Big Blue Huddle

Regardless of some of you bashers, he's someone to give consideration to after the top two.

https://nfltraderumors.co/syracuse-qb-kyle-mccord-declares-for-2025-nfl-draft/

Which of our picks would you be willing to use on him?

Here's a pretty good scouting report

https://www.the33rdteam.com/kyle-mccord-2025-nfl-draft-scouting-report/

Here's another

https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Kyle-McCord-QB-OhioState#:~:text=Scouting%20Report%3A%20Summary&text=His%20decisiveness%20and%20ability%20to,to%20consistently%20move%20the%20chains.

Quote from: MightyGiants on January 10, 2025, 07:21:17 PMHere's a pretty good scouting report

https://www.the33rdteam.com/kyle-mccord-2025-nfl-draft-scouting-report/

Thanks.

So, according to these guys, most likely a day three-selected NFL backup.

Quote from: MightyGiants on January 10, 2025, 07:25:01 PMHere's another

https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Kyle-McCord-QB-OhioState#:~:text=Scouting%20Report%3A%20Summary&text=His%20decisiveness%20and%20ability%20to,to%20consistently%20move%20the%20chains.

This one seems more optimistic.

Quote from: Ed Vette on January 10, 2025, 06:15:28 PMRegardless of some of you bashers, he's someone to give consideration to after the top two.

https://nfltraderumors.co/syracuse-qb-kyle-mccord-declares-for-2025-nfl-draft/

Why is someone a "basher" if they're not high on a prospect? Is there not room for difference of opinion without demonizing the other side?

Between Ohio St. and Syracuse, I've likely seen 80%+ of McCord's starts. He's inconsistent, struggles with accuracy and placing balls in ideal spots for his receivers.

Anyone who watched his time at Ohio St. will tell you his numbers were helped substantially by having elite pass catchers like MHJ and Egbuka making plays on balls that were not well thrown. It's not unreasonable to expect him to struggle in the NFL, where windows are even tighter.

I'd be fine considering him in the 5th round if a QB isn't selected before then but don't see him worth more than that. Not sure if that makes me a basher.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 10, 2025, 07:36:02 PMThanks.

So, according to these guys, most likely a day three-selected NFL backup.

We need a competent back up.

Quote from: madbadger on January 10, 2025, 08:47:08 PMWe need a competent back up.

Is it better to use a mid round pick for that than to simply sign one? Using a mid-round pick (1) runs the risk you draft a Nassib or Lauletta, who isn't even backup-worthy, and (2) deprives you of the opportunity to draft a position player there who is more likely to add value or potentially pan out to being better than expected for the mid-rounds (higher probability of this with eg a linebacker or safety than a QB),

I get that a "competent" backup still costs money (say $6m-$9m), whereas a mid-round QB will be something in the order of $1mm. That is not lost on me. But I'm still not sure I like the relative economics, including the opportunity cost considerations, unless you genuinely believe the QB you're picking has a legit shot to be a quality starter at some point.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 11, 2025, 06:26:09 AMIs it better to use a mid round pick for that than to simply sign one? Using a mid-round pick (1) runs the risk you draft a Nassib or Lauletta, who isn't even backup-worthy, and (2) deprives of the opportunity to draft a position player there who is more likely to add value or potentially pan out to being better than expected for the mid-rounds (higher probability of this with eg a linebacker or safety than a QB)?

I get that a "competent" backup still costs money (say $6m-$9m), whereas a mid-round QB will be something in the order of $1mm. That is not lost on me. But I'm still not sure I like the relative economics, including the opportunity cost considerations, unless you genuinely believe the QB you're picking has a legit shot to be a quality starter at some point.

The theme I got from the reports (which explain the general low regard despite impressive stats) is that he is a limited athlete who lacks a strong arm.

That said, I have seen QBs with those limitations enjoy success in today's NFL.  The two I am thinking of are Bo Nix and Brock Purdy.   The suggestion from the reports is McCord's quick processing skills help him overcome his physical limitations.  That seems to be how both Nix and Purdy have found success.

That said, drafting a QB is always a crapshoot.  As a team, you can boost your chances by having good support.   As a prospect, you can boost your chances by having a strong arm or being athletic.  If you draft McCord with the hope that maybe he is your starter, you better protect him and give him some targets to throw to (while having a strong run game to take some of the pressure off), and you better have a coach that is more QB guru who can maximize a given QB's talents.

Quote from: MightyGiants on January 11, 2025, 07:28:25 AMThe theme I got from the reports (which explain the general low regard despite impressive stats) is that he is a limited athlete who lacks a strong arm.

That said, I have seen QBs with those limitations enjoy success in today's NFL.  The two I am thinking of are Bo Nix and Brock Purdy.   The suggestion from the reports is McCord's quick processing skills help him overcome his physical limitations.  That seems to be how both Nix and Purdy have found success.

That said, drafting a QB is always a crapshoot.  As a team, you can boost your chances by having good support.   As a prospect, you can boost your chances by having a strong arm or being athletic.  If you draft McCord with the hope that maybe he is your starter, you better protect him and give him some targets to throw to (while having a strong run game to take some of the pressure off), and you better have a coach that is more QB guru who can maximize a given QB's talents.

If I may...the concrete reasons I'm interested in McCord are his pre-snap recognition, quick processing skills to read through his progressions, and his quick release and accuracy. I learned this based on a comment made by Ben McAdoo and how arm strength was not at the top of his list in QB evaluation. I thought back to a remark that Phil Simms made many years ago when he auditioned for Walsh and how he was asked to demonstrate touch and accuracy. As you know BW eventually drafted Joe Montana who was branded as having a weak arm. As far as arm strength goes, those critics refer to velocity. McCord's deep passes are his forte. I think I mentioned to you that Bo Nix threw a TD pass last week that traveled 65 air yards, hitting his Receiver in stride in the Endzone. The intangible that I liked in Nix, and I see in McCord, is his ability to improve his game. That seems to escape some critics who double down on his time at Ohio State.

In my amateur opinion, he has plenty of arm strength, but needs to know his limitations at the next level. I don't know if he can curtail that gun-slinger mentality, but he's worth watching through the process. It's too early to predict where he will go off in the Draft, and anyone who declares that unequivocally at this juncture, knows him much better than I do it seems. 

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 11, 2025, 06:26:09 AMIs it better to use a mid round pick for that than to simply sign one? Using a mid-round pick (1) runs the risk you draft a Nassib or Lauletta, who isn't even backup-worthy, and (2) deprives you of the opportunity to draft a position player there who is more likely to add value or potentially pan out to being better than expected for the mid-rounds (higher probability of this with eg a linebacker or safety than a QB),

I get that a "competent" backup still costs money (say $6m-$9m), whereas a mid-round QB will be something in the order of $1mm. That is not lost on me. But I'm still not sure I like the relative economics, including the opportunity cost considerations, unless you genuinely believe the QB you're picking has a legit shot to be a quality starter at some point.

I have said previously that I believe we should follow the Packer model of drafting quarterbacks later in the draft and letting them develop out of the limelight. If they need them they have a good one if not they trade them for much more than they paid initially. Brunnell, Brooks, Flynn and Hassleback all come to mind. They also aren't shy about using a first round pick on a quarterback when they still have a Hall of Fame quarterback on the back side of their prime. Like most of the rest of the league our approach to the most important position on the field is moronic.

Quote from: DaveBrown74 on January 11, 2025, 06:26:09 AMIs it better to use a mid round pick for that than to simply sign one? Using a mid-round pick (1) runs the risk you draft a Nassib or Lauletta, who isn't even backup-worthy, and (2) deprives you of the opportunity to draft a position player there who is more likely to add value or potentially pan out to being better than expected for the mid-rounds (higher probability of this with eg a linebacker or safety than a QB),

I get that a "competent" backup still costs money (say $6m-$9m), whereas a mid-round QB will be something in the order of $1mm. That is not lost on me. But I'm still not sure I like the relative economics, including the opportunity cost considerations, unless you genuinely believe the QB you're picking has a legit shot to be a quality starter at some point.

Quote from: madbadger on January 10, 2025, 08:47:08 PMWe need a competent back up.

So we use a draft pick for a position that if he is "good" he wont likely get any playing time.  Given our need for good starters that just feels like a wasted pick.  Sign one off waiverS.

Quote from: Philosophers on January 11, 2025, 06:49:58 PMSo we use a draft pick for a position that if he is "good" he wont likely get any playing time.  Given our need for good starters that just feels like a wasted pick.  Sign one off waiverS.

That's my attitude as well. Too many other needs.

Quote from: Philosophers on January 11, 2025, 06:49:58 PMSo we use a draft pick for a position that if he is "good" he wont likely get any playing time.  Given our need for good starters that just feels like a wasted pick.  Sign one off waiverS.

Are you getting tired of watching our $hitty team suck because we don't have a good starter or a competent backup? Using a fourth or fifth round pick every four or five years isn't going to set our program back, and if it hits and we have a really good starter you trade him out for a higher pick than we spent on him. Would you prefer to waste that pick on a position player who most likely will never be more than a special teamer?