FWIW, Charlie Casserly said on NFL Network that he polled all 32 teams as to which QB was the highest rated. According to him, 24 teams said Watson was.
he said specifically "a scenario where the jets take a QB at 6" sometimes people make bad mock drafts. Trib is the best QB in the draft according to all the scouts and the only QB in the draft in the top 25 prospects. Of course surprises can happen and I think some goes to shock value. and I could see Cleveland taking watson or kizer (probably watson) at 12 regardless as the QB position is always worth a reach if he's "your guy" but realistically trib will be the 1st QB taken and likely in the top 5. I mean remember the mock drafts that had leaf going before manning when everyone knew manning was gonna be the 1st overall pick?
not exactly "The NFL Network analyst and former NFL GM polled personnel from 22 NFL clubs on the subject, and a vast majority selected either Clemson's Deshaun Watson (nine votes), or North Carolina's Mitchell Trubisky (eight votes). Two favored Texas Tech's Patrick Mahomes, while three more were undecided. Conspicuously absent from the results: Notre Dame QB DeShone Kizer" polled people (not GMs or the one's making the decisions for all we know. could be just some scouts) on 22 teams. 9 picked watson and 8 picked trib. But we all know how much people love the champ game displays (remember vince young shoot up draft boards over it) he goes onto say ""My feeling, when I watch the tape, Trubisky is the most consistent quarterback of all these guys in accuracy and decision-making," that's what GMs want. a guy who makes good decisions with the football and is accurate. most likely trib goes top 6 (he won't get past us) and watson goes 12 to cleveland
1st, what personnel? Janitors -- who gives a shit? GMs or evaluators -- how can you trust anything they say before the draft? Setting this aside, do you truly not understand the logical jump you're making? Let me try to explain it.... Let's say Trub is indeed the #1 QB prospect this draft. This does NOT mean he belong in top-6 overall. All it means is he should be taken before other QBs -- that's all. He can be taken in the middle of the 3rd round, and still be higher than all other QBs.
The mocks I looked at were on NFL.com and CBSSports.com so if you want to say all of those are bad then I would say you should not ever bring up mock drafts again, not that I personally put much stock in mocks but a dozen mocks and only one has him going before 10, that tells me something. Why not show us which scouts are now saying he is the best in the draft and where they say he will be gone before the Jets pick. Also huge difference when you are talking about QBs that could be picked anywhere from 5th pick to #32 and 2 QBs that went #1 and #2 in the draft.
So I know about smokescreens and all that so don't put too much into where teams say they would ranks the QBs but in addition to the above SI.com has Trubisky ranked 4th of all QBs, ESPN has him as the 2nd, Mike Mayock has him as the 3rd, Scout.com has him #2, PFF has him at #2, Sporting news has him at #3. About the only one I found that had him as the #1 QB was walterfootball and I don't give Cherepinski much validation at all. I'll just put this here, I don't think any QB in the draft is worth the #6 pick.
You hope that 2 or more teams, say SD (7), Cleveland (12) and Arizona(13) are in love with a QB & either trade up to our slot or above us to land said QB. Best case, we land a nice haul in the bidding war. Worst case, it pushes down a position player that we want.
Because of his scouting background Mac thought he was smarter than he really is. That's why he traded for and signed overpriced vets, traded away picks, and took a ridiculous chance on Hack. Bowles just exists.
I understand that, I never said otherwise. But he's considered a top 10 prospect in the draft and QBs always tend to go a bit higher due to the importance of the position. How is it not a logical jump if the HC says "there is a scenerio we can take a QB at 6" and there is 1 QB prospect that is in the top 10 of the draft that the coach would be talking about that QB.
CBSsports actually is pretty terrible. They always have random crap that will never happen. They just try to be different. NFL.com is fine as are tons of sites, but remember these sites are predicting what teams will do and not necessarily going by which prospects are better. Just looked at the 4 on NFL.com one guy has the panthers trading up 6 spots to #2. the chances of that happening are slim and none. also only 1 has a QB going in the top 10 (same guy who predicted the trade) and it's trib. The chances of all the QB needy teams in the top 10 (jets, niners, browns, chargers and bills possibly as well) all passing on the top QB prospect are pretty slim. May not be a fair comparison with leaf and manning, but what about rodgers and smith most had rodgers going 1st overall and nobody had it mocked out of the top 10 and he fell to 24th and smith went 1st. All in all, the draft is a crapshoot and mocking is more fun then realistic. everyone gets its wrong. some more then others. who thought we'd take brady over sapp? or draft ducasse in the 2nd round? Sure anything can happen, but I don't see an issue with my speculation
yes smokescreens exist. every team wants to play coy right now so I take it with a grain of salt as well NFL.com also has him as the 1st QB. they have him at a 6.5 grade, watson has a 6.1 and mahomes a 5.8 along with peterman and kizer at a 5.7 round out their top 5. Remember that mocks are predictions and not who is better. williams was the best player in the draft when we got him at 6 and every mock predicted he would go higher but teams went with other players instead and he fell. I just looked at the ratings over CBS Trib, watson kizer http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2017/QB Walter Trib, kizer, mahomes http://walterfootball.com/draft2017QB.php NFL trib, watson, mahomes http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/track...drafteventpage-tracker#dt-tabs:dt-by-position fox sports trib, kizer, watson http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/galler...011917-011917-011917-011917-011917-011917-011 drafttek trib, watson, kizer http://www.drafttek.com/2017-NFL-Draft-Prospect-Rankings/Top-QBs.asp Kipers top 25 Trib, watson, (no 3rd QB in his top 25)http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...17-nfl-draft-big-board-after-scouting-combine so 6 sites (including most of the major ones all have trib as their top QB)
I stand corrected. Nevertheless, it appears that Trubisky is not a slam dunk better pick than Watson. Personally, I prefer Watson but wouldn't mind if the Jets took any of the three and started building a team around one of them. Mahomes has too many questions for me to be comfortable taking him at 6 but wouldn't mind if they got him later in the draft. I'm convinced the Jets will draft one high in this draft.
I mean just because trib is the "top prospect" doesn't mean anything in the long term. No player is a slam dunk. Nothing wrong with preferring watson as it's clear none of them are "head and shoulders" above the rest. i mean smith went before rodgers, eli and rivers went before ben, who knows how their careers will turn up. plus you get guys like brady, wilson, dalton, carr, dak etc that aren't even 1st rounders that turn out great and you get guys like RG3, russell, leaf, leinhart, sanchez etc that are top picks and become busts. The entire draft is at best throwing darts blind
not that it means much but walter fotoball has this listed about watson their lates mock draft would be terrible for us. fournette is gone at 4 to jax, we pass on trib who falls to Cleveland at 12 (1st QB taken) and we pas on defense and select TE howard who is considered to now be a top 10 pick but still a TE at 6 overall with out needs?
unless he turns out to be tony gonzales it wouldn't be worth the pic. In 4 seasons he averaged less then 450 yards per season and less then 30 catches and 7 total TDs. The production was too little for me to want to spend such a high pick on him personally
Those are the comparisons being thrown around and its widely recognized how he was underutilized due to bamas penchant to run. which brings up point 2. his blocking is good so besides a playmaker we improve both run and pass blocking. i would take him long before any of the questionable qbs available
I'm going to be really surprised if a 6'2" guy with 13 college starts is taken in the top 5. That would be a Mark Sanchez level error on the part of whoever made the pick. QB's taken high in the draft have to have something going for them and "he looks better than the other guys" is not "something" when you're talking about expending a blue chip marker to acquire him.
