Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot

Avatar

Posted: 2/21/2012 2:43 PM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 



SoulDawg74 wrote:

 

We also see that the chance of having a great season in touchdowns per attempt decreases each time weight increases. We didn’t see this trend in the first quarterback graph, however, so I’d say that that is just a mere coincidence.


I thought there was really a vegas line, dude. Put me down for "I don't care because I know what he can do".

This last part is only true because Jamarcus was so bad he got benched too early to skew this stat.  Seriously, makes a statement about the ability to stand and deliver in the pocket to a degree I guess.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm-_Cnyk3u0

Last edited 2/21/2012 2:45 PM by Nasdaq

Posted: 2/21/2012 3:05 PM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 


"I thought there was really a vegas line, dude. Put me down for "I don't care because I know what he can do"."

-- We all can see what he did at Baylor in the Big 12. Makes him no different than any other college guy.

The hard part for scouts is figuring out what a guy can/will do in the NFL. College stats and size are factors, of course. Ryan Leaf was a first rounder. Tom Brady was a 6th rounder.

RG3 has a solid background both in football and it seems in life. His size may be a factor someone uses. I wonder what the reaction would be if a paid scout said "I don't care about a QB's size"? Heck, if you can get the opinion off an internet forum, why are you paying for it?

I think size does matter as a factor. It has to be considered just like his college career, his personality, his injury status and his injury "toughness" to the extent it can be measured. The whole thing has to be looked at- including the team's system, players and coaches a guy might go to.
Avatar

Posted: 2/21/2012 11:23 PM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 



Nasdaq wrote:
SoulDawg74 wrote:

 

We also see that the chance of having a great season in touchdowns per attempt decreases each time weight increases. We didn’t see this trend in the first quarterback graph, however, so I’d say that that is just a mere coincidence.


I thought there was really a vegas line, dude. Put me down for "I don't care because I know what he can do".

This last part is only true because Jamarcus was so bad he got benched too early to skew this stat.  Seriously, makes a statement about the ability to stand and deliver in the pocket to a degree I guess.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm-_Cnyk3u0
SD:

Not my comments , everything after the quote was the article .

stat fodder for the Prosecutor .

Me  I like the eyeball test and the smell test ., he  clears em both like like a pole vaulter setting a new World record  and pushing the bar a clear two feet above the old mark.

The best QB in the world was Joe montana .

RG3 is the same size  with more speed a better arm  enough smarts to pursue a law degree , and a rep that his football acumen beats his book smarts  which is quire a feat considering   he graduated in four years with a Masters while posting a 3.67 GPA.


SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Avatar

Posted: 2/22/2012 12:19 AM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 


Hey, SD. Just out of curiosity what was your opinion of Shurmer's play-calling last year? Do you think that having an inexperienced 6'1.5" rookie QB is going to somehow grow him a set of play-calling nads? Or do you think, as I do, that he's going to handcuff RGIII by calling runs and 3 yard outs to TE"s on EVERY first and second down in the first half, leaving the rookie with the same impossible 3rd and longs that he set McCoy up with last year?  That was the norm. The guy didn't move the ball all year unless he was down two scores and had to throw it. His play-calling to me was the worst thing about the 2011 team, without a close second. The predictability of his offense was embarrassing and dysfunctional. I think your love for RGIII and dislike of McCoy is blinding you to the most glaring problem this team had last year. How well do you think Tom Brady and the Pats would do if Belichick regularly called either a run or a 3 yard out on every 1st and 2nd down on every first half play? They would suck. That's why HE doesn't do that. Why would Shurmer? And don't say talent. When your talent is suspect, your play-calling needs to be MORE creative, not less. The alternative is rudderless suck. When your talent isn't great, you'd better call plays like freaking Bill Walsh on his best day. If you don't, then you're TRYING to lose. Did I just explain how we only won 4 games? I think I did. Shurmer's manufactured 3 and outs killed our defense by continually putting them back onto the field, and they killed our skill position players on offense by putting them into too many low percentage, high risk situations on 3rd down.

To me, McCoy is an unknown because Shurmer butchered the offense in 2011. I suppose a keen talent evaluator could still evaluate Colt's 2011 performance even with a seemingly weak supporting cast in a horrible offense, but only by comparing it to other QB's performance on 3rd and long. Maybe that's what Heckert meant when he said you could still evaluate the QB. I don't have that keen QB eye that some on this board can claim, but the hard evidence of Shurmer's horrible play-calling is compelling.

Either Shurmer is smart and used his predictable play-calling to sabotage the season so we'd get a better draft position, or he's as dumb as a post as a play-caller and Uncle Mike hasn't taken that privilege away yet. Two guesses as to which one I fear it is.

To the OP. Under 6.185... 6'2" exactly.



SoulDawg74 wrote:
Nasdaq wrote:
SoulDawg74 wrote:

 

We also see that the chance of having a great season in touchdowns per attempt decreases each time weight increases. We didn’t see this trend in the first quarterback graph, however, so I’d say that that is just a mere coincidence.


I thought there was really a vegas line, dude. Put me down for "I don't care because I know what he can do".

This last part is only true because Jamarcus was so bad he got benched too early to skew this stat.  Seriously, makes a statement about the ability to stand and deliver in the pocket to a degree I guess.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm-_Cnyk3u0
SD:

Not my comments , everything after the quote was the article .

stat fodder for the Prosecutor .

Me  I like the eyeball test and the smell test ., he  clears em both like like a pole vaulter setting a new World record  and pushing the bar a clear two feet above the old mark.

The best QB in the world was Joe montana .

RG3 is the same size  with more speed a better arm  enough smarts to pursue a law degree , and a rep that his football acumen beats his book smarts  which is quire a feat considering   he graduated in four years with a Masters while posting a 3.67 GPA.


SoulDawg

Avatar

Posted: 2/22/2012 7:59 AM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 


AL>

 Do you think that having an inexperienced 6'1.5" rookie QB is going to somehow grow him a set of play-calling nads? Or do you think, as I do, that he's going to handcuff RGIII by calling runs and 3 yard outs to TE"s on EVERY first and second down in the first half, leaving the rookie with the same impossible 3rd and longs that he set McCoy up with last year?  That was the norm. The guy didn't move the ball all year unless he was down two scores and had to throw it. His play-calling to me was the worst thing about the 2011 team, without a close second. The predictability of his offense was embarrassing and dysfunctional. I think your love for RGIII and dislike of McCoy is blinding you to the most glaring problem this team had last year.

SD:

My critique of Mccoy isn't a prop to build up RG3 .

Colts liabilities are openly apparent , and have been for two years .

I said he wasn't good enough to proceed with in Year 2011 as the starter  and we had to hedge ur bets  , by trading up for Cam newton and fix the problem , or sign Hasselback in free agency and draft Locker to mentor both guys , while adding  immediate stability to the position with Matt as starter and have the vet to coach these guys up to the WCO , it gave us a Young  Future starter with legit NFL  talent while Colt provided immediate depth .

None of that was followed  Colt proceeded to suck sheeit thru a straw with his performance and proved to tbe the worst starter in the divison and one of the worst starters in all of football .

I said he was the sixth best QB in our division and I wasn't exaggerating , I was really being too kind .

Wallace in relief experienced none of the problems you claim handicapped Colt in executing this offense vs the ttoughest leg of our shedule vs division opponents all in the playoff hunt.

The WCo uses short passes like hand offs then expands the offense from that hub as you suck in the defense .

The problem with Colt is he couldn't execute the base fundamental of this system and complete the bread and buter short throw  without it looking lie a Three Black board seession with einstein laying out his worksheet on the theories of relativity.

presnap he's clueless , and this offense requires  you knowing where the ball is going before your foot hits the ground on the last step of your drop ,.

Dude couldn't pick up  obvious blitz packages , that Ray Charles could have picked up with his eys closed turned the other way , just by feeling the hairs raise on the back of his neck .

he sucked at the line and his pocket awareness was for sheeit , only beaten by his terrible accuracy short long or inbetween where the ball was never delivered  with the same rotation or speed in a repitive fashion ever.

I can't count five good looking passes he threw all yaer  which you can say were beautiful passes , nor a dozen which had a decent spiral spin rate  or velocity for the situation which caused hs receievers to reach behind ahead up down in the ground , because of the lack of speed location and correct velocity ..

The passes which hit the mark  on even short throws , often  got there so slow the receiver had time to recap his will and visualize waking up in the hospital  after making the catch , because he knew with the combo of  colt telegraphing the pass and the ball taking the slow boat to China to get there they were gonna get racked up no matter what.

The Green Bay packers BTw had more drops than us , so don't even bother haning your hat on that issue anymore.

Bottom line .

Colt Mccoy isn't good enough .

His own Coach called him out , which never happens in this league ever with a guy so Young

Not with these kinda words anyway ""Colt has to Play Better "

That mitigated all other circumstance of blame and put the problem where it belongs and succinctly makes my point .

The kid an't sheeit , told ya that two years ago before Holmgren foolishly handed him the keys as a third round mutt ,while  mistakenly treating him like a franchise selection sans all competition.

A pig in a sunday dress is still a pig .

A kid  who can't throw , can't be hidden , the defenses will find him out.


SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME

Last edited 2/22/2012 8:07 AM by SoulDawg74

Posted: 2/22/2012 12:51 PM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 


KEO:

RG3 has a solid background both in football and it seems in life. His size may be a factor someone uses. I wonder what the reaction would be if a paid scout said "I don't care about a QB's size"? Heck, if you can get the opinion off an internet forum, why are you paying for it?

I think size does matter as a factor. It has to be considered just like his college career, his personality, his injury status and his injury "toughness" to the extent it can be measured. The whole thing has to be looked at- including the team's system, players and coaches a guy might go to.

OKD:

I think the size of a QB matters to the extent that it enhances his skillset, but it doesn't matter in the purely objective sense outside of "does he fall into the standard range for an NFL QB". 

Roethlisberger's size makes him better at what he does best: extending plays by being able to shrug off tacklers and throwing down-field.  You could certainly argue that there's a bit of chicken/egg in that statement, but the size enables him to play that way -- a guy that is 6' and 215 is much less likely to succeed at that sort of game.  

Size doesn't play much of a role in injury status or toughness, either.  There's probably something to be said for larger size allowing you to lessen the effect of the daily hits.  Depending on the injury type there are lots of other factors that weigh in: tendon flexibility and strength, recovery rate, etc.  Also... luck.

I think a scout would be right to not care about a guy's size independent of other variables.   A QB being 6'5" and 260 means nothing unless that size is proven to allow him to do things other guys can't.
-- OKD

Last edited 2/22/2012 12:53 PM by OklahomaDawg

Posted: 2/22/2012 4:49 PM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 


"Size doesn't play much of a role in injury status or toughness, either. There's probably something to be said for larger size allowing you to lessen the effect of the daily hits."

-- Size doesn't matter but it lessens the effect of hits? Huh?

I think size doesn't always matter in the injury realm. It does matter how "tough" you are or how you are put together. But size is a factor that has to be looked at. For injury and for NFL play.

"I think a scout would be right to not care about a guy's size independent of other variables. A QB being 6'5" and 260 means nothing unless that size is proven to allow him to do things other guys can't."

-- No. It's a factor. You look at other things too, of course. But in the NFL the size of QB talent is a factor. Guys can play around it- ala Steve Young's comments- but it is a factor. Roethlisberger as you note probably uses his size in his play. It's there, no matter what you think.

I would love to see a scout say to a GM that he isn't aware of a college guy's size that he's supposed to be evaluating.

Posted: 2/22/2012 5:26 PM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 


KEO:

Size doesn't matter but it lessens the effect of hits? Huh?

OKD

I'm talking about it lessening the effect of the daily hits.  Tackles, blocking, knockdowns, etc.  It's a momentum thing.  The greater your mass, the less power of their hit is transferred into you.  

It's much less important when you're talking about the major injuries that keep people out for extended periods.  If you slam your hand directly and hard enough on someone's helmet to break a bone in your hand, weighing 210 or 230 or 250 isn't going to make much of a difference... your hand is still going to be broken.  Injury resistance in tendons, ligaments, hammies... it's far more about conditioning and training than just overall weight.
-- OKD

Posted: 2/22/2012 5:55 PM

Re: Over Under Robert Griffin III measuring 6.185 Foot 


"Injury resistance in tendons, ligaments, hammies... it's far more about conditioning and training than just overall weight."

-- Fair enough. But it does matter. And now it may matter more than ever because of the new rules and new emphasis the NFL is placing.

That's the point, I think. Guys who are benched are worthless. It matters.