Matt Barkley

[bostonsoxandy]

I know this isn't exactly Fantasy or anything but it will be soon enough...and

 

Both QBs play in the Pac-12. Barkley is a junior but it is expected that he will go pro next year and Luck is a senior.

 

Barkley this year: 67.6% completion, 7.7 AVG, 3105 YDS, 33 TD, 7 INT, 155.6 PASSER RATING

Luck this year: 70.0% completion, 8.5 AVG, 3170 YDS, 35 TD, 9 INT, 167.5 PASSER RATING

 

Luck has actually statistically regressed this year, he posted a 170.2 PASS RATING last year...

 

I know the stats show Luck as the better QB but not by that much...Luck gets all the attention right now, yet I'm not even sold he's the best QB in the draft. This year Barkley has really shown good progression in his accuracy, decision-making, and reducing his turnovers (his INTs have gone from 14 to 12 to 7, FWIW Luck's INTs have gone up from 4 to 8 to 9, and this season is still going). Luck has thrown atleast 1 interception in 7 of his 8 last games, Barkley, who throws the ball more, has thrown 7 in the 12 games this year...

 

I probably am dead wrong about this, as people have said over and over and over that Luck is pro-ready and one of the best QB prospects of the decade...but the "experts" are usually wrong, just see Jamarcus Russell from not too long ago...the quotes with him and Luck are very similar:

 

"I can't remember being in such awe of a quarterback in my decade of attending combines and pro days. Russell's passing session was the most impressive of all the pro days I've been to. His footwork for such a big quarterback was surprising. He was nimble in his dropbacks, rolling out and throwing on the run. The ball just explodes out of his hands" -Todd McShay on Russell

 

"Three years from now you could be looking at a guy that's certainly one of the elite top five quarterbacks in this league. ...You're talking about a 2-3 year period once he's under center. Look out because the skill level that he has is certainly John Elway-like" -Mel Kiper Jr on Russell

 

"Luck is a once-in-a-decade kind of talent with all the tools to be an elite NFL quarterback. He returned to Stanford for the 2011 season even though coach Jim Harbaugh moved to the NFL, and the team with the No. 1 overall pick in 2012 should trade its existing quarterback to draft Luck. He's that good. If not, the pick will be up for public auction." - Todd McShay on Luck

 

"John Elway had the highest grade ever and that was back in the 1983 draft, ironically, out of Stanford. And certainly Andrew Luck will have the second highest grade behind Elway." -Kiper on Luck

 

I don't know, again I'm probably wrong on this when all is said and done, but for right now, my money is on the underdog Barkley to be a better NFL QB than Luck.

 

Feel free to share your opinions, thoughts, etc.

[keggerz]

McShay and Kiper are hacks

[SLAYER]

They are both good, but if one is going to learn from Peyton I'll take the guy from Stanford.

[wildcat2334]

Barkley is going to be a good one no question but Luck is in a class all by himself. Nothing remotely similar about him and Russell- that is a bad example. Luck is not only the best QB prospect in a long time, but the best pro prospect. He has it all.

 

stats don't tell the whole story - remember he is doing this minus his only legit WR for most of the year, and doing it with Stanford-level talent. If he had Woods and the rest of the USC WR to throw to, his numbers would be even better.

 

He is P Manning-esque, minus him this years Stanford is probably 7-4.

 

it isn't just McShay and Kiper evaluating him, it is everyone. Could he be a bust? maybe, but highly unlikely.

[coordi88]

if you are going by stats then case keenum is the best!

[gilthorp]

I need to wait to answer until BB comes along and tells me whether college statistics are relevant in forming an opinion on the subject.

[bostonsoxandy]

if you are going by stats then case keenum is the best!

 

I'm comparing two QBs who play in the same conference...like I stated in my initial post, they both play in the Pac-12, and therefore have very similar schedules so I believe you can use their statistics to compare them. Obviously if one was in the SEC and the other was in Houston's "Conference USA" stats are null and void...

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Matt Barkley

Mitch Mustain

Aaron Corp

Mark Sanchez

John David Booty

Matt Leinart

Carson Palmer

Mike Van Raaphorst

John Fox

Brad Otton

Kyle Wachholtz

Rob Johnson

Reggie Perry

Todd Marinovich

Shane Foley

Rodney Peete

Sean Salisbury

Tim Green

Kevin McLean

Scott Tinsley

John Mazur

Gordon Adams

Paul McDonald

Rob Preston

Rob Hertel

Vince Evans

[bostonsoxandy]

Matt Barkley

Mitch Mustain-undrafted, CFL player, backup to Barkley

Aaron Corp - transferred to Richmond, never played with USC @ QB much, if at all, senior at Richmond currently

Mark Sanchez - TBD, but is relevant to Barkley

John David Booty-5th round draft pick, talent was never there

Matt Leinart-a classic bust...extremely hyped up due to the Rose Bowl victory, 10th overall pick, considered prototypical QB

Carson Palmer - college stats are extremely similar to Barkley (shows vast improvement over the years) 1st overall draft pick, he holds numerous franchise records for the Bengals, has a 86.6 career QB rating, Quarterback of the Year in 2005, "FedEx Air Player of the Year" in 2005, 2x Pro Bowl selection.

Mike Van Raaphorst - obtained an MBA at USC, works at Western Asset Management, undrafted

John Fox - played a mix of tight end and qb, undrafted

Brad Otton - went undrafted, again this doesn't apply to Barkley in the least

Kyle Wachholtz-7th round draft pick, immediately converted to tight end, doesn't compare at all to Barkley

Rob Johnson-was a 4th round draft pick, still played 10 seasons in the NFL

Reggie Perry-----------everyone below this point played before 1990, this can't be used to make a point since they are from 20 years ago and beyond, different era of USC football, different coaches etc.....

Todd Marinovich

Shane Foley

Rodney Peete

Sean Salisbury

Tim Green

Kevin McLean

Scott Tinsley

John Mazur

Gordon Adams

Paul McDonald

Rob Preston

Rob Hertel

Vince Evans

 

How many of these are actually pertinent examples that relate to Barkley though...I guess you can just not do any research and just copy/paste a list from Wikipedia to try to make a point....look at the notes above, how many of those guys you listed actually have anything to do with Barkley? I say Sanchez, Leinart, and Palmer are the ONLY relevant examples on that entire list you posted. See my notes above if you disagree...

 

As for those three you can't call Sanchez a bust or success yet because he is still really developing, Leinart was always considered weak-armed but was also called a prototypical NFL QB, and Palmer I would consider a success, considering before he suffered a few major injuries he was a 2x Pro-Bowler and one of the best QBs in the league...

 

I'm sure if you found a list of Stanford QBs you'd see the same exact thing....Plunkett, Elway, Luck and then a whole bunch of bums...come on man

[bostonsoxandy]

McShay and Kiper are hacks

 

I completely agree, that's sort of my point...is there anyone in the media world that you can find showing concern over Russell and also a quote of him glowing over Luck and saying there is no concern, because I couldn't.

[darin3]

I heard on some ESPN Radio show that Barkley may not actually be 6'3". They were talking about him being more like 6'1". Maybe I misheard but pretty sure. Luck is a confirmed 6'4". Take that as you will.

[Ditkaless Wonders]

How many of these are actually pertinent examples that relate to Barkley though...I guess you can just not do any research and just copy/paste a list from Wikipedia to try to make a point....look at the notes above, how many of those guys you listed actually have anything to do with Barkley? I say Sanchez, Leinart, and Palmer are the ONLY relevant examples on that entire list you posted. See my notes above if you disagree...

 

As for those three you can't call Sanchez a bust or success yet because he is still really developing, Leinart was always considered weak-armed but was also called a prototypical NFL QB, and Palmer I would consider a success, considering before he suffered a few major injuries he was a 2x Pro-Bowler and one of the best QBs in the league...

 

I'm sure if you found a list of Stanford QBs you'd see the same exact thing....Plunkett, Elway, Luck and then a whole bunch of bums...come on man

 

 

I posted a list. You read the list and presumed it was some sort of negative argument or criticism.

[keggerz]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...autionary-tale/

 

Mayock: JaMarcus Russell's Pro Day a cautionary tale

Posted by Mike Florio on March 30, 2010, 11:23 AM EST

The consensus around the NFL is that Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford had an impressive Pro Day on Monday. But even as he agrees with that assessment, NFL Network draft analyst Mike Mayock is offering up a cautionary tale of why coaches and general managers shouldn’t fall in love with a player based on what he does in shorts and a T-shirt.

 

“Let me give you an example of the other side of it,” Mayock said this morning on The Dan Patrick Show. “The best Pro Day I ever saw as a quarterback was JaMarcus Russell. . . . I’ve never seen a quarterback throw the football like that in my life, but I still couldn’t take him in the first round — the guy doesn’t care about football. He doesn’t have the passion for the game, doesn’t have the work ethic, I don’t want him. But by the way, it was a pretty impressive Pro Day.”

 

Ultimately, Mayock said, teams can’t allow what they see in a workout to supercede what they see in game action.

 

“The tape work and the body of work in college has to take precedence,” Mayock said.

 

Fortunately for Bradford, Mayock says, his great Pro Day was only reinforcing his great play on the field at Oklahoma. And Mayock says that unless there’s a medical concern, there’s no reason Bradford won’t be the first overall pick in the draft.

Edited November 27, 2011 by keggerz

[bostonsoxandy]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...autionary-tale/

 

Mayock: JaMarcus Russell's Pro Day a cautionary tale

Posted by Mike Florio on March 30, 2010, 11:23 AM EST

The consensus around the NFL is that Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford had an impressive Pro Day on Monday. But even as he agrees with that assessment, NFL Network draft analyst Mike Mayock is offering up a cautionary tale of why coaches and general managers shouldn’t fall in love with a player based on what he does in shorts and a T-shirt.

 

“Let me give you an example of the other side of it,” Mayock said this morning on The Dan Patrick Show. “The best Pro Day I ever saw as a quarterback was JaMarcus Russell. . . . I’ve never seen a quarterback throw the football like that in my life, but I still couldn’t take him in the first round — the guy doesn’t care about football. He doesn’t have the passion for the game, doesn’t have the work ethic, I don’t want him. But by the way, it was a pretty impressive Pro Day.”

 

Ultimately, Mayock said, teams can’t allow what they see in a workout to supercede what they see in game action.

 

“The tape work and the body of work in college has to take precedence,” Mayock said.

 

Fortunately for Bradford, Mayock says, his great Pro Day was only reinforcing his great play on the field at Oklahoma. And Mayock says that unless there’s a medical concern, there’s no reason Bradford won’t be the first overall pick in the draft.

 

But that quote about Russell comes in hindsight...I mean a quote that is during/before/around the time of the draft-before anyone knew he was a bust. Anyone could say he doesn't have a passion and no work ethic once it becomes a fact that he is a gigantic bust and all the crap that came out about him. And that quote is about Bradford not Luck.

[bostonsoxandy]

I posted a list. You read the list and presumed it was some sort of negative argument or criticism.

 

So you just posted the list for the sake of posting a list? You weren't attempting to make any point at all?

 

....

[keggerz]

the above was revisionist in nature....here you go:

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_blogs/...2007-draft.html

 

Five Potential Busts in the 2007 Draft

 

SI.com's Peter King says teams are very nervous about paying overrated first-round prospects this year. Here are five players I think have a high probability of being busts:

 

JaMarcus Russell, QB, LSU (FILM ROOM): If Russell goes No. 1 overall to the Raiders, No. 2 to the Lions or No. 3 to the Browns, he'll be placed in a position to lose that might be hard to climb out of. And there are still lingering questions about his passion for the game.

Edited November 27, 2011 by keggerz

[keggerz]

But that quote about Russell comes in hindsight...I mean a quote that is during/before/around the time of the draft-before anyone knew he was a bust. Anyone could say he doesn't have a passion and no work ethic once it becomes a fact that he is a gigantic bust and all the crap that came out about him. And that quote is about Bradford not Luck.

I realized the date after I posted it...see the one by Peter King

[ajh2]

Of Course, Oakland took Russell....

 

Luck is at this time the more complete QB which is why everybody is talking about him as the best QB in the draft.

 

Does Barkley have the same abilities as Luck and chance of success, probably so; however, he requires more work to achieve the results.

[bostonsoxandy]

I realized the date after I posted it...see the one by Peter King

 

Does King also have quote saying that he has little to no doubts about Luck's game/skill/in general?

[Ditkaless Wonders]

So you just posted the list for the sake of posting a list? You weren't attempting to make any point at all?

 

....

 

 

Just placing him in historical context and taking a look at the list while cogitating on a point.

[Dave Sherman]

Interesting topic... Circling back to the fantasy angle, since Indy is pretty much a lock to get Luck, how long will his fantasy value be limited due to being behind Manning? I guess there is some concern over if Manning will be there or not, but I can't imagine him not being there for a few years at least.

 

If Barkley goes to Miami or Washington does he get a chance to start right away, and if he does, will he make an impact like Cam Newton and Andy Dalton?

 

So if Barkley doesn't get drafted by the Colts, he may have a chance to make a fantasy impact before Luck, but will he be better?

[piratesownninjas]

Barkley Vs Luck discussion?

Bah, RG3... If we're talking for fantasy football then I'd put Griffin ahead of Luck and Barkley.

[wildcat2334]

Barkley Vs Luck discussion?

Bah, RG3... If we're talking for fantasy football then I'd put Griffin ahead of Luck and Barkley.

 

 

good stuff- isn't even in the same discussion as Barkley or Luck in the NFL - fun college QB though

[darin3]

 

good stuff- isn't even in the same discussion as Barkley or Luck in the NFL - fun college QB though

[piratesownninjas]

 

good stuff- isn't even in the same discussion as Barkley or Luck in the NFL - fun college QB though

Wrong. Most people think that because he's a world class sprinter that he must also be a run first QB and that couldn't be any further from the truth. He's a pocket passer with legit arm strength and accuracy. Pair that with the fact that he's playing with lesser players around him than Barkley or Luck. To say he's not going to be anyone to watch in the draft and that he's just a fun college QB is borderline asinine. I'm half thinking that you're just kidding with that post.