Matt Barkley 6 TD clinic against UCLA | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Matt Barkley 6 TD clinic against UCLA

I think something to keep in mind when looking at Matt Barkley versus Andrew Luck is that Luck's offense gives him an inherent advantage when it comes to the pollsters saying which guy has more arm strength. Luck's offense is more vertically oriented than Barkley's.

The problem is that most people would tell you that automatically means the Stanford offense asks more out of Andrew Luck physically. This is NOT the case. Barkley's offense is a horizontal stretch offense. The football field is over 53 yards wide, people. If you're throwing far hash to near sideline with ZERO vertical aspect, a lateral pass, that's still a 30 yard throw. But the problem is, due to the camera views and the way the game flows, those throws don't LOOK impressive. You could stack a 30 yard lateral throw on top of a 30 yard vertical throw where the QB gets the ball 30 yards up the field, and both balls could be exactly the same with the exact same pace, placement, trajectory, etc...you poll 10 people on which throw looked more "physically impressive" and 9 out of those 10 are going to tell you the vertical throw was more physically impressive when the reality is they were the exact same throw.
 
ckparrothead said:
What I'm trying to do is get specific. There's enough tape of Luck out there that you should be able to point to specific examples. Take the following game of Andrew Luck's against UCLA:

[video=youtube;vPLNMwv3hHg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPLNMwv3hHg[/video]

I don't see a SINGLE throw on that footage that I have not seen Matt Barkley make with the same pace and accuracy. Do you?

The most impressive throws on that tape happen at 0:07, 0:18, 3:55, 4:05 and 6:25.

The first one he's rolling left and throws a nice little dart up the field accurately. Nice to see when a QB can throw while rolling left. But the throw was certainly nothing amazing, it was only about 9 or 10 yards beyond the line of scrimmage. I've seen Matt Barkley make that throw multiple times, with just as much pace on the ball.

The second one he's rolling to his right and this is a more impressive throw with better pace at about 14 yards beyond the line. But you know what? Seen Matt Barkley make that exact throw, with that exact pace, multiple times.

Some would think the third impressive throw would come at 2:43 but this was really just a simple throw over the middle. There's no special heat on that ball and I've seen even the weaker armed QBs make it and look the same. But at 3:55 you have a throw to the wide side of the field at about 30 yards through the air. Nice flat trajectory, but look where the ball arrives at the receiver's feet, he has to sit down pretty low to catch it. For an impressive throw, it's not really all that impressive.

Then at 4:05, Andrew throws a nice ball at about 33 yards up the middle. This is by no means a 'wow' throw. It really isn't. I've seen Barkley get the same pace on the ball at the same distance.

The fifth and final impressive throw comes at 6:25 on the roll to his right, Andrew throws into a nice tight window at about 20 yards.

But I want you to take a look at some clips from this video:

[video=youtube;jX8PlVYM4GY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX8PlVYM4GY[/video]

The first is at 0:47 in the video. Matt Barkley is rolling to his right, and unloads a 28 yard ball at a dead run into a tight space in coverage. This is a virtually IDENTICAL throw to the one above in Andrew Luck's video at 0:18. Same distance, same leverage, same tight window, exact same pace on the ball. It's actually more impressive than the throw Luck makes at 6:25 for the touchdown.

The next Barkley throw I want you to look at is at 1:44 in the Barkley video above. This time he's rolling left, much like Luck did at 0:07 of his UCLA video. Barkley throws this ball in a zip line about 29 yards through the air. This is a MORE impressive throw than the one Luck had at 0:07 in his UCLA video.

You go to 1:58 in the following video, you get Barkley throwing up the field to an open man in stride, and it's about the same distance as the Luck throw at 4:05, has the exact same pace on the ball.

[video=youtube;_djxg-xSg0Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_djxg-xSg0Q[/video]

On the other hand, go to 3:36 in the Andrew Luck video and take a look at the ball placement on that fade throw to I believe that's Griff Whalen. Look where that ball is placed. The ball was placed in a spot where the defender had the best shot at it, either the defender was going to catch it or nobody was.

Now fast forward to 7:51 of the video quoted by the original poster at the top of the thread, with the close up replay at 8:00. This is the same throw, to the same defense, even to the same side of the field, ball was lined up on the near hash so the play had the same spacing. Look at the ball placement on the two fades. Was the coverage any worse for Barkley than on the pass Luck threw? No. It was tight on both throws. But look where Barkley placed the ball right on that outside shoulder in the ideal spot.

I'm not saying Barkley consistently throws that ball better but this is the same defense, same spacing, same throw, and Luck's throw was inferior to Barkley's in every way imaginable, resulting in a near interception for Luck versus a touchdown for Barkley.

So again, I'm going throw by throw, and not seeing this exaggerated "significantly" better arm that Andrew Luck supposedly has. I think it's maybe just a little better, but I also think that Barkley's release is more versatile, which is a function of arm strength too.
Click to expand...

I used to work for a guy named Don Erenberg, who runs a company by the name of First New York Securities. He has a son, Rich, who played at Colgate and I think the Steelers for a bit. The subject of pro potential came up and he mentioned, using Walter Abercrombie as an expmple, the importance of that tenth of a second, 4.4 vs 4.5, 4.5 vs 4.6, that a running back needs to turn the corner, what a make or break factor that can be. The same thing applies to Quarterbacks. Barkley throws a nice ball- Luck throws a better one with more authority. Will Barkley sometimes throw a better ball than Luck? Sure, why not. But 10 out of 10 times, all things considered, I'm going with Luck's arm over Barkley's in a pro setting. That added force, that added driving ability, is significantly better, and that's significantly important in my opinion.
 
If Luck didn't exist, Barkley would be the best prospect in the last decade.

IMO Barkley is a better QB, Luck is just a little more mobile, which is a huge diffrence in how they will make it in the NFL
 
What's ironic is that actually if I had to pick which offense was designed more to leverage the physical ability of the man under center, it would be Matt Barkley's offense. It's a stretch offense. You stretch the field horizontally AND vertically. This relies on a throwers physical throwing ability to be extremely accurate with the football and not at all afraid to throw it 50 to 60 yards through the air on any given throw. When you're such a horizontally dangerous run-after-catch offense, the way the defense has to react to that leaves them vulnerable to the deep ball. So if you're always stretching the field horizontally then this gives you opportunities to drop the bomb on top of them and that's what USC does.

I think Andrew Luck's offense relies on his mental ability more, making the right read, making calls at the line, fooling a defense into doing what you want them to do. This is what makes him so damned attractive as a pro.

But given all that it does end up being kind of ironic that Barkley's known for being the physically less impressive passer. I don't deny it, but the margin is small in terms of throwing. It's bigger in terms of speed.
 
ckparrothead said:
What's ironic is that actually if I had to pick which offense was designed more to leverage the physical ability of the man under center, it would be Matt Barkley's offense. It's a stretch offense. You stretch the field horizontally AND vertically. This relies on a throwers physical throwing ability to be extremely accurate with the football and not at all afraid to throw it 50 to 60 yards through the air on any given throw. When you're such a horizontally dangerous run-after-catch offense, the way the defense has to react to that leaves them vulnerable to the deep ball. So if you're always stretching the field horizontally then this gives you opportunities to drop the bomb on top of them and that's what USC does.

I think Andrew Luck's offense relies on his mental ability more, making the right read, making calls at the line, fooling a defense into doing what you want them to do. This is what makes him so damned attractive as a pro.

But given all that it does end up being kind of ironic that Barkley's known for being the physically less impressive passer. I don't deny it, but the margin is small in terms of throwing. It's bigger in terms of speed.
Click to expand...

CK, The 1st pick of the draft, who would you take?
 
Phinatic8u said:
CK, The 1st pick of the draft, who would you take?
Click to expand...

Andrew Luck. But not because of arm differences between he and Barkley, which are marginal at best. In fact, Barkley might be more consistently accurate with better ball placement. I take Andrew luck because he's more athletic, and more mentally advanced.
 
jim1 said:
I used to work for a guy named Don Erenberg, who runs a company by the name of First New York Securities. He has a son, Rich, who played at Colgate and I think the Steelers for a bit. The subject of pro potential came up and he mentioned, using Walter Abercrombie as an expmple, the importance of that tenth of a second, 4.4 vs 4.5, 4.5 vs 4.6, that a running back needs to turn the corner, what a make or break factor that can be. The same thing applies to Quarterbacks. Barkley throws a nice ball- Luck throws a better one with more authority. Will Barkley sometimes throw a better ball than Luck? Sure, why not. But 10 out of 10 times, all things considered, I'm going with Luck's arm over Barkley's in a pro setting. That added force, that added driving ability, is significantly better, and that's significantly important in my opinion.
Click to expand...

You can continue the lectures on philosophy of how throwing a ball with better pace is theoretically better than throwing a ball with worse pace, until you're blue in the face. But the fact of the matter is, you're not doing a very good job of showing why that philosophical preference even applies to this matter, becausey ou've not demonstrated in any way whatsoever that Luck's arm is significantly stronger than Barkley's.

Every time you bring up a point, it's a philosophical point about how arm strength is important. That's fine. It is. But you've not demonstrated how that philosophy applies to this comparison.
 
ckparrothead said:
Andrew Luck. But not because of arm differences between he and Barkley, which are marginal at best. In fact, Barkley might be more consistently accurate with better ball placement. I take Andrew luck because he's more athletic, and more mentally advanced.
Click to expand...

Could Barkely be a better pro based on there college tape? Or is Luck destined to be the best?
 
ckparrothead said:
You can continue the lectures on philosophy of how throwing a ball with better pace is theoretically better than throwing a ball with worse pace, until you're blue in the face. But the fact of the matter is, you're not doing a very good job of showing why that philosophical preference even applies to this matter, becausey ou've not demonstrated in any way whatsoever that Luck's arm is significantly stronger than Barkley's.

Every time you bring up a point, it's a philosophical point about how arm strength is important. That's fine. It is. But you've not demonstrated how that philosophy applies to this comparison.
Click to expand...

There's no mystery here, and no philosophy of any note. Just looking at the 1st minute of each clip I see Luck throwing with more authority on out patterns. I look at 4:10 of the Luck tape and I see Luck make a throw up the gut to Fleener- not one of his best- that I prefer to a Barkley throw of the same type.

Luck just has a stronger, better arm. I don't even see the need for debate on this. Barkley reminds me of a Bob Griese type of arm. Luck reminds me of a Bert Jones type of arm. Weeden reminds me of a Tom Brady type of arm. And I grew up watching Griese, he was great. But if I'm drafting a guy high, I'd rather be looking at a Bert Jones type of arm and arm strength than a Griese arm, that's my preference. It's not philosophy, it's preference. I just don't prefer Matt Barkley, and if I'm drafting a QB I don't even think of taking Barkley over Luck, ever, and I'm planning on how and when to take Weeden. Again, my preference. You can cue up all the Barkley clips you want- his arm is not as good as Luck's (or Weeden's), period, and I've stated my reasoning behind that opinion on multiple occasions. And of course, it's just my opinion.
 
hooshoops said:
jim...don't quit your day job...:lol:
Click to expand...

For you and others who may equate Barkley's arm to Luck's, I would suggest the same. There is no way that Barkley has as strong an arm as Luck, and if that isn't important to you, so be it. This is far from the first time that I've gone against the grain with an opinion, and I usually end up looking pretty well when all is said and done. I've been a big Weeden supporter and I admire Luck's game, you obviously like Barkley- we'll see in due time how the three turn out as pros. But the notion that Barkley has an arm that is as strong, as good as Luck or Weeden, is absurd. Such a simple point- not to worry, I'm used to the peanut gallery going off on such things, old hat by now.
 
Phinatic8u said:
Could Barkely be a better pro based on there college tape? Or is Luck destined to be the best?
Click to expand...

I think Andrew Luck is destined to be the best. He's more mentally agile from snap to whistle, and boasts more physical ability in his size, body strength and speed.
 
You have to take barkley. Luck won't happen unless indy will part with the top pick. Were picking too high for weeden, and what if we depend on him falling to our 2nd pick, and someone else likes him and trades into the back of the 1st and scoops him up? Then we have another year of Moore or another 2nd tier rookie, should we take one. No thanks.
 
jim1 said:
For you and others who may equate Barkley's arm to Luck's, I would suggest the same. There is no way that Barkley has as strong an arm as Luck, and if that isn't important to you, so be it. This is far from the first time that I've gone against the grain with an opinion, and I usually end up looking pretty well when all is said and done. I've been a big Weeden supporter and I admire Luck's game, you obviously like Barkley- we'll see in due time which how the three turn out as better pros. But the notion that Barkley has an arm that is as strong, as good as Luck or Weeden, is absurd. Such a simple point- not to worry, I'm used to the peanut gallery going off on such things, old hat by now.
Click to expand...

come on jim...i'm just rattlin your chain...i appreciate you bringing your own individual observations and opinions to the table...whether i agree with them or not...and with barkley i absolutely do not
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom