Some draft rumours

I also don't believe Fields drops that far. Sorry I don't see Mac Jones as anything more than a game manager.
 
Mr_437 said:
Exactly
Click to expand...

Where does this come from?

Jones isn't even talked about as one of the top QBs in the Class. I mean, how do you say Exactly and why does the question of, "why doesn't it matter", even make a difference? He's kinda not in the discussion to me.
 
ABQCOWBOY said:
Where does this come from?

Jones isn't even talked about as one of the top QBs in the Class. I mean, how do you say Exactly and why does the question of, "why doesn't it matter", even make a difference? He's kinda not in the discussion to me.
Click to expand...

https://www.theringer.com/2021/4/14/22383093/justin-fields-draft-stock-narratives-pro-day

"Furthermore, per The Draft Network’s Benjamin Solak, Fields threw beyond his first read 42 times, for a rate of 19.09 percent. That mark is higher than those of the other four QB prospects who are likely to go in the first round: Lawrence (16.99 percent), Wilson (14.20 percent), Jones (9.72 percent), and Lance (16.61 percent)."
 
Gaede said:
https://www.theringer.com/2021/4/14/22383093/justin-fields-draft-stock-narratives-pro-day

"Furthermore, per The Draft Network’s Benjamin Solak, Fields threw beyond his first read 42 times, for a rate of 19.09 percent. That mark is higher than those of the other four QB prospects who are likely to go in the first round: Lawrence (16.99 percent), Wilson (14.20 percent), Jones (9.72 percent), and Lance (16.61 percent)."
Click to expand...

Yeah, still doesn't make it a good article. Two things I take away from that article.

1. First or second reads are not the question. In the NFL, if you are a two read QB then you are basically just an RPO QB. You aren't a passing QB. In the NFL, you are expected to get to all of your reads and that's 3 or 4 and sometimes 5. So the question becomes, how many balls were thrown to recieving option outside of just the first two. And when he did that, what do those stats look like? This article says nothing about that so it's basically not telling the whole story.

2. The fact that the Offense Fields plays in demands that he hold the ball longer is not a plus. In the NFL, those kinds of Offenses don't exist because that's how you lose QBs. Now, this doesn't mean that Fields can't play in a Pro Style Offense but it certainly doesn't prove that he can and it absolutely says that this is a poorly written article, more of a fluff to me. NFL personnel guys want to see QBs making reads, making quick decisions, making good decisions and making accurate throws. The Offense described in the article basically tells you why QBs from high powered programs like Ohio State struggle in the NFL. You don't get to run Offenses like that in the Pros.

I just don't see how this piece really helps Fields but just my opinion.
 
ABQCOWBOY said:
Yeah, still doesn't make it a good article. Two things I take away from that article.

1. First or second reads are not the question. In the NFL, if you are a two read QB then you are basically just an RPO QB. You aren't a passing QB. In the NFL, you are expected to get to all of your reads and that's 3 or 4 and sometimes 5. So the question becomes, how many balls were thrown to recieving option outside of just the first two. And when he did that, what do those stats look like? This article says nothing about that so it's basically not telling the whole story.

2. The fact that the Offense Fields plays in demands that he hold the ball longer is not a plus. In the NFL, those kinds of Offenses don't exist because that's how you lose QBs. Now, this doesn't mean that Fields can't play in a Pro Style Offense but it certainly doesn't prove that he can and it absolutely says that this is a poorly written article, more of a fluff to me. NFL personnel guys want to see QBs making reads, making quick decisions, making good decisions and making accurate throws. The Offense described in the article basically tells you why QBs from high powered programs like Ohio State struggle in the NFL. You don't get to run Offenses like that in the Pros.

I just don't see how this piece really helps Fields but just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I think that's moving the goal posts a little. First it was, 'he never goes beyond his first read', now it's 'he never goes to his fifth read'. Does anyone know how many times Mac Jones went to his third, fourth, or fifth option? I'd wager it was even less than Fields (and why would you, when you have Smith, Waddle etc). I've seen this before with Dak. There is no possible way to meet requirements when the requirements are constantly changing. 'Dak is innacurate' 'Oh, we didn't mean he was inaccurate overall, but only on deep throws!' 'Oh, now that that's disproven, we didn't mean inaccurate on deep throws, but that he can't win the game.' To call it what is, people are stereotyping Fields as a prospect because he's an athletic black QB from Ohio State. And crappy for him, the last black QB from Ohio State flunked out of the league

Fields is everything anyone could want in a QB and he's being downgraded, irrationally, because someone decided to parrot the stereotype that he's not 'smart' enough for the position (because he's an 'athlete'), while white guys like Jones, Wilson, and Lawrence NEVER field these criticisms, despite two out of three of those guys being less accomplished than Fields, while also being really really good athletes
 
Last edited:
ABQCOWBOY said:
Yeah, still doesn't make it a good article. Two things I take away from that article.

1. First or second reads are not the question. In the NFL, if you are a two read QB then you are basically just an RPO QB. You aren't a passing QB. In the NFL, you are expected to get to all of your reads and that's 3 or 4 and sometimes 5. So the question becomes, how many balls were thrown to recieving option outside of just the first two. And when he did that, what do those stats look like? This article says nothing about that so it's basically not telling the whole story.

2. The fact that the Offense Fields plays in demands that he hold the ball longer is not a plus. In the NFL, those kinds of Offenses don't exist because that's how you lose QBs. Now, this doesn't mean that Fields can't play in a Pro Style Offense but it certainly doesn't prove that he can and it absolutely says that this is a poorly written article, more of a fluff to me. NFL personnel guys want to see QBs making reads, making quick decisions, making good decisions and making accurate throws. The Offense described in the article basically tells you why QBs from high powered programs like Ohio State struggle in the NFL. You don't get to run Offenses like that in the Pros.

I just don't see how this piece really helps Fields but just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Lol, just shutup.
 
KingintheNorth said:
He was at Ohio State. His "primary read" is almost always a future NFL WR.

And yes, it has been debunked. It was people just regurgitating a take that matched their personal opinion; confirmation bias.
Click to expand...
Our resident QB guru (self appointed) has bloviated about how much more he knows about football and quarterbacks and was one of the ones regurgitating this lol. Go figure.
 
If you see OSU games the primary read is not only open but wide open,why would any QB not throw it to such a wide open guy?.
 
unionjack8 said:
Click to expand...


Interesting. The Cowboys could get Chicago's 1,2 and 3rd round picks in exchange for their 1st and 3rd comp pick. I like it. At 20 they can take maybe Barmore, or Newsome, then have 2 2nd round picks to get 2 more good players. I am in on this deal. Make it happen!
 
Creeper said:
Interesting. The Cowboys could get Chicago's 1,2 and 3rd round picks in exchange for their 1st and 3rd comp pick. I like it. At 20 they can take maybe Barmore, or Newsome, then have 2 2nd round picks to get 2 more good players. I am in on this deal. Make it happen!
Click to expand...
If we did that and landed grant and mcneill in the second our D would look a lot better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 2,525 (members: 21, guests: 2,504)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,966
Messages
13,907,507
Members
23,793
Latest member
Roger33
Back
Top