Barkley at #18?

[DFWJC]

He has already been surrounded by dangerous weapons at USC. Most NFL teams would take Marquise Lee and Robert Woods right now.

He is not worth an R1 pick but someone will pony up because of the position and the lack of QBs this year.

His 64% comp percentage is solid but not great. He ranked 41st and behind such accurate arms as David Ash.... Geno Smith was at 71%.

His 36 TDs are a very solid total but his 15 picks were a bit high.

And yes the recent success of USC QBs will count against him. There is actually quite a lot of similarity between he and Sanchez.

Sanchez completed 64% of his passes for 34 TDs and 10 INTs. He was 6'2" and 225.

I used Sanchez as a most likely scenario for him. But maybe I'm wrong, but I always looked at Sanchez as more mobile.

Maybe he ends up suprising us; I wouldn't count him out. I'm certainly not pulling against him.

I only responded to this thread in the 1st place becasue the idea of Dallas taking him with our 1st pick this year seemed beyond outragous.
I honestly think it would be debatebale to even take him at 47 given our needs and what type of players could be there.

 

[jterrell]

I used Sanchez as a most likely scenario for him. But maybe I'm wrong, but I always looked at Sanchez as more mobile.

Maybe he ends up suprising us; I wouldn't count him out. I'm certainly not pulling against him.

I only responded to this thread in the 1st place becasue the idea of Dallas taking him with our 1st pick this year seemed beyond outragous.
I honestly think it would be debatebale to even take him at 47 given our needs and what type of players could be there.

If Dallas is blowing it up and starting over they likely need a top 5 pick as the next QB.

It makes no sense to go all in on a Brady Quinn type QB--- i.e. Barkley.

Barkley could succeed in the right circumstances but you need the poise and raw talent of an RG3 to succeed in Dallas. Barkley would be eaten alive.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

In all honesty, I don't think we need to be looking at QB at 18. I am not at all certain that there is a QB in this draft that is worthy of 18, much less 1. This is not to say that there is not talent in this draft at the position, I just think that the talent that is there needs to be developed and is not worthy of the pick. If we take a QB, I would rather it be somebody later in the draft.

Next year is a much better year for QB IMO.

 

[NeonNinja]

No thanks.

 

[DFWJC]

If anyone thought a 6-3 guy was 6-1 or under they suck as a talent evaluator and are in serious need of some glasses.

He did not come in at 6'3" btw. I just had so many other things to pick at as far as Dallas taking him 1st, that I let him have a pass on that one.

His is 6' 2"- 6' 2 1/2 in shoes.

I hear Arizona likes him.

 

[IAmLegend]

Tyler Bray > Barkley

 

[alohawg]

Ryan Mallett- 2 years learning behind Belicheck and Brady under his belt, has kept his nose clean, is far and away more talented than any in this qb class and could be had for a 2nd rd. pick.....just solidify the o-line, he's about as mobile as Manning, Peyton that is.

 

[SWG9]

Thanks for the polite (for the most part) replies.

To elaborate a little further: by no means am I saying that the Cowboys absolutely have to draft Barkley. If they have the two OG's rated as higher prospects and one of them is available at #18, by all means, draft one of the OG's and re up with Romo.

But if both guys are gone (a definite possibility), and there's no other real difference makers at #18 (a probability, based on what I'm reading), doesn't it make sense to swing for the fences with Barkley if he's there?

For once we have some leverage with a player (Romo), I'd like to actually use it instead of automatically resigning him before the draft and locking us into looking elsewhere at #18.

 

[SWG9]

I used Sanchez as a most likely scenario for him. But maybe I'm wrong, but I always looked at Sanchez as more mobile.

Maybe he ends up suprising us; I wouldn't count him out. I'm certainly not pulling against him.

I only responded to this thread in the 1st place becasue the idea of Dallas taking him with our 1st pick this year seemed beyond outragous.
I honestly think it would be debatebale to even take him at 47 given our needs and what type of players could be there.

Ah, so you believe a team should draft for need? Say no more. Thanks for the response.

 

[SWG9]

If we draft a USC QB, that'll be a wrap for my fandom. Does any program produce more overhyped, overrated prospects? I think not.

Yes, the USC thing gives me pause as well.

 

[DFWJC]

Ah, so you believe a team should draft for need? Say no more. Thanks for the response.

Not at all.
But all else equal...and btw, I don't remotely think all "else would equal" wouldn't even need to be considered if taking Barkely at 18--then you do take what you need, of course.

My argument against Barkley hinges even more on BPA than it does on need, in other words. He may turn out to be great. But there is no scenario where he would be BPA, imo, at 18. I said maybe not even pick 47 for that reason. There may be a better player available even at 47. That's extreme, but possible.

I just looked at 12 mocks on Monday and 4 had him in the first round....1 had him 55th overall.
I don't go by those things too much, but just saying that many don't see him even in the 1st round, let alone 18.
Becasue of the postion he plays though, he could get picked ina non-BPA manner. That is not uncommon for reaches on QBs.

 

[joseephuss]

Matt Barkley went to USC. Cassell, Sanchez and Leinart went to USC. Therefore, Barkley is Cassell, Sanchez or Leinart.



The one legit negative for Barkley is he doesn't have elite arm strength, but outside of that he's as clean as it gets. And let's not act like his arm is Colt McCoy, Fitzpatrick or Pennington bad... it's way closer to Romo, Kurt Warner, etc. Arm strength is not as important as decision making, consistency and ball placement... all strengths for Barkley.

If he's put inside a rhythm and timing based offense like the Saints or Patriots run he'll be a 10 year starter and a highly productive QB.


He already disproved one big negative for him, his size. A lot of people were expecting him to be 6'1 or shorter and throught he didn't have ideal size. He checked in at nearly 6'3, 227lbs with a 10 1/8in hand... sounds like ideal NFL size to me.

Draftcountdown's scouting report:

• Accurate with impressive touch, timing and anticipation
• Technically sound with refined mechanics and footwork
• Able to read coverages and work through progressions
• Cool, calm and collected with superb pocket presence
• Shows ability to slide and maneuver within the pocket
• Accustomed to working under center in pro style system
• Outstanding intelligence with extremely high football IQ
• Excellent feel, awareness and understanding of game
• Mature, hard working and is a respected team leader
• A ton of experience against high-quality competition

You are the one who keeps bringing up arm strength as a negative in this thread. His arm is not strong, but that is hardly his problem.

I disagree greatly from that scouting report.
I don't think he has good anticipation.
He doesn't have good footwork when he has to slide around in the pocket.
I don't find him to be cool or calm or have good pocket presence.

I find the comparisons to other USC QBs to be quite accurate. Those guys have not prospered in the NFL due to some very similar faults. That happens when you are trained under the same basic conditions.

 

[Rack]

Barkley at #18?

 

[SWG9]

Clever analysis.

 

[SWG9]

The simple fact of the matter is that no one knows for a fact whether or not Barkley is going to be good or not. I happen to think he will be, others don't. Fine.

What I'm saying is this: The Cowboys have to kick the tires and do a full work up of Barkley. If they don't have a first round grade on him, fine, pass.

But if they do have a top 10 grade on him and he falls to #18, IMO, you have pull the trigger. It's a lot harder to do that if you've just locked Romo up to a long term extension.

There's no reason at all to rush into an extension before the draft.

BPA means BPA, no matter what the position.

 

[koolaid]

Just curious how many of you would consider Barkley at #18, provided that he actually does fall that far?

It's an interesting scenario, IMO. If the Cowboys do hold off on extending Romo and manage to get Barkley, they have a lot of leverage. They can let Romo play out this season without an extension and turn it over to Barkley in 2014. If they don't think Barkley is ready, they can franchise Romo in 2014. And if they think Barkley is a day one starter, they can explore the trade market for Romo this offseason.

Barkley's rookie contract will certainly be less money than Romo's extension.

This isn't about getting rid of Romo at all costs. I happen to think Romo's an excellent QB. But you're looking at it purely in terms of asset management, I think it's a pretty solid football move.

Let's be totally honest too; is it the worst thing in the world for Romo to be playing 2013 with a fire lit under his butt?

I've got some other thoughts on this, but I'm curious to see what the board thinks...

No thanks on Barkley. He wasn't very impressive last year even though he had two studs at WR. Also i'm not big on players from USC, especially qbs.

 

[MartinRamone]

No way, pass.

 

[joseephuss]

The simple fact of the matter is that no one knows for a fact whether or not Barkley is going to be good or not. I happen to think he will be, others don't. Fine.

What I'm saying is this: The Cowboys have to kick the tires and do a full work up of Barkley. If they don't have a first round grade on him, fine, pass.

But if they do have a top 10 grade on him and he falls to #18, IMO, you have pull the trigger. It's a lot harder to do that if you've just locked Romo up to a long term extension.

There's no reason at all to rush into an extension before the draft.

BPA means BPA, no matter what the position.

I am sure they are doing full work ups on Barkley and several other QBs. I doubt any of them have top 10 grades. And if he is available at 18, that doesn't mean he would be the BPA at that time. There could still be players at other positions or even another QB that is the BPA option over Barkley.

 

[Rack]

Clever analysis.

It was the perfect response to the thread title.

 

[tantrix1969]

ok but going by

BPA means BPA, no matter what the position.

whether we give Romo an extension or not should have nothing to do with it, that being said imo there are more than 18 in front of him going by bpa