He's the size of a middle school boy.

That's enough for me.

Yeah, because drafting a huge tall QB worked out so well for us last time.. Bortles and Flacco sure are lighting it up in the league, huh? You sound like a child. Quit getting your opinions from analysts and watch the actual game. He's one inch shorter than Russel Wilson, with better speed and a better arm. I'm taking that over Haskins or Foles any day.

---

I would rather our QB be bigger than a kicker.

Stupid, non football reasons. Analyze him as a Qb then we can talk

You seen him?

He's no where near the size of Russell Wilson. Not even close. It's not just height, although he's 5'8", which is NOT just one 1" shorter than Wilson. He weighs 160lbs at most.

His agent said he's 205? From what? His frame is tiny. Haskins is almost 6'3" and is easily twice the size of Murray in pure shoulder width.. and he weighs 230. 205 is a pipe dream. He is a tiny little man and his frame prohibits him from getting bigger. Mike Vick coming out of Virginia Tech was a monster compared to Murray. Oh and he had better arm strength and was faster...

I'm sure he'll be great the first 5 games... then a DT that is faster and bigger than he ever dreamed possible is going to destroy him.

---

He's the size of a middle school boy.

That's enough for me.

Yeah, because drafting a huge tall QB worked out so well for us last time.. Bortles and Flacco sure are lighting it up in the league, huh? You sound like a child. Quit getting your opinions from analysts and watch the actual game. He's one inch shorter than Russel Wilson, with better speed and a better arm. I'm taking that over Haskins or Foles any day.

---

I would rather our QB be bigger than a kicker.

Stupid, non football reasons. Analyze him as a Qb then we can talk

But you presume that height is a non football related reason for not drafting him.

There is a reason that QBs 6-3 to 6-5 are deemed the prototype by professional scouts, coaches, and GMs.

Generally, they can see the field better.  Generally, they will have fewer passes batted down.  Generally, less than perfectly placed shotgun snaps they can still field would either sail over the head of a 5'9 (?) QB or throw off the timing enough to turn the play into chaos.  Generally, coaches can call more conventional and less restrictive game plans with a bigger QB.  With a shorter QB, a coach will have to call for more rollouts/moving pockets to compensate for the inability to see over the OL/DL.  That was exactly how it transpired with Flutie.  Those plays tend to limit the passing options available on a play of that nature.   Rightly or wrongly, there is also the question of durability.

In a risk averse enterprise that is the NFL drafting of QBs, drafting a guy 5'9" (at best) runs against that...for football reasons.

Murray may prove to be the exception's exception, but I wouldn't want the team to take that risk to find out...for football reasons.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Interesting thread, albeit with some flaws

https://twitter.com/KentWeyrauch/status/...30624?s=19

---

Interesting the comparision/contrast between how some felt about Bridgewater's size (that it was a non-issue) yet how some they feel Murray's size is something to worry about.

Murray is on the shorter and lighter end, but he's a rare athlete.

Bridgewater was extremely small framed and not particularly athletic.

Because of his athleticism, I wouldn't worry about Murray's ability to hold up. There's no reason to concern about that as there was/is for Bridgewater.

There have been a lot of small guys in the NFL that had very long careers because they were special athletes. Many or most of those at positions that take more punishment and general wear and tear that QBs do.

Some may disagree, but I see Murray having special athleticism.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Interesting the comparision/contrast between how some felt about Bridgewater's size (that it was a non-issue) yet how some they feel Murray's size is something to worry about.

Murray is on the shorter and lighter end, but he's a rare athlete.

Bridgewater was extremely small framed and not particularly athletic.

Because of his athleticism, I wouldn't worry about Murray's ability to hold up.  There's no reason to concern about that as there was/is for Bridgewater.

There have been a lot of small guys in the NFL that had very long careers because they were special athletes.  Many or most of those at positions that take more punishment and general wear and tear that QBs do.

Some may disagree, but I see Murray having special athleticism.

Bridgewater was huge compared to Murray.

And plenty of people had trouble with Bridgewater's tiny ankles.

---