Matt Barkley doesn't resemble elite quarterback prospect in 2012

[milkman]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

And again, the reason you call it a risk is you have to ASSUME he is a clutch qb even though we haven't seem enough physical evidence. We have to assume he can handle tough defenses even though hes played mostly Mickey mouse defenses. Or that he can bounce back after getting battered around. We have to assume he will excel at blitz pickups, hot reads, and can win even in games where the defense dominates the o line.

I like the guys ability to overcome these things. But they are risks. Risks I didn't worry about last year with rgIII.

That is just a stupid ****ing argument.

You are just making shit up to support a stupid ****ing argument with no merit.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by milkman

That is just a stupid ****ing argument.

You are just making shit up to support a stupid ****ing argument with no merit.

He hasn't played good defenses. He hasnt proven to be nails in the clutch consistently. His biggest successes have come out of a college oriented offense.

I didn't say he can't do these things. I am saying you are assuming he can even though we haven't seen it.

I'm the one arguing on merit. You're the one who is absolutely sure about something we haven't seen.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

He hasn't played good defenses. He hasnt proven to be nails in the clutch consistently. His biggest successes have come out of a college oriented offense.

I didn't say he can't do these things. I am saying you are assuming he can even though we haven't seen it.

I'm the one arguing on merit. You're the one who is absolutely sure about something we haven't seen.

not like he scored 70 in the bowl game ...or lit up the #8 passing d in the country last week and almost beat Oklahoma with no defense.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by BossChief

not like he scored 70 in the bowl game ...or lit up the #8 passing d in the country last week and almost beat Oklahoma with no defense.

Never happened.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by BossChief

not like he scored 70 in the bowl game ...or lit up the #8 passing d in the country last week and almost beat Oklahoma with no defense.

For a #1 qb, you are basing off a very low sample size against defenses that aren't exactly elite. It is an assumption that because he carved up Oklahoma, that means he can carve up the texans.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

For a #1 qb, you are basing off a very low sample size against defenses that aren't exactly elite. It is an assumption that because he carved up Oklahoma, that means he can carve up the texans.

How about last year against LSU? Texas this year?

If you are gonna say he has played mostly cupcake defense, thats ok...the kid plays in a conference that isnt known for defense....but you also cant discount the games he has played very well against good defenses by touting "small sample size" either.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by BossChief

How about last year against LSU? Texas this year?

If you are gonna say he has played mostly cupcake defense, thats ok...the kid plays in a conference that isnt known for defense....but you also cant discount the games he has played very well against good defenses by touting "small sample size" either.

I am not discounting them. I am saying there isn't enough evidence to say he is surely going to succeed against elite nfl defenses. We are assuming. I ASSUME he can because I think he has football iq and work ethic. But I know it is an assumption and that he hasn't proven it on the college level nearly enough. Hence, the risk.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I am not discounting them. I am saying there isn't enough evidence to say he is surely going to succeed against elite nfl defenses. We are assuming. I ASSUME he can because I think he has football iq and work ethic. But I know it is an assumption and that he hasn't proven it on the college level nearly enough. Hence, the risk.

All of this is true for every single player at every single position who enters the NFL draft.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I am not discounting them. I am saying there isn't enough evidence to say he is surely going to succeed against elite nfl defenses. We are assuming. I ASSUME he can because I think he has football iq and work ethic. But I know it is an assumption and that he hasn't proven it on the college level nearly enough. Hence, the risk.

You are so full of shit.

Geno Smith is putting up comparable numbers against the same competition, with a far inferior cast around him that RGIII had.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

He hasn't played good defenses. He hasnt proven to be nails in the clutch consistently. His biggest successes have come out of a college oriented offense.

I didn't say he can't do these things. I am saying you are assuming he can even though we haven't seen it.

I'm the one arguing on merit. You're the one who is absolutely sure about something we haven't seen.

What? He put his team in position to win multiple times vs OU and TCU, both good teams.

OU was the 12th rated defense and have 2 first round caliber DB's and Geno torched them. TCU has a nice DB prospect in Jason Verett (5 INT's this year) and Geno torched him too at the end of the game for a TD.

TCU, TTU, KSU and OU were all good defenses that Geno has played this year. And he made good throws on an insanely talented LSU defense last year.