Mallett or Newton

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 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).

Zero help on his team. His WR's suck and drop the ball. That and a throw deep offense leads to some incompletions.

I dunno man. I watched a lot of the Huskies games last year and Locker definitely showed promise but I did see him miss a lot of wide open receivers. I'm sure the injury this season factored in him being inaccurate, but he already had that reputation a season ago. He has a lot to prove this offseason.

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 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).

Zero help on his team. His WR's suck and drop the ball. That and a throw deep offense leads to some incompletions.

If you look hard enough, you can find excuses for everything and everyone in life. In the NFL, you either produce or you're out regardless of the excuses (real or imagined). This kid hasn't produced to where he's worthy of a high pick....doesn't mean he won't get picked high (some team might fall in love with him), but there's nothing in his play/production over the course of his career that says, "consistent, quality passer/high draft pick."

^ Locker does not throw receivers open, throw into tight NFL windows or throw a very catchable ball. He is ok at the college level but he will really need work to be a good NFL QB.

Lots of intangibles but inconsistent and inaccurate. Sounds familiar...

Locker isnt even ok on the college level.

He is complete garbage, trash, booty, whatever you want to call him. His footwork and decision making are the WORST i have ever seen for a supposed high draft pick. Cutler was the worst till i saw Locker. Difference is Cutler has a gun and its accurate when he sets his feet(almost never). Ive never seen ANYTHING out of Locker that says remotely successful.

Dont bring up stats or excuses they get no play around a real scout.


Ive been scouting QBs for a long time and im almost never wrong.
my only real misses in the last 8 years have been Matt Ryan(thought he would be good not great but alot of his success can be attributed to a strong running game) and Sanchez(but might be too early to tell on him, never thought he was more than serviceable)
Flacco, Bradford, Campbell, Cutler, Freeman, Rivers, Manning, Big Ben....all look exactly like i thought they would. If you want i will break down all of them. But those are the guys i am comparing these QB's to coming out of college.


Luck is overrated. I can only see him being a probowl qb on a team with a strong running game. Doesnt look off coverages, doesnt consistently find his second or third receivers. He is a 1st read QB, much like Aaron Rodgers. Looks very good when the play design works like its supposed to. Great with playaction. Great accuracy on short to intermediate routes. Looks most like Matt Ryan/Eli Manning

Mallett is the pocket qb with the biggest upside, stands tall in the pocket can make all the throws effortlessly and accurately. Not as polished as Luck. But that can be attributed to NFL level coaching that Luck has already had. Would be best on a team with big receivers. Puts the ball in spots where only his guys can get it, even on the 3rd options. Forces the ball into coverage due to world class arm. Looks most like Joe Flacco/Ben Rothlesburger with a Rivers like moxie about him

Kellen Moore is by far the smartest of these 3. Will constantly look off coverages and diagnoses defenses before the snap. Very accurate down-field thrower. Comes up big in key situations. Due to lack of height will have trouble seeing the entire field. Looks most like Drew Brees.

The best 'passer' of these 3 is easily Moore. But i learned a long time ago, if you look at the 3 things a qb does best, if two of them arent physically related he will have a tough time being successful in the NFL. The ability to see over and get away from mammoth dudes trying to hurt you is not an underrated ability. Look at all the great or very good qbs in the league today and they all have the same thing, size. With the exception of Brees and Vick who are so outstanding in other areas they can make up for it. And it took them both a long time to figure out how to use them.

Who i would take? Any of these 3 or Cam. None of the other ones. If the QB you are going to draft isnt going to be great, they arent worth drafting. Its just a waste of a pick to draft a Grahmn Harrell or a Colt Brennen or a Ricky Stanzi.
It really all depends on what kind of offense we are going to run. WC would fit Luck's attributes the best. Mallett has the talent to run any kind of offense but would be most successful with great talent on the outside. Moore would work best from a spread. The difference between all these guys and Cam Newton is Cam doesnt seem to need great talent around him to be excellent. His physical attributes (size, speed, arm strength AND touch) are so outstanding, the rest of his game doesnt need to be complete to be very very effective.

With the talent on the 49ers it SCREAMS Camron Newton.

Originally posted by skd420:
Locker isnt even ok on the college level.

He is complete garbage, trash, booty, whatever you want to call him. His footwork and decision making are the WORST i have ever seen for a supposed high draft pick. Cutler was the worst till i saw Locker. Difference is Cutler has a gun and its accurate when he sets his feet(almost never). Ive never seen ANYTHING out of Locker that says remotely successful.

Dont bring up stats or excuses they get no play around a real scout.


Ive been scouting QBs for a long time and im almost never wrong.
my only real misses in the last 8 years have been Matt Ryan(thought he would be good not great but alot of his success can be attributed to a strong running game) and Sanchez(but might be too early to tell on him, never thought he was more than serviceable)
Flacco, Bradford, Campbell, Cutler, Freeman, Rivers, Manning, Big Ben....all look exactly like i thought they would. If you want i will break down all of them. But those are the guys i am comparing these QB's to coming out of college.


Luck is overrated. I can only see him being a probowl qb on a team with a strong running game. Doesnt look off coverages, doesnt consistently find his second or third receivers. He is a 1st read QB, much like Aaron Rodgers. Looks very good when the play design works like its supposed to. Great with playaction. Great accuracy on short to intermediate routes. Looks most like Matt Ryan/Eli Manning

Mallett is the pocket qb with the biggest upside, stands tall in the pocket can make all the throws effortlessly and accurately. Not as polished as Luck. But that can be attributed to NFL level coaching that Luck has already had. Would be best on a team with big receivers. Puts the ball in spots where only his guys can get it, even on the 3rd options. Forces the ball into coverage due to world class arm. Looks most like Joe Flacco/Ben Rothlesburger with a Rivers like moxie about him

Kellen Moore is by far the smartest of these 3. Will constantly look off coverages and diagnoses defenses before the snap. Very accurate down-field thrower. Comes up big in key situations. Due to lack of height will have trouble seeing the entire field. Looks most like Drew Brees.

The best 'passer' of these 3 is easily Moore. But i learned a long time ago, if you look at the 3 things a qb does best, if two of them arent physically related he will have a tough time being successful in the NFL. The ability to see over and get away from mammoth dudes trying to hurt you is not an underrated ability. Look at all the great or very good qbs in the league today and they all have the same thing, size. With the exception of Brees and Vick who are so outstanding in other areas they can make up for it. And it took them both a long time to figure out how to use them.

Who i would take? Any of these 3 or Cam. None of the other ones. If the QB you are going to draft isnt going to be great, they arent worth drafting. Its just a waste of a pick to draft a Grahmn Harrell or a Colt Brennen or a Ricky Stanzi.
It really all depends on what kind of offense we are going to run. WC would fit Luck's attributes the best. Mallett has the talent to run any kind of offense but would be most successful with great talent on the outside. Moore would work best from a spread. The difference between all these guys and Cam Newton is Cam doesnt seem to need great talent around him to be excellent. His physical attributes (size, speed, arm strength AND touch) are so outstanding, the rest of his game doesnt need to be complete to be very very effective.

With the talent on the 49ers it SCREAMS Camron Newton.

Thought about that too.

On another note, please enlighten me with why you would consider Stanzi in the same company as Harrell and Brennen? I don't see the same "type" of player. Really serious and would love an 'insiders" point of view.

They are very good college players and they do the things you need a qb to do well enough at the college level. But to play very good at the pro level you need to be outstanding at more than one different aspect of your game. Stanzi is a good leader and good thrower but not consistent enough accuracy wise or decision making wise. He has improved a lot through college which is very telling that he is receptive to coaching and doesnt force the ball into coverage nearly as much as he used to. I wasnt trying to compare him to those other two guys because they arent the same type of QB, but i wouldnt waste the time to draft and develop a guy who doesnt have that high of a ceiling. Some other people would but i wouldnt. I guess i could compare him to a Colt McCoy or a Jimmy Clausen. Neither one of those guys are franchise QBs. If you put enough talent around them and gameplan and coach around their deficiencies, they can be good enough to win games, even playoff games. But that is with a great organization around them and great players. Bradford is the only qb in last years draft that legitimately had a chance to be THE MAN. (btw he was the best college qb i have seen since Phillip Rivers and Peyton Manning before that) I really think Mallet, Luck and Moore all have a shot to be that kind of player. It depends a lot on situation and coaching obviously but Luck and Mallet no doubt have the kind of talent that could rise above that.

Cam Newton is completely different from and other qb i have ever seen. He has the talent and the charisma of a LeBron James but he has been playing qb his whole life. Physically is a lot like Josh Freeman, less polished but also much less playing time. He probably would be a hall of fame TE as i have heard him called, but that kind of threat playing QB is so much more dangerous.

The reason Vick is so hard to stop is that you cant play press, man coverage against him. If he breaks contain against it, its a 20-30 yard run. So they sit back in zones and read him. It would work before but now you can see him looking off coverages and firing the ball in between the spaces of the zone coverages. The threat of the run is what opens up those throwing lanes.

Originally posted by skd420:
Locker isnt even ok on the college level.

He is complete garbage, trash, booty, whatever you want to call him. His footwork and decision making are the WORST i have ever seen for a supposed high draft pick. Cutler was the worst till i saw Locker. Difference is Cutler has a gun and its accurate when he sets his feet(almost never). Ive never seen ANYTHING out of Locker that says remotely successful.

his decision-making is bad??? ok, i watched the wrong games...

i will remind you about your statements in 2-3 years...anyone can talk a lot of on the internet.

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by skd420:
Locker isnt even ok on the college level.

He is complete garbage, trash, booty, whatever you want to call him. His footwork and decision making are the WORST i have ever seen for a supposed high draft pick. Cutler was the worst till i saw Locker. Difference is Cutler has a gun and its accurate when he sets his feet(almost never). Ive never seen ANYTHING out of Locker that says remotely successful.

his decision-making is bad??? ok, i watched the wrong games...

i will remind you about your statements in 2-3 years...anyone can talk a lot of on the internet.

Go ahead ill be right here.

even on his completions, he is late with the ball. Those roll out sideline passes are ints in the pro game.

Originally posted by skd420:
Locker isnt even ok on the college level.

He is complete garbage, trash, booty, whatever you want to call him. His footwork and decision making are the WORST i have ever seen for a supposed high draft pick. Cutler was the worst till i saw Locker. Difference is Cutler has a gun and its accurate when he sets his feet(almost never). Ive never seen ANYTHING out of Locker that says remotely successful.

Dont bring up stats or excuses they get no play around a real scout.


Ive been scouting QBs for a long time and im almost never wrong.
my only real misses in the last 8 years have been Matt Ryan(thought he would be good not great but alot of his success can be attributed to a strong running game) and Sanchez(but might be too early to tell on him, never thought he was more than serviceable)
Flacco, Bradford, Campbell, Cutler, Freeman, Rivers, Manning, Big Ben....all look exactly like i thought they would. If you want i will break down all of them. But those are the guys i am comparing these QB's to coming out of college.


Luck is overrated. I can only see him being a probowl qb on a team with a strong running game. Doesnt look off coverages, doesnt consistently find his second or third receivers. He is a 1st read QB, much like Aaron Rodgers. Looks very good when the play design works like its supposed to. Great with playaction. Great accuracy on short to intermediate routes. Looks most like Matt Ryan/Eli Manning

Mallett is the pocket qb with the biggest upside, stands tall in the pocket can make all the throws effortlessly and accurately. Not as polished as Luck. But that can be attributed to NFL level coaching that Luck has already had. Would be best on a team with big receivers. Puts the ball in spots where only his guys can get it, even on the 3rd options. Forces the ball into coverage due to world class arm. Looks most like Joe Flacco/Ben Rothlesburger with a Rivers like moxie about him

Kellen Moore is by far the smartest of these 3. Will constantly look off coverages and diagnoses defenses before the snap. Very accurate down-field thrower. Comes up big in key situations. Due to lack of height will have trouble seeing the entire field. Looks most like Drew Brees.

The best 'passer' of these 3 is easily Moore. But i learned a long time ago, if you look at the 3 things a qb does best, if two of them arent physically related he will have a tough time being successful in the NFL. The ability to see over and get away from mammoth dudes trying to hurt you is not an underrated ability. Look at all the great or very good qbs in the league today and they all have the same thing, size. With the exception of Brees and Vick who are so outstanding in other areas they can make up for it. And it took them both a long time to figure out how to use them.

Who i would take? Any of these 3 or Cam. None of the other ones. If the QB you are going to draft isnt going to be great, they arent worth drafting. Its just a waste of a pick to draft a Grahmn Harrell or a Colt Brennen or a Ricky Stanzi.
It really all depends on what kind of offense we are going to run. WC would fit Luck's attributes the best. Mallett has the talent to run any kind of offense but would be most successful with great talent on the outside. Moore would work best from a spread. The difference between all these guys and Cam Newton is Cam doesnt seem to need great talent around him to be excellent. His physical attributes (size, speed, arm strength AND touch) are so outstanding, the rest of his game doesnt need to be complete to be very very effective.

With the talent on the 49ers it SCREAMS Camron Newton.

You scout QBs?

Then there must be something wrong with what I'm watching along with what other analysts have been saying about Locker. You say he has the worst footwork when I think he has very good footwork. Locker has good feet, a strong arm, he's mobile, but his accuracy is bad.

Also, there's a reason why Luck is overrated. It's because he has shown the most promise for a franchise signal caller in a long time. He's got great size and he can move well with it. He's very accurate and has a quick release. He also makes very quick reads. You say that he doesn't look for his second or third option, but that isn't accurate at all. Luck gets all his receivers involved. Against Oregon St. eight different receivers had at least one reception. But I do agree with you that he resembles Eli Manning a lot. Just more athletic than Eli.

I do agree with your points on Mallett. The only thing I would guess for him to be successful in the NFL is that he would need a very good o-line because he doesn't move well in the pocket.

Ricky Stanzi...very different from Colt Brennan and Graham Harrell. First off, he runs in a pro style offense and should transition quicker to the pros. He hasn't been totally successful in college, but he has progressed a lot from last year. Better decision making and very accurate. I like Stanzi in the 2nd round.

As for Cam Newton....there's no doubt this kid's got talent. Great size and speed for a QB and has a cannon arm. His accuracy is ok. I think his ability to run through defenses keep the D honest and helps Newton find his targets easier because they're always looking for him to run. As for everything else, I think he has sloppy footwork and his mechanics need work, fortunately, most QBs coming out of college do. I actually feel like out of all the high rated QBs coming out of the upcoming draft, Newton may take the longest to develop.

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by skd420:
Locker isnt even ok on the college level.

He is complete garbage, trash, booty, whatever you want to call him. His footwork and decision making are the WORST i have ever seen for a supposed high draft pick. Cutler was the worst till i saw Locker. Difference is Cutler has a gun and its accurate when he sets his feet(almost never). Ive never seen ANYTHING out of Locker that says remotely successful.

Dont bring up stats or excuses they get no play around a real scout.


Ive been scouting QBs for a long time and im almost never wrong.
my only real misses in the last 8 years have been Matt Ryan(thought he would be good not great but alot of his success can be attributed to a strong running game) and Sanchez(but might be too early to tell on him, never thought he was more than serviceable)
Flacco, Bradford, Campbell, Cutler, Freeman, Rivers, Manning, Big Ben....all look exactly like i thought they would. If you want i will break down all of them. But those are the guys i am comparing these QB's to coming out of college.


Luck is overrated. I can only see him being a probowl qb on a team with a strong running game. Doesnt look off coverages, doesnt consistently find his second or third receivers. He is a 1st read QB, much like Aaron Rodgers. Looks very good when the play design works like its supposed to. Great with playaction. Great accuracy on short to intermediate routes. Looks most like Matt Ryan/Eli Manning

Mallett is the pocket qb with the biggest upside, stands tall in the pocket can make all the throws effortlessly and accurately. Not as polished as Luck. But that can be attributed to NFL level coaching that Luck has already had. Would be best on a team with big receivers. Puts the ball in spots where only his guys can get it, even on the 3rd options. Forces the ball into coverage due to world class arm. Looks most like Joe Flacco/Ben Rothlesburger with a Rivers like moxie about him

Kellen Moore is by far the smartest of these 3. Will constantly look off coverages and diagnoses defenses before the snap. Very accurate down-field thrower. Comes up big in key situations. Due to lack of height will have trouble seeing the entire field. Looks most like Drew Brees.

The best 'passer' of these 3 is easily Moore. But i learned a long time ago, if you look at the 3 things a qb does best, if two of them arent physically related he will have a tough time being successful in the NFL. The ability to see over and get away from mammoth dudes trying to hurt you is not an underrated ability. Look at all the great or very good qbs in the league today and they all have the same thing, size. With the exception of Brees and Vick who are so outstanding in other areas they can make up for it. And it took them both a long time to figure out how to use them.

Who i would take? Any of these 3 or Cam. None of the other ones. If the QB you are going to draft isnt going to be great, they arent worth drafting. Its just a waste of a pick to draft a Grahmn Harrell or a Colt Brennen or a Ricky Stanzi.
It really all depends on what kind of offense we are going to run. WC would fit Luck's attributes the best. Mallett has the talent to run any kind of offense but would be most successful with great talent on the outside. Moore would work best from a spread. The difference between all these guys and Cam Newton is Cam doesnt seem to need great talent around him to be excellent. His physical attributes (size, speed, arm strength AND touch) are so outstanding, the rest of his game doesnt need to be complete to be very very effective.

With the talent on the 49ers it SCREAMS Camron Newton.

You scout QBs?

Then there must be something wrong with what I'm watching along with what other analysts have been saying about Locker. You say he has the worst footwork when I think he has very good footwork. Locker has good feet, a strong arm, he's mobile, but his accuracy is bad.

Also, there's a reason why Luck is overrated. It's because he has shown the most promise for a franchise signal caller in a long time. He's got great size and he can move well with it. He's very accurate and has a quick release. He also makes very quick reads. You say that he doesn't look for his second or third option, but that isn't accurate at all. Luck gets all his receivers involved. Against Oregon St. eight different receivers had at least one reception. But I do agree with you that he resembles Eli Manning a lot. Just more athletic than Eli.

I do agree with your points on Mallett. The only thing I would guess for him to be successful in the NFL is that he would need a very good o-line because he doesn't move well in the pocket.

Ricky Stanzi...very different from Colt Brennan and Graham Harrell. First off, he runs in a pro style offense and should transition quicker to the pros. He hasn't been totally successful in college, but he has progressed a lot from last year. Better decision making and very accurate. I like Stanzi in the 2nd round.

As for Cam Newton....there's no doubt this kid's got talent. Great size and speed for a QB and has a cannon arm. His accuracy is ok. I think his ability to run through defenses keep the D honest and helps Newton find his targets easier because they're always looking for him to run. As for everything else, I think he has sloppy footwork and his mechanics need work, fortunately, most QBs coming out of college do. I actually feel like out of all the high rated QBs coming out of the upcoming draft, Newton may take the longest to develop.

I agree with you about Luck. Except that its not for a long time, because Joe Flacco, Matt Ryan and Sam Bradford all had franchise QB grades as well. All three of them are better than Andrew Luck. Im fearing him being put in that class due to the success of those 3 recently coming out. But he isnt as good as any of those 3. If he shows better 20 to 30 yard accuracy i would take him in a heartbeat.

Locker moving very well doenst mean he has good footwork. Footwork is economy of motion. Only moving them just enough to get away from pressure and still stay balanced to throw accurately. Phillip Rivers is slow as sh!t but has great footwork, same with Manning and Brady.

Cam would take the longest to develop into a traditional dropback passer, but you dont need him to be that for him to be successful. That was the whole point. If we are going to get the cookie cutter QB then Luck, Mallett and Moore are all great choices. But Cam has the athletic ablility AND the arm talent to be just as good as Ben Rothlesburger if not much much better. And Big Ben is light years behind the top signal callers in terms of cookie cutter QB skills. But his ability to extend the play supersedes his lack of ability in reading coverages quickly. Extend the play long enough and someone will be open. Ben has the athletic ability and arm strength to make it work. Cam is much more talented.

Originally posted by skd420:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by skd420:
Locker isnt even ok on the college level.

He is complete garbage, trash, booty, whatever you want to call him. His footwork and decision making are the WORST i have ever seen for a supposed high draft pick. Cutler was the worst till i saw Locker. Difference is Cutler has a gun and its accurate when he sets his feet(almost never). Ive never seen ANYTHING out of Locker that says remotely successful.

Dont bring up stats or excuses they get no play around a real scout.


Ive been scouting QBs for a long time and im almost never wrong.
my only real misses in the last 8 years have been Matt Ryan(thought he would be good not great but alot of his success can be attributed to a strong running game) and Sanchez(but might be too early to tell on him, never thought he was more than serviceable)
Flacco, Bradford, Campbell, Cutler, Freeman, Rivers, Manning, Big Ben....all look exactly like i thought they would. If you want i will break down all of them. But those are the guys i am comparing these QB's to coming out of college.


Luck is overrated. I can only see him being a probowl qb on a team with a strong running game. Doesnt look off coverages, doesnt consistently find his second or third receivers. He is a 1st read QB, much like Aaron Rodgers. Looks very good when the play design works like its supposed to. Great with playaction. Great accuracy on short to intermediate routes. Looks most like Matt Ryan/Eli Manning

Mallett is the pocket qb with the biggest upside, stands tall in the pocket can make all the throws effortlessly and accurately. Not as polished as Luck. But that can be attributed to NFL level coaching that Luck has already had. Would be best on a team with big receivers. Puts the ball in spots where only his guys can get it, even on the 3rd options. Forces the ball into coverage due to world class arm. Looks most like Joe Flacco/Ben Rothlesburger with a Rivers like moxie about him

Kellen Moore is by far the smartest of these 3. Will constantly look off coverages and diagnoses defenses before the snap. Very accurate down-field thrower. Comes up big in key situations. Due to lack of height will have trouble seeing the entire field. Looks most like Drew Brees.

The best 'passer' of these 3 is easily Moore. But i learned a long time ago, if you look at the 3 things a qb does best, if two of them arent physically related he will have a tough time being successful in the NFL. The ability to see over and get away from mammoth dudes trying to hurt you is not an underrated ability. Look at all the great or very good qbs in the league today and they all have the same thing, size. With the exception of Brees and Vick who are so outstanding in other areas they can make up for it. And it took them both a long time to figure out how to use them.

Who i would take? Any of these 3 or Cam. None of the other ones. If the QB you are going to draft isnt going to be great, they arent worth drafting. Its just a waste of a pick to draft a Grahmn Harrell or a Colt Brennen or a Ricky Stanzi.
It really all depends on what kind of offense we are going to run. WC would fit Luck's attributes the best. Mallett has the talent to run any kind of offense but would be most successful with great talent on the outside. Moore would work best from a spread. The difference between all these guys and Cam Newton is Cam doesnt seem to need great talent around him to be excellent. His physical attributes (size, speed, arm strength AND touch) are so outstanding, the rest of his game doesnt need to be complete to be very very effective.

With the talent on the 49ers it SCREAMS Camron Newton.

You scout QBs?

Then there must be something wrong with what I'm watching along with what other analysts have been saying about Locker. You say he has the worst footwork when I think he has very good footwork. Locker has good feet, a strong arm, he's mobile, but his accuracy is bad.

Also, there's a reason why Luck is overrated. It's because he has shown the most promise for a franchise signal caller in a long time. He's got great size and he can move well with it. He's very accurate and has a quick release. He also makes very quick reads. You say that he doesn't look for his second or third option, but that isn't accurate at all. Luck gets all his receivers involved. Against Oregon St. eight different receivers had at least one reception. But I do agree with you that he resembles Eli Manning a lot. Just more athletic than Eli.

I do agree with your points on Mallett. The only thing I would guess for him to be successful in the NFL is that he would need a very good o-line because he doesn't move well in the pocket.

Ricky Stanzi...very different from Colt Brennan and Graham Harrell. First off, he runs in a pro style offense and should transition quicker to the pros. He hasn't been totally successful in college, but he has progressed a lot from last year. Better decision making and very accurate. I like Stanzi in the 2nd round.

As for Cam Newton....there's no doubt this kid's got talent. Great size and speed for a QB and has a cannon arm. His accuracy is ok. I think his ability to run through defenses keep the D honest and helps Newton find his targets easier because they're always looking for him to run. As for everything else, I think he has sloppy footwork and his mechanics need work, fortunately, most QBs coming out of college do. I actually feel like out of all the high rated QBs coming out of the upcoming draft, Newton may take the longest to develop.

I agree with you about Luck. Except that its not for a long time, because Joe Flacco, Matt Ryan and Sam Bradford all had franchise QB grades as well. All three of them are better than Andrew Luck. Im fearing him being put in that class due to the success of those 3 recently coming out. But he isnt as good as any of those 3. If he shows better 20 to 30 yard accuracy i would take him in a heartbeat.

Locker moving very well doenst mean he has good footwork. Footwork is economy of motion. Only moving them just enough to get away from pressure and still stay balanced to throw accurately. Phillip Rivers is slow as sh!t but has great footwork, same with Manning and Brady.

Cam would take the longest to develop into a traditional dropback passer, but you dont need him to be that for him to be successful. That was the whole point. If we are going to get the cookie cutter QB then Luck, Mallett and Moore are all great choices. But Cam has the athletic ablility AND the arm talent to be just as good as Ben Rothlesburger if not much much better. And Big Ben is light years behind the top signal callers in terms of cookie cutter QB skills. But his ability to extend the play supersedes his lack of ability in reading coverages quickly. Extend the play long enough and someone will be open. Ben has the athletic ability and arm strength to make it work. Cam is much more talented.

I actually think Andrew Luck will be better than Flacco, Ryan, and Bradford. Remember that Flacco wasn't even considered a top flight QB until after his last season, then all of a sudden, his stock took a huge boost during that offseason. Bradford was the clear cut #1 QB last yr only cus there wasn't another QB worth taking that high. A lot of analysts suggested that had Locker decided to come out early, he would have challenged Bradford for the #1 pick. The thing with Luck is that he makes everyone around him better. It also helps that he's got a great offensive minded coach that knows how to develop a QB. The o-linemen in Stanford are dominant, but they wont be high draft picks. Luck makes them look good cus of his ability to make the quick reads and get the ball to his receiver. It also helps that he's mobile around the pocket and can be a threat to run. As far as his accuracy past 20-30 yards, I think people tend to underrate that skill. Against Oregon State, he was forced to move up the pocket due to pressure and flung the ball 42 yards to his receiver without even setting his feet. Luck is very accurate.

As for Locker, I wasn't just talking about his mobility. I know that footwork is a completely different attribute to posses. Locker is fluid when he drops back and you can see him use his back leg to give more umph on his throws. I think if he were to have a coach like Harbaugh develop him, he would become a good QB in the NFL.

As of right now, I see Cam becoming a faster Josh Freeman. I compared him to Vince Young in the past, but Josh Freeman would probably be his ceiling. It really depends on his maturity, and if he wants to continue to work hard to get better. I see no relation to Ben besides maybe their arm strength. Ben used to have happy feet, but he's very good in the pocket and can still be a threat on the run.

You do make some valid points though.

I know nothing about either of these guys. I've watched maybe 3 quarters worth of their play, combined. So I'm relying on what I read about them, and I just read somewhere that Mallet may be a character concern. They made it sound like he's not a particularly hard worker.

Has anybody else heard that? Or know where its coming from?

I wish I could remember where I saw it, so I could post a link. But I can't.

The debate really boils down to this, regardless of who we take. Do we want a player than can come in and get significant playing time and/or start immediately or do you want a project player? My preference is for the player that can contribute to some degree next season. With that being said, IF we have a coaching staff that can has a track record of developing successful QBs and IF there is a player available who has talent that screams he is worth taking the time to develop over 1-3 seasons, take the player. I like Andrew Luck, Kellen Moore, and Cam Newton. Most likely, Luck is gone when we pick and we don't have to go for Moore that high in the first, leaving only Newton.

If this franchise is willing to wait until 2012 to see Newton get significant playing time (similar to how Montana sat nearly all of 1979 and eventually took over in 1980), then go for it. However, we also are going to have to hit a home run with our 2nd and 3rd round picks (speedy receiver to compliment Crabtree and a CB). Trading up for an extra 2nd rounder may be an option as well, because in spite of what people believe, this team doesn't have that many holes.

None of this will make a difference though if we don't get a solid front office and coaching staff in order.

Any of you think Cam will be a first rounder?The dude looked better and better every week.