FalcFans Forums

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday

Go to the link b/c its got several youtubes mixed in as examples. Best article I've seen from someone neutral, pretty much hitting the nail on the head. FWIW, every single coach said Taylor even outplayed Ryan Williams as the spring's MVP...and that sir is ridiculous.

exerpt...

I look forward to seeing what Taylor does this year. But again, my biggest beef with him is the lack of pocket presence. And the Nebraska youtube clip in the article I think illustrates this perfectly. He is not a 3-step dropback passer that is comfortable throwing from the pocket. He suffers from the same limitations as Vick. His release is almost identical to Vick's. He's mobile. He works best out of the shotgun or when VT uses a mobile pocket because he doesn't have ideal height and seems to struggle to see passing lanes.

I have nothing against Taylor, and I think eventually when he gets to the pros he can be an effective starting quarterback. And with coaching, many of those kinks can be lessened.

But I don't see a guy that can dropback and deliver the ball decisively and anticipate throws. He's always pumping, and looking to evade. If you apply the Vick rules to him, he will struggle. Now lucky for him, very few college football teams have the personnel to successfully institute the Vick rules well.

Now, that could all change this upcoming season. And i'm not going to sit here and say that Taylor cannot/will not improve. I'm only judging off junior tape. But he's a Vick clone. Or if you prefer: Tarvaris Jackson clone.

Thats called being able to keep the play alive. But thats also gonna make you look like an antsy pocket qb, but they're not necessarilly the same thing. You know Suh played on Neb right, that dude probably collapsed the pocket on 2/3rds of the snaps that game fwiw. Just ask Colt McCoy.

Man I still have no idea where you keep bringing up the vick comparison. Thats like the easiest thing to say, yet only if you're not really watching most of the games. Thats why I posted that article, cause the author points out the difference of the two.

I think we're going to have to wait until the season at this point to hash this out further. I'm not budging, and don't think I'm being biased one bit. I just think you're pigeon holing him still. I'm not calling him a statue pocket passer like Bradford or Luck, but he isn't a Vick anything ether. Come on Pudge, don't use the anti-rose colored specs when the season starts, you're better than that.

Where? Other than citing a few positive passing stats, I don't see any compelling argument that suggests Vick and Taylor aren't similar. But anybody that has been a patron of this board for a couple of years now knows that I pay very little attention to college stats. Maybe they indicate Taylor is a more effective college passer, but we aren't talking about who is the more effective college passer, I thought we were talking about how they project to the NFL level.


You could be right, and in the 9 or 10 Virginia Tech games that I didn't watch this past season, maybe Taylor's mechanics, overall play, and pocket presence were very un-Vick like. I doubt that is the case, as it's been my experience that if you've seen a guy play 3 or more games in a single college season, you've probably wound up seeing 80-90% of what the guy has to offer. And if said guy plays pretty much the same way in all those games, then missing the other part of the season becomes even less of an issue.

Now I'm not pretending to think that only seeing 25% of Taylor's body of work makes me some sort of expert.


It's not just the Nebraska game. It's all the games I saw, and practically every snap I saw Taylor take this year. I've heard/seen that in the NFL, a QB has on average 2-3 seconds from the time the ball gets into his hands on the snap to making a decision and the time it is released from his hand. When I watch a guy like Colt McCoy, despite his other issues, I saw this ability. When I watch Taylor play, it's 4, 5, 6, or more seconds ticking off the clock before he's making his decisions and throwing.

To me this indicates a critical lack of field vision, that I think was one of the critical aspects of Vick's game that was missing. And when you have a mobile QB that makes up for it with his mobility, then I think the comparisons make a ton of sense. Maybe it's too simplistic and lazy on my part to call him a Vick clone, but it's hard for me not to notice the glaring similarities in their games when both are athletic QBs, that are most effective when they are able to scramble, waiting for WRs to break off their routes because they are far less effective when you're asking them to be confined to the pocket and deliver the ball quickly and decisively, and both happen to be black kids in Blacksburg that can make plays with their legs, makes it all the more relevant to me.

Now if he shows significant improvement in those areas: anticipation, accuracy, field vision, pocket presence, and not rely on his legs so much, and essentially become a more cerebral QB this season, I will dial down my "criticisms" of Taylor and be more willing to point out the differences between him and Vick than their similarities.

But Taylor IMO is only marginally a better NFL prospect than Jarrett Brown was this past year. And at least Brown had the excuse that he only had 1 year as a starter. Taylor doesn't have such an excuse, and thus any lack of significant progress this season will be inexcusable.

Well I think right there you're gonna have to temper your analysis then. Considering many future nfl college players continually improve their knowledge, grasp of the offense, accuracy, arm strength, huddle/play command...saying you've got a qualified opinion, of the QB positon no less, is fairly ridiculous.

The first paragraph of the article spoke to the difference between he and Vick??



You're 100% right about the time part, just not about the reason why. VT doesn't run a WCO were you're third step you get that ball out or else. We pretty much run the opposite of that. They coach him like this. Go through your reads, but if its not there after the progression, take off. WHY would you have him not utilize this weapon? That is what would be stupid. YOU CAN in college, but I see you're point in there in that it doesn't best prepare you for the NFL. Well we said the same thing about the spread offense, yet it doesn't mean you CAN"t play in the NFL. That was your arguement from a while back. So where hes taking 4-6 secs, its be he can buy the time with his legs, so why not do it? Its the only reason we be Nebraska for example, perfect example in fact.



Did you seriously just dumb it down that much? Wow. At some point you're gonna have to give a more unbiased, qualified analysis, and 25% of games and jumping to the easiest conclusion in the book is lazy. Again, you're better than that imo.

By saying he's been more comparable to Bryan Randall probably because unlike Vick, neither Randall or Taylor led the Hokies to a national championship appearance in their first years as starters. But had Taylor led VT to a national championship last year, I'm sure there would be the inevitable Vick comparisons. Because it's comparing their college careers. I thought we were talking about their pro prospects? Never once did I ever really care about "Tyrod Taylor, the college QB."

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=12495&p=83536


I guess I did. But I don't see anything wrong with comparing current college players to former alumni. It's allowed that if I wanted to compare a current Michigan Caucasian QB to Brian Griese, Tom Brady, or Chad Henne, but the minute I do it for a black guy at Virignia Tech, it's called being lazy. We can do it with USC wide receivers to Dwayne Jarrett or Keyshawn Johnson, but I guess it's still too touchy a subject to point out the obvious.


I don't think it's ridiculous at all. This entire time I've said that in the 3-4 games I saw Virginia Tech play last year, I didn't see what I would consider a good NFL skillset. What I keep hearing from you is that he's not a Vick clone because his college career has been different, his stats are better, and VT uses him differently than they did Vick. I could care less about those "facts." To me, they aren't relevant to this conversation that I'm having.

Because unless you're telling me in those 9 or 10 games I missed, he showed much better pocket awareness, better anticipation, better field vision than what he did in those games I saw and/or what Vick showed during his pro career in Atlanta, then I do think my opinion is qualified.

So you're telling me that if Tyrod Taylor was put on an NFL team today, you think he would be significantly different (and better) type of NFL passer than Michael Vick was between 2001 and 2006?

What do you think i've been talking about the whole time?? That hes NOT like Vick, except for the fact that God gave them both the ability to run. I thought I had made it pretty clear imho that thats where the similarities end. Don't get me wrong, if you only see 1/4 of the games, then that comparison is easy, but still wrong. Its like me watching only 25% of the Pitt games, and pretending I know you're QB as well as you. Like kid X...has one trait similiar to say Marino (quick release), so kid X is Marino b/c of the easy trait to name (quick release). Don't you think more analysis can be derived than that? I would defer to your knowledge if I kept beating the drum like I have that he's very different from Vick, running ability aside. You act like I have some special ax to grind, I think I've been very objective.



I have about the thickest skin in the world, so I could care less about easy school/race comparisons. I want hard core, accurate analysis. I'm pretty much the anti-so such and such did this there, so that means such and such now is predetermined the same fate. Thats just the height of laziness to me, if you're actually interested in the respective prospects themselves. Ie. Why I give TT a clean slate for analysis. Isn't that also what draft analysis is all about?

What he means about Randall v. Vick is that Vick came on the scene like a comet, period. Out of nowhere, took the college football world by storm, nobody had ever seen anything like it, buzz, hype, the whole deal. Bryan R on the other hand slowly built himself into a damn good football player, but he was still always gonna have a limited ceiling with his physical ablilities, but his brain carried him. TT is somewhere in the middle, mucho more brain than Vick (seems as smart as randall fwiw), but mucho more athleticism than BR. So really none of the three are comparible when really analyzed. But again, if you're being lazy then...yeah they all had running ability, so yeah they're clones. TT is similiar to Randall in that he wasn't a comet, but he has continually improved his game in all aspects. Thats what the writer of that article was pointing out correctly. No more no less. The diff is that TT skill set gives him a much higher ceiling than a BR had.

Does TT have more to improve upon to be drafted, absolutely. Does he have the mindset and skill set to get there, absolutely. Does he have anything in the world to do with Vick, absolutely not.

Look, I've given numerous reasons why I think he is comparable to Vick, not just because he's black, runs, and goes to Virginia Tech. I've talked about his field vision, pocket awareness and management skills, mechanics, difficulty going through progressions, ability to make quick decisions, accuracy and anticipation, etc.. I don't know what other aspects of playing the QB you want me to bring up that I can compare the two where I can find divergence. Because when I look at Taylor's skillset in those areas, and think back to Vick, particularly in 2006, I see almost identical players..

A few years back when I compared Vick to Tarvaris Jackson, many bristled at the comparison. The excuses given why I was wrong was because Jackson hadn't won 60% of his games, been to 3 Pro Bowls, and won a road playoff game at Lambeau. Those are simply achievements, not reasons why their games are different. Their games are essentially the same. The most glaring differences between Vick and Jackson are that one is left-handed and probably in his prime could clock a 40 in the 4.3 range rather than the 4.6 range.

The same applies to Taylor, IMHO. Certainly, you could argue that Taylor has better intangibles than Vick. He does seem to have a better head on his shoulders, and I would expect once he gets to the NFL will have a bigger desire to want to learn the pro game. But don't sell me this notion that Taylor's intangibles are great and polar opposite than Vick. Because if they were, then IMO I should have seen a guy able to make quicker decisions last season. He may lack Vick's sense of entitlement, but don't sell me on this notion that he's a cerebral QB, because he is not. Or at least I have yet to see that in his game.

And you can harp on the fact that I missed 75% of his games this past season. You wouldn't be the first person to do so. I recall many moons ago, people at the Roost used to do the same. "Pudge, you don't see all the games. You don't know what you're talking about." And I don't deny that your opinion is more informed because you saw all of the games. But I don't think that invalidates my opinion, or automatically makes you right and me wrong on this one.

I may not have a complete picture of Taylor, but I do think that only seeing 25% of his games gives me a good sense of what he brings to the table. I think that applies to any player on the field, in this sport, and probably any other sport.

Taylor has a chance to prove me wrong and change my opinion by how he plays this year. And I will try my best to go into this season with an open mind, and the 3-4 Tech games that I watch this year, I'll be looking to see if he shows significant improvement on the areas where he is weakest, which IMO are pretty much the same critical areas that Vick lacked in his game.

Now, I'm not going to predict that Taylor will have the same career as Vick. But if you're going to ask me who Taylor's game resembles, it's probably Vick. If I was going to predict who Taylor's career is likely to resemble most, it would probably be Tarvaris Jackson or Dennis Dixon. Because as of today, I will predict that Taylor will be a 3rd or 4th round pick, go to a team that will groom him for a number of years as a backup, and then he'd get an opportunity to be a starter 2-4 years down the road, where he probably will be better prepared than Vick to handle such a role. Since he probably won't be the No. 1 pick, and will have the value of being able to get a decade's worth of perspective on Vick's career, the mountains and the pitfalls, he'll likely be smart enough to be able to avoid many of those same things that Vick did.

And I disagreed with you each time. Vick had one quality, God made him one bad mother of an athlete. 99% athelete, 1% brain. I don't know that I've ever seen anyone like Vick. Probably never will.



If you're admitting this, and you take into account that you're wrong about the above (don't you remember us discussing why his rushing attempts dropped so dramatically?), whats left???????????????????? Oh yeah...



Dude just watch VT v BSU in the first game.

You seem to have only narrowed the argument to intangibles. And since you believe Taylor's intangibles are better than Vick's, that seems to be the only thing that matters in your eyes, despite them being very similar in almost every other trait that goes into making a QB.

And again, while Taylor's intangibles appear to be better than Vick's, it doesn't mean he has good/high intangibles. Like Vick, he appears low on intangibles when it comes to how smart a player he is. I'm not saying Taylor is a bad character guy or stupid, he just isn't a cerebral QB like you need to be to have lots of success at the next level. In time, with good coaching that could be brought out of him, but right now, I would say in terms of intangibles Taylor are on par with those of D.J. Shockley. Every UGA fan has told me that D.J. is a smart, humble, nice guy, that showed leadership in college, but Shockley has lacked the "it" to date that would indicate he truly can grasp and run an NFL offense efficiently, nor does he show that ability to have really taken advantage of his opportunities like QBs with the "it" factor seem to do when given the opportunity.

I'm not talking about Taylor in terms of his character when compared to Vick. I'm talking about his game, what he can do on Sundays. And it appears you are unable to separate the two. Based off what I've seen so far from Taylor, when I project him to the NFL, I see a player that just like Michael Vick will rely on his legs to make more plays than his brain/arm. I see a player that because of his poor anticipation, lacking accuracy, poor field vision, and poor pocket management skills will not be an efficient NFL passer just like Michael Vick. I see a player that can make plays because of his mobility/athleticism allow him to just like Michael Vick, but when the chips are down and his team needs him to throw to win games, he will fail more often than not, just like Michael Vick.

Now unlike Michael Vick, I do not expect Tyrod Taylor to finance a criminal organization, to quit on his team, to throw his coaches under the bus, and to have a minimal work ethic. Now if you assumed I meant those things by calling him a "Vick clone," then that's simply a miscommunication on my part, because I was only referencing and comparing Taylor on how he plays the game, not how he approaches the game.

I almost think I've run down the rabbit hole so far on this one I've lost a little context in my point.

Let me play devils advocate with msyelf so you can see that my main point is that he really doesn't share anything more in common with Vick than the ability to run, no more, no less. Intangibles, brain, accuracy, touch, reading d's, work ethic, humbleness, attitude, knowing when to run/pass....all favor TT, even w/ what you saw from an NFL Vick.

My other pt is that I think he has the tools mentally and physically to succeed at the next level, w/ plenty of work to be done.

I think one thing I give him some credit for is being thrown into the fire as a t-fresh @LSU and not wetting his pants. If I'm not mistake he took us down the field for our only pitiful score fo the day, LSU was tough that year (champs maybe?). Having always had to f w/ Glennon for whose starting, only for VT to hope it was the older Glennon, promise TT a redshirt, only to realize he could eat pancakes of Glennon's head and yank the shirt at the last minute. Kid has had to adjust to what VT needed more than once, and never griped or complained. Just rolled up his sleeves and got better. IMHO he's progressed from a run only guy to a pass first guy in 3 years. For a guy w/ still the ability to run by everyone in college, that says something. Sure you're supposed to develop as a passer, but Vick never did in college. TT wants to be good, and he wants to be a passer first. He's put his money where his mouth is, and the numbers bear that, even if you only saw a handful of games. Lets not kid ourselves either, VT is a run heavy offense, so the attempts aren't what some others receive either. And ideal VT game has the run game over 200 with under 20 attempts, throw in the Bud D and Beamerball and thats the FBeamer formula. Yet b/c of that he has to make the most of the ones he gets. The thing I love about him best is he's a winner. Some people just know how to get it done when you have to, and he's a pretty cool customer (ie. Nebraska).

Cons, my poor man scouts analysis so to speak...

His height will be the #1 concern of scouts, 6'1" true I believe. Passable, but one of those qb's that has to move around to find passing lanes. This could also be conceived as somewhat antsy, but this is mostly by design of the VT offense for rollouts. But those rollouts lead to questions about consistently throwing from the pocket. I think he needs more work on sitting in the pocket as he will need to do in the nfl. But the monkey wrench in that is if you roll him, it opens up the run option if the pass isn't open. This is specifically how his is coached at VT, and why VT loves mobile qbs, its always a plan B. Great for the O, bad for projecting pocket precense in the nfl. A plus here is that he has uncanny accuracy passing on the move. Has since a freshman. Someone like Brees is the master of beating being QB short, but also with his knowledge of the O, and that takes time and god givin ability obviously. He would have the work ethic to have a shot, and the pure running ability doesn't hurt.

He can make all the throws for an NFL offense, plenty of arm strength. He knows how to read a D and audible. He's been good about knowing when to run/pass, evolving over the course of his career, specifically last year. The problem with these pros lies in VT's run heavy offense and his overall consistency. You can see him make the throws occasionally, but its not like running a pro offense.

He will need to make the most of his attempts this year b/c VT has an enviable problem at RB. They should be able to run Williams and Evans most games and call it a day. Beamer tends to be very conservative, so I'm a bit afraid he will throw more to keep D's honest than b/c we have to. So even more than normal, TT will have to really make the most of his attempts. On the other hand, VT is simply loaded at WR too, even though all you hear about is the backs. Boykin, Coale, Roberts are all Juniors that have played since t-freshman and grown each year in chemistry with TT. The X factor here is throwing in 2-3 freak of natures lurking in the shadows. WR's Marcus Davis (6'4", 230) and DJ Coles (6'3", 220), plus #2 QB of the future Logan Thomas (6'6”, 235) who is talented enough to get a h-back package this year if TT stays healthy and he's not needed at QB. Long point being I hope that edge talent pushes us to a more 50/50 play call, but with Williams that’s just tough sometimes.

Your projection of 3-4 round as of now if probably pretty accurate imo. If he plays his cards right and continues to show good decision making he can move up. One thing they will love about him is he is very low turnover guy. They will question the height. They will question can he make those good decisions on more attempts, just as they will the ability to complete them. They will question those things translating to the speed of the nfl. They will love his pure athleticism, playmaking and ability to wiggle out of danger. They will love his leadership and work ethic. They will like his arm and build, he’s tough to run as much as he did when he was younger.

At the end of the day, he has the tools in the toolbox to be successful. Will he have to sit a year and learn, absolutely. Maybe more than one, but he's got a chance. Give him a view this year as a kid that’s genuinely worked hard to be a passer first. That does was a run heavy VT asks him to do. That he wants to be great and has/is working hard to accomplish such. He’s not a hard kid not to root for, and given his ability, not a bad bet either.

I just don't think he's a passer first...not yet.

Okay, here's my scouting report on Taylor based off the notes I took last year. And again, I think from my perspective, when you read a lot of these things, it is almost an exact duplicate of the same scouting report I think anybody would write up about Vick during his time in Atlanta.

I'll use the same basic areas that I use for any quarterback. With the same grading scale:
1-poor, 2-weak, 3-above average, 4-very good, 5-elite. 2.5 is average.

Arm Strength (5.0): Shows good potential as a vertical passer, able to drive the ball downfield with a flick of his wrist. Can fire some lasers and shows ability to thread the needle with ease.

Accuracy (2.5): He does show some touch on his throws downfield and will display accuracy when given time to throw. But really needs to work on his touch. Passes tend to be high and sail on him. Will throw lasers when he doesn't need to, making it harder for his receivers.

Mobility (5.0): Throws very well on the run and does an excellent job extending the play outside the pocket. Has a habit of slipping tacklers and avoiding sacks. Does a nice job keeping his eyes downfield when he's on the move. Dangerous runner in the space that is very difficult to bring down due his superior quickness and shiftiness. Very difficult for defenders to tackle in one on one situations in space. Doesn't show great ball security when he's running with the ball and has a tendency to cough up the ball whenever a defender does get a good shot in. Can be tentative about contact.

Decision Making (2.0): Doesn't seem to go through his progressions. Has a tendency to improvise, waiting for his receivers to break their routes. Tends to overly rely on those improvisational skills. Will stare down his receivers. Seems to only have one read, and then if not open he'll tuck it and run. Has a very long clock in his head. Doesn't show much anticipation when it comes to seeing hte field and anticipating throws and reads. Usually doesn't make the bad decision, but has a tendency to rely on his feet to get him out of trouble rather than showing really good decision making.

Pocket Awareness (1.0): Doesn't appear comfortable throwing from the pocket. Holds onto the ball too long, and at other times is much too quick to run. Tends to get happy feet. Doesn't really show great footwork and ability to slide in the pocket for open throwing lanes, instead looking to flee outside the tackles to find space to throw.

Mechanics (2.5): Doesn't always set his feet when throwing. Improper footwork probably also could be blamed for inconsistent accuracy and touch. Has a bit of a quirky and elongated release. Causes him to dip the ball down a bit in the windup, almost identical to that of Michael Vick and Andre Woodson, which adds some time to when he can get the ball out.

Intangibles (2.5): Haven't seen much to think he stands out here. Seems to have a more laid-back persona on the field. Seems cool at all times, and doesn't appear to show any outward signs that he gets tight or buckles in pressure situations.

Maybe the intangibles are incomplete, but given how much he's played, and IMO how little his pocket awareness and decision making have improved (so far), I don't think he grades highly there. And that's not to say he hasn't improved. He probably has from his freshman and sophomore year, but I don't think he's at a level comparable to where I think a player should be after 28 collegiate starts.

And again, I want to stress I'm not closing the book on Taylor. I will look forward to seeing any and whatever progress he does make this season. But I can only give an opinion based off the information that is in front of me, and I don't want to do too much projecting to what he can/will/can't/won't do this season. After all, it's just May. We'll be revisiting this thread 10 months from now, and both of us could easily have eggs on our faces.

Then it really does come back to you didn't seen enough games to get the correct sample size. I've told you personally, shown you 08v09 numbers, shown you other people writing the same thing. I give up, you're still going off of his sophomore performance, not junior year. You're analysis would be pretty damn accurate is he was a rising-jr, not senior.

Passing
2008 99 173 1036 57.2 5.99 40 2 7 20 103.25
2009 136 243 2311 56.0 9.51 81 13 5 28 149.39

Throw in the fact that he cut his rushing attempts in half and that completes the formula. Hell another thing I remembered too, he was specifically told last year not to run as much (even though he already didn't intend to) b/c VT had NO reliable backup QB. Running leads to injuries, which would have derailed our ENTIRE season. Geez I should have said that first, cause thats what happened. He pulled it off and we never needed the backup QB. Let alone the passing numbers vs running numbers being completely flip flopped.

If you would forget Vick for crying out loud, you wouldn't be pigeon holing him incorrectly. But if you keep pretending that they've got the same scouting report to make it an easy analysis then you'll never peg him correctly.

Enough debate, good debate, but you're gonna have to wait and see him rip BSU a new one I suppose.

Your basing too much of your analysis on numbers. I'm basing it off what I see. I could care less that Virginia Tech is a run-first offense which caps his pass attempts. That is really irrelevant to whether or not he is a passer or runner first.

I'm basing that analysis off the fact that when things start to break down, does he trust his legs more than his arm/brain. And in the case of Taylor, it's overwhelmingly legs. It's no different than Jake Locker as well. He is still a runner first because he still trusts his legs far too much to get him out of trouble, rather than just throwing the ball away, and/or using his brain/arm in the first place to prevent him from getting into trouble.

Now I understand that from a coaching staff's perspective, they aren't going to tell a guy with Taylor (or Locker's) athletic ability to just give up on a play. So VT probably coaches him to run around a lot and improvise and create things when stuff breaks down. But what that does when a player gets to the pros is creates a major crutch. Because running around and mkaing plays with your legs while it can extend drives in the short-term, also hurts an offense's cohesiveness in the long-run. Becuase QBs don't build rapports with their WRs, and it makes O-linemen's jobs harder because they have no clue whether or not they should be blocking for 4 seconds or 8 seconds.

That is not Taylor's fault, he's coached that way at Virginia Tech. But like Vick, when he gets to the next level, it is going to be a significant hurdle. Taylor plays the QB position like a sophomore, and he's a rising senior.

An NFL QB has to be decisive with the ball. Taylor hasn't been coached to do this yet at Virginia Tech, and I doubt he ever will as you've been pointed out before. And thus, it'll limit his NFL potential and give him a very high learning curve on the next level just like it did for Vick.

I actually saw all the games (for all three years too), not a whopping 3...

Your previous quote below....good grief man, come on.



Again...
Enough debate, good debate, but you're gonna have to wait and see him rip BSU a new one I suppose.

You can stress how "few" games I saw last year, but it's not as if I didn't see most of VT's important.

Of the 4 games I watched (and I just checked my notes and confirmed it was indeed 4), it was Alabama, North Carolina, Boston College, and Nebraska. So I saw half of his performances against the 8 bowl-eligible teams VT faced last year. So even without seeing him perform against Tennessee, Miami, and Georgia Tech (and Marshall), I think I saw the majority of the top, NFL-caliber defenders he faced.

In those 4 games I saw, I saw 80 of his 243 passing attempts, a third of them. I probably saw Taylor drop back to pass close to 100 times in game situations against top NFL-caliber defensive linemen, linebackers, and defensive backs. That may not be a complete picture, but I think it's more than enough to have a "clue" of what he brings to the table.

In the past few years in scouting prospects, I've learned that there seems to be a magic threshold that seems to be crossed after the 3rd or 4th game of watching a player play in that you really don't gain any new information. Over the past two years there have been a few teams that I've watched 6-9 games of them in a given season (2008 Oklahoma, 2009 Pittsburgh are two good examples), and frankly, in those 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th games, I didn't see anything new from those prospects that I didn't see in the first 3-4 games. Not to say that the more tape you have on a guy isn't helpful, but it isn't necessary IMHO to have an informed opinion about a player.

It works just like a movie. I don't need to sit down and watch 2 hours of a movie in order to tell whether I like it or not. I can usually get by with just the first 30 minutes of movie. Just like Tim Tebow, I'm sure few of us have seen every Florida game he played this past year, but I'm sure most of us have an opinion on what kind of NFL QB he can be. If I had only scouted Taylor in 2 games this year, then I would probably be more flexible than I am about my opinion.

We're well past that point of agreeing to disagree. We've each made at least a half dozen posts on this subject, and it's obvious we're at a point where we aren't going to give any more ground to the other party. And while you may have a more informed opinion about Taylor because you saw all 13 Virginia Tech games this past year, having more information doesn't always make your opinion any more right than mine. I don't think that my missing 9 Virginia Tech games makes as big a difference as you think it does. Because in the 4 games I saw, Taylor did nothing different. He was the exact same player in all 4 games I saw. An athletic, strong-armed, and antsy pocket quarterback. This "I saw all the games, you only saw a fraction of them...I'm right, you're wrong." doesn't fly with me. Because just because you saw him throw more passes, doesn't mean you have a better eye for QB play. So unless a third party swoops into this thread and tells me that Taylor showed really good pocket passing skills, anticipation, and decision making vs. Miami, Georgia Tech, and/or Tennessee, then I am done with this.

I'll reiterate my point one last time. Based off what I've seen, in terms of arm strength, accuracy, athleticism/mobility, decision making, pocket passing skills, Tyrod Taylor and Michael Vick are one in the same. The fact that they are both black and go to Virginia Tech only adds to the similarities. The only real difference that I can find between Taylor and Vick is that Taylor doesn't appear to be a prima donna. So presumably he has better intangibles. But he's not a high intangibles guy. And just like Vick, IMO he appears to be deficient in that area. There are some players that play with fire, passion, and play every snap like its their last. This is obvious on Saturdays (and Sundays) when you watch them. You don't need to see them practice to know this. Those are the high character players. I haven't seen a shred of evidence that Taylor is one. You again can stress that I've only seen 4 games. But if Taylor was indeed this type of player, I'm sure it would be apparent in every game he plays, not just 9 out of 13 taht I happened to miss. And you can continue to stress these "minor" differences between Vick and Taylor. And IMHO, it's like stressing the differences between Aaron Brooks and Vick or Tarvaris Jackson and Vick or Tommy Maddox and John Parker Wilson or Jake Delhomme and Chad Henne. They may be different, but not to any degree where someone should be vehemently arguing that a person comparing the two doesn't know what he's talking about.

Yeah well he pretty much did kill Miami and Tennessee, and the Bowl game always leads you into the offseason/next season. Much more relevant for the future if you progressed over the season than week 1 vs UA. Miami had the U is back hype machine in full effect after three games and we see how that ended. GT was a rougher offensive day, chippy game.

Everybody destroyed UT, not just Taylor. Check out this ENTIRE clip on teh UT game, I don't know how a QB can thro wthe ball any better than he did in that game. Perfect mechanics, poise, accuracy, plus its show the seasons progression in mice fashion to say the least.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlmPveMhZxk


Alabama, Nebraska and UNC all had top D's in '08, so naturally those are gonna look different as a sample size compared to 13.



Yeah you may determine that you don't like it, but that doesn't mean you can say you know how its going to end. You took the cliff notes, while others watchrd the whole movie and read the book.

I think in general you seem more interested in widdling down your scouting analysis and backing up your eye for talent. I've given reasons, you're giving your eye. I don't think I've done anything more than try to show you that when you watch a season in progression, you see trends. All of your games were in the first halfish of the season, so really you didn't see the finished product so to speak. One thing thats made me wonder in this thread is that I would say you do have a good "scouts" eye best I can tell (and not that my opinion means anything). Many random threads I share the same analysis, and usually from a deeper nature like yourself. I'm gonna quit beating the drum, I'm tired. We certainly can agree to disagree and see where we stand a year from now. Either way its okay for us to disagree, the damn guys getting paid millions to be truly good at it don't even get it right w/ any consistency.