Trent Edwards

[OHBillsFan]

Every season, NFL teams make me wonder why they hire scouts in the first place. Each year, a quarterback from a mediocre-to-bad team gets a ton of hype after the Combine and rockets up the draft board. In 2003, it was Kyle Boller at 19th overall. In 2004, Philip Rivers flew up to 4th overall after five straight weeks of talk about his intangibles. 2006 gave us the Broncos trading up to 11th to grab Jay Cutler.

 

What do all these quarterbacks have in common? There are a few common strings that tie this breed together: First, they need to play for a bad team in a major conference (Boller – Cal (Pac-10), Rivers – NC State (ACC), Cutler – Vandy (SEC).) Second, they can only marginal success as a starter. Leading the team to a major bowl game is out of the question. Third, a phenomenal Combine workout is a necessity, and is really the fuel that sets the media rolling up until draft day. Boller actually went above and beyond in his workout at Cal, where he threw a football from his knees and split the uprights. As we've seen from his play in the NFL, this skill translates directly to the football field.

 

These traits set up a firestorm of media hype that allows the players to fly up the draft board. Boller was considered a shaky pick until all of the excitement over his little parlor trick at his workout. Everyone fell in love with Rivers' intangibles, and I remember that people were debating whether the Bills should pick him at 13th. It turns out that all the excitement would push him from a borderline first rounder to Top Five. While this wasn't so bad, since he had shown strong abilities to lead a team and sufficient physical tools at NC State, he was picked unnecessarily high based on the ridiculous media hype. This past year, pundits like Merrill Hoge argued that Jay Cutler should be picked ahead over Vince Young (who single-handedly won the Nat'l Championship) and Matt Leinart (the most decorated college QB of all-time). The basis for this odd argument? Cutler has a stronger arm. Apparently Merrill lives in a fantasy world where Tom Brady is an Arena leaguer while Jeff George and Rob Johnson battle for the Super Bowl every year.

 

Naturally, I was led to ask what college signal caller we've never heard of will end up being picked above proven college veterans. I went to NFLdraftcountdown.com, which is generally a reliable source for the top prospects and hype surrounding them. After pulling up the top Senior prospects, my prayers were answered. Along with Brady Quinn, Drew Stanton, and Troy Smith was a Pac-10 QB who stuck out like a sore thumb: Stanford's Trent Edwards. The website's comment only added to my excitement, stating that Edwards "Has the physical tools you look for and could be this year's Jay Cutler." A comment about physical tools without regard for intangibles! A comparison to Jay Cutler! This was almost too good to be true.

 

Next stop, his statistics. Surely, playing in the pass-happy Pac-10 on a bad team, allowed Edwards to put up massive numbers. Here they are:

 

2003 - In 8 games, 4 TDS / 9 INT for 750 yds. with a 45.3 completion %

2004 - In 9 games, 9 TDS / 11 INT for 1718 yds. w/ a 54.6 comp. %

2005 - In 11 games, 17 TDS / 7 INT for 1934 yds. w/ a 62.7 comp. %

2006 - In 7 games, 6 TDS / 6 INT for 1027 yds 60.3 w/ a comp. %

 

Aside from the 2005 season, those look like very pedestrian numbers. The difference in games played is due to the injuries he's dealt with every season, including missing time during the 2005 campaign (another red flag). Also, four of his six touchdowns for the 2006 season came in one game, against San Jose State. While the 2005 season was fairly impressive as a whole, let's take a look at what he did against the best teams in his conference:

 

@ USC: 21 for 35, 1 TD / 3 INTs, 245 yds.

 

OREGON: 16 for 28, 1 TD / 2 INTs, 156 yds.

 

@ Oregon State: 16 for 28, 2 TDs / 2 INTs, 196 yds.

 

It sure doesn't look like he elevates his game against tough competition. Although he did throw all of his interceptions for the 2005 season in those three games, bear in mind that outside of those three teams, the PAC-10 is very weak in pass defense. He's played on a bad team, but throwing three picks in a game sure wasn't going to help them contend.

 

Moving past his stats, the most concerning aspect to any team looking to draft the kid should be his answers during the "Getting to know Trent Edwards" aspect of his Stanford bio. Some of his answers: "What most people don't know about me is: I wasn't going to play high school football", "My favorite class at Stanford: The Holocaust", "Least favorite class: Colonial and Revolutionary American History", "One moment in history I wish I could have seen: Amelia Earhart's transatlantic flight", and the grand finale: "Favorite Actresses: Dakota Fanning, Piper Perabo."

 

Now, I realize that I'm being harsh on the guy. I don't know the man, and have no idea about his character. This isn't a personal attack on Trent Edwards. My real problem is with the national sports media, and their desire to overhype unproven players. Troy Smith has beaten Michigan three times, plays with a mean streak rarely seen in college quarterbacks, and is the unquestioned leader of the top team in the country. Drew Stanton has battled hard in a tough Big 10 schedule, and has shown outstanding toughness. Brady Quinn, although he has his own flaws (poor bowl record and mediocre stats against non-academy schools) has shown the ability to run a pro-style offense.

 

Trent Edwards has put up very mediocre numbers in a conference geared to allow quarterbacks to put up huge stats. He's missed parts of every season due to injury and hasn't shown the slightest ability to be clutch in a big game. Of course, since he's 6'4" 220 and has a strong arm, scouts will overlook four years of weak production on the field. Get ready for the media firestorm about his 'upside', while what big-time players actually did on the field is ignored. Here's hoping that NFL teams will stop looking for the next diamond in the rough, and start taking the gem right in front of them.

[smokinandjokin]

What do all these quarterbacks have in common? There are a few common strings that tie this breed together: First, they need to play for a bad team in a major conference (Boller – Cal (Pac-10), Rivers – NC State (ACC), Cutler – Vandy (SEC).) Second, they can only marginal success as a starter. Leading the team to a major bowl game is out of the question. Third, a phenomenal Combine workout is a necessity, and is really the fuel that sets the media rolling up until draft day.

 

Or, they have to be coached by Jeff Tedford.

 

Joey Harrington at Oregon, and Boller and Aaron Rodgers at Cal. Rogers is still unproven, but he was supposed to go top-5 at the draft, and slipped into the mid-20's. I think it's safe to say the other two are busts.

[I 90]

Or, they have to be coached by Jeff Tedford.

 

Nice ob. What is it about Tedford products that doesn't scream "system QB" ?

 

I enjoyed the personal attack on Mr. Edwards but that is where you are going to look for a QB prospect. Generally, struggling big conference teams have to do things a little differently and one way is to sell offence and recruit a big time arm -- who is inevitably thrown to the wolves. If he is the "it" guy for this year, good for him... there are probably five similar guys in his wake.

 

The question for me is whether these types are preferable to the same sort who struggle in the way you describe at non major conferences and get the draft hype -- Dilfer, McNair, Culpepper, Pennington, Carr, Ramsey, Leftwich, Roethlisberger, Losman (a UCLA washout), Alex Smith...

 

Quarterback is an absolute mess and GM killer at the top of the draft. For every Tim Couch, Akili Smith or rapidly devolving Eli Manning that fit your profile there is a Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler, Jim Druckenmiller, (Kerry Collins?) that also dissapoints.

[Bagel]

Every season, NFL teams make me wonder why they hire scouts in the first place. Each year, a quarterback from a mediocre-to-bad team gets a ton of hype after the Combine and rockets up the draft board. In 2003, it was Kyle Boller at 19th overall. In 2004, Philip Rivers flew up to 4th overall after five straight weeks of talk about his intangibles. 2006 gave us the Broncos trading up to 11th to grab Jay Cutler.

 

What do all these quarterbacks have in common? There are a few common strings that tie this breed together: First, they need to play for a bad team in a major conference (Boller – Cal (Pac-10), Rivers – NC State (ACC), Cutler – Vandy (SEC).) Second, they can only marginal success as a starter. Leading the team to a major bowl game is out of the question. Third, a phenomenal Combine workout is a necessity, and is really the fuel that sets the media rolling up until draft day. Boller actually went above and beyond in his workout at Cal, where he threw a football from his knees and split the uprights. As we've seen from his play in the NFL, this skill translates directly to the football field.

 

These traits set up a firestorm of media hype that allows the players to fly up the draft board. Boller was considered a shaky pick until all of the excitement over his little parlor trick at his workout. Everyone fell in love with Rivers' intangibles, and I remember that people were debating whether the Bills should pick him at 13th. It turns out that all the excitement would push him from a borderline first rounder to Top Five. While this wasn't so bad, since he had shown strong abilities to lead a team and sufficient physical tools at NC State, he was picked unnecessarily high based on the ridiculous media hype. This past year, pundits like Merrill Hoge argued that Jay Cutler should be picked ahead over Vince Young (who single-handedly won the Nat'l Championship) and Matt Leinart (the most decorated college QB of all-time). The basis for this odd argument? Cutler has a stronger arm. Apparently Merrill lives in a fantasy world where Tom Brady is an Arena leaguer while Jeff George and Rob Johnson battle for the Super Bowl every year.

 

Naturally, I was led to ask what college signal caller we've never heard of will end up being picked above proven college veterans. I went to NFLdraftcountdown.com, which is generally a reliable source for the top prospects and hype surrounding them. After pulling up the top Senior prospects, my prayers were answered. Along with Brady Quinn, Drew Stanton, and Troy Smith was a Pac-10 QB who stuck out like a sore thumb: Stanford's Trent Edwards. The website's comment only added to my excitement, stating that Edwards "Has the physical tools you look for and could be this year's Jay Cutler." A comment about physical tools without regard for intangibles! A comparison to Jay Cutler! This was almost too good to be true.

 

Next stop, his statistics. Surely, playing in the pass-happy Pac-10 on a bad team, allowed Edwards to put up massive numbers. Here they are:

 

2003 - In 8 games, 4 TDS / 9 INT for 750 yds. with a 45.3 completion %

2004 - In 9 games, 9 TDS / 11 INT for 1718 yds. w/ a 54.6 comp. %

2005 - In 11 games, 17 TDS / 7 INT for 1934 yds. w/ a 62.7 comp. %

2006 - In 7 games, 6 TDS / 6 INT for 1027 yds 60.3 w/ a comp. %

 

Aside from the 2005 season, those look like very pedestrian numbers. The difference in games played is due to the injuries he's dealt with every season, including missing time during the 2005 campaign (another red flag). Also, four of his six touchdowns for the 2006 season came in one game, against San Jose State. While the 2005 season was fairly impressive as a whole, let's take a look at what he did against the best teams in his conference:

 

@ USC: 21 for 35, 1 TD / 3 INTs, 245 yds.

 

OREGON: 16 for 28, 1 TD / 2 INTs, 156 yds.

 

@ Oregon State: 16 for 28, 2 TDs / 2 INTs, 196 yds.

 

It sure doesn't look like he elevates his game against tough competition. Although he did throw all of his interceptions for the 2005 season in those three games, bear in mind that outside of those three teams, the PAC-10 is very weak in pass defense. He's played on a bad team, but throwing three picks in a game sure wasn't going to help them contend.

 

Moving past his stats, the most concerning aspect to any team looking to draft the kid should be his answers during the "Getting to know Trent Edwards" aspect of his Stanford bio. Some of his answers: "What most people don't know about me is: I wasn't going to play high school football", "My favorite class at Stanford: The Holocaust", "Least favorite class: Colonial and Revolutionary American History", "One moment in history I wish I could have seen: Amelia Earhart's transatlantic flight", and the grand finale: "Favorite Actresses: Dakota Fanning, Piper Perabo."

 

Now, I realize that I'm being harsh on the guy. I don't know the man, and have no idea about his character. This isn't a personal attack on Trent Edwards. My real problem is with the national sports media, and their desire to overhype unproven players. Troy Smith has beaten Michigan three times, plays with a mean streak rarely seen in college quarterbacks, and is the unquestioned leader of the top team in the country. Drew Stanton has battled hard in a tough Big 10 schedule, and has shown outstanding toughness. Brady Quinn, although he has his own flaws (poor bowl record and mediocre stats against non-academy schools) has shown the ability to run a pro-style offense.

 

Trent Edwards has put up very mediocre numbers in a conference geared to allow quarterbacks to put up huge stats. He's missed parts of every season due to injury and hasn't shown the slightest ability to be clutch in a big game. Of course, since he's 6'4" 220 and has a strong arm, scouts will overlook four years of weak production on the field. Get ready for the media firestorm about his 'upside', while what big-time players actually did on the field is ignored. Here's hoping that NFL teams will stop looking for the next diamond in the rough, and start taking the gem right in front of them.

 

Just curious OHBillsFan, have you ever even seen this kid play?

[KD in CA]

Every season, NFL teams make me wonder why they hire scouts in the first place. Each year, a quarterback from a mediocre-to-bad team gets a ton of hype after the Combine and rockets up the draft board. In 2003, it was Kyle Boller at 19th overall. In 2004, Philip Rivers flew up to 4th overall after five straight weeks of talk about his intangibles. 2006 gave us the Broncos trading up to 11th to grab Jay Cutler.

 

What do all these quarterbacks have in common? There are a few common strings that tie this breed together: First, they need to play for a bad team in a major conference (Boller – Cal (Pac-10), Rivers – NC State (ACC), Cutler – Vandy (SEC).) Second, they can only marginal success as a starter. Leading the team to a major bowl game is out of the question. Third, a phenomenal Combine workout is a necessity, and is really the fuel that sets the media rolling up until draft day. Boller actually went above and beyond in his workout at Cal, where he threw a football from his knees and split the uprights. As we've seen from his play in the NFL, this skill translates directly to the football field.

 

These traits set up a firestorm of media hype that allows the players to fly up the draft board. Boller was considered a shaky pick until all of the excitement over his little parlor trick at his workout. Everyone fell in love with Rivers' intangibles, and I remember that people were debating whether the Bills should pick him at 13th. It turns out that all the excitement would push him from a borderline first rounder to Top Five. While this wasn't so bad, since he had shown strong abilities to lead a team and sufficient physical tools at NC State, he was picked unnecessarily high based on the ridiculous media hype. This past year, pundits like Merrill Hoge argued that Jay Cutler should be picked ahead over Vince Young (who single-handedly won the Nat'l Championship) and Matt Leinart (the most decorated college QB of all-time). The basis for this odd argument? Cutler has a stronger arm. Apparently Merrill lives in a fantasy world where Tom Brady is an Arena leaguer while Jeff George and Rob Johnson battle for the Super Bowl every year.

 

Naturally, I was led to ask what college signal caller we've never heard of will end up being picked above proven college veterans. I went to NFLdraftcountdown.com, which is generally a reliable source for the top prospects and hype surrounding them. After pulling up the top Senior prospects, my prayers were answered. Along with Brady Quinn, Drew Stanton, and Troy Smith was a Pac-10 QB who stuck out like a sore thumb: Stanford's Trent Edwards. The website's comment only added to my excitement, stating that Edwards "Has the physical tools you look for and could be this year's Jay Cutler." A comment about physical tools without regard for intangibles! A comparison to Jay Cutler! This was almost too good to be true.

 

Next stop, his statistics. Surely, playing in the pass-happy Pac-10 on a bad team, allowed Edwards to put up massive numbers. Here they are:

 

2003 - In 8 games, 4 TDS / 9 INT for 750 yds. with a 45.3 completion %

2004 - In 9 games, 9 TDS / 11 INT for 1718 yds. w/ a 54.6 comp. %

2005 - In 11 games, 17 TDS / 7 INT for 1934 yds. w/ a 62.7 comp. %

2006 - In 7 games, 6 TDS / 6 INT for 1027 yds 60.3 w/ a comp. %

 

Aside from the 2005 season, those look like very pedestrian numbers. The difference in games played is due to the injuries he's dealt with every season, including missing time during the 2005 campaign (another red flag). Also, four of his six touchdowns for the 2006 season came in one game, against San Jose State. While the 2005 season was fairly impressive as a whole, let's take a look at what he did against the best teams in his conference:

 

@ USC: 21 for 35, 1 TD / 3 INTs, 245 yds.

 

OREGON: 16 for 28, 1 TD / 2 INTs, 156 yds.

 

@ Oregon State: 16 for 28, 2 TDs / 2 INTs, 196 yds.

 

It sure doesn't look like he elevates his game against tough competition. Although he did throw all of his interceptions for the 2005 season in those three games, bear in mind that outside of those three teams, the PAC-10 is very weak in pass defense. He's played on a bad team, but throwing three picks in a game sure wasn't going to help them contend.

 

Moving past his stats, the most concerning aspect to any team looking to draft the kid should be his answers during the "Getting to know Trent Edwards" aspect of his Stanford bio. Some of his answers: "What most people don't know about me is: I wasn't going to play high school football", "My favorite class at Stanford: The Holocaust", "Least favorite class: Colonial and Revolutionary American History", "One moment in history I wish I could have seen: Amelia Earhart's transatlantic flight", and the grand finale: "Favorite Actresses: Dakota Fanning, Piper Perabo."

 

Now, I realize that I'm being harsh on the guy. I don't know the man, and have no idea about his character. This isn't a personal attack on Trent Edwards. My real problem is with the national sports media, and their desire to overhype unproven players. Troy Smith has beaten Michigan three times, plays with a mean streak rarely seen in college quarterbacks, and is the unquestioned leader of the top team in the country. Drew Stanton has battled hard in a tough Big 10 schedule, and has shown outstanding toughness. Brady Quinn, although he has his own flaws (poor bowl record and mediocre stats against non-academy schools) has shown the ability to run a pro-style offense.

 

Trent Edwards has put up very mediocre numbers in a conference geared to allow quarterbacks to put up huge stats. He's missed parts of every season due to injury and hasn't shown the slightest ability to be clutch in a big game. Of course, since he's 6'4" 220 and has a strong arm, scouts will overlook four years of weak production on the field. Get ready for the media firestorm about his 'upside', while what big-time players actually did on the field is ignored. Here's hoping that NFL teams will stop looking for the next diamond in the rough, and start taking the gem right in front of them.

 

 

Some of these year old threads are pretty entertaining.

[FistingBot]

 

Some of these year old threads are pretty entertaining.

 

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Little did the original poster know that Edwards would (1) end up a Bill, and (2) win the starter job as a rookie! I think this is why we're fans and we don't get paid to be NFL talent evaluators.

 

On another note, I actually did watch Trent play in college on several occasions and I posted in a now-long-gone thread that I thought he was a real talent (#1 rated pro-style QB nationally coming out of HS) but got stuck playing behind maybe the worst offensive line in the history of college football at Stanford! He threw picks because his team was usually down by 30 at the half and he had to take chances with the ball to try to get his team back into games.

[Bagel]

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Little did the original poster know that Edwards would (1) end up a Bill, and (2) win the starter job as a rookie! I think this is why we're fans and we don't get paid to be NFL talent evaluators.

 

On another note, I actually did watch Trent play in college on several occasions and I posted in a now-long-gone thread that I thought he was a real talent (#1 rated pro-style QB nationally coming out of HS) but got stuck playing behind maybe the worst offensive line in the history of college football at Stanford! He threw picks because his team was usually down by 30 at the half and he had to take chances with the ball to try to get his team back into games.

 

Two points:

 

1. In Trent's four year playing career at Stanford his team was down by 30 at the half once (USC in 2005, Trent missed the Notre Dame in 2003).

 

2. In Trent's worst year at Stanford (2006), I thought that the major problem was his receivers. Once Bradford and Mooore got hurt, he was throwing to walk-ons and redshirts who could not get any separation. Opponents blitzed all day because they could cover the receiveers one on one. It was not pretty. But let's not forget that in Trent's junior year (2005) Stanford was one blown call away from 6-6, beating Navy, Washington State, Arizona, Arizona State and Oregon State. They also took UCLA to overtime and almost beat a 9-2 Notre Dame team (Notre Dame won in the last minute). Clearly, he did have some success.

[I 90]

Strange... there are some posts missing. We never did get to the bottom of OHBillsFan's (7 posts !) mysterious appearance. A high school kid's coincidental writing assignment ? Someone in the front office floating a cheeky idea ? Who can tell...

[In space no one can hear]

A thread about Edwards without it ending up in a love, hate Losman, Edwards clusterf*k?

 

Mods, please lock this virgin thread for posterity.