The Christian Ponder Bandwagon

Its ok to be high on newton or gabbert, but to suggest they are worthy of the 7 spot, well that's just....moronic.

[ Edited by DaveTheShocker on Jan 28, 2011 at 13:52:35 ]

Because of his history of injuries, I would not want him as the ONLY QB project. I actually want to QB projects at the same time!! Then, if one does not turn out to be good, then maybe the other will.......

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
Its ok to be high on newton or gabbert, but to suggest they are worthy of the 7 spot, well that's just....moronic.

So if a respected draft analyst like Mayock (after intense film study and inquiries into what other NFL personnel are saying) ends up projecting Gabbert as a good fit for us at #7, you're saying he's a moron?

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
My point is alot of people try to belittle the CP supporters with their "holier than thou" attitude, then go post about gabbert somewhere else, who is by far the most incomplete qb prospect projected to be taken where he is.

You dont like those that belittle CP supporters yet you call those that do "moronic" and "holier than thou"? I just find this ironic more than moronic.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
My point is alot of people try to belittle the CP supporters with their "holier than thou" attitude, then go post about gabbert somewhere else, who is by far the most incomplete qb prospect projected to be taken where he is.

You dont like those that belittle CP supporters yet you call those that do "moronic" and "holier than thou"? I just find this ironic more than moronic.

Post of the day.

I like the fact that Ponder was able to string together at least two seasons of over 60% completion, and was having a great year in '09 (almost 70%) before the injury. Not even Andrew Luck has been able to do that (over 70% in '10, but only 56% in '09).

I'm not saying Ponder is better than Luck, but it's no small feat to string together that type of consistency.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
Its ok to be high on newton or gabbert, but to suggest they are worthy of the 7 spot, well that's just....moronic.

So if a respected draft analyst like Mayock (after intense film study and inquiries into what other NFL personnel are saying) ends up projecting Gabbert as a good fit for us at #7, you're saying he's a moron?

Yes.

Just because QB is a glaring need, does not mean we reach for the highest ranked qb in a thin qb class (as far as hands down stars.) Doing that, instead of drafting one of highly touted CBs or DEs that are more sure picks is stupid. I don't care what analyst suggests it. Remember they compared alex smith to brett favre just before the draft, so their opinion is just as credible (or not) as that of an educated fan of the sport.

[ Edited by DaveTheShocker on Jan 28, 2011 at 14:27:12 ]

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
^^ Wasn't try to be an ass with the guy; just trying to make the point that people just have different perspectives on things.

I know. It's just funny when new people come on here and started calling people names.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
I like the fact that Ponder was able to string together at least two seasons of over 60% completion, and was having a great year in '09 (almost 70%) before the injury. Not even Andrew Luck has been able to do that (over 70% in '10, but only 56% in '09).

I'm not saying Ponder is better than Luck, but it's no small feat to string together that type of consistency.

You see, aside from the fact that I'm an a**hole, we aren't so different, you and I.

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
I like the fact that Ponder was able to string together at least two seasons of over 60% completion, and was having a great year in '09 (almost 70%) before the injury. Not even Andrew Luck has been able to do that (over 70% in '10, but only 56% in '09).

I'm not saying Ponder is better than Luck, but it's no small feat to string together that type of consistency.

You see, aside from the fact that I'm an a**hole, we aren't so different, you and I.

Oh.... maybe just a bit.

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
Its ok to be high on newton or gabbert, but to suggest they are worthy of the 7 spot, well that's just....moronic.

So if a respected draft analyst like Mayock (after intense film study and inquiries into what other NFL personnel are saying) ends up projecting Gabbert as a good fit for us at #7, you're saying he's a moron?

Yes.

Just because QB is a glaring need, does not mean we reach for the highest ranked qb in a thin qb class (as far as hands down stars.) Doing that, instead of drafting one of highly touted CBs or DEs that are more sure picks is stupid. I don't care what analyst suggests it. Remember they compared alex smith to brett favre just before the draft, so their opinion is just as credible (or not) as that of an educated fan of the sport.

I don't know who "they" was who compared Smith to Favre, but I'd bet good money it wasn't Mayock.

So two things can be equally true. I actually agree with you that we should take a pass rusher at #7, and grab a QB later in the draft. However, I disagree that taking a QB at #7 is a moronic, stupid thing to do. If that's the direction we took, I would trust the judgement of people who do this for a living (guys like Mayock and specifically, Harbaugh/Baalke) over my own personal evaluation or that of everyone else on this board.

Reason being, these guys see/hear things that we're not privvy to, and they get to meet these kids and get a better understanding of what they're all about. That information is part of the evaluation process that the casual fan doesn't have access to, so when the final decision is made, they're at least informed beyond anything we can ever hope for.

That doesn't always guarantee success of course, but if I was a betting man, I'd place my money on the professionals over amatuers like me and you.

[ Edited by GhostofFredDean74 on Jan 28, 2011 at 14:43:30 ]

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
Its ok to be high on newton or gabbert, but to suggest they are worthy of the 7 spot, well that's just....moronic.

So if a respected draft analyst like Mayock (after intense film study and inquiries into what other NFL personnel are saying) ends up projecting Gabbert as a good fit for us at #7, you're saying he's a moron?

Yes.

Just because QB is a glaring need, does not mean we reach for the highest ranked qb in a thin qb class (as far as hands down stars.) Doing that, instead of drafting one of highly touted CBs or DEs that are more sure picks is stupid. I don't care what analyst suggests it. Remember they compared alex smith to brett favre just before the draft, so their opinion is just as credible (or not) as that of an educated fan of the sport.

I don't know who "they" was who compared Smith to Favre, but I'd bet good money it wasn't Mayock.

So two things can be equally true. I actually agree with you that we should take a pass rusher at #7, and grab a QB later in the draft. However, I disagree that taking a QB at #7 is moronic, stupid thing to do. I would trust the judgement of people who do this for a living (guys like Mayock and specifically, Harbaugh/Baalke) over my own personal evaluation or that of everyone else on this board.

These guys see things that we're not privvy to, and they get to meet these kids and get a better understanding of what they're all about. That information is part of the evaluation process that the casual fan doesn't have access to, so when the final decision is made, they're at least informed beyond anything we can ever hope for.

That doesn't always guarantee success of course, but if I was a betting man, I'd place my money on the professionals over amatuers like me and you.

Nothing wrong with taking a qb at 7, just not in this draft. The value of the pick that any qb represents this year at 7 just isn't enough to warrant that kind of contract and its too risky when yout have a couple of nfl ready prospects on the board there. I would have traded the house for Andrew Luck no questions asked because I know he's going to be that good.

Also, I have a problem with the combine as far as qbs are concerned because it improves the draft stock of athletes, and hurts the true instinctual quarterbacks who don't run their 40 like others. This is exactly why you see alot of bust picks, because opinions on the player become based off what he does at the combine instead of on the field. I dont remember Rodgers combine, but I know Alex did really well there. When comparing the two on how they played, it was a no brainer AR was suppose to be our guy.

All in all, you'll see the newtons and lockers of the world light up the combine and get taken early, and you'll see the daltons, ponders, and devlins prove to be just as capable football players with proper coaching.

[ Edited by DaveTheShocker on Jan 28, 2011 at 14:55:37 ]

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
Its ok to be high on newton or gabbert, but to suggest they are worthy of the 7 spot, well that's just....moronic.

So if a respected draft analyst like Mayock (after intense film study and inquiries into what other NFL personnel are saying) ends up projecting Gabbert as a good fit for us at #7, you're saying he's a moron?

Yes.

Just because QB is a glaring need, does not mean we reach for the highest ranked qb in a thin qb class (as far as hands down stars.) Doing that, instead of drafting one of highly touted CBs or DEs that are more sure picks is stupid. I don't care what analyst suggests it. Remember they compared alex smith to brett favre just before the draft, so their opinion is just as credible (or not) as that of an educated fan of the sport.

I don't know who "they" was who compared Smith to Favre, but I'd bet good money it wasn't Mayock.

So two things can be equally true. I actually agree with you that we should take a pass rusher at #7, and grab a QB later in the draft. However, I disagree that taking a QB at #7 is moronic, stupid thing to do. I would trust the judgement of people who do this for a living (guys like Mayock and specifically, Harbaugh/Baalke) over my own personal evaluation or that of everyone else on this board.

These guys see things that we're not privvy to, and they get to meet these kids and get a better understanding of what they're all about. That information is part of the evaluation process that the casual fan doesn't have access to, so when the final decision is made, they're at least informed beyond anything we can ever hope for.

That doesn't always guarantee success of course, but if I was a betting man, I'd place my money on the professionals over amatuers like me and you.

Nothing wrong with taking a qb at 7, just not in this draft. The value of the pick that any qb represents this year at 7 just isn't enough to warrant that kind of contract and its too risky when yout have a couple of nfl ready prospects on the board there. I would have traded the house for Andrew Luck no questions asked because I know he's going to be that good.

Also, I have a problem with the combine as far as qbs are concerned because it improves the draft stock of athletes, and hurts the true instinctual quarterbacks who don't run their 40 like others. This is exactly why you see alot of bust picks, because opinions on the player become based off what he does at the combine instead of on the field. I dont remember Rodgers combine, but I know Alex did really well there. When comparing the two on how they played, it was a no brainer AR was suppose to be our guy.

All in all, you'll see the newtons and lockers of the world light up the combine and get taken early, and you'll see the daltons, ponders, and devlins prove to be just as capable football players with proper coaching.

That's the question, though. Even with proper coaching, can guys like Dalton, Ponder or Devlin be "just as capable" QBs as Locker and Newton, if they were given the same type of "proper coaching." The latter have much higher ceilings to work with when it comes to their athletic skill-set, so why not project that same type of growth/development for Jake and Cam after being taught how to play QB by great coaching staffs?

I'm playing devil's advocate here.

Because in my opinion, those later round qbs have natural quarterback instincts and mechanics. Throwing motion, pocket presence, poise, etc. these are essential qb qualities that are easily overshadowed by a fast 40, or cams 20 rushing tds. I'm not saying draft a pure quarterback with cement feet, but the first thing you should look at is how they play their position and ask yourself: Will this transfer over to the nfl? Look at CP, he plays in a mixed offense, plenty of under center snaps, and he does all the little things correct.

Those natural qb qualities can't really be taught. At least not nearly as easily as other aspects like improving athleticism.

Originally posted by DaveTheShocker:
Because in my opinion, those later round qbs have natural quarterback instincts and mechanics. Throwing motion, pocket presence, poise, etc. these are essential qb qualities that are easily overshadowed by a fast 40, or cams 20 rushing tds. I'm not saying draft a pure quarterback with cement feet, but the first thing you should look at is how they play their position and ask yourself: Will this transfer over to the nfl? Look at CP, he plays in a mixed offense, plenty of under center snaps, and he does all the little things correct.

Those natural qb qualities can't really be taught. At least not nearly as easily as other aspects like improving athleticism.

I agree that Locker doesn't appear to have those natural QB qualities. But if you're saying Gabbert or even Newton doesn't, I totally disagree. Both clearly need refining in a lot of areas, but they do possess natural QB qualities in varying degrees (movement in the pocket to extend the play, touch and accuracy from the pocket and on the move, and the natural leadership skills that every great QB needs).

There's a lot to work with when you're talking about Newton and Gabbert natural QB qualities; less so regarding Locker (IMO).