1a. Matt Stafford,
Georgia – The good? His game is very reminiscent to that of 2008’s No. 3 overall pick, Matt Ryan. He has a strong arm, takes quite a bit of chances (which helps explain the low completion % and less than optimal TD/INT ratio), enough speed to escape pressure but will never be confused with a running QB, and can be effective improvising. The bad? His footwork (and overall game) is inconsistent and he’s never needed to be the take-charge leader of his team (unlike Ryan) and had a tendency to not step up in big games. He’s more game-ready than Sanchez, but if the team that drafts Sanchez can afford to let him sit and learn the system for a year or so I’d rather have Sanchez.
1b. Mark Sanchez, USC – I like him more long-term than
Stafford. He throws much better on the run and out of play action, two key qualities in a pro QB. I also really like his decisiveness, footwork and quick release. There’s a lot to like here. My biggest concerns come from his lack of experience (one year as a starter) and having such a strong supporting cast potentially masking his deficiencies. The one weak area of his game that stuck out in-season was his lack of field vision, especially when it came to reading the safety and where the pressure was coming from. Had he returned for his senior season I think he’d have a good chance of being 2010’s No. 1 pick if he had improved those weaknesses of his game, but he should still see a nice rookie payday.
3. Nate Davis,
BallState – I think this kid's got it all. Big arm, accurate (especially on mid-range to deep balls), mobile, throws well and accurately on the run (still looks to throw, doesn't run until he has to), tough, shows leadership abilities, great field vision, has the quickest release in this class, decision making, and pocket awareness, can make all the throws, effective making broken plays, experienced coaching (unlike many small school prospects), he’s fearless and he's consistent. Every QB has his bad moments;
Davis’ come when he’s trying to make plays behind the line of scrimmage with his feet. He’s fumble prone and many believe it’s in large part due to his unorthodox grip. Others will knock his lack of size and point to his learning disability as reasons he won’t succeed at the next level. I’d rather take those gambles than the other alternatives presented in this class. Only one NFL team (Colts) showing up to his Pro Day leads me to believe he’s going to be a day two after thought, which I think will be a big mistake. I’ll be anxious to see where he signs.
4.
Pat White,
West Virginia – I don’t think he’ll ever be a franchise QB, but a gimmick play maker and a quality backup? Absolutely. I think there are too many deficiencies in his game for him to ever establish himself as ‘the guy’ and due to his lack of ideal size I’m not sure any team will ever be willing to give him the opportunity either.
5.
Josh Freeman,
Kansas St – Most around here are well aware that I am not buying into Freeman. He has the tools, but he does not know how to use them. If given lots of time to sit on the bench and learn he may have success, but given where many believe he’ll be drafted I’m not sure that will be the case. I have a laundry list of things I do not like about him – accuracy, inconsistency, poor decision making, does not put touch on any of his throws, drives (or lack thereof) full of either big plays or quickly stalled drives, poor footwork, problems reading defenses and his mechanics break down under duress. Sounds like the makeup of a day two pick, not a day one guy.
Overall, this is a very weak QB class.
Stafford and Sanchez both have moderate franchise QB potential, but they’re far from standout prospects. Nate Davis is a boom or bust guy, Pat White is likely a ‘what you see is what you get’ option, and the rest of the class are long shots to ever do anything meaningful in the NFL. This is not the class you want to be QB hunting in.
Facebook
Twitter
