Kentucky QB Will Levis has 'cannon,' but Colts need to know he can limit mistakes

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

Fans might want to start warming up to Richardson.

If he's valuing what his coach says, then he's valuing Stroud immensely. Whenever Steichen talks about what he wants in a QB, it reads like a description of CJ Stroud.

[Oldcolt]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

If he's valuing what his coach says, then he's valuing Stroud immensely. Whenever Steichen talks about what he wants in a QB, it reads like a description of CJ Stroud.

Unless you actually know the guy this is bullshit. Even if you know him, whether he lives and breathes football after he is a millionaire is an unknown. All of these guys, to an extent, are gambles. Always has been and always will be. If folks could actually tell Brady wouldn't have been a 6th rounder and Mahomes would have gone #1. Hooker may turn out to be the franchise QB of this class. Don't give up the farm for any of these dudes

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

Unless you actually know the guy this is bullshit. Even if you know him, whether he lives and breathes football after he is a millionaire is an unknown. All of these guys, to an extent, are gambles. Always has been and always will be. If folks could actually tell Brady wouldn't have been a 6th rounder and Mahomes would have gone #1. Hooker may turn out to be the franchise QB of this class. Don't give up the farm for any of these dudes

They interview them for a reason, and it's to answer the questions you're posing here. Every indication is that CJ Stroud is impressing NFL teams in his interviews, unless something new has come out in the last 24 hours that runs contrary to every report prior to it. It's not an exact science, but good GMs are right more often than they're wrong.

[Oldcolt]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

They interview them for a reason, and it's to answer the questions you're posing here. Every indication is that CJ Stroud is impressing NFL teams in his interviews, unless something new has come out in the last 24 hours that runs contrary to every report prior to it. It's not an exact science, but good GMs are right more often than they're wrong.

I agree with everything you say except the last one. I think the record shows that it is very difficult to predict who will be a good QB and GMs miss more than 50% of the time.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

I agree with everything you say except the last one. I think the record shows that it is very difficult to predict who will be a good QB and GMs miss more than 50% of the time.

I said "good", not "all".

[Oldcolt]

So you define good as hitting on a QB most of the time? If Ballard (or anyone else) hits then they are good? If not they are not good? We just do not agree. I think it is luck most of the time and the draft proves it in my opinion.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

So you define good as hitting on a QB most of the time? If Ballard (or anyone else) hits then they are good? If not they are not good? We just do not agree. I think it is luck most of the time and the draft proves it in my opinion.

When did I say hitting on a QB most of the time? Most GMs get one shot at QB, maybe 2 if they're lucky. You either hit or miss. That has nothing to do with being right more often than not in the draft in general. Hitting on QB or not is the determining factor of whether you have a job as a GM, which is why risk taking is ill advised.