Can he stay healthy with his style of play? Also how does he compare to Deshaun Watson?
As a Clemson fan I'm biased, but IMO in head to head games there was no comparison.
Watson's running is a concern, but despite his injury, I don't see him as an RGIII or a Lamar. Running may become LESS a part of his game, but in short yardage the defense will always have to account for him.
In the Clemson Citadel game today (see, I really am a Clemson fan) the announcers made an interesting comment; when Watson rolled out, he was looking to pass - in contrast to Bryant who if he can't pass, runs.
Although Watson was also criticized for accuracy, I don't think that held up in the pros. (I always said that with the Clemson receivers; and more importantly Venables' defense where you were going to get the ball right back, he was instructed to throw 50/50 balls).
Because of Watson's football intelligence and maturity, the fact that he didn't operate under center in college was not a problem.
Many people questioned Watson's accuracy coming out of college too Â
If Jackson does he is a very special athlete. I have never been a big fan of run first guys either but the league is changing and so is how offense is played. OBJ, SS, and EE along with a few moves along the OL with Jackson’s threat would be interesting.
Can he stay healthy with his style of play? Also how does he compare to Deshaun Watson?
Not as good, he's improved a lot as a passer, but his deep ball isn't very accurate. His release is lightning quick
I am not knocking him but I would much rather have Darnold, Rosen, or Mayfield.
The Mayfield incident today knocked him down in my eyes. I know he is passionate but you don't want your QB acting that way.
You need to take what Mayfield did into context. Kansas had been cheap shotting him and the worse one was where he threw a pass and the KU defender shouldered him in the face 2 secs after the throw.
But when I've seen him interviewed, he leaves some question marks. Now, I'm willing to concede that a young athlete can be intelligent without being particularly well-spoken, but I think it would require some careful vetting. A lot of great college players have failed to translate their games to the NFL because of the steep learning curve. Paxton Lynch is a recent example (although he doesn't have nearly the physical ability of Jackson).
It’s a bit puzzling how so little consideration is being given to his prospects as a pro. Reminds me somewhat of the treatment of Watson. After having played well against easily the toughest D college football could offer, there were still ???s. Yet Mitch Trubisky goes ahead of him?
Slight frame...maybe but he’s 6’3 205 and Rosen’s 6’4 210 but I haven’t heard concerns about his frame.
It’s a bit puzzling how so little consideration is being given to his prospects as a pro. Reminds me somewhat of the treatment of Watson. After having played well against easily the toughest D college football could offer, there were still ???s. Yet Mitch Trubisky goes ahead of him?
Slight frame...maybe but he’s 6’3 205 and Rosen’s 6’4 210 but I haven’t heard concerns about his frame.
In fairness, frame matters a lot more for a running QB than for a pocket passer, but the point is well taken.
If I remember correctly, most of the concerns about Watson centered on arm strength - he had the lowest throwing velocity at the combine (and if I'm not mistaken, the lowest velocity in years). If anything, Watson's success shows how much intangibles matter in addition to physical attributes. But let's also not ignore the fact that Watson has a very limited sample size in the NFL thus far.
I don't see the comparison of concerns about Watson as all that similar to Jackson, unless you're saying that running QB prospects are just undervalued in general.
You have made the point that you want QB to be a revolving position. So, you’d invest a top 5 pick in a QB you wouldn’t give a second contract?
Terps isn't giving a second contract to anybody he picks in the top 5 unless they are top 5 players in the NFL so it really wouldn't matter which position he takes.
He will draft L.Jackson and build an offense around him like he wanted to do with Tebow.
Partial sarcasm but I do think this is going to come down to the new GM and Coach.
I am a Jackson fan and would love to see a mobile QB that can create with his feet and a more modern offense. Bring some excitement.
But are the Giants going to hire the same stuffed shirts they have always have or do they break the mold and go young and inventive???
Not as good, he's improved a lot as a passer, but his deep ball isn't very accurate. His release is lightning quick
Quote:
Can he stay healthy with his style of play? Also how does he compare to Deshaun Watson?
Not as good, he's improved a lot as a passer, but his deep ball isn't very accurate. His release is lightning quick
I am not knocking him but I would much rather have Darnold, Rosen, or Mayfield.
Quote:
In comment 13696019 Jay on the Island said:
Quote:
Can he stay healthy with his style of play? Also how does he compare to Deshaun Watson?
Not as good, he's improved a lot as a passer, but his deep ball isn't very accurate. His release is lightning quick
I am not knocking him but I would much rather have Darnold, Rosen, or Mayfield.
The Mayfield incident today knocked him down in my eyes. I know he is passionate but you don't want your QB acting that way.
As a Clemson fan I'm biased, but IMO in head to head games there was no comparison.
Watson's running is a concern, but despite his injury, I don't see him as an RGIII or a Lamar. Running may become LESS a part of his game, but in short yardage the defense will always have to account for him.
In the Clemson Citadel game today (see, I really am a Clemson fan) the announcers made an interesting comment; when Watson rolled out, he was looking to pass - in contrast to Bryant who if he can't pass, runs.
Although Watson was also criticized for accuracy, I don't think that held up in the pros. (I always said that with the Clemson receivers; and more importantly Venables' defense where you were going to get the ball right back, he was instructed to throw 50/50 balls).
Because of Watson's football intelligence and maturity, the fact that he didn't operate under center in college was not a problem.
Quote:
In comment 13696023 OdellBeckhamJr said:
Quote:
In comment 13696019 Jay on the Island said:
Quote:
Can he stay healthy with his style of play? Also how does he compare to Deshaun Watson?
Not as good, he's improved a lot as a passer, but his deep ball isn't very accurate. His release is lightning quick
I am not knocking him but I would much rather have Darnold, Rosen, or Mayfield.
The Mayfield incident today knocked him down in my eyes. I know he is passionate but you don't want your QB acting that way.
You need to take what Mayfield did into context. Kansas had been cheap shotting him and the worse one was where he threw a pass and the KU defender shouldered him in the face 2 secs after the throw.
I'll take it!
- Jerry Reese, New York Giants
No, they're not the same people.
Stick to your sharp evaluation of Lonzo.
Score another 2 points, play no defense and not back up his teammates?
Guy's a turd just like you.
He is bigger than Bob, more durable than Bob and a better passer than Bob ever was - now, as a college junior.
He's got a really good chance to be an excellent pro.
Slight frame...maybe but he’s 6’3 205 and Rosen’s 6’4 210 but I haven’t heard concerns about his frame.
Slight frame...maybe but he’s 6’3 205 and Rosen’s 6’4 210 but I haven’t heard concerns about his frame.
In fairness, frame matters a lot more for a running QB than for a pocket passer, but the point is well taken.
If I remember correctly, most of the concerns about Watson centered on arm strength - he had the lowest throwing velocity at the combine (and if I'm not mistaken, the lowest velocity in years). If anything, Watson's success shows how much intangibles matter in addition to physical attributes. But let's also not ignore the fact that Watson has a very limited sample size in the NFL thus far.
I don't see the comparison of concerns about Watson as all that similar to Jackson, unless you're saying that running QB prospects are just undervalued in general.
You have made the point that you want QB to be a revolving position. So, you’d invest a top 5 pick in a QB you wouldn’t give a second contract?
Quote:
.
You have made the point that you want QB to be a revolving position. So, you’d invest a top 5 pick in a QB you wouldn’t give a second contract?
Terps isn't giving a second contract to anybody he picks in the top 5 unless they are top 5 players in the NFL so it really wouldn't matter which position he takes.
I agree. I’ve been a Jackson proponent for two years now. Not changing.
Partial sarcasm but I do think this is going to come down to the new GM and Coach.
I am a Jackson fan and would love to see a mobile QB that can create with his feet and a more modern offense. Bring some excitement.
But are the Giants going to hire the same stuffed shirts they have always have or do they break the mold and go young and inventive???
I'd have to really believe that his accuracy could improve but the skillset is just too tempting to pass on. The potential is immense.
Quote:
.
You have made the point that you want QB to be a revolving position. So, you’d invest a top 5 pick in a QB you wouldn’t give a second contract?
Sure. If Jackson is the best player, why not?
Quote:
In comment 13696352 Go Terps said:
Quote:
.
You have made the point that you want QB to be a revolving position. So, you’d invest a top 5 pick in a QB you wouldn’t give a second contract?
Sure. If Jackson is the best player, why not?
Taking Jackson top 3 would be a disaster.