Comcast - PAC 12 - Bay Area (Channel 433),
Comcast - PAC 12 HD - Bay Area (Channel 823)
Comcast - PAC 12 - national (Channel 434)
DISH (channel 413)
Comcast in Bay Area - FSN games are on KICU (Channel 6 and 706)
FCP Pacific (channel 415)
Cal college QB vs. USC NFL QB -
12-18-2012, 01:51 PM
Seeing Sanchez burnout in NY made me think what's more likely to happen, Cal delivers a good college QB or USC delivers a good NFL QB? I'm biased, but I'm thinking it's got to be Cal, right? The current USC NFL QBs are horrible, and I doubt Barkley pans out. That should give us a couple of years to turn things around on our end.
I don't think NFL success is based on the school that the kid went to. Seems more dependent on the individual and his work ethic. Both schools have their share of excellent NFL players and NFL busts. Just like every other school. In that regard, I don't get the obsession.
I frankly care way more about Cal winning football games, which has certainly been a rare thing to witness these past 5 years. I also care way more about beating USC, which we will not have done in a decade once we play them next season.
Maybe my point was not very clear. I was comparing our QBs' performance in college vs. USC's QBs' performance in the NFL. Much like USC has had busts in the NFL, much of our QBs turned out to be busts while at Cal. My question was, who has a better chance of reversing that trend, Cal or USC?
Probably Cal, I think the bar is pretty low for us at the moment. Longshore, Ayoob, Riley... those were some brutal years.
As bad as the USC guys have been, at least they started for some period of time and a few continue to start. You may also be forgetting that Carson Palmer was pretty good for a while there.
Maybe my point was not very clear. I was comparing our QBs' performance in college vs. USC's QBs' performance in the NFL. Much like USC has had busts in the NFL, much of our QBs turned out to be busts while at Cal. My question was, who has a better chance of reversing that trend, Cal or USC?
Weird question, but I think it will even out for both programs in the end.
While I wanted to wipe the smug look off of Matt Barkley's face, I think he was a very good College QB and will be a very good NFL QB.
Meanwhile at Cal, based on potential, I think Dykes's system will produce very good College QBs who turn out to be very good NFL QBs as well....once they get over the "system" tag in the combines.
Likewise, USC's Wittek may be a stud in both College and NFL. USC is USC. They consistently get Talent no matter what naysayers may fantasize about.
Long story short, I say the trends for both schools will reverse immediately and then even out over the long run.
I'll take those "average" USC QBs who won in college and got them to bowl games.
Tell me about it! Aside from Rodgers, can anyone name a single USC starter they wouldn't take over every single QB in the Tedford era? Sanchez might motion to silence the crowd at away games, but he still won games.
at least Leinert, Sanchez, etc had a chance to prove their suckiness in the NFL. Longshore, Riley, Mansion, Bridgford etc all proved their suckiness before they even got a chance.
exactly. I don't really care what SC QB's do in the NFL, and though I enjoy Rodgers NFL dominance, its still a small interest compared to my Cal rooting agenda.
And in addition to the bowl games, etc. showing off a Heisman in Blue and Gold would be incredible...
If Johnny Manziel had chosen Cal and been an eligible QB this season, would Tedford have been stupid enough to play Maynard AGAIN simply because he was an experienced senior?
My guess is that Manziel would've spent the entire season picking pine splinters off his ass.
Probably Cal, I think the bar is pretty low for us at the moment. Longshore, Ayoob, Riley... those were some brutal years.
As bad as the USC guys have been, at least they started for some period of time and a few continue to start. You may also be forgetting that Carson Palmer was pretty good for a while there.
Maybe my point was not very clear. I was comparing our QBs' performance in college vs. USC's QBs' performance in the NFL. Much like USC has had busts in the NFL, much of our QBs turned out to be busts while at Cal. My question was, who has a better chance of reversing that trend, Cal or USC?
As I said, the success of an NFL QB is more determined by the work ethic and drive of the individual. So I don't see how USC has any control over 'reversing that trend.'
But I'll answer your question, anyway. The answer is Cal, not just because USC doesn't have control over what their QBs do in the NFL, but it's because Cal can control how their QBs do in college. We have the resources for an immediate turnaround in that regard, because 1) Tedford is no longer here, 2) Dykes has had success with his QBs wherever he has gone, and 3) Dykes will use his offensive talent to its absolute best to accommodate the QB.
Dykes has taken middling recruits and cranked out top offenses year-in and year-out. Tuitama and Foles are good examples, as his work with the likes of Cumbie and Harrell at TT. With Kline, Dykes can mold him into a top-performing QB NEXT season.
Linear Mode
