Pro Football View of Athletic QB's


All of the potential franchise quarterbacks drafted in the last 3 years are varying degrees of athletic.

From slow but strong Winston, to 4.4 speed Mariota. Watson, Wentz, Carr, Trubisky, and Prescott are between 4.6 to 4.8, with Watson having the best agility.

Goff is the outlier.

Everybody needs a dual threat quarterback. Avoiding the pass rush is a necessity.

And yet, you still have folks who want to put Lamar Jackson at WR. No matter how many times teams make a mistake and pass on talented players, they keep doing it.

How can you watch CFB every saturday and tell me with a straight face that Trubisky is better than Watson, or some other quarterback better than Jackson?

Of the qb’s that could come out in 2018, who do you guys think will turn out the best, as long as they dont get drafted by the browns?

(Patrick) #2

I like Jackson and Mayfied, but beyond that, I’m not sure any of the others will be successful when they get to the NFL. Jackson will also require a coach that can accentuate his strengths, which is always a question mark in the NFL.

Lot of names coming out, which should increase depth in the NFL, but there’s a lot of questions on all of them:

  • Rosen
  • Darnold
  • Jackson
  • Josh Allen - Wyoming
  • Thorson - Northwestern
  • Falk
  • Rudolph
  • Stidham
  • Chase Litton - Marshall
  • Ferguson
  • Shimonek

(Chris) #3

QB play is always related to the OL. An athletic QB can “mask” a sub par OL for some time but then gets "blown"away on any given Sunday. The Texans better draft or trade for OL’s but will they?
For the most part NFL head Coaches want to impose their style/vision of their offense on their drafted QB. For the most part the same HC ends up being fired a few years later. The same QB is now out of the NFL.
What makes a successful QB?
You select a player that will produce in your offense.
You create plays that will use your player’s best traits/abilities
Every NFL HC should ask their OC. Are we using our QB to its best abilities? How have we been productive adapting our offense to his best abilities? How is our OL “built” around his strengths? Do we have the same “types” WR’s or TE’s that he is used to in College?
How can we make him better by not “changing him”?
The sad part in all of this is that it is an exception when the franchise and the drafted QB are on the same page. The best possible way for any QB to have some success is to come into an organization that values the OL at the highest degree. The OL creates time for the QB to throw and thus creates SPACE for the offense to get open
What is the correlation between a dominant OL, a successful QB and a winning record? We all know the answer.


Question 1: Should the way a quarterback speaks factor into the evaluation process?

Question 2: Would you agree or disagree with the idea that proper english equates to intelligence, and why?

(Patrick) #5
  1. Yes, because communication is key for any leadership position. If you can’t communicate, how can you be expected to get across your message to your teammates. In the NFL, the QB is the most important position on the field.

  2. I disagree with this sentiment as being able to speak proper english has nothing to do with intelligence. Being able to communicate effectively, no matter how you do it, is a better sign of intelligence.

(Eric Prado) #6

Lol are you saying only English speakers are intelligent?

  1. Theoretically, yes. Insofar as the QB is in charge of cadence and playcalling and audibles, the ability to speak loudly and clearly is important. But if you can manage that stuff in college, you can probably handle it in the NFL, too.

  2. No. First and most importantly, there’s no such thing as “proper English.” English is a mishmash of languages and has evolved through colloquialisms for basically its entire history. Second, leadership requires the ability to communicate with those you’re leading in a way that makes them comfortable – if your entire team speaks in slang, you probably should, too.


Thanks for everyone’s thoughts on the topic. This topic was brought up on twitter. Someone made the argument that Lamar Jackson may not be smart enough to play in the NFL because of the way he talks. He doesn’t speak proper enough in his interviews.

My thoughts on this:

  1. I do not think how someone sounds when they speak should be in the evaluation process. Public speaking is a skill that can be learned. Players take classes to handle interviews. When Jackson was making the rounds last year for the heisman I thought to myself he needs some work in that area because most fan bases are white americans who want to understand what he is saying. Has nothing to do with on field success.

  2. I think this question is a load of crap actually. The guy who said this was using old school code language. A way of saying he thinks Lamar Jackson is not an intelligent individual because he hasn’t been properly assimilated into white culture. I just wanted to see if anyone else thought this way.

Number 2 really hit home to me. I live and work in spring branch/west houston. I have had multiple white people come up to me over the past 6 years and say, “Wow, you speak so well”.

What does that mean? I think it ties into this Lamar Jackson question. I think this specific twitter user has some prejudices when it comes to people of color.

(Eric Prado) #9

People lack of culture or exposure to different cultures


I think there are plenty of knocks on Lamar Jackson as a draft prospect, but his speech style is basically irrelevant. IMO, he reminds me a lot of Johnny Manziel – his game has a lot of flaws that are easily masked in a college offense, but that will get magnified at the next level. I don’t think he’ll be a pro QB of any note, but that doesn’t mean he’s dumb any more than the fact that Scott Kelly will never be a nuclear physicist.

That said, it’s easier to find flaws than it is to see the good stuff. Maybe I’m wrong, idk.


2 major differences between Johnny and Jackson.

  1. Johnny had issues between the ears.
  2. Jackson has world class athleticism. He will run a 4.3 in the 40.

He could be the next Michael Vick. It all depends on if inherits a coach who can best use his skills.


Vick was a lot more pro-ready. If you watch highlight tape of Vick at VT, you can see him dropping back, standing in the pocket, and going through his reads. Jackson doesn’t do that – if his first reciever isn’t wide open, he takes off. That won’t work in the NFL. Vick also had a much larger frame and could take hits better.


Article on tyrod taylor. Good snapshot of where the league is at on the shift towards dual threat qb’s.


This sounds about right. PFF seems to think he is improving in that area.

“Although the passing game lacked explosion we’re used to seeing, there were a number of positive plays with Jackson working through progressions and find receivers under in zone coverage.”