NewEra Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 Revisionist history much. Kaepernick and Wilson were complete afterthoughts here. I went back and looked at the archives. There were only a few that liked them enough for the Bills to pick them. Where was this love of these guys from you before their drafts? If you can't post such a thing then you really have no business mocking anyone liking Scott over any of these bozos in this draft class. If you're so certain, please show me a better (key word) college game video of Wilson or Kaepernick than Scott displays here against Stanford. There were a few threads on drafting both Wilson and Kaepernick. I wasn't a fan of Wilson until I saw the camp gruden episode. To say that no one though Wilson was good is ridiculous. There were many here that did. Maybe you didn't visit the site as much as you thought. I'm here several times a day and remember thinking people were crazy for wanting to draft Wilson (until I saw the camp gruden with Wilson.) It seems to me that you just want an athletic QB that can run. Scott was incredibly inconstant. He has tools, no doubt. But also has plenty of question marks. To say that you have no business to mock someone if they don't provide a link to past posts is just garbage. Not everyone lives, eats or breaths TSW or care to spend hours researching to make a post. That being said, I'd be cool with drafting him in rd 4 or later.
1billsfan Posted March 2, 2013 Author Posted March 2, 2013 There were a few threads on drafting both Wilson and Kaepernick. I wasn't a fan of Wilson until I saw the camp gruden episode. To say that no one though Wilson was good is ridiculous. There were many here that did. Maybe you didn't visit the site as much as you thought. I'm here several times a day and remember thinking people were crazy for wanting to draft Wilson (until I saw the camp gruden with Wilson.) It seems to me that you just want an athletic QB that can run. Scott was incredibly inconstant. He has tools, no doubt. But also has plenty of question marks. To say that you have no business to mock someone if they don't provide a link to past posts is just garbage. Not everyone lives, eats or breaths TSW or care to spend hours researching to make a post. That being said, I'd be cool with drafting him in rd 4 or later. I think we're splitting hairs here. Maybe I should say that there was no TSW groundswell. We both know what one of those is like here. I don't want to fight with anybody here. I'm too old for that. I was just shocked that this guy has not been seriously discussed at length here. As for me just wanting an "'athletic QB that can run" go back and watch him throw the ball. That ball explodes off his arm and is very accurate. THAT is what I real like about Matt Scott! The fact that he's athletic and is fast and quick to make cuts and move just ADDS to why I think he's better than any QB in this draft. Here' a highlight of his throws vs USC and an interview… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfLgZ4GqGWk I look at Barkley and Nassib and I see the same throwing motion that Fitzpatrick has. I think that they are both backups at the NFL level because they do not have the arm or athleticism to be a successful starter. Matt Scott has both the arm and athleticism and the only thing is how long to get him comfortable enough to be the starter. Six games in? A year? Two years? If he's a six games in or a year type of learner than the Bills should seriously consider drafting him as their QB of the future in the second round. Maybe after trading back in the round for an extra third would be the best thing to do.
greenmohawk Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 (edited) The big knock on Matt Scott is X's and O's. Rich Rods offense calls no plays, it's all spread and option pass routes. Like playground football. When he talked to NFL coaches at the East/West shrine game he was lost and needed extra coaching. Edited March 2, 2013 by greenmohawk
greenmohawk Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 Matt Scott = J.P. Losman. Nice arm, can run, can't read a defense. 6th round project.
1billsfan Posted March 2, 2013 Author Posted March 2, 2013 (edited) The big knock on Matt Scott is X's and O's. Rich Rods offense calls no plays, it's all spread and option pass routes. Like playground football. When he talked to NFL coaches at the East/West shrine game he was lost and needed extra coaching. Would you rather have a guy who knows Xs and Os but doesn't have the arm or physical skills to be a starting NFL QB (Barkley, Nassib) or the guy with the arm and great physical skills who could be taught the Xs and Os. Obviously you'd want both, but that kind of guy is getting picked #1 overall like Andrew Luck. If Cam Newton (no rocket scientist) can learn an NFL offense then why couldn't this kid? BTW, Matt Scott beat Russell Wilson's combine cone drills times. A QB who's obviously incredibly quick and athletic. These kind of QBs are the future of the NFL QB position. Guys like Flacco, Brady and Manning are going the way of the dinosaurs. These college programs are not staying with the classic drop back guys any longer. The NFL is changing and old school QBs like Barkley and Nassib will not have any careers of note in the league. Edited March 2, 2013 by 1billsfan
Bronc24 Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 Revisionist history much. Kaepernick and Wilson were complete afterthoughts here. I went back and looked at the archives. There were only a few that liked them enough for the Bills to pick them. Where was this love of these guys from you before their drafts? If you can't post such a thing then you really have no business mocking anyone liking Scott over any of these bozos in this draft class. If you're so certain, please show me a better (key word) college game video of Wilson or Kaepernick than Scott displays here against Stanford. Well...put me down as one of those guys. I know little of Scott, but Wilson was a massive mistake by this franchise. Check the history. Would you rather have a guy who knows Xs and Os but doesn't have the arm or physical skills to be a starting NFL QB (Barkley, Nassib) or the guy with the arm and great physical skills who could be taught the Xs and Os. Obviously you'd want both, but that kind of guy is getting picked #1 overall like Andrew Luck. If Cam Newton (no rocket scientist) can learn an NFL offense then why couldn't this kid? BTW, Matt Scott beat Russell Wilson's combine cone drills times. A QB who's obviously incredibly quick and athletic. These kind of QBs are the future of the NFL QB position. Guys like Flacco, Brady and Manning are going the way of the dinosaurs. These college programs are not staying with the classic drop back guys any longer. The NFL is changing and old school QBs like Barkley and Nassib will not have any careers of note in the league. I'd want to make sure a guy was able to learn X and Os. I'd want a guy who dealt with them a whole career. And to say Flacco, Manning and Brady are going the way of the dinosaur is a tad premature, is it not? Last time I checked, they are all playoff QBs with Flacco being the MVP in the Superbowl. I'd also submit that the read option is going to be a focus of every defensive coordinator in this league during the off season. It will be interesting to see how effective it remains.
Sisyphean Bills Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I'd also submit that the read option is going to be a focus of every defensive coordinator in this league during the off season. It will be interesting to see how effective it remains. By virtue of the fact that Dave Wannstedt is no longer an NFL DC, it's a given that the spread option will take a hit in production.
KOKBILLS Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 By virtue of the fact that Dave Wannstedt is no longer an NFL DC, it's a given that the spread option will take a hit in production. How right you are Sir!!!
Bronc24 Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 By virtue of the fact that Dave Wannstedt is no longer an NFL DC, it's a given that the spread option will take a hit in production. Ain't that the truth.
BobDVA Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I think Scott would be perfect as that "developmental QB" pick in the 4th round. In fact perfect, due to the fact he could actually develop.
NewEra Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 Would you rather have a guy who knows Xs and Os but doesn't have the arm or physical skills to be a starting NFL QB (Barkley, Nassib) or the guy with the arm and great physical skills who could be taught the Xs and Os. Obviously you'd want both, but that kind of guy is getting picked #1 overall like Andrew Luck. If Cam Newton (no rocket scientist) can learn an NFL offense then why couldn't this kid? BTW, Matt Scott beat Russell Wilson's combine cone drills times. A QB who's obviously incredibly quick and athletic. These kind of QBs are the future of the NFL QB position. Guys like Flacco, Brady and Manning are going the way of the dinosaurs. These college programs are not staying with the classic drop back guys any longer. The NFL is changing and old school QBs like Barkley and Nassib will not have any careers of note in the league. Nassib and Barkley both have arm and physical skills. Not to the effect of Scott, but enough to become good starting QBs. While I'm not really a fan of Nassib, I'd MUCH rather have Barkley than Scott and its not even close. The reason I like Scott, is because I think we can grab him in the 4th-6th rd. taking him in rd 2 is crazy IMO. Playing QB is much more than arm strength and running ability. Can he be taught the X's and O's? Maybe. Maybe not. The other 2 guys are miles ahead of him in that department. I can't envision anyone spending a 2nd rd pick on such and unpolished QB. Rds 4-6, Go for it. Any earlier is a huge mistake IMO. There will be some good players available in the 2nd that can come in and start this year. I'd rather have them.
greenmohawk Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 Matt Scott would be a nice developemental QB, it's beyond any of us fans why we haven't drafted QB's. Let's grab two of these guys and see what happens, maybe they both turn out good and we can trade one for high draft pick like the good teams do.
jjmac Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I don't know how accurate this is, but Draft Tek has him at 6-3, 198. Just a bit too skinny, IMHO.
KOKBILLS Posted March 2, 2013 Posted March 2, 2013 I don't know how accurate this is, but Draft Tek has him at 6-3, 198. Just a bit too skinny, IMHO. Scott measured 6-2 1/8 - 213 at the Combine...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 Scott measured 6-2 1/8 - 213 at the Combine... Well then he's too short.
Dibs Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 I think we're splitting hairs here. Maybe I should say that there was no TSW groundswell..... I don't see the relevance of this. Does having a bigger following on a Bills public forum effect how the actual teams drafting see a player?
1billsfan Posted March 3, 2013 Author Posted March 3, 2013 (edited) I don't see the relevance of this. Does having a bigger following on a Bills public forum effect how the actual teams drafting see a player? You need to read the thread to get the whole context. I got dissed for putting Scott in the same boat as Kaepernick and WIlson. It has nothing to do with the Bills picking players. Edited March 3, 2013 by 1billsfan
jaybee Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 You need to read the thread to get the whole context. I got dissed for putting Scott in the same boat as Kaepernick and WIlson. It has nothing to do with the Bills picking players. You could suggest Tom Brady on this forum. They'd all say late round project at best on this chat board. They'd spend all day looking for mud on Brady. They'd eventually find one game. They'd say "I told ya so". They'd all say the Bills front office knows less than them. They'd suggest drafting someone....that they'd later say sucks cuz he threw a pic and the front office knows nothing. Then they'd say fire everybody. Cut all the players. Its funny as hell when ya come right down to it. OP could be right on with this idea. Or not. I for one like suggestions like his. I was not aware of the kid he mentions. He doesn't look too bad to me at all, albeit his read of defenses does appear weak in the video but hey that can be fixed in some cases. jb
KOKBILLS Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 You could suggest Tom Brady on this forum. They'd all say late round project at best on this chat board. They'd spend all day looking for mud on Brady. They'd eventually find one game. They'd say "I told ya so". They'd all say the Bills front office knows less than them. They'd suggest drafting someone....that they'd later say sucks cuz he threw a pic and the front office knows nothing. Then they'd say fire everybody. Cut all the players. Its funny as hell when ya come right down to it. OP could be right on with this idea. Or not. I for one like suggestions like his. I was not aware of the kid he mentions. He doesn't look too bad to me at all, albeit his read of defenses does appear weak in the video but hey that can be fixed in some cases. jb I never took issue with the suggestion...Who would? It's a message board and I welcome any conversation. I would not mind seeing the Bills Draft Scott either (just not in the 2nd Round)... But the OP still continues to compare Scott favorably with Wilson and Kaepernick as prospects...And I'll I'm saying is...That's impossible...But I'm not saying Scott does not have the potential to play in the NFL...I'm not even saying Scott can't be as good as Wilson or Kaep in the NFL (though I doubt it)...I'm saying Kaep and Wilson were not just good, but great College Football QB's, which in turn made them better NFL prospects coming out...The OP seems to think that point is incorrect because there was not enough people banging the table on TBD for Wilson and Kaep before their Drafts...I'm not trying to dis anyone...I'm arguing a point... The discussion was started because the OP made the comment that this Vid of Scott vs Stanford was likely as good as any College film on Wilson or Kaep...Which I think is a pretty outrageous statement to be honest...I mean...Y'all can argue that point among yourselves...I've rested my case on it... And to the OP 1billsfan I do apologize for being a bit of a wise-ass...I can do that sometimes...My bad...I still stand by my argument 100%...But I should not be such a dick about it either...
Dibs Posted March 3, 2013 Posted March 3, 2013 ....I would not mind seeing the Bills Draft Scott either (just not in the 2nd Round)... So you're saying you would be happy if we drafted him in the 1st round!!!
Recommended Posts