Andrew Luck vs Jake Locker

October 31st, 2010 | Written by Rob Staton

A tough night for Jake Locker vs Stanford

 

I was able to watch the first three quarters of the Stanford vs Washington game (or Luck vs Locker as it’s become). I’ve just got back home from working in London and will be up early tomorrow (it’s 1:30am here) to return to the city for tomorrow’s Denver vs San Francisco game. However, I wanted to open up this thread as a discussion center for those watching the game or any of the CFB this weekend. 

Frankly it’s impossible to scout Jake Locker in this situation. Washington’s offensive line has been shambolic. He’s taken a couple of big hits, had almost no time in the pocket and has became jittery. 

But as bad as Washington’s offensive and defensive lines were, Stanford were the polar opposite. It certainly makes life easy for Andrew Luck – who had an age to throw and is able to lean on a completely dominant run game. Having said that - Luck has cleary made significant strides from the UCLA game. His throws are a lot more restrained, he’s moving the ball well and his accuracy is much improved. He’s nowhere near as erratic despite a similar blow-out. 

A 51-yard touchdown run from Luck flashed the kind of athletic qualities he has. As a passer he’s milked Washington dry. 

In my last mock draft I put Luck in San Francisco. That would be an ideal situation. It’s close to his current home, he’ll have a solid young O-line. He’ll be able to lean on a power back (Frank Gore) with two legitimate targets to throw to (Davis/Crabtree). A match made in heaven. 

Elsewhere, Cam Newton (who will almost certainly declare for 2011 and will be in my next mock) is stamping is name all over the Heisman. He’s caught a TD pass today and thrown a lot more in a beat-down of Ole Miss. 

I’ve also caught some of Florida vs Georgia. It was interesting to watch Janoris Jenkins (CB, Florida) perform well against AJ Green (WR, Georgia). Jenkins has done a great job this year covering Julio Jones and Green. That’s probably the two elite WR prospects from the 2011 class. He struggled, however, against Terrance Tolliver (WR, LSU) who might be a UDFA or late round pick. 

The reason? When it comes to pure coverage, Jenkins might be the best corner in next April’s draft. When asked to make open field tackles or confront a big receiver in space, he’s one of the worst. Nevertheless, he’ll go early – teams love corner’s that can cover. Jenkins has elite cover skills. 

I’ve got games to watch when I get back from London. Expect plenty on the blog Monday. Until then, let me know any thoughts you have in the comments section on this weekends action.

12 Responses to “Andrew Luck vs Jake Locker”

  1. Matt says:

    Some QB stuff…

    Luck has been picking apart the UW defense with simple passes that frankly have little to no velocity. It’s very similar to Hasselbeck in his prime. Good enough arm, but it’s truly not a strength by any means. His accuracy has been good, but it’s pretty hard to evaluate because every WR has a 7 yard cushion.

    Locker…simply getting killed out there. Physically, draft stock wise, mentally.

    Barkley has made some great throws already. Gotta say that Locker and Luck are clearly behind Barkley by a healthy margin too. Mentally and physically he plays like a 5th year senior. If he had a sniff of the mobility of the previous 2, he’d probably be considered one of the better QB prospects in a long, long time.

    At this point, I’d be willing to trade a ton of picks to get Barkley. Sadly, he’ll have to wait another year. Although, I think he stays through his senior year (bowl eligible).

  2. 1sthill says:

    My take on the Illinois vs Purdue game,
    Purdue DE Ryan Kerrigan is a player that has been getting a lot of love in mock drafts. I watched him earlier this year vs. Ball St (only the 1st quarter) and was not that impressed with him. Today, I decided to give him another look and now I can see why a lot of scouts like him, although I still don’t think he would be a good fit at the LEO position for the Seahawks. He had a sack and a few QB hurries in this game. Kerringan was great at anticipating the snap, he was usually the first d-lineman off the snap. He consistantly plays with good leverage enabeling him to push OT’s back off the LOS. He has a non stop motor and is stout against the run despite only weighing 263 lbs. Kerrigan has an average burst off the snap for a DE, but he usually makes up for it by doing a good job of anticipating the snap. He has average speed when chasing plays. He has a nice rip move, but he did not show a consistent/effective counter move. He does not have elitie flexibility to get low under the OT’s reach and turn the corner. It may sound like I’ve have a lot of negative notes on him, but I think he can be a great player if he develops some pass rush moves. I am of the opinion that pass rush moves can be taught in the NFL whereas leverage cannot. By the time a defensive lineman gets to the NFL he either plays with good leverage or he doesn’t; I think its like trying to change the throwing mechanics of a QB when he gets to the NFL. Off this one game (which isn’t fair to do, but we are here to discuss how players look week to week) I would give him a late 1st to early 2nd round grade.

    Illinois RB Mikel Leshoure is another guy who looked good although he didn’t get a lot of carries in this game. Leshoure is 6-0 230 lbs with quick feet and good lateral agility for a big RB. He has good acceleration with decent long speed (estimate 4.5 40-yard dash type speed). He runs with good pad level and he keeps his legs churning upon contact. I have see Leshoure play in two other games earlier this year, back when the Seahawks didn’t have Marshawn Lynch, and I really liked his running style. Leshoure is only a junior but if he declares I think he could be a late 1st to mid-2nd round pick.

  3. Blake says:

    Do you think that no matter how poorly Jake plays he won’t fall past us? Carroll saying things like best he ever saw and total package to describe Jake make me feel optimistic that as he falls down other teams’ boards, he won’t on ours. And what were the 4 things PC said he looks for in a QB? Handsize, Accuracy over arm strength, mobility and….?

  4. Matt Quarre says:

    Do you think the seahawks need a CB in the first round? Someone like Aaron Williams or Ras – I – Dowling or curtis brown or even Jenoris jenkins and Brandon Harris if they drop? Please reply

    • Rob says:

      It’s certainly an option Matt. I’m not sure Dowling, Curtis or Williams will go in round one. I like Harris and Jenkins but expect both to go in the top 20. Brandon Burton (CB, Utah) and Jimmy Smith (CB, Colorado) are two to watch if Seattle maintains their lead in the NFC West.

  5. Frankfrog says:

    Jags, Cards, Niners, Bills, Bengals, Vikings all have Qb needs. Carolina needs targets and protection not a Qb. Broncos regret Tebow already but what can you do. Lord Farve will hang it up after being a Headline for all the wrong reasons again. Luck and Mallet have to leave the board first to have a shot at Locker. So does Luck become a Bill, Mallett becomes a Niner, Locker becomes a Card or a Viking most likely maybe a Jag. Who knows I’m just sayin may have to trade up or go deeper.

  6. Matt says:

    There’s now no chance Locker goes in the top 15. I’d argue that going in the top 15, the drafting team would get a lot of pressure to start him at some point in season 1 and he’s not ready for it. Ok, not that he’s not ready, it would just be wise to let him work in a system and get comfortable while learning what it’s like to have more than 2 seconds in the pocket.

    Locker is about a unique of a case for QB in an NFL draft, as there probably ever will be. You can’t really study game tape and get an accurate read on him. There will be huge inconsistencies, but it’s hard not to factor in what is just a terrible team around him. Put on the Stanford tape, and you will walk away thinking he’s nothing more than a UDFA. Put on the Oregon State tape, and you walk away thinking there’s no way he doesn’t go #1. Drafting him in the first round is going to take a real conviction because there simply isn’t a ton of great tape (not necessarily his fault though). I’d take the chance on him after 15 for sure but it is a factor.

    A lot of people like to point out the comparison to Jay Cutler’s situation, but we should remember that Cutler was protected by a first rounder (Chris Williams) and throwing to a second rounder (Earl Bennett). So as bad as his team was, there was some real talent at vital positions.

    Another Andrew Luck game, another day of me not being overly impressed by anything he does. He’s clearly a smart kid and a good athlete but his “good athlete” plays are blown assignments that allow for absurd running room (last night was perfect example) and his “intelligence” is more along the lines of constant check downs and low risk/safe passes. Now, not that I want him taking risks, but I have yet to see him make a difficult throw into any sort of decent coverage. He’s not going to get all day in the NFL like he does in college. It’s time people recognize that he has the best OL in the country (big, athletic, smart). By no means am I saying that Luck is no good (he’s clearly good), but he plays right now like Mark Sanchez on the Jets. So, if he’s already managing games like that in college, so why would a bad team want to draft him in the top 5 when they can’t afford him that luxury?

    Did anybody else notice/think Luck’s arm strength was actually quite mediocre? Everything he threw just floated and his throw looks a lot like Danny Weurfel with that pushing action.

    Overall, I have to say that QB play in college is just getting worse and worse in regards to transitioning to the NFL. Some of the more highly regarded QBs (think Luck, Locker, Mallett, Newton) all have some sort of crutch/factor that makes me really weary in regards to becoming a good NFL QB. Luck is already a game manager. Newton and Mallett are in friendly, stat padding systems with great talent to help. And Locker has the crutch of playing on a bad team. Part of me wouldn’t be surprised if a guy like Ricky Stanzi or Kirk Cousins have the most success in the NFL because they won’t go in the first round (meaning they get time to develop), yet have good enought tools and pedigree to eventually start for an NFL team.

  7. Alex says:

    I also watched the Stanford vs. Wash game and I couldn’t watch anymore after 3 quarters.

    My impressions was that you couldn’t evaluate Locker simply because there was A) no run game AT ALL and B) no time to throw. It was probably the worst run game I’ve seen from the Huskies in the last 2 years. And it was also the worst trench domination I’ve seen since the 08 season. The offensive game plan (I heard) was to go side to side, throw quick passes, and if the line could hold up, pick apart the vulnerable Stanford secondary. Well, none of that happened because the Stanford DL dominated the Huskies OL so much (the worst beating I’ve seen this year) that the blitzing secondaries usually covered the sides so any run games onto the sides usually resulted in -3 loss of yards, that Jake couldn’t properly make the 3 steps with his read because the DT or blitzing secondary are usually already at Jake’s neck within 2 step. And forget about the 3rd part of the plan, you don’t even have time for 3 steps let alone 5 or 7 steps to read the “weak” secondary that was actually just blitzing the daylight out of the team. Even when Locker was in shotgun, the blitz (and it felt like Jim called a blitz every play) usually got in Locker’s face within 3 seconds (probably 1 read, at most 2). Heck, the blocking was so bad that Locker couldn’t even run because the front was already broken through by the DTs and the sides were broken through was the DE with 2 more CBs blitzing in. He had literally no where to go.

    And finally, other than Kearse (and he even had an off day), there was a ton of miscommunication. There were a few side-screen passes that were aimed at the line of scrimmage, but the WR just stood at his original spot.

    As for Luck. I’ll admit that my impression of him has gotten better, but I still don’t see anything special. IMO, he’s a late first-early 2nd rounder though I’m pretty sure with all the hype he’s getting that he’ll be in the top 5. I do agree with the others, he’s still a game manager though he is FAR better than what he was in the Stanford vs. UW game last year (but slightly worse than the 1st half of the UO vs. Stanford game). In general, his OL gives him time. His power RBs SETS UP the pass rather than the other way around. He takes a lot of low risk throws. And the few times where the UW defense was able to make Luck throw the 30+ yarder, it usually failed. It in part fails because of a lack of arm strength (floats a bit) but it’s nowhere as bad as Jimmy Clausen’s arm strength (dives down wobbly). His accuracy is good in the short range, ok in the intermediate, below average by NFL standards in the long range. Overall, his accuracy is good, but it’s definitely overhyped. It’s nowhere as good as Bradford or even Mark Sanchez two years ago. If Locker and Mallet are 1st rounders this year, Andrew Luck would also have the weakest arm strength of the 1st round QBs in the last 3 years. IMO, Luck’s arm strength grades out at dead NFL average (Bradford is a notch or two better).

    As for CBs, I’m of opinion that unless we’re somehow miraculously in the position for Prince or Patrick (the 2 top corners) that we look at QB. It’s the most important position and we’re at a point where we have to fill that void now. The only reason that I was in favor of delaying the pick last year was because I thought Clausen was definitely overrated and a 2nd rounder (right on that) and Bradford, though extremely accurate, was questionable in regards to his health (wrong on that though Bradford did bulk up about 10-20 lbs). Yes, you have to fill the inevitable void at QB, but if you’re doing it, get it right with the proper potential franchise QB (IMO, only Locker has that potential this year). The only other player that I would look at is probably AJ Green at WR. I.e. I’m in favor of the top 3 skills position players and then it’s QB for me.

    Alex

  8. Blake says:

    Who’s line got demolished worse this weekend? Hawks or Huskies? I LOVED the first play of the Hawks game. Spencer could hardly get his hands up before Kelly was in the backfield. Rough day for the wide receivers to. Definitely not as bad as Lynch and Pitts made them sound, but Butler had a drop, BMW had a touchdown drop, and Tate probably should have got his feet in on the sideline fade. BTW why are we throwing fades to 5’11″ Butler and Tate instead of 6’5″ BMW or John Carlson? I wouldn’t be surprised to hear Bryant’s career is over. Definitely torn ACL, possibly MCL and/or PCL. Terrible knee injury. Poor guy. Injury bug has bitten us bad opening up the door for the other NFC West teams.

    Matt played much better than the statline would show. Played it a little safe on some throws, but overall had nice accuracy and touch on a lot of downfield balls. Raiders DBs just outplayed our WRs on a lot of plays. Can’t wait to buy my neon green #10 jersey!

  9. matt says:

    Locker out this weekend with broken ribs. Apparently they’ve been fractured for the last couple weeks and a couple off those sacks this week against Stanford just worsened his condition. Wonder how this will be spun against him?

  10. akki says:

    I would agree that you can’t interpret much on Locker from the game. He made a couple of nice throws, and at least the first pick wasn’t his fault. But you’ll need positive interpretation of him every game from here on out, including the postseason, if he’s going to move back up boards. Every game you can’t get a good reading on Locker because of the lousy OL is just as bad as his missing a game due to injury, unfortunately.

    Luck is beginning to remind me a lot of Matt Ryan now. Ryan had a good but not elite arm, decent but not great mobility, good but not great accuracy. He was considered very accurate on the short stuff, pretty accurate on the intermediate stuff, and hit-and-miss on the deep passes. But a qb isn’t just a mad gunslinger (outside of Jeff George), and Ryan seemed to be rated at the top of the charts on all of the intangibles – command, audibling, reading the defense, poise under the rush. I’ll admit, I thought that Ryan had no business being such a high pick at the time because of his lack of elite physical traits or skills in any one area, but the Falcons are probably pretty happy they picked him that high. And, 3 years down the road, Ryan is still sometimes criticized as a game manager dependent on Michael Turner’s running to soften the defense, but hey, the team’s solid anyway. As for Luck, he has better mobility than Ryan, and lacks Ryan’s experience (the biggest worry to me), and might be pretty similar in other phases.

    Luck looped a number of intermediate and deep passes in the game, but why rifle a dart to an open receiver – just throw something that’s catchable in stride. First, he did throw some high velocity passes there (I remember a pass to Doug Baldwin while Luck was scrambling, for example). Second he seemed to know where all the open guys were, and they weren’t always the primary targets based on how he seemed to be scanning the field and calling pre-snap audibles. You have to at least give some credit for that.

    • Matt says:

      Here’s the biggest difference between Ryan and Luck….Ryan carried Boston College while Luck is already game managing @ Stanford.

      I honestly don’t mind game managers (though I wouldn’t draft one in the top 20), but what I do worry about a kid that never has to be THE guy to win a game. Not to mention, Luck will not receive half the time he already gets right now at Stanford, who many believe have the best O-line in the country (talking LT – RT, across the board).

      My biggest problem with Luck (He’s a good QB, don’t get me wrong), is that his life as a QB is about as easy as it gets for a college kid. Unbelievable O-line play and one of the stronger running games in the country (talking old school power running, not spread crap). One could argue the same for Sam Bradford at Oklahoma, but the difference is, Bradford made many throws a game that were just jaw dropping. In all honesty, I have yet to see a “great” throw by Luck against any sort of decent coverage.

      He does a lot of things well (at the college level) and has average NFL tools across the board (accuracy, arm strength, mobility) and certainly does not come across as an “alpha” type leader on his team (on field demeanor, sideline behavior). That doesn’t mean he’s not a leader, but I’m thinking about leading a bunch of NFL men, not Stanford student-athletes. I think he can be very successful in the NFL, but that would be him going to a team like the 9ers or Vikings which would allow him to hand the ball off and make safe dump off type throws. I see Luck as a Hasselbeck type without the fiery leadership. In all honesty, he reminds me a lot of Trent Edwards. Smart, athletic, not a risk taker. As I’ve said before, I’m not dying to get a Favre like risk taker, but at some point not taking risks makes a team very predictable which makes the life of a defense much easier.