+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 21
FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 209

Thread: Locker at 12?

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Red-headed step-child View Post
    That's what everyone said when he went to the Senior Bowl and then he bombed it.
    He threw 10 passes, it's not really a part of my evaluation

  2. Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    16,648

    Quote Originally Posted by vikingsteve26 View Post
    It's just for one year. To draft a QB this year is stupid... there are no elite QB prospects and we're picking at 12, which is a bad spot for drafting a QB in the first round unless someone falls.
    Surely with another BPA/Safe draft you'll likely be picking around the same spot next year too? You won't get a QB then next year either and you'll be in the Buffalo Bills scenario that was happened over the last 5-10 years.

    If the Vikings feel Locker is a franchise QB you have to take him. If that is the evaluation they come to then they will either flourish or flounder because of that decision. Playing the 'wait and see' game at QB to me looks like a team without a plan or strategy. To me that is worse than making a brave (possibly stupid) decision because you haven't made a decision at all.

    If the case is that the Vikings do not feel he is a franchise QB then I understanding playing 'wait and see'. They should not feel pressurized into taking a QB they do feel 100% confident in.

  3. Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    40,776

    Quote Originally Posted by mdb17 View Post
    Surely with another BPA/Safe draft you'll likely be picking around the same spot next year too? You won't get a QB then next year either and you'll be in the Buffalo Bills scenario that was happened over the last 5-10 years.

    If the Vikings feel Locker is a franchise QB you have to take him. If that is the evaluation they come to then they will either flourish or flounder because of that decision. Playing the 'wait and see' game at QB to me looks like a team without a plan or strategy. To me that is worse than making a brave (possibly stupid) decision because you haven't made a decision at all.

    If the case is that the Vikings do not feel he is a franchise QB then I understanding playing 'wait and see'. They should not feel pressurized into taking a QB they do feel 100% confident in.
    Did you miss the part where I said it's just for one year? This QB class sucks. God dammit, read the post. These guys aren't Sam Bradford, Ben Roethlisberger, Philip Rivers, Andrew Luck, etc... those guys are worth 1st round draft picks. Jake Locker is inconsistent. Those QBs I mentioned before were not inconsistent. Inconsistent players shouldn't be taken in the first round. You don't take a QB in the first unless you are SURE he is going to hit. You might disagree with that, but why would you EVER risk it if you weren't sure? As if this team isn't in a bad enough place with the lack of a new place to play in 2012.


    Just remember, if they take him at 12, and he busts, we all said "I told you so." Then the Vikings will go back to their dumbass "hey let's draft our starter in the 6th round!" bull**** that they used for the last 50 years.
    Last edited by vikingsteve26; 04-11-2011 at 11:22 AM.

  4. Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The grind
    Posts
    16,582

    I think it would be foolish, but then again my Broncos drafted Tebow in the first...

  5. Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    31,791

    Quote Originally Posted by cutty View Post
    He threw 10 passes, it's not really a part of my evaluation
    There was also practice.

    I find that anytime people base their evaluations on how bad a guy's team was it never works.

  6. Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    16,648

    Quote Originally Posted by vikingsteve26 View Post
    Did you miss the part where I said it's just for one year? This QB class sucks. God dammit, read the post. These guys aren't Sam Bradford, Ben Roethlisberger, Philip Rivers, Andrew Luck, etc... those guys are worth 1st round draft picks. Jake Locker is inconsistent. Those QBs I mentioned before were not inconsistent. Inconsistent players shouldn't be taken in the first round.


    Just remember, if they take him at 12, and he busts, we all said "I told you so." Then the Vikings will go back to their dumbass "hey let's draft our starter in the 6th round!" bull**** that they used for the last 50 years.
    I didn't miss the part when you said one year. That's why I referred to the Buffalo Bills problems getting a franchise quarterback. They haven't either gotten lucky with a mid-late round guy or been so bad they've gotten a top prospect at the position. Do you think the Vikings will be one of the 5 worst teams in the NFL next year? That is the most likely way they have a chance of getting a franchise QB.

    Then again you clearly didn't read what I said properly at all then. Talk about being very hypocritical. Just because it is a bad year for Quarterbacks does not mean the Vikings don't think that Locker is a franchise QB. You don't think he is. There is a huge difference there.
    Last edited by mdb17; 04-11-2011 at 11:48 AM.

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Red-headed step-child View Post
    There was also practice.

    I find that anytime people base their evaluations on how bad a guy's team was it never works.
    I don't base evaluations on his teammates, but they do influence his play. You get to see how Locker plays under fire - and we're talking about a pass-rush that gets through before he even finishes his drop.

    The only reason I ever bring up the bad supporting cast is to basically say that I Wins and Losses are a non-factor with Locker. Josh Freeman was in a somewhat similar situation, but his problem was lack of receivers so it was more of a stats thing

  8. Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    New York, New York
    Posts
    25,136

    I actually tend to agree with Steve here. Normally if there's a QB on the board I would say you have to go and get one, but this isn't the year to do that. Locker is an intriguing talent, but I think he would be a serious reach at 12. If ever there was a year to sit and wait on QBs, it's this one.

  9. Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    16,648

    Quote Originally Posted by hunterm View Post
    I actually tend to agree with Steve here. Normally if there's a QB on the board I would say you have to go and get one, but this isn't the year to do that. Locker is an intriguing talent, but I think he would be a serious reach at 12. If ever there was a year to sit and wait on QBs, it's this one.
    Surely if you felt that Locker was a franchise QB (which I know you don't) then you take though at 12 right?

  10. Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    New York, New York
    Posts
    25,136

    Quote Originally Posted by mdb17 View Post
    Surely if you felt that Locker was a franchise QB (which I know you don't) then you take though at 12 right?
    For sure.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts