pocket, its no wonder that he can do a lot of things.

Originally posted by WINiner:

OH come on now. If you are going to argue that Stanfords Oline is soooo much superior, then you certainly should be able to name some 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds prospects from it shouldn't you?

Better yet how about admitting that you have lost this debate miserably and re-visit it later when you have some actual facts to back up your argument.

i dont have to name any draftable player...and i wont admit in the mid of the season that locker is so much worse...we can and will talk about that at the end of the season.

[ Edited by communist on Oct 12, 2010 at 12:43:36 ]

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SF69ers:


Where does Walterfootball say anything about the mid-rounds? He's only been covering the first two rounds so far.

Why wouldn't you name any draftable players? The NFL loves looking at NFL ready prospects and Stanford runs a pro-style offense and a base 4-3 defense. But when I look at Stanford's o-line, no one jumps out to me till probably that later rounds.

walter has got a prospects' corner for every position...

no one jumps out but luck has still a lot of time to throw...i dont know how they do it but thats a fact. why should i care about draftable players? i SEE that the o-line can pass protect well and thats enough to argue that with the time luck got in the pocket, its no wonder that he can do a lot of things.

One of the reasons why Luck makes that line look so good is because he makes quick reads and quick decisions. If the line breaks down, Luck can and has been making plays with his feet.

Draft stock is important because it signifies if a player is NFL ready or can even make it as a backup in the pros. It rates potential. That's why it's important.

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SF69ers:


Where does Walterfootball say anything about the mid-rounds? He's only been covering the first two rounds so far.

Why wouldn't you name any draftable players? The NFL loves looking at NFL ready prospects and Stanford runs a pro-style offense and a base 4-3 defense. But when I look at Stanford's o-line, no one jumps out to me till probably that later rounds.

walter has got a prospects' corner for every position...

no one jumps out but luck has still a lot of time to throw...i dont know how they do it but thats a fact. why should i care about draftable players? i SEE that the o-line can pass protect well and thats enough to argue that with the time luck got in the pocket, its no wonder that he can do a lot of things.

One of the reasons why Luck makes that line look so good is because he makes quick reads and quick decisions. If the line breaks down, Luck can and has been making plays with his feet.

Draft stock is important because it signifies if a player is NFL ready or can even make it as a backup in the pros. It rates potential. That's why it's important.

we can continue that discussion after next weekend...dont wanna tell the same arguments over and over again.

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SF69ers:


Where does Walterfootball say anything about the mid-rounds? He's only been covering the first two rounds so far.

Why wouldn't you name any draftable players? The NFL loves looking at NFL ready prospects and Stanford runs a pro-style offense and a base 4-3 defense. But when I look at Stanford's o-line, no one jumps out to me till probably that later rounds.

walter has got a prospects' corner for every position...

no one jumps out but luck has still a lot of time to throw...i dont know how they do it but thats a fact. why should i care about draftable players? i SEE that the o-line can pass protect well and thats enough to argue that with the time luck got in the pocket, its no wonder that he can do a lot of things.

One of the reasons why Luck makes that line look so good is because he makes quick reads and quick decisions. If the line breaks down, Luck can and has been making plays with his feet.

Draft stock is important because it signifies if a player is NFL ready or can even make it as a backup in the pros. It rates potential. That's why it's important.

we can continue that discussion after next weekend...dont wanna tell the same arguments over and over again.

I agree. And for the record, I am a fan of both QBs, but I know that Luck is the better of the two.

Watching the USC game I have to admit that LUCK is the best of the two. I believe it was Brent Musberger that said that Luck is the best college QB he has seen since Peyton Manning. Now that my friends I believe is enough to get him. The guy is awesome but so is Matt Barkley but Luck I like more. I don't like Locker and his mechanics the dude scares me and not accurate at all.

Luck has absolutely everything I want in our QB. I hope to God we get him.

Makes quick reads, fires with confidence, nice arm, smart as sh*t and MAKES PLAYS!

If we get Luck that will make me feel pretty good. Then we're just a real, experienced coaching staff away from being where we need to be.