NFL draft 2010 - The Quarterbacks

The NFL draft is soon going to move into focus. Even now, people are speculating that the Redskins may take Jimmy Clausen as their next franchise QB. Tim Tebow remains almost unclassifiable, despite his record with Florida. Sam Bradford and Colt McCoy, who Tebow beat to the Heisman in 2007, are the other big name prospects entering the draft this year. I've been discussing this with friends for some time, so here's my take on the quarterbacks in the NFL draft 2010.

First of all, I think Shanahan is not one to buy into hype, and he likes a certain type of QB. Look at Cutler for example. He was fixated on him because he felt like he had the ability to make the kid great. He won't take Clausen, Bradford, Tebow or McCoy based purely on any kind of hype, or because he feels compelled to take a QB. Jason Campbell is not a no-hoper, and there is actually no pressure on Shanahan to select any QB in 2010.

The biggest issue is still firstly, that I don't believe any of the top four exhibit elite mental strength needed to be a franchise QB. That may change, and thankfully we get an opportunity to see more of them as time goes on. In this category I rate Bradford the highest. I like Tebow from an attitude perspective, but I'd be concerned about McCoy lacking true intelligence, and Clausen's failings with Notre Dame. That's not to say all of them can't change opinions in the next few months as we see them play and talk, especially at the combine and senior bowl.

Secondly, the physical issues that they all have are enough to make me wonder if any are really worth a first round pick, when you combine it with the mental aspects of their respective games.

Clausen has the best knowledge of pro system from college, but his fundamental technique will need an awful lot of work. He has a horrendous release that is excruciating to watch. Again you have to question his performances in college and whether he is in any way going to be a capable QB at the NFL level, especially when he suffers through any initial growing pains. My gut says no. I am staggered by the idea that people think Shanahan will draft a QB like that. People are making these predictions, but the realities of the situation will be fairly apparent come draft day. There's no way Shanahan pays a QB top 5 money unless they're completely sold on him, and there is currently zero evidence to suggest this is the case, or ever will be the case.

McCoy is one of those guys who is at his best when a play is broken, but he doesn't have the accuracy, arm strength, or experience of playing under centre. A second day pick in all likelihood. I could envisage him starting because of injury at some point in his career, but he's not going to be anyone's great hope for the future, and definitely does not have the mental agility to compensate for his lack of physical ability.

Tebow is just an enigma. I reckon he will go a round higher than he should (so the 2nd) purely because of who he is. It would be a total shambles if a team drafts him and expects to have the guy under centre within a year. I really like his attitude, it lends itself to adapting. I Would be massively suspicious about him declining the Senior Bowl. It's a great opportunity to work with NFL coaching staff, even if it is the Lions and Dolphins, and he has just turned it down flat. I'd hazard a guess, much like I did in December, that this is down to his realisation that he could well end up hurting his draft stock by exhibiting his lack of ability to run a pro offence and adapt his playing style.

The more I think about him the harder I find it to place him in the NFL. My instinct is to say someone like Cleveland, KC, St Louis etc would be a good fit because they're weak on offence, and he could be used dynamically. The problem I see with that theory is that the coaches who are there probably aren't building their team on the basis that they will always be bad. Take Cleveland, for example, and you can safely say that Mike Holmgren isn't looking for a gimmick to take the heat off Brady Quinn. He'll either believe in the QB or he'll go and find another one, but I don't see Tebow fitting that kind of team either way.

Someone will take him, I think that's the only given. Maybe Jacksonville in the second round. It's easier to place him there because of the recent rumours surrounding the team's future. It may be the team's only hope of galvanising support in the local area. I appreciate that it's the 'trendy pick', but I don't see any reason for a team to take him for footballing reasons. The Jags will likely get antsy for a QB if Bradford and Clausen are both gone at that point.

Which leads me to Sam Bradford himself. Durability is a slight concern after suffering a season ending shoulder injury. That's for medical staff to decide whether it has had an affect on his throwing ability, and for the purposes of analysing the guy at this point in time, let's assume it is not an issue. it's certainly something that coaches will want to see from him before risking a high pick. Of the four, he's the guy I would trust more. Bradford has a slightly lackadaisical attitude, but not to the point of being dumb or being unable to lead.

That would my big question though, if I was an interviewer: Is this guy going to inspire the players around him to play better football? That has to be the first and in some ways the only meaningful question you ask a QB prospect in the run up to the draft. I've said it before, but the physical gulf between QB's in the league is nowhere near as big as the mental one. You have guys who can make every throw, who have rocket arms, but it gets them nowhere in the league. Then you have smart guys like Chad Pennington who can compensate for any physical issues by being a true leader of men, a guy who has the intelligence to adapt his game to a situation.

There is no happy medium for a quarterback in this league. You have to believe if you're drafting a guy in the first few rounds, that he has the mental ability to lead his team to greatness. He needs confidence in his own ability, and the mental intelligence to diagnose plays as they happen. What sets apart 'great' QB's is that they naturally do this. They study the game until it is embedded in their brains, and the thought process about what is actually happening during any given play really is taking up a minimal amount of their decision-making process. That allows them to go through their progressions and concentrate on avoiding interceptions and mistakes.

The mentally fragile QB will take a sack because he has held onto the ball too long, and it's not in the Ben Roethlisberger way, it's in the panicked 'oh crap, what the hell is going on?' way. You see it quite often in guys who run backwards a lot. The true greats are feeling pressure, yeah, but they take the hits like anyone else - it's just after they've let go of the football. The point is not just avoiding pressure, but having the confidence and ability to know what is happening downfield and make a throw regardless of how close a defender is to a sack.

Anyway, I digress. None of the QB's in this year's draft particularly exhibit those qualities, but Bradford has the best all-round ability. I'd describe him as average-good on both mental and physical fronts. If I was a fan I'd take no issue with a team drafting him as a future starter, but I would be cautious about drafting him too high in the first round. if he's not the guy you really want, but you need a QB, you absolutely have to wait for a guy you have faith in. The NFL is littered with first round players who the coaching staff probably drafted more out of hope and need, than out of belief in the player. The killer is that if you're the Raiders and JaMarcus Russell is your pick, what happens in three years time? That's the cut off point for a first round QB in my eyes. That situation is repeated often by teams, purely because someone thought that 'any quarterback is better than no quarterback'.

There's a compelling argument for what Chicago have done with Jay Cuter, ie: trading away first round picks for a franchise QB who is proven in the league. The lottery of drafting in the first round means that if you have a chance to secure a player who you believe in and has shown that he can play, then you are far better off than gambling. Imagine if Chicago had played last year with Kyle Orton (who they don't believe in) and he had been average. The pressure would now be on to select one of these four, and yet none may be the guy they really want.

If I had to go out on a limb and predict where the top QB prospects will go in the draft, this is how it would go today:

Sam Bradford to go in the middle of the first, most likely to Buffalo, Seattle, or one of the teams with a new GM or coach that is looking for a guy to start afresh with. Jacksonville could be an option if they want to actually draft a player on ability. I don't think he'll last until the beginning of the second.

Jimmy Clausen to go at the beginning of the second round. St.Louis would probably take him out of need at that position. Again, a team with a recent coaching overhaul might throw a surprise in there and take him at the back of the first round by trading ahead of St. Louis. I wouldn't trade anything to draft him personally.

Tim Tebow to go to the Jaguars in round two. I think they would bite if there was nobody else they were sold on. Hell, they're probably right to do so. You can blow a second round pick like Miami did on Pat White, and he won't give you any extra sell-outs, whereas Tebow will do that for the Jags. There's a case to be made that even if he's a bust, they haven't really lost as long as they don't select him instead of a guy they really want - hey, if anything, you could say it's less of a gamble than drafting a guy to actually play football for you. The Jags don't currently have a second round pick, but they may well trade up to get him if they have neglected to take a QB earlier.

Colt McCoy I believe could be a 4th, perhaps 5th round pick. He'd be a project for a team with a veteran starter. Seattle would be a good fit in that respect, but a lot depends on what teams do earlier on.

Finally, this is an inexact science that will never be pinned down. Sam Bradford may be a complete bust and Colt McCoy may get a shot and be the next Tom Brady. My mindset is that you can coach physical issues to a certain extent, but character and mental ability is something that the guy has to have within him. You're looking for a winner, not a guy who has won.

Broncos the most likely team to play 49ers at Wembley

Well, it's good news for San Francisco fans in britain - the team looks well set to play in one of the Wembley games this year. Who will be their opponent? Well since Philadelphia are on the schedule, they are less likely than Dallas to go to Wembley on the basis of their lack of a Jerry Jones-style egocentric character, so my money is firmly on Denver.

New Orleans
Tampa Bay
Denver
Oakland
Arizona
St. Louis
Seattle
Philadelphia

As New Orleans and Tampa have already played in Europe, and the Raiders are a rival team. the only logical choices are the Eagles and Broncos. Of course, this is assuming the 49ers are the home team, as I believe they will be...

The Offensive Line NFL dictionary

Here are the unofficial additions to the NFL dictionary 2009. If you have any suggestions, you can send them on twitter

JaMarcus (Jah-mar-cuss)
To expend more energy by not trying, than you would by simply being competent at a great job.

"He's spent the last 3 hours JaMarcussing around rather than helping us moisturise these damn playboy bunnies - Be a dear and hold still could you?"

Cribbs (Kribs)
Army slang for a long range missile capable of destroying your much better equipped opponents, and which therefore must be used in every way but the manner intended.

"See, we were going to use the Cribbs to win our next war, but we decided that if we used it as ballast in a submarine, then sold it to Iran, we could buy more of these here zeppelins!"

Polian (Pole-ee-ann)
To refuse an attempt at a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity in favour of trying to accomplish something you have already done once.

"He only needed to win one more hand for a shot at $1m, but he Polianed it and went to play bingo again"

Welkered (Well-ker-d)
To vindicate a Polian.

"Turns out he had a pair of twos, he'd have been Welkered if he carried on. Still, looks like he's doing ok in the bingo..."

McDaniels (Mac-dan-ee-ells)
High pitched screech that eventually wears down all in earshot.

"Protestors have complained that the new runway will leave many local residents unable to sleep because of intolerable McDaniels emitting from aircraft taking off"

Zorn (Zorn)
To become disinterested in one's grisly demise.

"I think after we cut off his toes he just kind of Zorned out"

Cutler (Cut-ler)
Talented employee of organisation who is given poor tools to work with, but is expected to perform better than the previous incumbent.

"He might have been good in the kitchen, but lets see how he manages if we cut his arms off! I bet he's a Cutler, you can see it in his chin"

Favre (Far-v-re)
To cuckold your boss in public.

"You wouldn't think he could still Favre like that at his age. I don't think she's complaining though. Hey Brad, isn't that your wif... oh. Why are you sobbing?"

Houshing (Hoosh-ing)
The act of talking up your ability whilst simultaneously proving yourself incorrect.

"He reckons he's going to kick our ass at pool, but I think he's just houshing - look, he's just racked them up on the foosball table..."

Offensive Tackle (Off-en-sive Tack-el)
Speciality of the Oakland Raiders

"And that's now 4 offensive tackles for Zach Miller, all coming off JaMarcus Russell interceptions..."

Texans secure a winning season at last

Anyone who knows me will be aware of my deep-rooted love for the Chicago Bears, which began way back in what Alan Partridge's friend Bono would describe as 'the nineteen-eightieees'. My favourite player was actually Kevin Butler for many many years, which is slightly embarrassing, as it was only when I got to the age of 12 that I realised that having a kicker as your hero was not something you admitted.

Fast-forward 15 years and I'm still a Bears nut (as many a baffled girlfriend will testify, usually at 5am on a tuesday morning), but I have had a soft spot for the NFL's newest franchise, the Houston Texans, since their induction into the league. After seven seasons, it has finally become acceptable to admit this further bizarre affiliation to my inglorious NFL resumé.

The Houston Texans have a winning season.

The most important part of the whole equation will not be decided until the Baltimore Ravens, New York Jets, and Denver Broncos finish their games (the Texans best hopes are probably that the Broncos and Jets lose, although I have a strange feeling about Oakland today, maybe they can get an upset), but the likelihood is that the team will keep coach Gary Kubiak around for 2010, which will be good for continuity. It isn't good for the media commentators who aren't fans of his, but Kubiak has quietly overseen some solid drafts in Houston, and deserves more credit than he is getting.

Actually, on that point, the Texans have done pretty well in recent years even before Kubiak. The Mario Williams pick is a feather in the cap of former G.M. Charlie Casserly, and with starters DeMeco Ryans, Owen Daniels, Zac Diles, Steve Slaton, Jacoby Jones all coming in recent years, the team has done well. This year LB Brian Cushing and DE Connor Barwin have also shown they will be starters in the league.

Perhaps the only disappointments have been in the linemen and in the secondary. The team lacks a bruising DT to compliment Amobi Akoye, and some of the OT's drafted have looked slightly out of their depth at times. Patience may be the best virtue, but it will again be a draft where the team invests in defensive backs.

For now though, the Texans will be hoping they can cap the team's first winning season with their first trip to the postseason.

Wide-Right

Wide-Right is being renamed as 'The Offensive Line'.

As you may or may not be aware, the domain was essentially car-jacked from under my nose (well, it was 'virtually' car-jacked, but you get the idea) and is currently being used as an advert for penis enlargement, or possibly for unspecified 'meds'. Either way, it's impractical for me to continue with the wide-right banner and website. so the only alternative is a complete re-brand, which fits quite well with my ideas for the future.

I'm going to develop this site for the next six months or so, and get a good groundwork in place for September, when I intend to commit a lot of time to it. I'm also headed to the U.S in June for four months, which will be an experience if nothing else.

So keep an eye on things. I'm hooking this up to twitter, where you can follow me, and I'll be trying to make the whole thing as easy to read as possible. Any suggestions, just drop me a tweet at www.twitter.com/ShaunLowrie

Shaun

Michael Vick: What next? (part one)

Another week, another talented Quarterback who's status is up in the air to talk about.

Michael Vick, jailed for his part in a Dogfighting ring in December 2007, will be released from prison this week, and the media frenzy is already starting. Will Vick return to the NFL? The answer is out of his hands, but if Roger Goodell approves his reinstatement before the 2009 season begins, could Vick land on a roster? I believe that Vick has two problems, so I'll address them separately.

Should Mike Vick be reinstated to the NFL?

Vick's release is merely the first step on his path to redemption. Of course, he will first and foremost concentrate on getting his personal life in order, the time will come in the next few months where Vick appeals to commissioner Roger Goodell in an effort to seek employment in the National Football league once more.

There are those who believe that Vick is not deserving of reinstatement, that his callous cruelty to animals and premeditated approach to the execution of those dogs unfit to fight shows a character that is not capable of being reformed. As a dog owner, I can relate to that point of view, but I also think it shows rank hypocrisy. We all make mistakes. Some are worse than others, and some reveal parts of our character that people will not forget in a hurry. Michael Vick will live with the stigma of his actions for the rest of his life. There will likely not be a Ray Lewis-esque Superbowl victory that somehow erases people's feeling towards him. He is guilty, and there can be no argument that what Michael Vick did showed a worrying side to a player who was a role model to millions.

Unfortunately, there are many questions regarding the wider issue of giving a criminal a second chance that I really don't intend to delve into here. Every case is different, and there is no right answer that will somehow uniformly cover all eventualities.

But Michael Vick deserves his chance, and here's why: For starters, he has served his time. He committed a crime and was punished heavily for it. He has lost his entire fortune, his freedom, and ultimately it could have cost him the chance to maintain his way of life. Is that not ample punishment? Murderers have got away with less, and whilst I would never condone or justify Vick's actions, we need to put this into perspective and realise that Vick deserves contempt, but also he needs our help to overcome this.

The partisan nature of football means that many of us were quietly satisfied with Vick's fall from grace. Watching a sportsman lose his personal wealth is engrossing, but when the dust settles, there is another human being under the uniform. What good would it do society in general, to hang Vick out to dry and deny him the chance to earn a living? We're talking about a guy who doesn't have anything else to fall back on, and if anything, I'd say that treating him as a pariah is more likely to send him back toward the people who instigated his downfall. Far better, I think, to give him the chance to repay his creditors, to get his life back on track. He will never get another $130m contract, and indeed, as I'm about to point out, his problems off the field may not be his only issue as regards his personal income.

But that comes with the territory of playing in the NFL. Vick knows what he has done wrong. Even if he doesn't believe what he did was wrong (there is no way of quantifying remorse, you know), he is now fully aware that wider society will not tolerate dogfighting, and I'd class him as 'highly unlikely' to get involved in anything that will jeopardise his NFL career again.

So my appeal to Roger Goodell would be 'Give Mike Vick another chance'. If we turn our back on Vick, we will merely be doing it out of misplaced moral righteousness, and if he were then to go back to his old ways, it would be us who were to blame as much as Vick.

The NFL can succeed in Europe

This is part two of a two part series examining the NFL's attempt to expand into Europe. For part one, click here.

Whilst the tone of my earlier article was somewhat negative, it wasn't intended as such, and it doesn't mean I think the league can't succeed at all over here.

It can, but it needs a long-term strategy that starts at the bottom, rather than getting another short-term gain as we experienced in the 1980's. These gains will quickly be lost again if the league is arrogant enough to believe in the 'product' myth. There is already a British league system, the BAFL (See Right), but it needs significant help to compliment the live experience of NFL regular season games.

If I was Roger Goodell, here's what my plan would be to promote the sport in the UK:

Step One:

Step one is all about education. A lot of the kids we're trying to get into the sport won't have access to the laws of the game, so it's important that they learn at least the basic rules in order that they feel comfortable stepping onto a field. The most obvious solution is the way a lot of kids learn the game - with Computer games such as the Madden NFL series. These games are valuable aids to a sport that can be complex and frustrating to get to grips with if you have no prior knowledge of it.

It's not just the young people who need this knowledge though. If they're to be taught the game, they need teachers. There are already enough people in the UK who know the rules well enough that they could umpire games to a decent level, and to take advantage of that commodity, they should be fast-tracked where possible into refereeing courses around the country. For a lot of people, this will give them a chance to be involved in the sport even if they would usually be unable to take part as a player.

Step Two:

The most important foundation to lay, is that of a grass-roots American Football infrastructure that allows youngsters to experience the game on both recreational and competitive levels. There are already adult teams across the UK that struggle for funding and stadia. They deserve to benefit more than anyone from this new found interest, yet as it stands, the league seems intent on ignoring them.

To do this, the most important purchases are the equipment to allow kids to learn the game from a young age, and with minimal financial outlay. Obviously, pads, helmets, and balls are the items that aren't widely available to most parents in the UK. That needs to change, and to do so, it will take money.

It will also need a youth league system. Ideally, this would take place in schools, who should in many cases have Rugby goalposts that can easily substitute for the real thing with almost no noticeable difference. There also needs to be substantial investment in the organisational tools that are needed to make the game as easy to run as possible. Chains, some way of marking ground quickly, and referee equipment would all be essential, and ideally, rulebooks that allow both teachers and students to pick up the game quickly.

Step Three:

Invest in the University and Club sides that already exist in the UK. These clubs are generally poorly funded, and most competitors are forced to buy their own equipment just to have any chance of playing. There is little or no awareness of these teams in the outside world, which means that new recruits are hard to come by, and most teams are far from guaranteed a full quotient of players for each game. That needs to change, and the only way to do that is with 'proper' investment in the existing structures.

For starters, the University teams should be given free equipment to make it easy for them to practice and play games on a regular basis. This would, in many cases, lead to them becoming a popular alternative to soccer, especially as it caters to players of almost every size, and has large squads that require a multitude of different skill sets.

The amateur game suffers from the same maladies, but the BAFL's (British American Football League) primary problem is simply in a lack of infrastructure to play games. Unlike the university or school sides, they do not have ready access to grounds, officials, or players to allow for the league to function properly. Being without a major sponsor for some time now has compounded the problem, and a semi-farcical lack of financial stability makes it almost impossible for clubs, players, and staff to commit to the game for anything more than one season at a time.

To combat this, teams need assurances as far as stadium rental, transport, and equipment are concerned. These issues prevent the league from growing beyond it's current system, which currently is only able to financially support five teams in the top tier. Once there is a healthier level of competition, it will be much easier for the BAFL to attract sponsorship. In the short-medium term though, the league needs to be prepared to invest money without guarantee of renumeration if it is to help the game itself grow at grass roots level.

Step Four:

The final challenge is to get the game on TV for as many people as is humanly possible every Sunday.

Whilst I and many others subscribe to Sky, who currently hold the broadcasting rights to all Sunday afternoon games, there are millions who do not. These people are denied the chance to watch the game at a reasonable hour simply because of the current TV deals that neglect terrestrial viewers. Even Channel 5, the terrestrial home of the NFL for almost a decade, have announced that they can no longer support broadcasting Monday Night Football, because the game is concurrently live on Sky. What kind of system allows a broadcaster to monopolise and hinder the sport's growth in such a way?

The NFL needs to be back where it belongs: On Channel 4 or the BBC at 6pm on a Sunday evening. This would, I can guarantee, have a massive impact on viewing figures and levels of interest in the sport at every level. Remember that the 'glory days' of the NFL were on Channel Four in the 80's, a terrestrial broadcaster. Whilst it can be argued that Sky has enough subscribers to justify the contract, it can't tick the one box that should be essential to the league: 'Is it available for every person in the country?' While the answer is no, the league should look to at least take one game per weekend and put it on terrestrial Sunday evening TV in the UK.

In theory, the aim should be that within ten years, the league would have an infrastructure in place that allowed University and Pro teams in England to compete on a level that justified being on TV during the NFL off-season. Although this is a long way off, it has to be the aim of the NFL if it wants it's own professional game to be anything more than a passing fad every twenty years. Nothing will replace the NFL, but a thriving British College and Amateur game would be the best way of promoting the sport amongst young and old alike.

Now all we need is somebody to listen.