Scources: Locker visiting Patriots

[Box_O_Rocks]

Or do you mean Rich Gannon?

If he gets his nose out of joint over it all. :snob:

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

Most likely a smoke screen, but you never know with BB and the draft.

Don't they sometimes bring in guys just to see how their evaluation process is working out too (though I imagine that is always the case with each prospect) in the years to follow.

 

[AzPatsFan]

At some point the Patriots will have to take a QB to groom behind Tom Brady.

The Patriots are well managed and saw how the 49ers extended their reign and faced the aging of Montana. They also surely saw how the Packers prepared for the passing of the Favre era.

The only question is when and who they select to groom.

 

[Snake Eyes]

At some point the Patriots will have to take a QB to groom behind Tom Brady.

The Patriots are well managed and saw how the 49ers extended their reign and faced the aging of Montana. They also surely saw how the Packers prepared for the passing of the Favre era.

The only question is when and who they select to groom.

Dane Locker!

 

[sg14]

Locker does have all the physical skills, (he does make some passes that make you go "Wow"( [and "Oh no"]
but even the local pundits are not pushing for the Seahhawks to pick him.

Great kid, but went 5 for 20 against Nebraska,,

Now if the Pats braintrust have some plan where he sits behind #12 and gets superior coaching, he could be a gem. But I would not know either way.

As far as the safety thing, I don't think you all be being serious, Nice Gannon mention by the way.

Now he could be a good TE/ Keith Byars role,,

At some point the Patriots will have to take a QB to groom behind Tom Brady.

The Patriots are well managed and saw how the 49ers extended their reign and faced the aging of Montana. They also surely saw how the Packers prepared for the passing of the Favre era.

The only question is when and who they select to groom.

 

[Thirdbasekid24]

Not to make any excuses, but I think most QB's would struggle behind a poor Tyrone Willingham recruited offensive line such as the Huskies. Being from the same town as Jake, I'll be a homer and say I'd love to see him on the Pats, but at pick 33, and assuming we've addressed the lines with the other 2 picks. That said I think he will be this years Tebow of the draft where somebody will trade back up to get him. I believe the saints may be getting some phone calls on draft day.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Not to make any excuses, but I think most QB's would struggle behind a poor Tyrone Willingham recruited offensive line such as the Huskies. Being from the same town as Jake, I'll be a homer and say I'd love to see him on the Pats, but at pick 33, and assuming we've addressed the lines with the other 2 picks. That said I think he will be this years Tebow of the draft where somebody will trade back up to get him. I believe the saints may be getting some phone calls on draft day.

I have reservations about Locker at quarterback, Willingham recruiting or not, but once he's in the laundry he gets the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Off The Grid]

At some point the Patriots will have to take a QB to groom behind Tom Brady.

The Patriots are well managed and saw how the 49ers extended their reign and faced the aging of Montana. They also surely saw how the Packers prepared for the passing of the Favre era.

The only question is when and who they select to groom.

My suggestion would be in the 2014 - 2015 range.

Favre turned 40 as he had that great year for the Vikings in 2009, and he's a degenerate.

Brady will be 34 in August, is a dedicated worker, and of course has stated his desire to play 10 more full years, of which he's played one.

He'll be 36 ~ Gods grant him lasting great health ~ when the 2014 Draft comes, and 37 when the 2014 season begins.

He won't be 40 until the 2017 season.

We could conceivably wait until that Spring's Draft to expend 1st or 2nd Round Capital on his successor.

MIND you: That wouldn't be my notion, but all this talk I've read about doing so this year astounds me.

I seriously doubt that it would take our coaching staff more than one year to get the new guy up to speed. Why, then, flush Draft Capital ~ and Salary Cap space ~ down the drain gratuitously, by hastening the move several years ahead of time? There's never been a seamless transition ~ emphatically including the ascensions of both Young and Rodgers ~ and we always make a point to have a Cassell or an Hoyer ready to step in and command at an high level in a pinch.

Meanwhile, I see no reason not to spend Late Round Capital on QB's with superior Diagnostics + Processing Speed.

His successor may very well come thence.

 

[Thirdbasekid24]

I have reservations about Locker at quarterback, Willingham recruiting or not, but once he's in the laundry he gets the benefit of the doubt.

Rightfully so, but having 2 seconds to make reads will hamper any QB's progression. In HS he ran the wing-t offense, which means he was throwing 4 or 5 times a game and relying on his feet to make plays. Not until 2 years ago did he start finally learning how to be a pro style QB, and again I don't think the oline gave him much help. He certainly is a project QB that will benefit from sitting like Aaron Rodgers, but if he's there at 33 and people aren't knocking down our doors for a trade I wouldn't be upset if we took him.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Rightfully so, but having 2 seconds to make reads will hamper any QB's progression. In HS he ran the wing-t offense, which means he was throwing 4 or 5 times a game and relying on his feet to make plays. Not until 2 years ago did he start finally learning how to be a pro style QB, and again I don't think the oline gave him much help. He certainly is a project QB that will benefit from sitting like Aaron Rodgers, but if he's there at 33 and people aren't knocking down our doors for a trade I wouldn't be upset if we took him.

NE drafted Chung with #34, essentially treating it as a first round pick. I'd be disappointed if they drafted a QB project with #33. Green Bay may have chosen to use a first round pick on Aaron Rogers with an aging Brett Favre in the barn, but I'd argue Brady is not as far along in his career as Favre, nor is he playing the retirement games Brett was just beginning at the time. Further, I'd argue Rogers was less of a project then Locker is today. Anytime mid-second and on I'd be fine, but #33 is a lovely big net waiting to scoop up a day one oversight or feed the Belichick trading legend.

 

[dryheat44]

Rightfully so, but having 2 seconds to make reads will hamper any QB's progression. In HS he ran the wing-t offense, which means he was throwing 4 or 5 times a game and relying on his feet to make plays. Not until 2 years ago did he start finally learning how to be a pro style QB, and again I don't think the oline gave him much help. He certainly is a project QB that will benefit from sitting like Aaron Rodgers, but if he's there at 33 and people aren't knocking down our doors for a trade I wouldn't be upset if we took him.

If he's there at #33 and we take him over guys like Ponder or Dalton, who we know can play Pro-Style, or Koepernick, whom we don't know that about but has a higher upside than Locker, I'll be extremely puzzled. I didn't get the whole Locker Love Fest last year, when he was projected to go #1 in this draft, and I still don't get it. He's honestly shown nothing as a QB except that he has a strong arm, and he's a fantastic athlete. At least Tebow had that whole WINNING! [size=-3](c)2011 Charles Sheen [/size] thing about him.

 

[VJCPatriot]

If he's there at #33 and we take him over guys like Ponder or Dalton, who we know can play Pro-Style, or Koepernick, whom we don't know that about but has a higher upside than Locker, I'll be extremely puzzled. I didn't get the whole Locker Love Fest last year, when he was projected to go #1 in this draft, and I still don't get it. He's honestly shown nothing as a QB except that he has a strong arm, and he's a fantastic athlete. At least Tebow had that whole WINNING! [size=-3](c)2011 Charles Sheen [/size] thing about him.

Wow. I agree with you. There are a couple of prospects I'd like to take a look at ahead of Locker. Kaepernick being one of them. Did you watch his clip on Sports Science? I know Kevin O'Connell was a failure, but it goes to show that the Pats do consider the mobile QB type as a possiblity to be 'the guy' after Brady hangs it up (which won't be anytime soon, but you should always be prepared).

Kaepernick's super accuracy examined on Sports Science.

 

[Thirdbasekid24]

Locker is very accurate on the run, its his pocket making decisions that have been subpar at times. That's something that should only improve as he gets more reps and is surrounded by better talent.

As for Tebow, there is a huge difference in talent between a team that was competing for national titles vs a team was struggling to win 1 game. Apples and oranges. I still think Locker will go in the first, I know Minnesota has been in contact with UW looking for information so wouldn't be surprised if he even went as high as 12. Don't think its the ideal situation for him, but I guess we will find out in 3 years.

YouTube - Washington Huskies upset USC - 16-13 (last 4 mins) 091909

 

[sg14]

Read a newspaper article today where Jim Mora Jr said the best place for Locker to land would be Phily, where Andy Reid could roll him out, and Locker could learn behind M Vick, but he thought Locker would go 10th or 12th in the draft.

No link, would have to look for it, read the article while in a small sub shop on the south side of Seattle. The BLT was good.

Locker is very accurate on the run, its his pocket making decisions that have been subpar at times. That's something that should only improve as he gets more reps and is surrounded by better talent.

As for Tebow, there is a huge difference in talent between a team that was competing for national titles vs a team was struggling to win 1 game. Apples and oranges. I still think Locker will go in the first, I know Minnesota has been in contact with UW looking for information so wouldn't be surprised if he even went as high as 12. Don't think its the ideal situation for him, but I guess we will find out in 3 years.

YouTube - Washington Huskies upset USC - 16-13 (last 4 mins) 091909

 

[Thirdbasekid24]

A little off topic, but with this recent article coming out about Pioli bringing in Weatherspoon last year to ask him about Aldon Smith, is it at all possible that Locker was brought in to question about a teammate coming out in the future, Chris Polk perhaps? Could also have been just to get some information on him if he gets drafted by the Dolphins or Bills.

 

[Off The Grid]

Read a newspaper article today where Jim Mora Jr said the best place for Locker to land would be Phily, where Andy Reid could roll him out, and Locker could learn behind M Vick, but he thought Locker would go 10th or 12th in the draft.

No link, would have to look for it, read the article while in a small sub shop on the south side of Seattle. The BLT was good.

On that subject, I'd just like to go on record as saying that I think Reid is making a GIGANTIC mistake.

He's trading the wrong Quarter Back.

Leaving morality matters completely out of it ~ that ship sailed when he signed Michael Vick in the first place ~ I think Vick's Ascension last year was one of the most amazing transformations I've ever seen: Truly, he evolved into a Quarter Back.

But I believe that the best true Field General in that locker room is Kevin Kolb.

And even though Kolb's several years younger ~ and in my mind, the better Quarter Back ~ I'll bet they could get a LOT more for Michael Vick in a trade.

Furthermore...I believe Vick's about to have a DISASTROUS Campaign.

He's grown immensely as a Quarter Back, yes...But now every DC in the league has Book on The New + Improved Michael Vick. I believe that an HUGE part of last year's success was because nobody knew how to defend him. Now that they do, I believe the worm is going to turn, and take a big BITE out'f'is @$$.