(12-08-2020, 04:15 PM)Kane Wrote: (12-08-2020, 03:29 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: The talk about evaluating the player's potential instead of his rookie year performance shouldn't really need to be explained.
You can look at the majority of NFL QB's rookie years and say they sucked.
As far as rehashing old threads, why bother posting 40 times in various predraft threads about these guys if we're just going to then ignore their actual careers and our various prognostications????
It's part of the deal on this and other boards.
I'm wrong on at least half of the players I prop up pre draft. Folks can drag me for it all they want.
I just don't tend to run about bad mouthing the players I don't prefer to draft very often.
(Fournette is the last time I did so - though I expressed doubt in Deshaun Watson as well)
LOTS of folks had a field day dragging Allen through the mud pre-draft, and that's why myself and others enjoy furthering the discussion.
Need to be explained? No one was talking about Allen pre draft like he could "someday be great" people were hyping him up because of his size and arm strength. Which we've seen before fail guys who don't hone their craft. Sorry not buying the whole notion that we're always talking about potential vs how good they are coming into the league. At least I'm certainly not. If you're drafting a guy top 10, he should be ready to come in and be good right away. Not on a good team seeing as they are picking top 10, so likely that won't be wins and losses really but QB performance. His QB performance wasn't good right away. It just wasn't. He was a low comp % high turnover running QB.
Why bother posting in threads if not to rehash it (when convenient) years down the road? I dunno... to kill time? For general discussion purposes as it pertains to the team and the upcoming draft at the time... I mean, are we building future GM resumes based of the poo we flung at the message board wall back in 2018? Cuz man... if I had known we were being quizzed on who would be right 3 years later I might have studied more "film" 
And I can't speak for everyone "draggin Allen through the mud" but I think most of the naysayers would point to low comp %, low YPA, and level of competition as big reasons for doubt. Calling him "trash" came after the Ramsey article which based on his rookie year, seemed legit.
It's like a guy can't play like garbage and then get better. It's like "he was always great, you just didn't give him time". Nah, he wasn't very good and got better. Because of his physical ability, i.e. arm strength and mobility, when he worked on being a better QB he became a better QB. But the rookie Allen wasn't good, the kid coming from Wyoming where he didn't have very good stats against meh competition, wasn't good. Whatever noun or adjective makes you feel better about it, use it my dude... trash, not good, lackluster, mediocre.
Hindsight is a beautiful thing but if Josh Allen was our QB would he be the QB we saw Monday night? No one knows though likely not. He didn't just get better he worked with people in the off season, kinda like how Bortles TRIED to do. Therefore all the people that were in love with him pre draft wouldn't have been "proven right" necessarily.
The bolded is EXACTLY what I and others were saying about him. If he caught up the mental aspects even remotely to match his "arm talent" ( I hate that term) then he could be great.
It was a pretty common refrain. Sorry you missed it.
Seeing that actually happen after claiming it just might happen is worth commenting for me.
I went back one page to see this thread. Didn't require a search. No need to take it personally.
I'll refrain from quoting your older posts next time I guess. *shrug*
Also you're still caught up in analyzing periods of development instead of analyzing potential which is weird to me.
Determining a player's ability to improve and likelihood to improve is a pretty important element of scouting college players, no?
No one is mad at you for saying he sucked statistically in "X" way at "X" period of time. He had clear issues.
I merely think his development is a very good example of why folks shouldn't be so quick to write off prospects that have shown elite traits in some areas while lacking sorely in others.
