'10 WA QB Jake Heaps

#109
#109
okay....i didnt know that. I hope his coach works on that because that will turn some colleges off because its a hard habbit to break
 
#111
#111
Yeah i see where your coming from.....got a question, why is he a DT QB? i never saw him run it once.
 
#114
#114
g8terh8ter_eric said:
LOL, no that's not what I was implying at all. I just think that between the two that Bell is a better prospect from what I have to evaluate.
Click to expand...

I know what your intentions were. I just thought I'd get it out of the way before someone came along and made a serious post saying the same thing. It's Volnation tradition.
 
#116
#116
Sabanocchio said:
Trash someone else's opinion? Are you serious with this? Why all the whiny little girls in this particular thread. There are tons of "Kiffin is a bad, bad man" threads for you guys to congregate on. All I said is that Heaps wasn't going to be the overall prospect - which is true. I didn't trash the guy's opinion. He's perfectly welcome to it. I simply gave mine which is the more realistic one in all fairness.
Click to expand...

lmao @ :you guys"...and now you get to add dimwitted to your resume. Congratulations.

No, you didn't just say that "Heaps isn't going to be the top overall prospect", you told him your opinion, he responded with something to back up his opinion, and you went further by telling him to "get bent out of shape about something HE KNOWS ABOUT". Whta part of that isn't trashing his opinion? When he used one of the biggest recruiting services in the country to back up his opinion in Scout? Because you prefer Rivals? lol How about speak for something that YOU know about instead of what Rivals tells you.

Perhaps you should get out of your parents basement, ask a girl out on this Valentine's Day, and step away from VolNation and Rivals for a few moments and you'll be less worried about the "little girls" whom you can't seem to handle disagreeing with.
 
#119
#119
I'm just glad that the Jake Heaps thread has finally become the best place to get info on all quarterbacks not named Jake Heaps----Blake Bell, Blake Sims, Phillip Sims, Christian Green, Brett Favre and Jake Delhomme.

My prayers have finally been answered.

manningmaniac said:
...basically Mike Farrell with Rivals said this week that he was not impresses with Heaps when he saw him at a recent camp. Said his arm was not as strong as his videos have shown and that his reads were frequently off.
Click to expand...

I don't want to jump on anyone too much over the Farrell remarks---but I've got a response to Farrell's 'expert' opinions.

How can his arm not be as strong as the video evidence?

Does that mean the 10 minutes of highlight film he's already amassed as a junior is all owed to computer-generated special effects? Is he throwing at an altitude where the ball carries an extra 10 yards?

If his reads are so bad, why did he throw for 38 touchdowns against only 4 interceptions last season?

How did he complete 65% of his passes?

I realize he has a quality offensive line and Div.-1 prospects to throw to at WR----but he'll have a better supporting cast at the college level, so you can't totally discredit his stats based on having a great squad around him.

I understand some people want Phillip Sims and some people want Heaps and some people want Peter Thomas, but there's no reason to trash anyone's opinions because of a disagreement over projections---and I'm not addressing that to anyone specifically, I'm addressing that to anyone who resorts to trashing someone else's pick, rather than trying to support their own guy through positive remarks.

I would like someone to ask Mike Ferrell, point blank----

Norm Chow/Rick Neuheisel/Lane Kiffin/John Chaney/Gary Crowton/Charlie Weis/Butch Davis/Jeff Tedford all think this guy's a stud----why are they wrong and you're right?

If he's going to say it's because of one bad performance at a combine, then I have to laugh at that.

Anyone can have a bad camp----illness/unreported injury/nerves, whatever.

One bad camp doesn't negate what's on the film and in the stat books.

Here's a video linke where Tom Lemming, who's probably been at this longer than anyone, declares Heaps this year's Matt Barkley---

Jake Heaps Skyline High School Football Stats 08-09 - MaxPreps
 
#120
#120
Tennessee Jack said:
I'm just glad that the Jake Heaps thread has finally become the best place to get info on all quarterbacks not named Jake Heaps----Blake Bell, Blake Sims, Phillip Sims, Christian Green, Brett Favre and Jake Delhomme.

My prayers have finally been answered.



I don't want to jump on anyone too much over the Farrell remarks---but I've got a response to Farrell's 'expert' opinions.

How can his arm not be as strong as the video evidence?

Does that mean the 10 minutes of highlight film he's already amassed as a junior is all owed to computer-generated special effects? Is he throwing at an altitude where the ball carries an extra 10 yards?

If his reads are so bad, why did he throw for 38 touchdowns against only 4 interceptions last season?

How did he complete 65% of his passes?

I realize he has a quality offensive line and Div.-1 prospects to throw to at WR----but he'll have a better supporting cast at the college level, so you can't totally discredit his stats based on having a great squad around him.

I understand some people want Phillip Sims and some people want Heaps and some people want Peter Thomas, but there's no reason to trash anyone's opinions because of a disagreement over projections---and I'm not addressing that to anyone specifically, I'm addressing that to anyone who resorts to trashing someone else's pick, rather than trying to support their own guy through positive remarks.

I would like someone to ask Mike Ferrell, point blank----

Norm Chow/Rick Neuheisel/Lane Kiffin/John Chaney/Gary Crowton/Charlie Weis/Butch Davis/Jeff Tedford all think this guy's a stud----why are they wrong and you're right?

If he's going to say it's because of one bad performance at a combine, then I have to laugh at that.

Anyone can have a bad camp----illness/unreported injury/nerves, whatever.

One bad camp doesn't negate what's on the film and in the stat books.

Here's a video linke where Tom Lemming, who's probably been at this longer than anyone, declares Heaps this year's Matt Barkley---

Jake Heaps Skyline High School Football Stats 08-09 - MaxPreps
Click to expand...

Also, I just noticed that his team didn't play some very good competition it seems. The teams that gave them a run it seems as Heaps had his tougher games. I just don't think he's the #1 prospect that everyone is making him out to be. He might be between the #3 and #5 QB in the nation next year.
 
#121
#121
g8terh8ter_eric said:
Also, I just noticed that his team didn't play some very good competition it seems. The teams that gave them a run it seems as Heaps had his tougher games. I just don't think he's the #1 prospect that everyone is making him out to be. He might be between the #3 and #5 QB in the nation next year.
Click to expand...

This.

I didn't see anyone trash Heaps or even infer that he's not a good player. It was just pointed out that he isn't going to be the top overall player or even the top QB most likely. I still want him. Just because he's not the best doesn't mean he's chopped liver.
 
#122
#122
g8terh8ter_eric said:
The teams that gave them a run it seems as Heaps had his tougher games.
Click to expand...

Seriously? You could say that about virtually everyone to ever play the position. Of course a QB's going to have less impressive stats against better teams. Peyton Manning vs the Bengals or Manning vs the Ravens? Which team is he going to have more success against?

g8terh8ter_eric said:
I just don't think he's the #1 prospect that everyone is making him out to be. He might be between the #3 and #5 QB in the nation next year.
Click to expand...

Does it really matter where his final ranking is at the end of the day, be it anywhere in the top-5 for pro-style quarterbacks? He will be measured by his performance at college, not by his star rating.

He has the most impressive offer list for any quarterback in next year's class and that's not by accident. Will he end up at #1 for the position?---don't know. Will being number the #1 QB, as opposed to #5 help him win games at the next level?----no.
 
#123
#123
Sabanocchio said:
This.

I didn't see anyone trash Heaps or even infer that he's not a good player. It was just pointed out that he isn't going to be the top overall player or even the top QB most likely. I still want him. Just because he's not the best doesn't mean he's chopped liver.
Click to expand...

What did I do now?? :eek:hmy:
 
#125
#125
Tennessee Jack said:
Seriously? You could say that about virtually everyone to ever play the position. Of course a QB's going to have less impressive stats against better teams. Peyton Manning vs the Bengals or Manning vs the Ravens? Which team is he going to have more success against?



Does it really matter where his final ranking is at the end of the day, be it anywhere in the top-5 for pro-style quarterbacks? He will be measured by his performance at college, not by his star rating.

He has the most impressive offer list for any quarterback in next year's class and that's not by accident. Will he end up at #1 for the position?---don't know. Will being number the #1 QB, as opposed to #5 help him win games at the next level?----no.
Click to expand...

Measuring the level of competition is vital in determining if the guy is a stat machine or a good player. Obviously we think he is a good player, but how much of that is contributed to the overall fact that his team blew out most everyone they played. His team maybe that good, but I don't know enough about WA HS athletics to know for sure.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top