Mac Jones-QB-Jaguars

So Mac Jones is either Tom Brady, Joe Montana, Matt Ryan or Kirk Cousins. Holy f**king s**t people have lost the plot

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
So Mac Jones is either Tom Brady, Joe Montana, Matt Ryan or Kirk Cousins. Holy f**king s**t people have lost the plot

When they cant use game film or measurables. Go to comparaisons. Oh he is so smart & Tom Brady is smart. So he can be Tom Brady.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
But we don't know what any of these guys will be yet, so we can't know what "more than" means at this point.

List the top 10 QBs under 30 and you won't see any Mac Jones types. So the only hope you have is he becomes Tom Brady and if you are trading to #3 you don't do that for "well he can be Tom Brady" because he won't be Tom Brady.

What is a Mac Jones type? When is the last time, in fact, that a college prospect that was a pure pocket passer was ranked in the top 5? The reason the top 10 QBs are what they are is because that's what the majority of the college field looks like.

Also, Baker Mayfield. Joe Burrow. In this draft there's ONE guy in the top six that is a pocket passer. It is unsurprising the same percentage translates to the NFL, given that the college pool is full of mobile guys.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by WINiner:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Rathof44:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
It could be a monster success too. You look at all of the most successful QB's over the past 30 years and skill sets are all OVER the place from top physical traits to embarrassing physical traits to quick processors to slower processors to average skills across the board (master of none) to top in-your-face to quiet leadership skills, etc.

If there was one formula, we wouldn't be having this discussion. And to think YOU know now as a fan when professionals have come nowhere close to being good at these evaluations, is a bit much.

The NFL isn't the same as it was 30 years ago... Rules are different, play calling is different, overall talent and WHO is learning to play QB at a young age is much different then 30 years ago.

The fact that there hasn't been a successful QB with his skill set drafted in the past 5 yrs is proof of that. There are dudes that can play like him that come out every yr, they just don't happen to play on Bama and put up stupid numbers like he did. Like I said if Jones played for Iowa he wouldn't be a top 10 pick, not even close.

Sure it is. You still had cannon arms like Elway with quick-release QB's like Marino and deep ball masters like Moon, insane athletes like Michael Vick, etc.

Today, they're just different names but varying skill sets remain, all over the place.

Name one great pure pocket passer in the NFL under the age of 30?

Mahomes. He only rushes 100-300 yards a year. He's as pure as it gets.

I'd not call Mahomes a pure pocket passer, and I think you'd be far-fetched to find many people who would. Dude scrambles a LOT, he's just really adept at remaining behind the line of scrimmage to deliver the ball. Having said that, when he does run for gains Mahomes can hurt you so the threat is enough to give him advantages pure pockets QB's don't have.

FWIW at Texas Tech Mahomes had 22 TDs rushing TDs his last two years.

I watch more Big 12 games than anything else. I remember Mahomes being a major running threat at TT.

He had 131 rushing attempts in each of those last two seasons. He wasn't a Justin Fields type of runner, certainly, but part of his game was using his feet.

Yup, just made the same point few pages back. It'll be Shanny legacy for good or bad: "There's the idiot who gave up all those first rounders for the guy still backing up Jimmy" or "Wow, Shanny saw what none of us did, a,SB with Jones in only his second year" My money is on the first scenario.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by NCommand:
It could be a monster success too. You look at all of the most successful QB's over the past 30 years and skill sets are all OVER the place from top physical traits to embarrassing physical traits to quick processors to slower processors to average skills across the board (master of none) to top in-your-face to quiet leadership skills, etc.

If there was one formula, we wouldn't be having this discussion. And to think YOU know now as a fan when professionals have come nowhere close to being good at these evaluations, is a bit much.

30 years ago Lamar Jackson is playing WR not winning an MVP as a QB. Times change. You either get on board or get left behind.

LOL. You never heard of Michael Vick or Randall Cunningham?

WR?

I mean Randall Cunningham was a black guy and a great athlete too,...but I don't think that's what the OP was trying to parallel,...lol. Cunningham's nothing like Lamar. Cunningham played for 3 years @ UNLV and barely amassed 200 yards rushing total (while Lamar was over 4,000 yards) so at best,...this is extremely lazy on your part.

I think he means more of the Taysum Hill types,...guys that are clearly more athletic and can fill in elsewhere on the field,...instead of waiting for their passing to develop more. They were not going to design more of the offense around their ability to run,...working them in more and more in the passing game. Going back,..Slash was as close as we got and that was still part-time duty in the mid/late 90's.

But yes,...he wanted to be a QB and they wanted him to be everything else,...which validates the OP's point.

In college? Yes. In the pros,...no.

If it were today Kordell would've 100% have been given a shot to just be himself.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
But we don't know what any of these guys will be yet, so we can't know what "more than" means at this point.

List the top 10 QBs under 30 and you won't see any Mac Jones types. So the only hope you have is he becomes Tom Brady and if you are trading to #3 you don't do that for "well he can be Tom Brady" because he won't be Tom Brady.

What is a Mac Jones type? When is the last time, in fact, that a college prospect that was a pure pocket passer was ranked in the top 5? The reason the top 10 QBs are what they are is because that's what the majority of the college field looks like.

Also, Baker Mayfield. Joe Burrow. In this draft there's ONE guy in the top six that is a pocket passer. It is unsurprising the same percentage translates to the NFL, given that the college pool is full of mobile guys.

Disagree. Burrow had 142 yds in 10 games, averaged over 375 in two years at LSU.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
But we don't know what any of these guys will be yet, so we can't know what "more than" means at this point.

List the top 10 QBs under 30 and you won't see any Mac Jones types. So the only hope you have is he becomes Tom Brady and if you are trading to #3 you don't do that for "well he can be Tom Brady" because he won't be Tom Brady.

What is a Mac Jones type? When is the last time, in fact, that a college prospect that was a pure pocket passer was ranked in the top 5? The reason the top 10 QBs are what they are is because that's what the majority of the college field looks like.

Also, Baker Mayfield. Joe Burrow. In this draft there's ONE guy in the top six that is a pocket passer. It is unsurprising the same percentage translates to the NFL, given that the college pool is full of mobile guys.

Joe Burrow at LSU: 820 rushing yards & 13 TDs in 38 starts.

Baker Mayfield at Okl: 1,083 yards & 21 TDs in 41 starts.

Mac Jones at Alabama: 42 yards and 2 TDs in 30 starts.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
But we don't know what any of these guys will be yet, so we can't know what "more than" means at this point.

List the top 10 QBs under 30 and you won't see any Mac Jones types. So the only hope you have is he becomes Tom Brady and if you are trading to #3 you don't do that for "well he can be Tom Brady" because he won't be Tom Brady.

What is a Mac Jones type? When is the last time, in fact, that a college prospect that was a pure pocket passer was ranked in the top 5? The reason the top 10 QBs are what they are is because that's what the majority of the college field looks like.

Also, Baker Mayfield. Joe Burrow. In this draft there's ONE guy in the top six that is a pocket passer. It is unsurprising the same percentage translates to the NFL, given that the college pool is full of mobile guys.

Joe Burrow at LSU: 820 rushing yards & 13 TDs in 38 starts.

Baker Mayfield at Okl: 1,083 yards & 21 TDs in 41 starts.

Mac Jones at Alabama: 42 yards and 2 TDs in 30 starts.

Hey thats 1.4 yds/game.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
There are literally HUNDREDS of guys who never got much better at these things. Thousands probably. We have three on our team the last few years. We also had several others: Kaepernick, Gabbert, Barkley, Hoyer, Shaun, Troy Smith, David Carr, and on and on. The only one of our QBs the last 15 years that actually got appreciably better at the mental side of the game is Smith -- and he was TERRIBLE at it before then, so it's not like he became elite.

And there's SO MUCH context to every single case...you're throwing it all into one bag, which is silly.

IF you don't have the right coaching staff or roster you're f**ked. IF you're lazy and can't put the time in your f**ked. IF you get thrown out there too quickly and it's overwhelming/you're not prepared...you're f**ked.

I can point out HUNDREDS of guys coming out of college that were regarded as smart and could read coverages that failed all the same.

It is a learned trait, you're not born with the god given ability to read coverages lol. YOU LEARN THAT. Thinking a guy is a finished product regarding X's and O's At 20-22 is absurd.

That's because it's not about being smart or reading coverages. It's about visual instinct.

Agree, It's more a feeling/instinct type of *thinking* -- than a logical sherlock homes deduction kind of thinking. To a certain extent you can weaken it by throwing a rookie into the fire and destroying his confidence, or you can build up that so called *instinct* with some sort of film study and reps, but just like physical strength, each person has their baseline - and you can modify that to a certain extent, but it's not something that you can totally learn, there are limitations even to playbook learning. Just like running the 4.4 - to a certain extent using techniques - you can improve your forty time (losing weight, eating right, certain kinds of weight training) but it will hover around whatever baseline you were born with. I think that's how *instinct* kind of works.

QBs can be taught to read coverages in different ways depending on the coach they work with (high school to college to pros). If it's consistent in the manner that he is taught going from college to pros, the transition is easier and there is a better chance for the QB to improve his processing. If he goes to the NFL and is asked to re-wire his brain, that stunts the development in this area of his game. He may have to start from level 1 and work his way back up.

At one point Air Raid QBs were not having success because once they got to the NFL their reads were different and that contributed to their lack of success. Once NFL coaches started molding the NFL playbook to incorporate more of what their QB was doing in college, we saw more young QBs have early success. I do think there is an inborn aspect to this (reading coverages quickly), but it can be aided by what the QB is asked to do in the NFL and how similar or different it is from what he did in college.

It's not about reading coverages. what is being discussed is a visual instinct.

What is this "visual instinct" used for regarding what we are discussing?

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Sure it is. You still had cannon arms like Elway with quick-release QB's like Marino and deep ball masters like Moon, insane athletes like Michael Vick, etc.

Today, they're just different names but varying skill sets remain, all over the place.

and Elway Marino and moon all move around plenty....none of them only threw from outside of the pocket 11% of the time.

pure pocket passers under the age of 30 that are killing it in today's league? Doesn't exist.

So did Joe Montana and Elvis Grbac, Jeff Garcia, etc.

Just because you're primarily a pocket passer doesn't mean you need to be an athletic freak to be "mobile." Once again you're focused on extremes...Fields nearly ran a 4.3!!!

There's all levels just like with the mental game of QBing and they can and HAVE been successful and will continue to be.

My point still stands...even with new trends towards althetic freaks, you're still going to have successful QB's with varying skill sets all over the place. No different than when the league tended towards all pro-style pocket passers with 4 years of experience until a Michael Vick came along. And then the spread system.

While the league is cyclical, the varying skill sets of success will always remain.

Originally posted by boomer49er:

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by WINiner:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Rathof44:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
It could be a monster success too. You look at all of the most successful QB's over the past 30 years and skill sets are all OVER the place from top physical traits to embarrassing physical traits to quick processors to slower processors to average skills across the board (master of none) to top in-your-face to quiet leadership skills, etc.

If there was one formula, we wouldn't be having this discussion. And to think YOU know now as a fan when professionals have come nowhere close to being good at these evaluations, is a bit much.

The NFL isn't the same as it was 30 years ago... Rules are different, play calling is different, overall talent and WHO is learning to play QB at a young age is much different then 30 years ago.

The fact that there hasn't been a successful QB with his skill set drafted in the past 5 yrs is proof of that. There are dudes that can play like him that come out every yr, they just don't happen to play on Bama and put up stupid numbers like he did. Like I said if Jones played for Iowa he wouldn't be a top 10 pick, not even close.

Sure it is. You still had cannon arms like Elway with quick-release QB's like Marino and deep ball masters like Moon, insane athletes like Michael Vick, etc.

Today, they're just different names but varying skill sets remain, all over the place.

Name one great pure pocket passer in the NFL under the age of 30?

Mahomes. He only rushes 100-300 yards a year. He's as pure as it gets.

I'd not call Mahomes a pure pocket passer, and I think you'd be far-fetched to find many people who would. Dude scrambles a LOT, he's just really adept at remaining behind the line of scrimmage to deliver the ball. Having said that, when he does run for gains Mahomes can hurt you so the threat is enough to give him advantages pure pockets QB's don't have.

FWIW at Texas Tech Mahomes had 22 TDs rushing TDs his last two years.

I watch more Big 12 games than anything else. I remember Mahomes being a major running threat at TT.

He had 131 rushing attempts in each of those last two seasons. He wasn't a Justin Fields type of runner, certainly, but part of his game was using his feet.

Yet in the NFL, his focus is on passing first from the pocket, then scrambling around behind the line of scrimmage to pass and finally, a few design runs and scrambles of low degree. He's that Steve Young that everyone wants (including back then).

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
There are literally HUNDREDS of guys who never got much better at these things. Thousands probably. We have three on our team the last few years. We also had several others: Kaepernick, Gabbert, Barkley, Hoyer, Shaun, Troy Smith, David Carr, and on and on. The only one of our QBs the last 15 years that actually got appreciably better at the mental side of the game is Smith -- and he was TERRIBLE at it before then, so it's not like he became elite.

And there's SO MUCH context to every single case...you're throwing it all into one bag, which is silly.

IF you don't have the right coaching staff or roster you're f**ked. IF you're lazy and can't put the time in your f**ked. IF you get thrown out there too quickly and it's overwhelming/you're not prepared...you're f**ked.

I can point out HUNDREDS of guys coming out of college that were regarded as smart and could read coverages that failed all the same.

It is a learned trait, you're not born with the god given ability to read coverages lol. YOU LEARN THAT. Thinking a guy is a finished product regarding X's and O's At 20-22 is absurd.

That's because it's not about being smart or reading coverages. It's about visual instinct.

Agree, It's more a feeling/instinct type of *thinking* -- than a logical sherlock homes deduction kind of thinking. To a certain extent you can weaken it by throwing a rookie into the fire and destroying his confidence, or you can build up that so called *instinct* with some sort of film study and reps, but just like physical strength, each person has their baseline - and you can modify that to a certain extent, but it's not something that you can totally learn, there are limitations even to playbook learning. Just like running the 4.4 - to a certain extent using techniques - you can improve your forty time (losing weight, eating right, certain kinds of weight training) but it will hover around whatever baseline you were born with. I think that's how *instinct* kind of works.

QBs can be taught to read coverages in different ways depending on the coach they work with (high school to college to pros). If it's consistent in the manner that he is taught going from college to pros, the transition is easier and there is a better chance for the QB to improve his processing. If he goes to the NFL and is asked to re-wire his brain, that stunts the development in this area of his game. He may have to start from level 1 and work his way back up.

At one point Air Raid QBs were not having success because once they got to the NFL their reads were different and that contributed to their lack of success. Once NFL coaches started molding the NFL playbook to incorporate more of what their QB was doing in college, we saw more young QBs have early success. I do think there is an inborn aspect to this (reading coverages quickly), but it can be aided by what the QB is asked to do in the NFL and how similar or different it is from what he did in college.

They can..... but people sometimes act like it is easy and no big issue for them to learn. It is. Some players simply will never have the processing ability to read a defense at a high level. Many players have failed because of this. Just like Footwork and Mechanics can be taught but people like Jimmy who has had two of the best coach in the NFL and spent years behind the best QB ever, they still suck at these things. I would much rather have a guy I already know is Capable of these things, especially when it comes to something as important as reading a defense. I like that a lot more than the route of he might not be good at these things now but we can teach him.

Originally posted by Rathof44:
Nope. 272, 218, 308 yds rushing. 200-300 yds is hardly an immobile pocket guy.Think Brady-esque, less than 120 ydsseason. 8yds per game roughly.

LOL. That's nothing.

Originally posted by Bloodless:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
There are literally HUNDREDS of guys who never got much better at these things. Thousands probably. We have three on our team the last few years. We also had several others: Kaepernick, Gabbert, Barkley, Hoyer, Shaun, Troy Smith, David Carr, and on and on. The only one of our QBs the last 15 years that actually got appreciably better at the mental side of the game is Smith -- and he was TERRIBLE at it before then, so it's not like he became elite.

And there's SO MUCH context to every single case...you're throwing it all into one bag, which is silly.

IF you don't have the right coaching staff or roster you're f**ked. IF you're lazy and can't put the time in your f**ked. IF you get thrown out there too quickly and it's overwhelming/you're not prepared...you're f**ked.

I can point out HUNDREDS of guys coming out of college that were regarded as smart and could read coverages that failed all the same.

It is a learned trait, you're not born with the god given ability to read coverages lol. YOU LEARN THAT. Thinking a guy is a finished product regarding X's and O's At 20-22 is absurd.

That's because it's not about being smart or reading coverages. It's about visual instinct.

Agree, It's more a feeling/instinct type of *thinking* -- than a logical sherlock homes deduction kind of thinking. To a certain extent you can weaken it by throwing a rookie into the fire and destroying his confidence, or you can build up that so called *instinct* with some sort of film study and reps, but just like physical strength, each person has their baseline - and you can modify that to a certain extent, but it's not something that you can totally learn, there are limitations even to playbook learning. Just like running the 4.4 - to a certain extent using techniques - you can improve your forty time (losing weight, eating right, certain kinds of weight training) but it will hover around whatever baseline you were born with. I think that's how *instinct* kind of works.

QBs can be taught to read coverages in different ways depending on the coach they work with (high school to college to pros). If it's consistent in the manner that he is taught going from college to pros, the transition is easier and there is a better chance for the QB to improve his processing. If he goes to the NFL and is asked to re-wire his brain, that stunts the development in this area of his game. He may have to start from level 1 and work his way back up.

At one point Air Raid QBs were not having success because once they got to the NFL their reads were different and that contributed to their lack of success. Once NFL coaches started molding the NFL playbook to incorporate more of what their QB was doing in college, we saw more young QBs have early success. I do think there is an inborn aspect to this (reading coverages quickly), but it can be aided by what the QB is asked to do in the NFL and how similar or different it is from what he did in college.

They can..... but people sometimes act like it is easy and no big issue for them to learn. It is. Some players simply will never have the processing ability to read a defense at a high level. Many players have failed because of this. Just like Footwork and Mechanics can be taught but people like Jimmy who has had two of the best coach in the NFL and spent years behind the best QB ever, they still suck at these things. I would much rather have a guy I already know is Capable of these things, especially when it comes to something as important as reading a defense. I like that a lot more than the route of he might not be good at these things now but we can teach him.

I agree with you. Some QBs will simply 'get it' easier and faster than others when it comes to understanding what to look for and what to do post snap. There's definitely an instinct factor to it. When it comes to choosing the QB, it's up to the coach to determine what he values. If the coach believes his scheme can make the QB reads easier, which is what Kyle's system does, then that can play a role into what the coach prioritizes in his QB.