Scouts Inc (McShay): First time in 15 years that 4 QBs had a grade of 90+

[Seanbillsfan2206]

2 minutes ago, Woodman19 said:

Not too unlikely, anyone who is going to get taken in the first couple rounds obviously has skill and say he ends up getting taken by the Patriots or Steelers and has a chance to learn for a year or two while the Darnolds, Rosens etc get drafted by teams like the Browns and Jets then anything can happen.  Just look at any draft and see how the best players from them aren't always taken in the top 5.  Talent is littered throughout because players develop differently in different environments. 

You’re basing this off of hypothetical situations. In most scouts opinions, Rudolph is the 5th or 6th best QB in the draft. That tells me that he’s not very likely to have the best career out of this class. It’s possible, just not likely

[C.Biscuit97]

6 minutes ago, Mikey152 said:

 

Kyle Boller isn't nearly the bust people make him out to be, especially as the 19th pick...JaMarcuss Russell or Ryan Leaf are more synonymous with bust

He made ints than tds and a 69 (nice) career qb rating.  He was playing for a great organization and developed slowly.  He was a bust. 

33 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Where's Jevan Snead?

 

 

I love when some people take these guy’s “opinions” as gospel and forget about this stuff. McShay completely altered that guy’s life.

 

and don’t forget about Mayock liking Gabbert over Cam Newton.  These guys better be right on Allen because it will be a major hit to their reputation given all the information we have on him.

[Woodman19]

8 minutes ago, Seanbillsfan2206 said:

You’re basing this off of hypothetical situations. In most scouts opinions, Rudolph is the 5th or 6th best QB in the draft. That tells me that he’s not very likely to have the best career out of this class. It’s possible, just not likely

As I said, I don't necessarily think he will either but people seem to take the pre-draft information as gospel and proclaim things impossible or probable based on an incomplete. (for both good and bad)

[Chicken Boo]

23 minutes ago, Mikey152 said:

 

Kyle Boller isn't nearly the bust people make him out to be, especially as the 19th pick...JaMarcuss Russell or Ryan Leaf are more synonymous with bust

 

You must not remember Boller too well then.  While he may not have been the colossal bust Leaf or Jamarcus were, he was a bust just the same.

 

He was terrible!

[ComradeKayAdams]

2 hours ago, metzelaars_lives said:

Yeah I don’t know- Biff from Tonawanda insists that Josh Allen is definitely gonna suck.  Surely he knows more than Scouts Inc. (Biff being a metaphor for half the people on this website).

 

Go ahead and ridicule me. But I was right on RJ in 1998, Losman in 2004, and Manuel in 2013. Typical "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" QB types who lacked the requisite accuracy and decision-making skills to thrive in the modern-era NFL. If they haven't shown the ability by the time they finish college, it's extremely rare for them to somehow figure it out within the first few years in the pros.

 

 

[HappyDays]

 

[metzelaars_lives]

12 minutes ago, BiffFromTonawanda said:

 

Go ahead and ridicule me. But I was right on RJ in 1998, Losman in 2004, and Manuel in 2013. Typical "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" QB types who lacked the requisite accuracy and decision-making skills to thrive in the modern-era NFL. If they haven't shown the ability by the time they finish college, it's extremely rare for them to somehow figure it out within the first few years in the pros.

 

 

Yes!!

2 hours ago, Buffalo Boy said:

I see 10 or 11 out of 33 that are flat our suckfest/ busts.

Leinart

Russell

Young

Quinn

RG3

Sanchize

Brohm

Henne

Locker

Manziel

(Cutler, Tannehill)???

 

So in other words, each of the guys this year has a 67% chance to be a franchise QB?  What point are you trying to make?  That sometimes big QB prospects bust so you should never take one?  I'm genuinely curious what you're trying to say here.  Did you think that posters on this website were heretofore unaware that not all first round QB's succeed in the NFL?

[Bisonbreath123]

Drew Willey is not on this list ?!?!

I'll have to update my draft board......

[NickelCity]

3 hours ago, metzelaars_lives said:

Yeah I don’t know- Biff from Tonawanda insists that Josh Allen is definitely gonna suck.  Surely he knows more than Scouts Inc. (Biff being a metaphor for half the people on this website).

 

54 minutes ago, BiffFromTonawanda said:

 

Go ahead and ridicule me. But I was right on RJ in 1998, Losman in 2004, and Manuel in 2013. Typical "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" QB types who lacked the requisite accuracy and decision-making skills to thrive in the modern-era NFL. If they haven't shown the ability by the time they finish college, it's extremely rare for them to somehow figure it out within the first few years in the pros.

 

 

 

Lol. I love this board. 

[Jay_Fixit]

I wonder what the “Inc” stands for?

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

2 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said:

I wonder what the “Inc” stands for?

 

 

Incarcerated?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 hours ago, DCOrange said:

 

Unfortunately, there's no way to adjust the ratings from past years to match whatever this new rating system is, so I made no attempt to. I did, however, gather up all of the QBs from 2004-2018 that had a grade of 90+ and came up with the following, in order:

 

T14      Blaine Gabbert

T17      Philip Rivers

T17      Mark Sanchez

T19      Ryan Tannehill

 

T19      Sam Darnold

 

T21      Brian Brohm

T21      Cam Newton

T21      Marcus Mariota

 

T24      Josh Allen

T24      Josh Rosen

 

T26      Blake Bortles

T26      Carson Wentz

T26      Jared Goff

 

T26      Baker Mayfield

 

T30      Chad Henne

T30      Jake Locker

T30      Johnny Manziel

 

I'm not sure I understand this, but I think it's saying the best QB in this class slots in below Tannehill, Sanchez, and Gabbert  and the 4th best slots in below Blake Bortles and slightly above Jake Locker and Johnny Manziel?

[Buffalo Boy]

1 hour ago, metzelaars_lives said:

So in other words, each of the guys this year has a 67% chance to be a franchise QB?  What point are you trying to make?  That sometimes big QB prospects bust so you should never take one?  I'm genuinely curious what you're trying to say here.  Did you think that posters on this website were heretofore unaware that not all first round QB's succeed in the NFL?

I’m saying 1/3 are out immediately.

The remaining 2/3 TDs arent “ Franchise” QBs but good enough to garner multiple year starting status. That is probably a reflection of the general lack of good QB play the league has suffered through.

What is interesting to me is the disparity of opinion on who we should take( and whether we should move up to do so).

[DCOrange]

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'm not sure I understand this, but I think it's saying the best QB in this class slots in below Tannehill, Sanchez, and Gabbert  and the 4th best slots in below Blake Bortles and slightly above Jake Locker and Johnny Manziel?

 

The ranking is on the left, so for example, Mayfield is tied for 26th with Bortles/Wentz/Goff.

 

As I mentioned in the OP, it appears that Scouts Inc. changed the grading curve in 2014 or 2015, so in all likelihood, Mayfield being a 91 this year would be more like maybe a 94 by the former scoring system or something; we don't know because Scouts Inc. never actually declared a new grading curve but suddenly we went from having 10 guys (at any position) at 95+ each year to maybe 1 or 2.

 

This change only makes it even more impressive that there are 4 QBs in the 90+ threshold.

 

And the optimistic take would be that all 4 fall somewhere within the range of Philip Rivers and Carson Wentz 

[Elite Poster]

4 hours ago, Buffalo Boy said:

I see 10 or 11 out of 33 that are flat our suckfest/ busts.

Leinart

Russell

Young

Quinn

RG3

Sanchize

Brohm

Henne

Locker

Manziel

(Cutler, Tannehill)???

 

 

Yes so 66% of the time it works. That is a good statistic. Nothing in this world is 100%.

[4merper4mer]

11 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

 

The ranking is on the left, so for example, Mayfield is tied for 26th with Bortles/Wentz/Goff.

 

As I mentioned in the OP, it appears that Scouts Inc. changed the grading curve in 2014 or 2015, so in all likelihood, Mayfield being a 91 this year would be more like maybe a 94 by the former scoring system or something; we don't know because Scouts Inc. never actually declared a new grading curve but suddenly we went from having 10 guys (at any position) at 95+ each year to maybe 1 or 2.

 

This change only makes it even more impressive that there are 4 QBs in the 90+ threshold.

 

And the optimistic take would be that all 4 fall somewhere within the range of Philip Rivers and Carson Wentz 

The list doesn't really show anything positive or negative on this year's class but if I were Scouts Inc I would stop publishing it.

 

Matt Leinart > Matt Stafford does not scream out "Trust my process".

Edited April 5, 2018 by 4merper4mer

[Boatdrinks]

1 hour ago, BiffFromTonawanda said:

 

Go ahead and ridicule me. But I was right on RJ in 1998, Losman in 2004, and Manuel in 2013. Typical "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" QB types who lacked the requisite accuracy and decision-making skills to thrive in the modern-era NFL. If they haven't shown the ability by the time they finish college, it's extremely rare for them to somehow figure it out within the first few years in the pros.

 

 

Rob Johnson wasn't in the '98 draft, so there seems to be some discrepancy between your opinion and the facts. Anyway, the rankings are simply that: high probability prospects that have measurables. Most will not live up to their draft ranking. If all that mattered were the " measurables" there would be no busts. A high percentage of these college QBs will flame out as pros , because there is still no way to tell if they have the all important processing speed when the real bullets are flying at the faster NFL speed. Your guess is as good- and bad as anyone else's. Since so few of these QBs will become stars, saying player X will bust is a higher probability prediction than saying that same player X is a can't miss all-pro. 

4 hours ago, horned dogs said:

Or all 4 could be great or bust!

This is definitely true. What's clear is that this year looks like the target year to draft one. 4 highly ranked ranked possibles don't fall in the same draft class all that often. 

[RochesterRob]

1 hour ago, metzelaars_lives said:

Yes!!

So in other words, each of the guys this year has a 67% chance to be a franchise QB?  What point are you trying to make?  That sometimes big QB prospects bust so you should never take one?  I'm genuinely curious what you're trying to say here.  Did you think that posters on this website were heretofore unaware that not all first round QB's succeed in the NFL?

  I only see 25 percent of that list in terms of being a franchise QB.  Too early to ink the Titans or Bucs QB's in.  Maybe they will and maybe they will not be franchise QB's.  Then of course you can't ink the rookies in as they have not even played a down of NFL football.  Eli Manning in my mind has barely played to that standard and if the Giants did not win two SB's then the definition of franchise QB fits even poorer.  Yes, Eli has had strong years but then he has had periods where he was pretty mediocre.

[LABILLBACKER]

I was hoping 92 Allen was his completion %.....

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

19 minutes ago, Elite Poster said:

 

Yes so 66% of the time it works. That is a good statistic. Nothing in this world is 100%.

Yes! Thank you for putting a little bit of sanity. People work their butts of to get to 2/3 right, when you can flip a coin an expect 50. That is what we're dealing with, raising the bar a few degrees. 

15 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

Rob Johnson wasn't in the '98 draft, so there seems to be some discrepancy between your opinion and the facts. Anyway, the rankings are simply that: high probability prospects that have measurables. Most will not live up to their draft ranking. If all that mattered were the " measurables" there would be no busts. A high percentage of these college QBs will flame out as pros , because there is still no way to tell if they have the all important processing speed when the real bullets are flying at the faster NFL speed. Your guess is as good- and bad as anyone else's. Since so few of these QBs will become stars, saying player X will bust is a higher probability prediction than saying that same player X is a can't miss all-pro. 

This is definitely true. What's clear is that this year looks like the target year to draft one. 4 highly ranked ranked possibles don't fall in the same draft class all that often. 

Yep this is a year where you take your shot at excellent prospects. After that is done, alot of it will be somewhat luck dependent (injuries etc.). Surround him with coaches, weapons and anything else you can and then hope it works. But, I'm taking my chances on this years prospects.