SI.com's Don Banks: insight's from today's Combine workouts.

[cowboyjoe]

Locker also ran well, posting an official 4.59 in the 40 (NFL Network first reported a 4.52 but later changed), so his trademark athleticism was on display. More than anything, Locker gave teams hoping to see improvement in his accuracy -- he's working on it with former NFL quarterback Ken O'Brien -- reason for optimism, and he kept himself in the hunt for first-round consideration.

"I feel like Jake really proved himself today,'' said noted draft analyst A.J. Green, the Georgia receiver who caught passes from Locker. "He was throwing that thing pretty nice out there. There are a lot of questions out there about him, but I think he answered a lot of them.''

• It's hard to make the case that Auburn defensive tackle Nick Fairley's combine enhanced his candidacy to go first overall in April. For starters, he showed up smaller than advertised, measuring 6-3 and 291, when it was thought he was in the range of 6-5, 300. The NFL likes those 300-pound defensive tackles, and Alabama's Marcell Dareus, the draft's other elite tackle, checked in at 6-3½, 319 by comparison.



Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/don_banks/02/27/sunday.snaps/index.html#ixzz1FG3C4Stk

[ThreeSportStar80]

Locker is a workout warrior... I look at game film where he didn't impress at all.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Locker is a workout warrior... I look at game film where he didn't impress at all.

You look at game film.

That cracks me up.

Although I agree he is too inconsistent the idea that you look at game film just tickles me.

[Hoofbite]

You look at game film.

That cracks me up.

Although I agree he is too inconsistent the idea that you look at game film just tickles me.

:laugh2:

Don't you know everyone's a scout these days?

[ThreeSportStar80]

You look at game film.

That cracks me up.

Although I agree he is too inconsistent the idea that you look at game film just tickles me.


Well hey I can't help if I'm a student of the game...

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well hey I can't help if I'm a student of the game...

You do realize that games you watch or record on TV is not exactly the same as "game tape"...at least I hope you do.

[SilverStarCowboy]

You do realize that games you watch or record on TV is not exactly the same as "game tape"...at least I hope you do.


:shoot5:

[Randy White]

he could have hacked into the NFL gamefilms site that NFL coaches use for studying.. It is on-line.

but I understand what he meant because I do the same thing. It might not be " game film ", but if you know what you're looking for and know of a couple of cheap video editing features on Windows media and real player, you can learn quite a bit. :D

[fortdick]

You do realize that games you watch or record on TV is not exactly the same as "game tape"...at least I hope you do.

Youtube has the game films. All scouts watch youtube, don't ya know?

[jterrell]

Locker is a great QB ... if you need an anchor on your 4x400 QB relay team.

His 40 time is pointless.
Brady and Manning run in the 5's and win just fine.

QB is accuracy first and that is where Locker struggles.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Locker, to me, is interesting. He probably has the best overall set of skills of all the QBs this year. He needs work and time to develop, that's true but the Cowboys are in a bit of a unique situation here. He would be a guy that if they decided to take him, would be able to sit and learn. He could develop and by year 3, could be in a position to really challenge. That would put Tony in about his 11 season. Would be very interesting to see what the Cowboys might do n that situation.

[BrAinPaiNt]

He is very inconsistent. I think a good deal of his accuracy issues is due to his footwork. I think if he had a good coach can work with him enough to get that changed it would make a big difference. He also has to work on his decision making of course. I think at times he put too much of the offense on his shoulders to try and get a win (whether that was all on him or if it was kind of pushed on to him).

Personally there are a couple of QBs I like later.

Dalton - much later, Don't know if he would ever be a starter but I think he has the makings of a good backup. I guess the same could be said of McElroy but I just like dalton a little better.

Kaepernick (sp?) - I think this kid has a lot of upside but he will need to really work at it.

Don't want to spend a high pick on Newton or Gabbert (sp?). If we are in the mindset of getting a franchise QB in the draft...maybe they should trade down once or twice this year to get future picks and move up to get Luck next year.

Mallett - Kid has the skills...I just don't want to take the chance we get another QC (off the field drug issues).

As far as ragging on the Game film stuff. I was just joking some. I am sure he meant just watching the games through the year, but when you hear someone proclaiming they watch game film it just sounds like they think they are a scout or coach who has special access to the type of film a coach or scout would have. In the end I agree with his overall take so it is no big thing.

[jterrell]

Locker, to me, is interesting. He probably has the best overall set of skills of all the QBs this year. He needs work and time to develop, that's true but the Cowboys are in a bit of a unique situation here. He would be a guy that if they decided to take him, would be able to sit and learn. He could develop and by year 3, could be in a position to really challenge. That would put Tony in about his 11 season. Would be very interesting to see what the Cowboys might do n that situation.

I hugely disagree.

The skill you most need at QB is an accurate arm.

I can throw the ball hard and far(I did pitch in baseball). I am just insanely inaccurate. I also ran a 4.65 40... I'd have been a great QB prospect? Not a chance.

QBs do not need to win underwear olympics. The best QBs are accurate passers who read the field quickly. That isn't an athletic skill set at all but is definite QB skills. Locker doesn't possess those skills in abundance at all. He missed open receivers and threw inaccurate passes with plenty of regularity this year and in post-season work.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I hugely disagree.

The skill you most need at QB is an accurate arm.

I can throw the ball hard and far(I did pitch in baseball). I am just insanely inaccurate. I also ran a 4.65 40... I'd have been a great QB prospect? Not a chance.

QBs do not need to win underwear olympics. The best QBs are accurate passers who read the field quickly. That isn't an athletic skill set at all but is definite QB skills. Locker doesn't possess those skills in abundance at all. He missed open receivers and threw inaccurate passes with plenty of regularity this year and in post-season work.

Reading the field Quickly and being accurate are two different things.

If his footwork can be worked on it can improve his accuracy.

The speed of his decision making and the improvement of his decision making might be another story all together.

[jterrell]

He is very inconsistent. I think a good deal of his accuracy issues is due to his footwork. I think if he had a good coach can work with him enough to get that changed it would make a big difference. He also has to work on his decision making of course. I think at times he put too much of the offense on his shoulders to try and get a win (whether that was all on him or if it was kind of pushed on to him).

Personally there are a couple of QBs I like later.

Dalton - much later, Don't know if he would ever be a starter but I think he has the makings of a good backup. I guess the same could be said of McElroy but I just like dalton a little better.

Kaepernick (sp?) - I think this kid has a lot of upside but he will need to really work at it.

Don't want to spend a high pick on Newton or Gabbert (sp?). If we are in the mindset of getting a franchise QB in the draft...maybe they should trade down once or twice this year to get future picks and move up to get Luck next year.

Mallett - Kid has the skills...I just don't want to take the chance we get another QC (off the field drug issues).

As far as ragging on the Game film stuff. I was just joking some. I am sure he meant just watching the games through the year, but when you hear someone proclaiming they watch game film it just sounds like they think they are a scout or coach who has special access to the type of film a coach or scout would have. In the end I agree with his overall take so it is no big thing.

Excellent post.

Basically I'd draft no QB were I Dallas.
I think McGee is the equivalent player to Locker. So I don't see any value for us at QB. The lower rated prospects are probably a 4th best for us and the higher rated ones are big risks we'd have to keep over a partially proven McGee.

And all the QBs seem risky at the top.
It is a blessing indeed not to need to gamble on one.

And if the statement was --- I watch the games--- and not game tape it wouldn't have seemed nearly as absurd or hilarious.

[Randy White]

Locker, to me, is interesting. He probably has the best overall set of skills of all the QBs this year. He needs work and time to develop, that's true but the Cowboys are in a bit of a unique situation here. He would be a guy that if they decided to take him, would be able to sit and learn. He could develop and by year 3, could be in a position to really challenge. That would put Tony in about his 11 season. Would be very interesting to see what the Cowboys might do n that situation.

I agree and disagree.

I agree that Locker is absolutely an intriguing prospect. You can see the tools that are there, but unfortunately for him, he hasn't had anybody to teach him how to develop them. I think he'd be a perfect fit for Seattle.

Having said that, Tony's " 11 seasons " is a bit misleading. Yes, it's true he would have been in the league for 11 years ( at that point ), but would have played the equivalent of 7 because of development and injuries.

Tony's replacement, injuries aside, just graduated highschool right now. He'll spend his first year as a red-shirt frehman and then he'll proceed to have a wonderful 4 year career in a major college program. The Cowboys, then, would have made a schrewed move and acquire the pick in the first round to get him and the rest will be history bliss..

I even have the best candidate picked out and everything:

Nmc0eL0JP8k

:D

[jterrell]

Reading the field Quickly and being accurate are two different things.

If his footwork can be worked on it can improve his accuracy.

The speed of his decision making and the improvement of his decision making might be another story all together.

Absolutely.
Those are two different things.
But they are the two important things.
All this stuff about 40 times is just goofy.

[mmillman]

Locker could really help someone down the road. He needs a team where he can sit and learn for a few seasons behind a veteran? He has all the intangibles and was the only offensive weapon at Washington for a few seasons.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I agree and disagree.

I agree that Locker is absolutely an intriguing prospect. You can see the tools that are there, but unfortunately for him, he hasn't had anybody to teach him how to develop them. I think he'd be a perfect fit for Seattle.

Having said that, Tony's " 11 seasons " is a bit misleading. Yes, it's true he would have been in the league for 11 years ( at that point ), but would have played the equivalent of 7 because of development and injuries.

Tony's replacement, injuries aside, just graduated highschool right now. He'll spend his first year as a red-shirt frehman and then he'll proceed to have a wonderful 4 year career in a major college program. The Cowboys, then, would have made a schrewed move and acquire the pick in the first round to get him and the rest will be history bliss..

I even have the best candidate picked out and everything:

Nmc0eL0JP8k

:D

I would be very doubtful that we took any QB at 9 but I suppose it could happen. I don't know what kind of shape Romo will be in as he approaches his 11th season. I do, however, suspect that Jerry has no intentions of being in the same situation he was in when Troy retired. He has even said as much in various different interviews in the past. It is not inconceivable to me that he and Garrett might be thinking about doing something there. Of course, the other conclusion might be that Garrett want's to see more out of Romo. He might just want to see Romo take that next step. It's been said many times that Romo does not approach the game with the same seriousness as some of the great QBs in the league now. I don't know if that is true or not. However, if you wanted to try and force the issue, it might be a move you would consider if you are Garrett and or Jerry. I mean, if you develop a talented QB, the worst you'll get out of it is a trade down the line and probably for a fairly high pick or picks. IDK. As I said, I don't see it at 9 but I can imagine a scenario where the Cowboys might consider taking a QB higher then any of us might suspect.

[jterrell]

Locker, to me, is interesting. He probably has the best overall set of skills of all the QBs this year. He needs work and time to develop, that's true but the Cowboys are in a bit of a unique situation here. He would be a guy that if they decided to take him, would be able to sit and learn. He could develop and by year 3, could be in a position to really challenge. That would put Tony in about his 11 season. Would be very interesting to see what the Cowboys might do n that situation.

Just not sure I follow here logically.

Locker has all the physical tools one seeks at QB.
We are on the same page there.

Problem is he will be over-drafted based upon those skills versus what he has actually shown as a QB. So he won't be a value in the draft. A 2nd round pick at worst to take a guy who you'll sit for a few years makes very little sense to me when you already have a guy in that role; McGee, who has not only sat but actually played last year.

If the Cowboys drafted Locker with all the other holes they have I'd lose my mind. If they draft Cam Newton I'd expect them to trade Romo and recover picks/players but they won't turn the team over to Locker in short order like they would Cam.

Personally I wouldn't draft either guy but Cam has the better physical skill set and was far more successful in college.

[Randy White]

Locker could really help someone down the road. He needs a team where he can sit and learn for a few seasons behind a veteran? He has all the intangibles and was the only offensive weapon at Washington for a few seasons.

When people say that football is a game of inches, that's true in every sense of the word and beyond.

There but for the grace of the football gods goes Carson Palmer when I see Jake Locker and Palmer actually had a 10 times better coach in Paul Hackett than Locker ever had. Hackett was too busy being the HC and Palmer almost didn't develop. It wasn't until Norm Chow, under Carroll, got a hold of him and finished polishing the rough edges, that Palmer finally became the QB he did.

People may laugh at this, but I think that's also the biggest difference between Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers. Just about the only year that Smith looked good was when Norv Turner was the OC. Once he left, Smith didn't have the same success again.

[Randy White]

I would be very doubtful that we took any QB at 9 but I suppose it could happen..


Oh no, no, no.. Don't count me in that wagon.. I don't want the Cowboys to draft a QB at all, unless it's one of this guys that fell to the 3rd round or something..

no way, no how..:nono:

[InmanRoshi]

Locker was already getting great quarterback coaching at the college level. Both the UW's head coach and offensive coordinator/QB coach were former NFL Quarterback coaches.

If he hasn't developed any accuracy consistency to this point, it's because he just doesn't have it in him. Not because he was lacking anyone to teach him how to properly throw.

[Sam I Am]

Must be lots of inspection stickers today. Not seeing many updates from Joe today. :)

[ABQCOWBOY]

Just not sure I follow here logically.

Locker has all the physical tools one seeks at QB.
We are on the same page there.

Problem is he will be over-drafted based upon those skills versus what he has actually shown as a QB. So he won't be a value in the draft. A 2nd round pick at worst to take a guy who you'll sit for a few years makes very little sense to me when you already have a guy in that role; McGee, who has not only sat but actually played last year.

If the Cowboys drafted Locker with all the other holes they have I'd lose my mind. If they draft Cam Newton I'd expect them to trade Romo and recover picks/players but they won't turn the team over to Locker in short order like they would Cam.

Personally I wouldn't draft either guy but Cam has the better physical skill set and was far more successful in college.

I'd rather have Locker over Newton but it's here nor there. Not sure why you are confused. McGee is a decent prospect but he doesn't threaten Romo and I don't see him as anything more then a backup. I would think that if the Cowboys were going to consider drafting a QB early, as they have eluded is a possability, they would take somebody who has the skills to be the Franchise QB. That's not McGee IMO. There is a lot to work with in Locker. If you have the time to develop him, he could be a real nice QB. He has all the skills but it's a time thing with him IMO. It's not what I would do but if the Cowboys are honest in their statements, I'd have to think that a guy like Locker would be of interest to them.

[jterrell]

I'd rather have Locker over Newton but it's here nor there. Not sure why you are confused. McGee is a decent prospect but he doesn't threaten Romo and I don't see him as anything more then a backup. I would think that if the Cowboys were going to consider drafting a QB early, as they have eluded is a possability, they would take somebody who has the skills to be the Franchise QB. That's not McGee IMO. There is a lot to work with in Locker. If you have the time to develop him, he could be a real nice QB. He has all the skills but it's a time thing with him IMO. It's not what I would do but if the Cowboys are honest in their statements, I'd have to think that a guy like Locker would be of interest to them.

McGee is a very similar athlete to Locker. He played in a running based offense and that held him back but he actually showed more accuracy than Locker over the course of his career.

McGee came out in an insanely deep QB class. Stafford, Sanchez and Freeman were the top 3.... McGee was the 5th QB taken.

McGee completed over 60% of his college passes and had 28 TDs and 13 INTs. He lost his job as a senior after injury.

McGee was 6'3" and 225 and ran a 4.61 40. He was a good athlete who had been in a read-option offense and proven a tough and effective runner.


Locker is nearly identical size, 6'3" and 230 : Ran a 4.59 40
And completed about 5% less of his passes in college.
He did pass for many more yards but also had 35 total picks in college.
He completed his collegiate career against Nebraska and completed only 5 out of 16 passes for 56 yards.

These are essentially the same guy except McGee has been here and knows the system.

Locker is zero threat to Romo so I am again back to being confused. Except now I understand my confusion is a specific one about how you can feel Locker is this good a prospect? He was a 55% passer in college for cripes sake.