The thing about trying to find the "next Josh Allen" is you actually have to try. If they think Levis is basically traits and raw potential and think they can turn him into a superstar I don't really see a problem. They already got a top 10 QB out of the Wilson trade so this top 5 pick is basically house money.
Whatever happened to drafting the best player available? I know the QB position is special, and worthy of taking risks, but you didn't convince me to take Levis. If we do, I will fall in line, but until then, I am skeptical.
Great analysis. My hope is that free agency removes the leading teams that keep being connected to QBs in the draft. I hope you are right about there being less excitement about these QBs. All have some pretty profound limitations. I think Las Vegas signs a QB. I'm not sure that Houston thinks it's time to draft a QB in the 1st round at pick 2, a QB doesn't solve their issues and a failure gets everyone fired. I could see them taking Will Anderson. I think Indy takes a QB, and I think whoever picks at #1 takes a QB, potentially even Chicago. So I've got two QB off the board before we pick. I don't see Carolina taking a development QB, so them signing Jimmy Garroppolo makes a lot of sense to me. Detroit may be happy with Goff, but I wouldn't rule out them taking a development QB. Atlanta needs a QB but they could find one in free agency. Green Bay and Tampa Bay, those are the teams I could see moving up to draft a QB in the top 10, but I don't think they have the resources to get it done for #1 or even maybe the top 10, they may sit and hope for a fall, maybe trade up ahead of Houston at 12. If Houston doesn't take a QB, there probably won't be much trade market for Arizona. They'll have to take their favourite defensive player, and I don't see why people are only talking about EDGE for them, they need CB too. What this leaves me with is if we want a 1st round QB, we probably have to take them at 5 or hope that the Raiders want to trade up for a defensive player and Detroit is happy with Goff. If I can trade down to the Raiders and target Levis or Richardson, that's probably the ideal spot and resource allocation. It's also a good spot for a 2nd trade down with GB or TB. Either way, I bring back Drew Lock, but not Geno. I think Geno will make his money.
Also Indy loves Bryce Young. The question for them is whether they think he goes #1 or #2, if they think he'll be there at 4, they don't need to trade. If they trade up to #1, or #2 (more likely, I think), then there is likely to be only one QB taken before we pick.
We'll agree to disagree on 'science being dominated by special interests'. There is 'science' which is subject to scientific methods and challenged by peer review and verifiable replication, and there is peudo-science put forth by special interests 'pretending' to be actual science.
Until you do a deep dive and understand the importance of things like relative risk (95% effective!) and absolute risk, correlations and inverse correlations, p-values, weak & strong end points, gatekeeping, data adjustment, homegenization, teleconnections, etc. when (if) you actually read a study you have no idea if you're reading is correct. I've lost count how many times the data say one thing but the conclusion of a study says something entirely different. Now maybe you're one of the 1% of people who get this stuff but if you're not you're taking it on faith and likely agreeing with the studies and researchers whose conclusions agree with a position you already hold.
Kenneth's article is actually how the scientific method should work. You form an hypothesis (Will Levis should not be a top draft pick) and then you run studies not trying to show that your hypothesis is right but that the hypothesis is wrong. If the outcome of your experiment contradicts your hypothesis then the hypothesis is likely incorrect and should be abandoned. You can never prove something to be correct, you can only prove it to be wrong. Now some things can be tested so many times that they're assumed to be correct.
I have no expectation I'll ever change your mind on any belief you hold to be true because it's impossible to change a mind that isn't open to change. That's why I try hard to have an open mind because I'd much rather be shown to be wrong than continue to hold beliefs that aren't true.
I just ran across this post and am posting it because it's so apropos to this conversation. We are lied to constantly and hate the idea that I spent my 1st 4 years on this planet unequipped to know it.
It's not politics, it's science and how it's affected by bias... which was the topic of the article. The fact that people now confuse science and politics just show how off target science has strayed.
The last thing I'm going to do is disrespect Kenneth by dragging any of his posts down by talking about politics in the comment section but science shouldn't be so polarizing.
Great premise for an article and I appreciate the links to film reviews.
I feel better about the world not immediately ending if the Hawks pick Levis at #5, but I also feel conformation in feeling a little bit nauseous when I think about it. It's a huge risk because there is no middle ground with a QB pick at #5. He's either your new franchise QB for the next 3-5 years or a complete waste of the best draft pick you've had in a decade.
Pete and John don't seem shy about sharing their interest in picking a QB early and I think it's very interesting to see how they're playing this game. They are putting Geno on notice, but also telling the entire league that if you covet Levis or Richardson you better pay up to come get him. Their interest in a rookie QB could be legit, but it could be just for show, and it's in their best interest to show a lot of interest. Interesting!
I have been thinking that Seattle would draft Levis at 5 for some time now. As far as athletic ability, he has everything that John Schneider looks for in a quarterback. Size, arm strength, mobility, toughness and character are all plus traits for Levis. Timing and accuracy can be coached and it seems that Levis has a tremendous work ethic and a desire to be better. A great QB has to be a great leader and everyone around him says that he checks that box easily. If he is available at 5 and the Seahawks draft him, we should all run around the room sans pants because if John Schneider and company think he is worthy of a #5 pick, who are we to say otherwise?
I’m not so sure that timing and accuracy can be coached. Much of that comes down to how quickly the QB can process the information on the field, and in the end that’s genetic, Balance is a factor, too, and that can’t necessarily be taught.
Timing and accuracy most definitely can be coached. Athletes train to become more proficient in all sports. The one that really stands out is skeet shooting, although athletes drill to become more accurate and get their timing down in baseball, basketball, badminton, bowling, barrel racing, etc.(and those are just some of the the "B" sports). Learning to read the defense and more quickly process the information takes hard work, dedication and good coaching. And I'm sure genetics plays its part as well.
Yeah, I could Seattle talking themselves into it, although 5 is so high and they've said they wouldn't force anything. Would have to assume that if Levis is the pick, they don't think they're reaching, which would be interesting.
The #5 pick feels awfully rich to use on a guy who isn't a sure thing. But in this class, as you point out, a sure thing QB would be gone long before 5.
I'm not a Levis fan but I have probably not been fair to him. Seahawks Draft Blog is part of the reason. Rob banged his drum last year and I didn't see it. This season I tried to watch more of his games, and his play on Saturday's just didn't wow me. I wrote as much and my comment was removed. Instead of shrugging my shoulders and moving on, I doubled down. I began to watch Kentucky games looking for reasons that "this guy sucks." I am not a football talent evaluator and probably don't spend 5% of the time watching that Rob does. I should really just keep my favorites -or at least my least favorites -to myself and just see where they go and how they turn out. For every guy I'm right on, there are more I'm wrong on. I don't understand how anyone expected Josh Allen to amount to the player he's become. I have no idea if Kancey's arm length is going to be a problem at the next level. I'm not even sure I understand what makes me "like" watching a player other than feeling like they make plays. But I suppose if a GM were being honest, there's a lot of guesswork involved in their projections just like ours. And it's the offseason so what else are we supposed to talk about? But college player evaluations are certainly not a subject that casual fans of football should be getting defensive about or taking opposing views personally over. And I've been teetering on the edge of doing so. Top 10 picks couldn't wash out of the league and late rounders couldn't turn into stars if this were science.
Here’s why I say that the draft is akin to projecting how AA baseball players will perform in the major leagues. Bear with me!
Georgia could play the Houston Texans once a week from now until hell freezes over and they won’t come close to beating them. Every now and then they might be able boast that they made it a game until the middle of the second quarter, but that’s about it. The Texans may be a bad NFL team, but they are still bigger, faster, more athletic, more experienced, and more sophisticated than Georgia.
On the other hand, a good AAA baseball team playing ten games a bad major league team probably has enough major-league level pitching and positional talent--even if it’s still developing--to win one or two times. The best AA team, on the other hand, gets crushed.
From there, I make the leap that NCAA Div 1 is roughly equal to AA baseball. And GMs have to figure who can play in the NFL. So, you’re absolutely right: The draft is in many ways a crap shoot.
Because there's a low probability that any jump off the page "wow" prospects will be at 5, that leads me to believe trading or a QB could be their final call.
I’ve written this before, but what the heck. A team can buy every argument that Levis fans make—poor coaching, bad scheme, injuries, lesser talent to work with—and still believe that a top 5 draft pick should show more. When you go up against the equivalent of AA baseball and still leave questions about your accuracy and decision-making, it’s a problem. And, yes, it is reasonable to conclude that Bryce Young or Trevor Lawrence or Joe Burrow would have done better in the same situation.
It surprises me that any draft analyst couldn't see that Bryce Young would've done better at Kentucky, but if we all saw things the same there wouldn't be any point for discussion. Or a draft! It's interesting.
Staton is adamant that no one else could have done better. If that’s the take, though, then Levis is at least as good as any other QB in the draft. He also thinks that Young will fall because of size concerns. Well, I hope he’s right!
Maybe it's the pressure to find a franchise QB, maybe it's the unique position that Seattle is in this year, but it seems like Rob's off on a different path this year. I wish him well.
At a time when science is so often 'denied', it is refreshing to see good science in your approach. The "null hypotheses"... make a hypotheses, then strive to prove it wrong.
I'm a home builder and 15 years ago every expert in my field said prices would keep going up, it wasn't a bubble. I thought that was nonsense and took a deep dive into what the few people who thought it was a bubble were saying and they made sense so it made me wonder if some of my long held beliefs in other areas might be based upon a weak foundation.
My studies led me to look into science, first it was nutrition and health and then global warming. As someone who never had questioned the "experts" up to that point it was a real eye opener when I allowed myself to give the other side a chance. It's not easy realizing you've been a chump but once you see it there's no going back. I've learned that science is dominated by special interests... either monied interests or people wanting power or in the case of manmade global warming by people who want save the world. If you're on a holy grail to save the world it's the rare person who will ever question their underlying beliefs. As Ken mentioned, the confirmation bias in science these days is off the charts. The avoidance of cognitive dissonance is also huge.
Anyhow, my default response to pretty much any sensational claim made nowadays is "I don't frickin' believe you" but I do keep an open mind and am willing to change my mind, like I just did with Will Levis. If the Hawks draft Levis I'm gonna be good with it because JT O-Sullivan's video showed some good stuff.
Kenneth, this is the type of piece that keeps me around. Recognizing your own bias and trying to prove yourself wrong? Brilliant stuff.
Levis is appealing to me mostly because of the man he seems to be. While he is more mature from an age standpoint, he also acts like a pro from every interview and statement I've seen. I'd argue the reason QBs succeed or fail more often than not comes down to these things. Example: I believe if Zach Wilson were a better leader, he might still be the starter. Instead, he lost the locker room to Mike White is basically unstartable.
When we look at the best QBs to be selected in recent years, the ones who have succeeded tend to have great personalities. Josh Allen hasn't succeeded cause he was great at football coming into the league, but because he worked at it and was able to improve. Patrick Mahomes wasn't particularly great at football either. Major draftniks didn't even have him in rd 1. Yet the man he is and the situation he went to allowed for development.
No one can argue Levis is a great football player today. He's not. But what you can argue is that he has every intangible you look for. He led a Kentucky team this year that probably should have gone 3-9 or something. He took a beating and kept battling. And every word out of the program is that he's beloved. What does all this add up to?
In a normal year, I think Levis might go late top 10 or in the Jordan Love range. But this is not a normal year. This class is very weak at the top. Because of that, I believe a player like Levis will go earlier than he maybe should. If it was the Hawks that take him? I'll be content knowing we at least bet on a guy with crazy upside and great character.
Are we sure Penn State didn't pick the correct QB? Just looking at their numbers, they are both pretty similar. The big difference seems to be their arms and their size. Clifford's decision making seems to be better as well. And Clifford isn't likely to be drafted, so it's going to be physical projection and a prayer someone can teach Levis what he needs to take the next steps to greatness. I don't really see Levis as a first rounder. Could he be made into a really good QB? Sure. Do you really want to gamble with the #5 pick to do so? Not me. But I'm sure some awful franchise will wishcast their way into picking him way earlier than the talent says they should.
Great article and thanks for doing the research. You have made me a little lazy because I look forward to reading your articles every day. Sounds like he's a good guy and a competitor but a 1st rounder? I love the deeper insight to the players and getting to know them better and because of that, I do wish him success.
I wouldn’t want the Hawks to draft any player in the early rounds with so many fundamentals questions, regardless of what position he plays. I’ve never watched this kid play but if his accuracy is one of his weaknesses then he wouldn’t be one of my draft picks for QB. Can he catch and block? Maybe TE, if he’s willing to switch positions.
Unfortunately, my friend, there are probably only two or three guys in this class without fundamental questions. Bijan Robinson, and Will Anderson. Maybe Michael Mayer. If you would like, I'd be happy to run down the various major questions about every top prospect. However, it is very important to note that sure thing QBs are rare, and it's even rarer they last past the 1st pick. If you want to pick a prospect at 5, 20, or any other spot in the 1st round, I'm afraid you'll have to accept the risks and major questions.
You’re right. My response to the possibility of taking Will Levis in the first round was hastily worded. I agree that no one enters the League without fundamental questions.
However, for me, draft a QB with accuracy issues, no thanks. Draft a WR that can’t catch, no thanks. Draft a running back with a timed 40 of 5.00, no thanks.
If Levis is the 3rd best QB on the draft board for this year, then maybe there’s only 2 worth drafting.
Sorry my friend, but im going to take issue with the characterization of "accuracy issues". This is sort of like saying that a person is ill. Ok, great. But there are thousands of illnesses with a variety of symptoms and causes. A cold can be cured, MS, not as much. Saying a player has accuracy issues is the same. There are many, many reasons why a QB may be inaccurate.
Supposed accuracy issues can be fixable, or irreparable. If it's a throwing motion issue? Good luck. That's difficult to change. Ask Tebow. If it's an issue of poor receiving talent, lackluster playcalling, terrible oline, or myriad of injuries, these things can be dealt with. Don't forget, Mahomes had accuracy issues in college. Allen had accuracy issues in college, as did Joe Burrow his first year as a starter. Jalen Hurts went from being a guy with no NFL future due to his lack of arm talent, to a stud in his third year. Guys get better and learn.
The point I'm getting at is that characterizing Levis or Richardson for that matter as having accuracy issues is not helpful for this discourse. It lacks the nuance necessary when judging the future of a young man about to be handed millions of dollars. Sorry if that came off as condescending, I don't mean it to be.
Absolutely this. Levis had an absolutely terrible Oline in front of him. He was sacked 37 times in 11 games. This has to be a strong contributor to his "accuracy issues". He still managed a completion % >65%
Ammendment. If Bryce Young weighs in over 200 lbs as he's claimed he will, I will add him to the list of guys without major questions. His arm is nothing special, but he's a stellar QB.
See, this is why we need to keep spreading Seaside Joe to as many people as possible. A fully honest article where each point (point, not opinion) is then answered with an example. Self aware, in depth, quality article. - yet again!
Still hasn't sold me on Levis ahead of Day 2, but has made me think a little differently about his college stats (not that it makes up for the questionable on field game tape, and if he can step up two or three levels to be a genuine Superbowl leading QB).
The "good at football" question is the deal-breaker I would think. And, ok, Penn State may have been confused about how to run its offense and Levis might have paid the price for that, but if he was really *that good* he would have beaten out his competition there.
One of the reasons I like JJ McCarthy at MICH (he will be talked about a lot next year) is that he played a bit as a true freshman and beat out his competition, Cade McNamara (since transferred), to start as a junior.
To me, Levis just isn't a Rd 1 prospect never mind top 5, but that opinion plus $5 gets you something something at Starbucks.
The thing about trying to find the "next Josh Allen" is you actually have to try. If they think Levis is basically traits and raw potential and think they can turn him into a superstar I don't really see a problem. They already got a top 10 QB out of the Wilson trade so this top 5 pick is basically house money.
Hooker is starting to interest me. Is late second too late or too early or is it perfect porridge?
Whatever happened to drafting the best player available? I know the QB position is special, and worthy of taking risks, but you didn't convince me to take Levis. If we do, I will fall in line, but until then, I am skeptical.
Great analysis. My hope is that free agency removes the leading teams that keep being connected to QBs in the draft. I hope you are right about there being less excitement about these QBs. All have some pretty profound limitations. I think Las Vegas signs a QB. I'm not sure that Houston thinks it's time to draft a QB in the 1st round at pick 2, a QB doesn't solve their issues and a failure gets everyone fired. I could see them taking Will Anderson. I think Indy takes a QB, and I think whoever picks at #1 takes a QB, potentially even Chicago. So I've got two QB off the board before we pick. I don't see Carolina taking a development QB, so them signing Jimmy Garroppolo makes a lot of sense to me. Detroit may be happy with Goff, but I wouldn't rule out them taking a development QB. Atlanta needs a QB but they could find one in free agency. Green Bay and Tampa Bay, those are the teams I could see moving up to draft a QB in the top 10, but I don't think they have the resources to get it done for #1 or even maybe the top 10, they may sit and hope for a fall, maybe trade up ahead of Houston at 12. If Houston doesn't take a QB, there probably won't be much trade market for Arizona. They'll have to take their favourite defensive player, and I don't see why people are only talking about EDGE for them, they need CB too. What this leaves me with is if we want a 1st round QB, we probably have to take them at 5 or hope that the Raiders want to trade up for a defensive player and Detroit is happy with Goff. If I can trade down to the Raiders and target Levis or Richardson, that's probably the ideal spot and resource allocation. It's also a good spot for a 2nd trade down with GB or TB. Either way, I bring back Drew Lock, but not Geno. I think Geno will make his money.
Thanks GM!
Also Indy loves Bryce Young. The question for them is whether they think he goes #1 or #2, if they think he'll be there at 4, they don't need to trade. If they trade up to #1, or #2 (more likely, I think), then there is likely to be only one QB taken before we pick.
My take on Carolina differs from yours. Indy could effectively block them out of the top four with a trade that includes swapping picks with Arizona.
Carolina is now advertising that they want to get a development QB, so your take looks more likely to be right.
We'll agree to disagree on 'science being dominated by special interests'. There is 'science' which is subject to scientific methods and challenged by peer review and verifiable replication, and there is peudo-science put forth by special interests 'pretending' to be actual science.
I don't know what this is in reference to or what it means! (edit: i scrolled down and saw that this was in reference to)
I agree... but not in the way you think.
Until you do a deep dive and understand the importance of things like relative risk (95% effective!) and absolute risk, correlations and inverse correlations, p-values, weak & strong end points, gatekeeping, data adjustment, homegenization, teleconnections, etc. when (if) you actually read a study you have no idea if you're reading is correct. I've lost count how many times the data say one thing but the conclusion of a study says something entirely different. Now maybe you're one of the 1% of people who get this stuff but if you're not you're taking it on faith and likely agreeing with the studies and researchers whose conclusions agree with a position you already hold.
Kenneth's article is actually how the scientific method should work. You form an hypothesis (Will Levis should not be a top draft pick) and then you run studies not trying to show that your hypothesis is right but that the hypothesis is wrong. If the outcome of your experiment contradicts your hypothesis then the hypothesis is likely incorrect and should be abandoned. You can never prove something to be correct, you can only prove it to be wrong. Now some things can be tested so many times that they're assumed to be correct.
I have no expectation I'll ever change your mind on any belief you hold to be true because it's impossible to change a mind that isn't open to change. That's why I try hard to have an open mind because I'd much rather be shown to be wrong than continue to hold beliefs that aren't true.
I just ran across this post and am posting it because it's so apropos to this conversation. We are lied to constantly and hate the idea that I spent my 1st 4 years on this planet unequipped to know it.
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/artificial-grass-roots
Politics. Please do not link to political opinions.
It's not politics, it's science and how it's affected by bias... which was the topic of the article. The fact that people now confuse science and politics just show how off target science has strayed.
The last thing I'm going to do is disrespect Kenneth by dragging any of his posts down by talking about politics in the comment section but science shouldn't be so polarizing.
Great premise for an article and I appreciate the links to film reviews.
I feel better about the world not immediately ending if the Hawks pick Levis at #5, but I also feel conformation in feeling a little bit nauseous when I think about it. It's a huge risk because there is no middle ground with a QB pick at #5. He's either your new franchise QB for the next 3-5 years or a complete waste of the best draft pick you've had in a decade.
Pete and John don't seem shy about sharing their interest in picking a QB early and I think it's very interesting to see how they're playing this game. They are putting Geno on notice, but also telling the entire league that if you covet Levis or Richardson you better pay up to come get him. Their interest in a rookie QB could be legit, but it could be just for show, and it's in their best interest to show a lot of interest. Interesting!
Thanks Grant!
I have been thinking that Seattle would draft Levis at 5 for some time now. As far as athletic ability, he has everything that John Schneider looks for in a quarterback. Size, arm strength, mobility, toughness and character are all plus traits for Levis. Timing and accuracy can be coached and it seems that Levis has a tremendous work ethic and a desire to be better. A great QB has to be a great leader and everyone around him says that he checks that box easily. If he is available at 5 and the Seahawks draft him, we should all run around the room sans pants because if John Schneider and company think he is worthy of a #5 pick, who are we to say otherwise?
I’m not so sure that timing and accuracy can be coached. Much of that comes down to how quickly the QB can process the information on the field, and in the end that’s genetic, Balance is a factor, too, and that can’t necessarily be taught.
Timing and accuracy most definitely can be coached. Athletes train to become more proficient in all sports. The one that really stands out is skeet shooting, although athletes drill to become more accurate and get their timing down in baseball, basketball, badminton, bowling, barrel racing, etc.(and those are just some of the the "B" sports). Learning to read the defense and more quickly process the information takes hard work, dedication and good coaching. And I'm sure genetics plays its part as well.
I should have written “can necessarily be coached.” Certainly, biology is a factor in timing and accuracy.
Yeah, I could Seattle talking themselves into it, although 5 is so high and they've said they wouldn't force anything. Would have to assume that if Levis is the pick, they don't think they're reaching, which would be interesting.
The #5 pick feels awfully rich to use on a guy who isn't a sure thing. But in this class, as you point out, a sure thing QB would be gone long before 5.
I'm not a Levis fan but I have probably not been fair to him. Seahawks Draft Blog is part of the reason. Rob banged his drum last year and I didn't see it. This season I tried to watch more of his games, and his play on Saturday's just didn't wow me. I wrote as much and my comment was removed. Instead of shrugging my shoulders and moving on, I doubled down. I began to watch Kentucky games looking for reasons that "this guy sucks." I am not a football talent evaluator and probably don't spend 5% of the time watching that Rob does. I should really just keep my favorites -or at least my least favorites -to myself and just see where they go and how they turn out. For every guy I'm right on, there are more I'm wrong on. I don't understand how anyone expected Josh Allen to amount to the player he's become. I have no idea if Kancey's arm length is going to be a problem at the next level. I'm not even sure I understand what makes me "like" watching a player other than feeling like they make plays. But I suppose if a GM were being honest, there's a lot of guesswork involved in their projections just like ours. And it's the offseason so what else are we supposed to talk about? But college player evaluations are certainly not a subject that casual fans of football should be getting defensive about or taking opposing views personally over. And I've been teetering on the edge of doing so. Top 10 picks couldn't wash out of the league and late rounders couldn't turn into stars if this were science.
Here’s why I say that the draft is akin to projecting how AA baseball players will perform in the major leagues. Bear with me!
Georgia could play the Houston Texans once a week from now until hell freezes over and they won’t come close to beating them. Every now and then they might be able boast that they made it a game until the middle of the second quarter, but that’s about it. The Texans may be a bad NFL team, but they are still bigger, faster, more athletic, more experienced, and more sophisticated than Georgia.
On the other hand, a good AAA baseball team playing ten games a bad major league team probably has enough major-league level pitching and positional talent--even if it’s still developing--to win one or two times. The best AA team, on the other hand, gets crushed.
From there, I make the leap that NCAA Div 1 is roughly equal to AA baseball. And GMs have to figure who can play in the NFL. So, you’re absolutely right: The draft is in many ways a crap shoot.
Because there's a low probability that any jump off the page "wow" prospects will be at 5, that leads me to believe trading or a QB could be their final call.
If that was to be the case, why would other teams trade up, Ken?
All it takes is one GM to be enamored with a QB or such. But this feels like a draft were there might be some consensus on where the drop-off lies.
That'll be interesting to monitor, Phil!
I’ve written this before, but what the heck. A team can buy every argument that Levis fans make—poor coaching, bad scheme, injuries, lesser talent to work with—and still believe that a top 5 draft pick should show more. When you go up against the equivalent of AA baseball and still leave questions about your accuracy and decision-making, it’s a problem. And, yes, it is reasonable to conclude that Bryce Young or Trevor Lawrence or Joe Burrow would have done better in the same situation.
It surprises me that any draft analyst couldn't see that Bryce Young would've done better at Kentucky, but if we all saw things the same there wouldn't be any point for discussion. Or a draft! It's interesting.
Staton is adamant that no one else could have done better. If that’s the take, though, then Levis is at least as good as any other QB in the draft. He also thinks that Young will fall because of size concerns. Well, I hope he’s right!
Maybe it's the pressure to find a franchise QB, maybe it's the unique position that Seattle is in this year, but it seems like Rob's off on a different path this year. I wish him well.
At a time when science is so often 'denied', it is refreshing to see good science in your approach. The "null hypotheses"... make a hypotheses, then strive to prove it wrong.
KUDOS!
Thanks, Bob!
Science isn't "denied" today, it's dead.
I'm a home builder and 15 years ago every expert in my field said prices would keep going up, it wasn't a bubble. I thought that was nonsense and took a deep dive into what the few people who thought it was a bubble were saying and they made sense so it made me wonder if some of my long held beliefs in other areas might be based upon a weak foundation.
My studies led me to look into science, first it was nutrition and health and then global warming. As someone who never had questioned the "experts" up to that point it was a real eye opener when I allowed myself to give the other side a chance. It's not easy realizing you've been a chump but once you see it there's no going back. I've learned that science is dominated by special interests... either monied interests or people wanting power or in the case of manmade global warming by people who want save the world. If you're on a holy grail to save the world it's the rare person who will ever question their underlying beliefs. As Ken mentioned, the confirmation bias in science these days is off the charts. The avoidance of cognitive dissonance is also huge.
Anyhow, my default response to pretty much any sensational claim made nowadays is "I don't frickin' believe you" but I do keep an open mind and am willing to change my mind, like I just did with Will Levis. If the Hawks draft Levis I'm gonna be good with it because JT O-Sullivan's video showed some good stuff.
Kenneth, this is the type of piece that keeps me around. Recognizing your own bias and trying to prove yourself wrong? Brilliant stuff.
Levis is appealing to me mostly because of the man he seems to be. While he is more mature from an age standpoint, he also acts like a pro from every interview and statement I've seen. I'd argue the reason QBs succeed or fail more often than not comes down to these things. Example: I believe if Zach Wilson were a better leader, he might still be the starter. Instead, he lost the locker room to Mike White is basically unstartable.
When we look at the best QBs to be selected in recent years, the ones who have succeeded tend to have great personalities. Josh Allen hasn't succeeded cause he was great at football coming into the league, but because he worked at it and was able to improve. Patrick Mahomes wasn't particularly great at football either. Major draftniks didn't even have him in rd 1. Yet the man he is and the situation he went to allowed for development.
No one can argue Levis is a great football player today. He's not. But what you can argue is that he has every intangible you look for. He led a Kentucky team this year that probably should have gone 3-9 or something. He took a beating and kept battling. And every word out of the program is that he's beloved. What does all this add up to?
In a normal year, I think Levis might go late top 10 or in the Jordan Love range. But this is not a normal year. This class is very weak at the top. Because of that, I believe a player like Levis will go earlier than he maybe should. If it was the Hawks that take him? I'll be content knowing we at least bet on a guy with crazy upside and great character.
Thank you Starhawk! That means a lot to hear about what keeps you around and motivates me to keep criticizing myself!
Are we sure Penn State didn't pick the correct QB? Just looking at their numbers, they are both pretty similar. The big difference seems to be their arms and their size. Clifford's decision making seems to be better as well. And Clifford isn't likely to be drafted, so it's going to be physical projection and a prayer someone can teach Levis what he needs to take the next steps to greatness. I don't really see Levis as a first rounder. Could he be made into a really good QB? Sure. Do you really want to gamble with the #5 pick to do so? Not me. But I'm sure some awful franchise will wishcast their way into picking him way earlier than the talent says they should.
You could be right!
Great article and thanks for doing the research. You have made me a little lazy because I look forward to reading your articles every day. Sounds like he's a good guy and a competitor but a 1st rounder? I love the deeper insight to the players and getting to know them better and because of that, I do wish him success.
I'm grateful for that!
I wouldn’t want the Hawks to draft any player in the early rounds with so many fundamentals questions, regardless of what position he plays. I’ve never watched this kid play but if his accuracy is one of his weaknesses then he wouldn’t be one of my draft picks for QB. Can he catch and block? Maybe TE, if he’s willing to switch positions.
Unfortunately, my friend, there are probably only two or three guys in this class without fundamental questions. Bijan Robinson, and Will Anderson. Maybe Michael Mayer. If you would like, I'd be happy to run down the various major questions about every top prospect. However, it is very important to note that sure thing QBs are rare, and it's even rarer they last past the 1st pick. If you want to pick a prospect at 5, 20, or any other spot in the 1st round, I'm afraid you'll have to accept the risks and major questions.
You’re right. My response to the possibility of taking Will Levis in the first round was hastily worded. I agree that no one enters the League without fundamental questions.
However, for me, draft a QB with accuracy issues, no thanks. Draft a WR that can’t catch, no thanks. Draft a running back with a timed 40 of 5.00, no thanks.
If Levis is the 3rd best QB on the draft board for this year, then maybe there’s only 2 worth drafting.
Sorry my friend, but im going to take issue with the characterization of "accuracy issues". This is sort of like saying that a person is ill. Ok, great. But there are thousands of illnesses with a variety of symptoms and causes. A cold can be cured, MS, not as much. Saying a player has accuracy issues is the same. There are many, many reasons why a QB may be inaccurate.
Supposed accuracy issues can be fixable, or irreparable. If it's a throwing motion issue? Good luck. That's difficult to change. Ask Tebow. If it's an issue of poor receiving talent, lackluster playcalling, terrible oline, or myriad of injuries, these things can be dealt with. Don't forget, Mahomes had accuracy issues in college. Allen had accuracy issues in college, as did Joe Burrow his first year as a starter. Jalen Hurts went from being a guy with no NFL future due to his lack of arm talent, to a stud in his third year. Guys get better and learn.
The point I'm getting at is that characterizing Levis or Richardson for that matter as having accuracy issues is not helpful for this discourse. It lacks the nuance necessary when judging the future of a young man about to be handed millions of dollars. Sorry if that came off as condescending, I don't mean it to be.
Absolutely this. Levis had an absolutely terrible Oline in front of him. He was sacked 37 times in 11 games. This has to be a strong contributor to his "accuracy issues". He still managed a completion % >65%
Forgot to add footwork as a fixable issue with proper coaching. And Levis does have a few footwork issues that are a factor in some instances.
Ammendment. If Bryce Young weighs in over 200 lbs as he's claimed he will, I will add him to the list of guys without major questions. His arm is nothing special, but he's a stellar QB.
See, this is why we need to keep spreading Seaside Joe to as many people as possible. A fully honest article where each point (point, not opinion) is then answered with an example. Self aware, in depth, quality article. - yet again!
Still hasn't sold me on Levis ahead of Day 2, but has made me think a little differently about his college stats (not that it makes up for the questionable on field game tape, and if he can step up two or three levels to be a genuine Superbowl leading QB).
Much appreciated! Perhaps will need to unlock this article for more people to see!
The "good at football" question is the deal-breaker I would think. And, ok, Penn State may have been confused about how to run its offense and Levis might have paid the price for that, but if he was really *that good* he would have beaten out his competition there.
One of the reasons I like JJ McCarthy at MICH (he will be talked about a lot next year) is that he played a bit as a true freshman and beat out his competition, Cade McNamara (since transferred), to start as a junior.
To me, Levis just isn't a Rd 1 prospect never mind top 5, but that opinion plus $5 gets you something something at Starbucks.