Orton's Arm Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 An interesting question regarding Rodgers is whether he would have turned out to be the qb that he is today if he didn't ride the bench for a few years and then become the starting qb? Would a talent like Rodgers be squandered going to a dysfunctional organization such as the Bills or Raiders? Would a qb such as Carson Palmer have had a much better career with a stable organization than with the chaotic organization that he played for in Cincinatti? I understand that the Bengals have recently stabilized their operation but when CP played there it was one distracting issue after another that kept this franchise in turmoil. The reason I bring up these questions is that I'm not certain how this staff is going to handle Manuel. Are they going to immediately throw him into the fire like Seattle did with Russell Wilson? Or are they going to gradually ease him in in his rookie year like the 49ers did with Kaepernick? The Seahawks stuck with Wilson even though he struggled the first half of the season. After that he was a marvelous player. His poise and maturity were quite impressive. I don't believe the Bills are going to win many games next year. But that doesn't mean it will be another typical wasted year if Manuel demonstrates that he is capable of being a legitimate franchise qb. > An interesting question regarding Rodgers is whether he would have turned out to be the qb that > he is today if he didn't ride the bench for a few years and then become the starting qb? Aaron Rodgers in his prime is a better QB than Peyton Manning in his prime. Peyton Manning was thrown to the wolves as a rookie. I don't think that being thrown to the wolves early, alone, would have been sufficient to spoil Rodgers' career. Earlier I cited Bledsoe as an example of a QB who was much more successful in one system than in another. Rodgers is a much better QB than Bledsoe or Bradshaw. If Bledsoe or Bradshaw can flourish only under exactly the right circumstances, I think a guy like Rodgers would prove much more flexible and resilient. Look at what he did in the Super Bowl. He had no running game, no offensive line, and a lot of offensive players were hurt. But with the exception of one or two throws, Rodgers played a perfect game. As perfect a game as I can ever remember a quarterback playing. The lack of running game and OL was not unique to that Super Bowl. Seldom throughout Rodgers' career have the Packers done a particularly good job protecting him, or giving him a good running game. I imagine they made up for that by helping Rodgers in other ways: good coaching, a stable offensive system, etc. His situation could have been been worse--but it also could have been a lot better. Would Rodgers have been good enough to succeed in a "worst possible" situation? Given how well he's dealt with the significant adversity he has faced, I could easily imagine him overcoming still more. Would he look as good in a "worst possible" situation as he does now? No. But he'd play well enough that you'd still be able to see signs of greatness.
chris heff Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 I've skipped some stuff, so maybe I missed it... But where does EJ processing information slowly come from? Scouting reports? Media inventions? Is there tape on this that I can see? You're not going to get an answer. I asked where anyone has said that FSU's offense was over simplified, to no avail. Edwards Arm has no idea how simple or complex the FSU offense maybe and he has never seen EJ Manuel play one down of football. His opinions are based on others opinions and of course the all important Wonderlic.
eball Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) You're not going to get an answer. I asked where anyone has said that FSU's offense was over simplified, to no avail. Edwards Arm has no idea how simple or complex the FSU offense maybe and he has never seen EJ Manuel play one down of football. His opinions are based on others opinions and of course the all important Wonderlic. Did EJ bungle the Wonderlic? I don't remember seeing that. Also, different point -- I was listening to one of the SiriusXM NFL guys yesterday while driving around and he was talking about the pre-draft talk when Christian Ponder came out of FSU. He talked about how Jimbo Fisher told the Vikings Ponder would be a perfect fit for them because everything he had done at FSU was just like what Minnesota was doing. So -- either the Vikings' offense is overly simplistic, or the notion FSU's offense is overly simplistic has now been debunked. Edited July 15, 2013 by eball
Orton's Arm Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 I've skipped some stuff, so maybe I missed it... But where does EJ processing information slowly come from? Scouting reports? Media inventions? Is there tape on this that I can see? The most important question one can ask about a quarterback is whether he's capable of quickly and accurately processing large volumes of information. In this regard, a number of concerns have been raised about Manuel. For example: From Walter Football ********** NFL sources who watch Florida State closely have told WalterFootball.com that Manuel is not a natural pocket passer. They don't feel he is as accurate as his completion percentage indicates. . . . The scheme that the Seminoles run also came under criticism. The view is that it is extremely basic and does not have Manuel well-prepared to run an NFL offense. Our sources believe that Manuel too often looks to run when his first-read is covered rather than quickly looking to his second and third options. ********** From Mel Kiper: ********** I just think the No. 16 pick was way too high for EJ Manuel. . . . He needs to prove that he's capable of getting through progressions quicker and getting the ball out. He was my No. 6-ranked QB. ********** From the Sports Xchange: ******* Manuel will need work, like developing the ability to read the entire field and make his progressions. ******* From Yahoo! Sports: ******* I'm confused about EJ Manuel. Literally nowhere on the Internet can I find someone with a respected football opinion to tell me he's ready to be a starter in the NFL. ******* NFL.com also referred to Manuel as a project QB. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any college QB described as "raw" or a "project" who went on to have a successful NFL career. On the other hand, I can think of quite a few college QBs described as "polished" and "NFL-ready" who went on to achieve sustained NFL success.
JohnC Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) NFL.com also referred to Manuel as a project QB. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any college QB described as "raw" or a "project" who went on to have a successful NFL career. On the other hand, I can think of quite a few college QBs described as "polished" and "NFL-ready" who went on to achieve sustained NFL success. Colin Kaepernick was considered a "raw" type of qb coming out of college. He ran a pistol offense that many pro people felt wouldn't translate to the pro game. There were many analysts who believed that Cam Newton, although a physically imposing athlete, would have difficulty transitioning to the pro game. As it stands he is the dominant player on Carolina's roster. With respect to your qualms with Manuel they are well grounded. The Bills organization could have played it safe with the more cerebral Barkley and Nassib. Instead they went with the riskier prospect who had more tools than the other competing prospects. I salute them for not being afraid to take the risk for the bigger talent. Coming from a stolid organization I find that encouraging. Edited July 16, 2013 by JohnC
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 The most important question one can ask about a quarterback is whether he's capable of quickly and accurately processing large volumes of information. In this regard, a number of concerns have been raised about Manuel. For example: From Walter Football ********** NFL sources who watch Florida State closely have told WalterFootball.com that Manuel is not a natural pocket passer. They don't feel he is as accurate as his completion percentage indicates. . . . The scheme that the Seminoles run also came under criticism. The view is that it is extremely basic and does not have Manuel well-prepared to run an NFL offense. Our sources believe that Manuel too often looks to run when his first-read is covered rather than quickly looking to his second and third options. ********** From Mel Kiper: ********** I just think the No. 16 pick was way too high for EJ Manuel. . . . He needs to prove that he's capable of getting through progressions quicker and getting the ball out. He was my No. 6-ranked QB. ********** From the Sports Xchange: ******* Manuel will need work, like developing the ability to read the entire field and make his progressions. ******* From Yahoo! Sports: ******* I'm confused about EJ Manuel. Literally nowhere on the Internet can I find someone with a respected football opinion to tell me he's ready to be a starter in the NFL. ******* NFL.com also referred to Manuel as a project QB. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any college QB described as "raw" or a "project" who went on to have a successful NFL career. On the other hand, I can think of quite a few college QBs described as "polished" and "NFL-ready" who went on to achieve sustained NFL success. While I have a great deal of respect for your personally formed opinions of players, none of the links you posted carries any weight with me. To me, Kiper knows zero. His entire career is a mystery to me. The last one you linked is a quote from Chris Trapasso I believe. Trapasso's an amateur working in Yahoo's equivalent of the Bleacher Report. Walter Football is not credible to me. I really have no explanation for the somewhat lukewarm consensus on EJ but when I vetted him, watched every play from about a dozen games, read all the articles, saw his interviews, watched his workouts, I couldn't understand why he wasn't the top rated QB in the draft and I couldn't see why he wasn't considered a blue chip prospect. But lo and behold he was the first QB taken. The question is if the Bills didn't take him would he have still been the first QB taken? I believe so. I believe he's the best QB in this draft and I'm glad the Bills took him. Being able to trade down and still pick him is a bonus and I can't wait to see EJ play.
chris heff Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 While I have a great deal of respect for your personally formed opinions of players, none of the links you posted carries any weight with me. To me, Kiper knows zero. His entire career is a mystery to me. The last one you linked is a quote from Chris Trapasso I believe. Trapasso's an amateur working in Yahoo's equivalent of the Bleacher Report. Walter Football is not credible to me. I really have no explanation for the somewhat lukewarm consensus on EJ but when I vetted him, watched every play from about a dozen games, read all the articles, saw his interviews, watched his workouts, I couldn't understand why he wasn't the top rated QB in the draft and I couldn't see why he wasn't considered a blue chip prospect. But lo and behold he was the first QB taken. The question is if the Bills didn't take him would he have still been the first QB taken? I believe so. I believe he's the best QB in this draft and I'm glad the Bills took him. Being able to trade down and still pick him is a bonus and I can't wait to see EJ play. Thank you.
chris heff Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 The problem with EA's personally formed opinions is that he bases them on these links. As opposed to you who spent the time to make your own observations.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 The problem with EA's personally formed opinions is that he bases them on these links. As opposed to you who spent the time to make your own observations. I appreciate it Chris but there's no telling who's right about Manuel. I have a conviction about the guy but obviously that's no guarantee that he'll turn out well. It won't be long before we find out though! edit: And EA really is a very knowledgeable fan so there's that too.
reddogblitz Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Coming from a stolid organization I find that encouraging. If EJ turns out to be good I'll consider it encouraging. If he turns out to be a bust, I'll consider it dumb as dirt.
Big C Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 NFL.com also referred to Manuel as a project QB. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any college QB described as "raw" or a "project" who went on to have a successful NFL career. On the other hand, I can think of quite a few college QBs described as "polished" and "NFL-ready" who went on to achieve sustained NFL success. Kaepernick... Granted, he still has to prove his longevity. Obviously draft position has a lot to do with what they say. Tom Brady wasn't really called "raw" or "project," he was just never considered to have much of a career at all.
eball Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 It's somewhat remarkable to me that a QB who played at a big-time NCAA program for four seasons against top opposition, won four bowl games, and completed 67% of nearly 900 throws at an average per attempt of 8.6 yards is considered a "project" not ready to play in the NFL -- particularly when there are no glaring red flags relating to attitude, intelligence, leadership, work ethic, or anything else I've been able to see.
JohnC Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) If EJ turns out to be good I'll consider it encouraging. If he turns out to be a bust, I'll consider it dumb as dirt. Whether Manuel turns out to be good or a bust I have no criticism of the organization for this selection. They did their due diligence and acted on a conviction. What more do you want? What is worse: making a draft mistake on a qb or having Buddy not taking a risk on a qb prospect during his three year tenure? What is worse having teams drafting behind us taking qbs that we pass on and then rather quickly they excell? There are no quarantees that the qb you select to be your franchise qb turns out to be a franchise qb. What is a guarantee is that if you don't take a risk on drafting a credible qb prospect you will never have a credible franchise qb on your roster. When an inane organization continues to repeat the stupendously stupid cycle of acquiring cheaper by the dozen caliber of qbs such as Fitz, Kolb, TJ Jackson, Holcomb, Thigpen etc., etc to be their franchise qb the results are predictable. The below link is a Greg Cosell assessment of EJ Manuel. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000148931/article/ej-manuel-offers-both-concerns-positives-cosell-says Edited July 16, 2013 by JohnC
CodeMonkey Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) It's somewhat remarkable to me that a QB who played at a big-time NCAA program for four seasons against top opposition, won four bowl games, and completed 67% of nearly 900 throws at an average per attempt of 8.6 yards is considered a "project" not ready to play in the NFL -- particularly when there are no glaring red flags relating to attitude, intelligence, leadership, work ethic, or anything else I've been able to see. My opinion is that QB is the single most important, as well as the single most difficult, position to play which makes it logical that very few kids would be ready to graduate college and start in the NFL the next fall with only a few weeks of camp and a couple preseason games experience. I would expect all but a very select few QBs to be considered projects. Edited July 16, 2013 by CodeMonkey
eball Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 My opinion is that QB is the single most important, as well as the single most difficult, position to play which makes it logical that very few kids would be ready to graduate college and start in the NFL the next fall with only a few weeks of camp and a couple preseason games experience. I would expect all but a very select few QBs to be considered projects. That I agree with -- the rest I don't. A QB like Manuel has been playing the position for years, the last four of which were under what is essentially a professional program. See my comments above about Jimbo Fisher advising the Vikings when Ponder came out. QBs coming from small schools who played lesser competition, or who ran unconventional sets, or only played for a year or two, are the ones who should fall into the "project" category -- not big, strong, smart, successful college QBs who played at the highest level against top competition.
chris heff Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) I appreciate it Chris but there's no telling who's right about Manuel. I have a conviction about the guy but obviously that's no guarantee that he'll turn out well. It won't be long before we find out though! edit: And EA really is a very knowledgeable fan so there's that too. From a philosophical stand point I don't disagree with EA. Processing information and accuracy are the two most important qualities for an NFL QB. I disagree with his assessment of EJ Manuel because I don't believe he has ever seen him play. He formed his opinion based on the observations of other, and even there were he read "work in progress" and "project". I read " most potential" and "greatest up side". The assertion that FSU runs a simple offense is just wrong. Their play book is daunting. Although they run a small number of plays there are multiple formations for each play. This offense is particularly difficult for young receivers. If receivers are not where they are suppose to be, I don't care if you get to your fourth read, if the guy isn't there he isn't there. I'm not saying that EJ's decision making or the lack there of is all on his receivers, but it contributed. After the draft I went to YouTube and watched as many complete games as I could find. Some I had seen live. FSU lost two games last year. The NC State loss is on Fisher. They had a 16 point lead and Fisher had his team go in to a shell. In the Florida loss EJ had five turn overs, three interceptions and two fumbles. The first int he was under preasure, falling backwards, he should have eaten it. The second he threw it right to the defender. On the third the receiver quit on the pattern the defender did not. One fumble I don't remember. The others, in the NFL would have been a personal foul and the LB proably would have been fined. If you want to see a microcosm of EJ's FSU career watch the Florida game and the Clemson game. It is EJ at his worst and best against very good teams. Edited July 16, 2013 by chris heff
Dorkington Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) So, again... no actual analysis. Just sound bites, it seems like. Is there any video anywhere of someone breaking down exactly their concerns with EJ's mental facilities? This guy played on a fairly big program, there's gotta be some break down of his abilities other than "well, my source said he's kinda crappy at making decisions". San Jose, do you have any links to videos/games that you'd suggest people watch who want to know more about EJ? --- Been watching a few games where people have edited every EJ play, including incompletions... and so far, I like what I see. I'll continue to keep an eye out for "slow eyes" and his decision making... Edited July 16, 2013 by Dorkington
Orton's Arm Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 While I have a great deal of respect for your personally formed opinions of players, none of the links you posted carries any weight with me. To me, Kiper knows zero. His entire career is a mystery to me. The last one you linked is a quote from Chris Trapasso I believe. Trapasso's an amateur working in Yahoo's equivalent of the Bleacher Report. Walter Football is not credible to me. I really have no explanation for the somewhat lukewarm consensus on EJ but when I vetted him, watched every play from about a dozen games, read all the articles, saw his interviews, watched his workouts, I couldn't understand why he wasn't the top rated QB in the draft and I couldn't see why he wasn't considered a blue chip prospect. But lo and behold he was the first QB taken. The question is if the Bills didn't take him would he have still been the first QB taken? I believe so. I believe he's the best QB in this draft and I'm glad the Bills took him. Being able to trade down and still pick him is a bonus and I can't wait to see EJ play. > The last one you linked is a quote from Chris Trapasso I believe. Trapasso's an amateur working in Yahoo's equivalent of the Bleacher Report. The author of that piece is a Bills fan; and I'm fairly sure he doesn't get paid for his writing. By no means am I suggesting the guy is bursting with credibility. Before the draft, he had Manuel rated as the third or fourth best QB (I don't remember which). But a few weeks after the draft, he'd convinced himself Manuel had been the best available prospect all along. His endorsement of Manuel is much less credible than yours; because you've been touting him as the best available QB long before the draft. The only reason I quoted the article at all was because of the line indicating that nowhere on the Internet can he find a credible source describing Manuel as NFL-ready. A guy like that may not exactly be the world's best football analyst, I thought to myself, but odds are he's probably spent a fair amount of time scouring the Internet for draft-related articles. If he says no credible source has described Manuel as polished or NFL-ready, odds are he's probably right. But if he's wrong, and if there are articles by credible NFL sources describing Manuel in those terms, I'm sure one of Manuel's legion of supporters will find it. Thus far no such article has been brought to light; which leads me to believe the quoted statement is probably accurate. > Walter Football is not credible to me. My opinion of Walter Football is higher than yours. But I'll try to bear your opinion in mind; and use sources other than them if trying to persuade you. > I really have no explanation for the somewhat lukewarm consensus on EJ but when I vetted him, > watched every play from about a dozen games, read all the articles, saw his interviews, watched > his workouts, I couldn't understand why he wasn't the top rated QB in the draft and I couldn't see > why he wasn't considered a blue chip prospect. As a general rule I tend to ignore player interviews. There is no statistical correlation between how well someone does in a job interview and subsequent job performance. Part of that is undoubtedly because a person who raises serious red flags in an interview tends not to get hired in the first place. At the opposite end of the spectrum, people who do the best in job interviews are probably those who have deliberately cultivated the talent of telling the job interviewer whatever he wants to hear. As for the articles--when I read an article about a QB prospect, I have a mental checklist in my head. The checklist has words like "accuracy," "physical tools," "information processing speed," and so on. For example, the article JohnC recently cited about Manuel--the one with Greg Cosell's assessment of Manuel--contains no commentary about his decision-making or information processing speed. No new information about that item on my checklist, I think to myself. Opinions about the QB prospects of 2013 varied greatly. There is no one consensus view on a guy like Manuel. But there does seem to be a consensus or near-consensus about most of the specific items on my checklist. He has great physical tools by all accounts. No credible source that I've seen claims he ran a complex, 3 - 4 read offense at FSU. He's demonstrated reasonably solid intellectual achievements off the field; both in the classroom, and by getting about the same Wonderlic score as Roethlisberger. Reports on his throwing accuracy are more mixed; but those who praise his accuracy seem to outnumber those who have raised concerns. I've heard generally positive reviews about his work ethic and character; and I expect him to have a very different personality than Jamarcus Russel or Ryan Leaf. If a person is watching film of Manuel, or reading an article about him, or watching one of his workouts, the purpose should be to gather more information with respect to each item on the checklist. Once each item on the checklist is as accurate as possible, you'll be one step closer to forming a reliable composite picture of the guy. The next step is deciding how heavily to weight each item on the checklist. Below is my personal list: 1a. Information processing ability/mental bandwidth 1b. Throwing accuracy 3. Competitiveness/will to win 4. The ability to hit receivers in perfect stride 5. Touch 6. Leadership 7. Toughness 8. Physical tools
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 17, 2013 Posted July 17, 2013 San Jose, do you have any links to videos/games that you'd suggest people watch who want to know more about EJ? I always go to this site to watch prospects. http://draftbreakdown.com/players/ej-manuel/ Sadly (I don't know if it's due to server space or what) it seems like they've deleted some of their videos. They only have 7 of his complete games and 2 of them are from 2011. Also here's his worst performance from last year, the game against Florida: One other thing I factored into judging EJ was the fact that he played with very few talented offensive weapons over the course of his career. It seems to me like he really carried the offense and made the players better than they were.
Dorkington Posted July 17, 2013 Posted July 17, 2013 The few videos I watched, I noticed a fair amount of dropped passes, and failed separation for the WRs... I'll give this video a watch. I watched a few of the EJ Manual vs ____ games on YouTube, and he looked better than what some people here have been suggesting. And I can't say that their offense looked all that simple, but then again, I'm not an expert.
Recommended Posts