Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
because they are the exact same people...right?
I just do not understand this line of thinking at all...cause it makes no sense whatsoever. Just because two guys go to the same school (and have had different HC's no less) doesnt mean they have any kind of similarities at the pro level...if that was the case, then every team in the NFL would be drafting Michigan or Cal or Tennesee QB's only.
In the same vein they would never ever draft from" Washington or LSU or Florida moving forward....and again with the "USC" Qb thing....they have more frickin QB's in the NFL than any other school...period. So in some sort of convoluted way of thinking, that means teams should avoid them?
Its beyond ridiculous.
|
I'm not trying to slag USC as a program. I think Carrol did a tremendous job of coaching his players and his program often made his offensive players look much more talented than they were. And if you don't think there's a tendency for certain schools to produce QBs that generally don't succeed at the NFL level, then I don't know what to say. There are some easy examples of this, such as Notre Dame (I realize Montana played at Notre Dame but look at the QBs to come out of there since), Florida (under Spurrier), Houston, and Cal (excluding Rodgers).
Of those three QBs in the NFL, how many of them have lived up to there draft position? I'm not saying Barkley is destined to fail because of this, just that history shows us that USC's skill position players tend to be a little overrated coming out of college. That being said, top 10 picks don't have the same risks associated with them that they used to so he could be worth a shot.
And yes, if LSU, Washington, Florida, etc. had three QBs that were recruited by the same coach and all produced results that were below what was expected of them, I would say the exact same thing.