FYI-Pat McQuistan Scouting Report

[Angus]

It's somewhat distressing to hear Cowboy fan's treat any of the 3 above players as being "worthless" just because they were not significant draft picks. It would certainly benefit this club greatly for at least one of these players to become a starter.

"Draft Snobs" can be found anywhere; even at CowboysZone.

 

[silverbear]

Attack away, it's me.

I dunno. I have my doubts the forum would be cool with it.

I have my doubts that you could get a unanimous consensus from this forum if we were praising Mom, baseball and apple pie...

In those situations, I'm reminded of the great Paul Newman line from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid:

Boy, I've got vision, and the rest of the world wears bifocals...

Wait a sec, I'm wearing bifocals these days, too... what a revoltin' development... LOL...

 

[silverbear]

"Pat McQuistan"....that sounds like a horse in the Kentucky Derby...

That seems especially apropos once you've seen a picture of big Pat... I'm pretty sure that Mr. Ed is an uncle of his...

 

[silverbear]

All I know is that Parcells stated in one of his TC press conferences that he had gotten calls from variety of friends/contacts that they had heard/learned he had himself a "player" who he as very high on. Parcells stated he felt (our) McQuistan's development was one year behind his twin brother who was drafted in 3rd round of 06 by the Raiders and subsequently became their starting OG. Parcells indicated to the Cowboy organization that it was his belief McQuistan would be our next starting LT. Latter on in TC/preseason, Parcells even said if Adams couldn't start or was injuried for a lengthy period of time that he wouldn't hesitate to start McQuistan.

I'd be more impressed with that take if it didn't come from the man who gave us Petitti, Rogers, Fabini and Peterman... if there's one area where I wouldn't trust Parcells' talent evaluation skills, it's the offensive line... his track record with the Boys in that area was not pretty...

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I'd be more impressed with that take if it didn't come from the man who gave us Petitti, Rogers, Fabini and Peterman... if there's one area where I wouldn't trust Parcells' talent evaluation skills, it's the offensive line... his track record with the Boys in that area was not pretty...

It may not have been pretty but even a blind squirrel finds a nut once on a while.

At this point I think it's clear that McQ offered more potential than Petitti, Fabini and even Peterman to some extend and that's why McQ is here and the rest are gone.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I have my doubts that you could get a unanimous consensus from this forum if we were praising Mom, baseball and apple pie...

In those situations, I'm reminded of the great Paul Newman line from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid:

Boy, I've got vision, and the rest of the world wears bifocals...

Wait a sec, I'm wearing bifocals these days, too... what a revoltin' development... LOL...

grandmas are evil incarnations from the 4th circle of hades who attempt to steal your soul and torment it for eternity.

 

[burmafrd]

BP is also the one that went after Colombo, and kept Gurode around for one last try at Center. Petitti is a guy that was in such bad physical shape that it masked the bad and slow footwork that doomed him; that became clear his second year when he was in good physical shape. Rogers was good enough- just no heart or stones to play hurt. Peterman: that guy is a real mystery, he was very highly regarded by all scout services. Just goes to show you that sometimes EVERYONE can be wrong about a guy. Fabini was insurance; nothing more.

 

[lspain1]

BP is also the one that went after Colombo, and kept Gurode around for one last try at Center. Petitti is a guy that was in such bad physical shape that it masked the bad and slow footwork that doomed him; that became clear his second year when he was in good physical shape. Rogers was good enough- just no heart or stones to play hurt. Peterman: that guy is a real mystery, he was very highly regarded by all scout services. Just goes to show you that sometimes EVERYONE can be wrong about a guy. Fabini was insurance; nothing more.

I agree with this. It was time for Parcells to go, but picking talent (and I include the OL) was not the problem. We'll see if McQuistan pans out and then make a judgement.

 

[silverbear]

It may not have been pretty but even a blind squirrel finds a nut once on a while.

Oh, I'm hopeful that Pat's the real deal... I just don't feel inclined to get excited because Parcells waxed eloquent about him... that's not exactly the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval, when we're talking about offensive linemen...

 

[silverbear]

grandmas are evil incarnations from the 4th circle of hades who attempt to steal your soul and torment it for eternity.

This is true... it'll be hard to get a good debate up on this one...

I can say that 'cause I never knew either of my grandmothers... both were gone by the time I was born... so was my maternal grandfather... my paternal grandfather lived until I was in my mid-20s... he was not your classic role model, though; I'm pretty sure he must have had a white sheet with eyeholes cut out hanging in his closet, if you catch my drift... he was also real quick to settle disputes with his fists...

But he did love me and my brother...

 

[iceberg]

That's why I'm against drafting a OT high. I'd rather see McQ become the 3rd tackle this season.

i think one of the top 5 OT's in this draft have a "bit" better a chance at success than a players who's grade was "F".

you can reach and gamble all day long and you wind up with a line full of reaches and gambles. don't get me wrong, i hope he turns out - but i'd hazzard a guess that many more OTs in the league that were 7th rounders or FA walk ons have less chance of success than a day 1 pick.

you simply can't ignore the line. it's cliche but the game *is* won in the trenches. put forth good effort for a good line and it should happen. take a lot of flyers, you're not going to wind up with a good line.

 

[iceberg]

All I know is that Parcells stated in one of his TC press conferences that he had gotten calls from variety of friends/contacts that they had heard/learned he had himself a "player" who he as very high on. Parcells stated he felt (our) McQuistan's development was one year behind his twin brother who was drafted in 3rd round of 06 by the Raiders and subsequently became their starting OG. Parcells indicated to the Cowboy organization that it was his belief McQuistan would be our next starting LT. Latter on in TC/preseason, Parcells even said if Adams couldn't start or was injuried for a lengthy period of time that he wouldn't hesitate to start McQuistan.

All of Parcells comments mean nothing cause we the fans haven't seen anything of McQuistan except preseason appearances. But apparently other teams saw enough of McQuistan to express interest in acquiring him to Parcells who stated he flat our refused any offers.

For what it's worth, Parcells claimed our scouts also told him that there was no way Hurd or Austin (along with McQuistan) would make it thru waivers to get on our PS. That's the reason all 3 of them made the team; we didn't want risk losing them. All 3 of them along with all our other rookies and newly obtained vet FA players will greatly benefit from our offseason weight conditioning program.

I hope the public Cowboys' view of Hurd, Austin & McQuistan in particular bear fruit but we will all know a lot more in July TC--although all 3 looked good last year.

maybe. just maybe all this is true. but i can't name a single OL move made under the parcells era many of us feel "happy" about. so parcells played him up. normally parcells bags on players he really likes (glenn) and when he says good things, suddenly it's a "good" thing cause we want it to be.

i see zero "good" moves on the OL by parcells
i see mcq wasn't even supposed to be drafted
i see he got a grade "F" in the scouting reports

then i see a lot of fans overlooking this cause we *need* him to step up.

maybe. maybe he will.

or maybe there's a reason he graded "F" and we'll see that soon enough.

 

[NorthDalal]

maybe. just maybe all this is true. but i can't name a single OL move made under the parcells era many of us feel "happy" about. so parcells played him up. normally parcells bags on players he really likes (glenn) and when he says good things, suddenly it's a "good" thing cause we want it to be.

i see zero "good" moves on the OL by parcells
i see mcq wasn't even supposed to be drafted
i see he got a grade "F" in the scouting reports

then i see a lot of fans overlooking this cause we *need* him to step up.

maybe. maybe he will.

or maybe there's a reason he graded "F" and we'll see that soon enough.

I did. It's a very odd grading system. Barry Sanders is an example of a "D".

It's not A-B-C-D-F.

McQuiston is a hopeful prospect and his twins immediate success in Oakland is a good sign. Columbo is an excellent cheaply acquired OL starter by Parcells so his track record is at least mixed.
The one thing that should stand out from his scouting report is he's a hard worker with a lot of agressive tendencies--this goes a long way if an OL has the other factors of size and smarts.

Larry Allen and Flozell (and Jacob's Peterman & Petitti) could have used a dose of hard working agressiveness, it helps an OL from taking plays off as he move into his 30's....or turning into a weight lifting champ without aerobic or flexibility traning.

 

[iceberg]

I did. It's a very odd grading system. Barry Sanders is an example of a "D".

It's not A-B-C-D-F.

McQuiston is a hopeful prospect and his twins immediate success in Oakland is a good sign. Columbo is an excellent cheaply acquired OL starter by Parcells so his track record is at least mixed.
The one thing that should stand out from his scouting report is he's a hard worker with a lot of agressive tendencies--this goes a long way if an OL has the other factors of size and smarts.

Larry Allen and Flozell (and Jacob's Peterman & Petitti) could have used a dose of hard working agressiveness, it helps an OL from taking plays off as he move into his 30's....or turning into a weight lifting champ without aerobic or flexibility traning.

like i said - maybe. kosier is likely parcells best move on the line and in the end he could be solid depth, and that ain't bad. but it's not top tier/starting line stuff we really need.

some are happy w/kosier and i can see those points too. in the end i hope phillips can put together a good line from what parcells was able to do and what he can do and we can stop gnashing teeth about the line.

 

[superpunk]

Just so everyone understands what "F" means in their grading system...

Limited overall athletic ability, but outstanding production and ability to make plays.
Meets minimum height & weight requirements, but lacks top playing speed.
Examples – Tom Brady & Chad Clifton

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

maybe. just maybe all this is true. but i can't name a single OL move made under the parcells era many of us feel "happy" about. so parcells played him up. normally parcells bags on players he really likes (glenn) and when he says good things, suddenly it's a "good" thing cause we want it to be.

i see zero "good" moves on the OL by parcells
i see mcq wasn't even supposed to be drafted
i see he got a grade "F" in the scouting reports

then i see a lot of fans overlooking this cause we *need* him to step up.

maybe. maybe he will.

or maybe there's a reason he graded "F" and we'll see that soon enough.

Im wondering exactly how they are basing this F and what they graded his identical twin brother at. if its off of watching him play for basically one year at weber state then im not really convinced. i dont believe he was invited to the combine so im guessing that the scouting reports are not very compelling.

As for Parcells, he was terrible at drafting OL but that is not to say he couldnt coach them once they got here. Flozell, Gurode, Kosier and Columbo all played the best football of their careers under his watch. You never heard him say good things about Rogers and Peterman.

He did say a lot of good things about McQuistand and FWIW he played well in preseason.

 

[iceberg]

Just so everyone understands what "F" means in their grading system...

Limited overall athletic ability, but outstanding production and ability to make plays.
Meets minimum height & weight requirements, but lacks top playing speed.
Examples – Tom Brady & Chad Clifton

sorry - i *did* go by old school where F=Flunk.

my bad.

let's see what he can do, then.

 

[IndianaCowboyFan]

Anyone know MQs salary?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Anyone know MQs salary?

league min im sure.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

i think one of the top 5 OT's in this draft have a "bit" better a chance at success than a players who's grade was "F".

you can reach and gamble all day long and you wind up with a line full of reaches and gambles. don't get me wrong, i hope he turns out - but i'd hazzard a guess that many more OTs in the league that were 7th rounders or FA walk ons have less chance of success than a day 1 pick.

you simply can't ignore the line. it's cliche but the game *is* won in the trenches. put forth good effort for a good line and it should happen. take a lot of flyers, you're not going to wind up with a good line.

But I don't want to see us have to blow a draft pick on a top 5 OT this year-- not if there is a decent chance McQ can start in '08 for Adams-- provided we don't resign Adams. Then McQ can replace Colombo in '09-- provided we don't resign him too.

We have too many other holes at this point. I'm much more concerned about our depth at center/guard than I am tackle.