M&M: QBs we are not talking about much (Mond/Mills)

[MHS831]

So if the top QBs are gone and we decide instead to take the BPA and build around the QB position (Maybe trade back for a second or third rounder), is there anything wrong with doing some mining for QBs in the second round?

Imagine we grab a stud LT in round 1 (I see 3 that qualify) and add a pick in the process so we can trade back up and grab a CB.  If we do that, it is probably a good draft.  However, there are two QBs getting some late buzz and after watching some youtube I have decided both are possibly worth taking a look. We need backups as well as a starter, moving forward, so why not grab some depth and see if he can become more.

Trask falls into this category, but I am not going to include him here.  Why?  Because he had a bad game with a roster full of people not sitting out the bowl game.  Lets move past Trask because some have already determined that he is the worst QB to ever wear a helmet.

The two I am hearing about are Kellen Mond and Davis Mills.  Personally, I think Mond has starting potential, and I think Mills could get there.  So if you have an extra second rounder, what would it hurt, if you did not get the QB you wanted in round 1? Here are some films--and I think they show some good things and some bad. 

Mills:  He had a good UCLA game and seemed to get better as the year progressed, but he should have returned to Stanford for 2021.  He is 6'4" and has some mobility, and he anticipates WRs getting open really well.  He can drop the ball over LBs and under safeties as well as anyone I have seen.  He also has some moments when he is inconsistent.  I would love him as a backup with a chance to become a starter by about 2022, but not so fast.

Mond: I only included the Clemson video and they brought the house a lot vs. Mond.  He was at home, so that helps, and he made some really good throws against a pass rush he is even unlikely to see on the pro level.  A&M could not block Clemson.  Mond was forced into some quick decisions, and made some rather impressive decisions and throws.  I wondered how he would look on the roster at Clemson?  At BYU?  At Alabama?  At Ohio State?  At NDSU?  You see, the top 5 QBs in this draft played on teams that dominated their competition most of the time.  In the tape provided, A&M went 4-4 in the conference, 8-5 overall.  They were 8-1 in 2020, fwiw, so a young team matured under Mond's QB play.  It is hard to say that Mond would not do as well as Fields at OSU or Lance at NDS, but there are reasons to think he might be as good.

Mills seemed to get better as the year progressed---so I thought the QB school guy would be OK to show that.  At times he makes good points, and at times he rambles to impress you about his football acumen, but he gives it his best, so hats off.

Davis Mills, Stanford

 

Kellen Mond, Texas AM

 One final detail--Mond seems pretty intense when he plays--happy feet at times, where Mills is more methodical and calm.  I could not help but notice (in the thumbnails above) how calm Mills eyes are vs. Mond's.  Wonder if that means anything?

 

[Waldo]

As long as we pick a LT and a CB before this, whatever follows is whatever at that point.

If we do pick a QB, at least play them enough in 2021 to know if we still need a starter and not that purgatory he could be the guy but he hasn't played BS.

Edited April 2, 2021 by Waldo

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, Waldo said:

As long as we pick a LT and a CB before this, whatever follows is whatever at that point.

If we do pick a QB, at least play them enough in 2021 to know if we still need a starter and not that purgatory he could be the guy but he hasn't played BS.

yep.  I would go oline, oline in rounds 1 and 2 and be fuging done with it.  Although I would rather burn our 3rd on Darnold than these 2

[LinvilleGorge]

I'll be ready for this conversation if QB doesn't work out in the 1st. Once we're talking about these guys, we're well into the "Oh fug, this is NOT going well" section of the QB shopping list.

[Waldo]

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

yep.  I would go oline, oline in rounds 1 and 2 and be fuging done with it.  Although I would rather burn our 3rd on Darnold than these 2

I agree on the first part not the second part tho. Either the Jets cut Darnold this year or next, at least the draft picks haven't proved how bad they are in the NFL yet. Plus they are cheaper. Very likely none of them are the answer at the end of it all. I would rather draft an OG in the 3rd 10 out of 10 times then send it for Darnold.

[MHS831]

3 minutes ago, Waldo said:

I agree on the first part not the second part tho. Either the Jets cut Darnold this year or next, at least the draft picks haven't proved how bad they are in the NFL yet. Plus they are cheaper. Very likely none of them are the answer at the end of it all. I would rather draft an OG in the 3rd 10 out of 10 times then send it for Darnold.

Darnold has more mechanical issues than both of these QBs, but more gifts.  and he has had 3 years to resolve the ,mechanics (footwork, mainly) and he has not--so I do not see taking Darnold as a step up in terms of potential--and that is what we are going after at this point.

I am one who thinks we need a CB.

If the top 5 qbs were gone and Pitts was somehow there, it would be hard to take any other player over him.

 

[Smittymoose]

24 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

So if the top QBs are gone and we decide instead to take the BPA and build around the QB position (Maybe trade back for a second or third rounder), is there anything wrong with doing some mining for QBs in the second round?

Imagine we grab a stud LT in round 1 (I see 3 that qualify) and add a pick in the process so we can trade back up and grab a CB.  If we do that, it is probably a good draft.  However, there are two QBs getting some late buzz and after watching some youtube I have decided both are possibly worth taking a look. We need backups as well as a starter, moving forward, so why not grab some depth and see if he can become more.

Trask falls into this category, but I am not going to include him here.  Why?  Because he had a bad game with a roster full of people not sitting out the bowl game.  Lets move past Trask because some have already determined that he is the worst QB to ever wear a helmet.

The two I am hearing about are Kellen Mond and Davis Mills.  Personally, I think Mond has starting potential, and I think Mills could get there.  So if you have an extra second rounder, what would it hurt, if you did not get the QB you wanted in round 1? Here are some films--and I think they show some good things and some bad. 

Mills:  He had a good UCLA game and seemed to get better as the year progressed, but he should have returned to Stanford for 2021.  He is 6'4" and has some mobility, and he anticipates WRs getting open really well.  He can drop the ball over LBs and under safeties as well as anyone I have seen.  He also has some moments when he is inconsistent.  I would love him as a backup with a chance to become a starter by about 2022, but not so fast.

Mond: I only included the Clemson video and they brought the house a lot vs. Mond.  He was at home, so that helps, and he made some really good throws against a pass rush he is even unlikely to see on the pro level.  A&M could not block Clemson.  Mond was forced into some quick decisions, and made some rather impressive decisions and throws.  I wondered how he would look on the roster at Clemson?  At BYU?  At Alabama?  At Ohio State?  At NDSU?  You see, the top 5 QBs in this draft played on teams that dominated their competition most of the time.  In the tape provided, A&M went 4-4 in the conference, 8-5 overall.  They were 8-1 in 2020, fwiw, so a young team matured under Mond's QB play.  It is hard to say that Mond would not do as well as Fields at OSU or Lance at NDS, but there are reasons to think he might be as good.

Mills seemed to get better as the year progressed---so I thought the QB school guy would be OK to show that.  At times he makes good points, and at times he rambles to impress you about his football acumen, but he gives it his best, so hats off.

Davis Mills, Stanford

 

 

 

Kellen Mond, Texas AM

 

 

 One final detail--Mond seems pretty intense when he plays--happy feet at times, where Mills is more methodical and calm.  I could not help but notice (in the thumbnails above) how calm Mills eyes are vs. Mond's.  Wonder if that means anything?

 

 

Have you considered that Clemson, Alabama, BYU, NDSU, and Ohio State were dominant because they had huge advantages at QB relative to their competition, and TAMU did not? 

[PootieNunu]

IF we are picking one of these guys they need to see the field almost immediately. We already have one of these wasted picks on the roster in Grier, hard pass on another.

[Waldo]

2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Darnold has more mechanical issues than both of these QBs, but more gifts.  and he has had 3 years to resolve the ,mechanics (footwork, mainly) and he has not--so I do not see taking Darnold as a step up in terms of potential--and that is what we are going after at this point.

I am one who thinks we need a CB.

If the top 5 qbs were gone and Pitts was somehow there, it would be hard to take any other player over him.

 

I would take either LT and not blink. I don't get the Darnold love. I'm fine with a prove it deal out of free agency just not giving up any draft capital for a guy with that much bad film. One is a flyer approach and the other is overspending on a warm body who is an extreme longshot.  

[LinvilleGorge]

7 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

Have you considered that Clemson, Alabama, BYU, NDSU, and Ohio State were dominant because they had huge advantages at QB relative to their competition, and TAMU did not? 

TAMU got carried by their defense. They ran a ball control offense. Whether that was due to Mond's limitations or coaching philosophy I don't know. Early in the year I was intrigued by his physical tools, but the more I watched the more inconsistencies I saw.

[frankw]

27 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

yep.  I would go oline, oline in rounds 1 and 2 and be fuging done with it.  Although I would rather burn our 3rd on Darnold than these 2

We could spend the whole draft on o line and be lucky to get 1 or 2 above average starters. It's still a crapshoot as much as looking for a qb don't kid yourself that's why so many ol who manage to hit free agency are getting paid crazy money now too particularly tackles.

[BrianS]

20 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

TAMU got carried by their defense. They ran a ball control offense. Whether that was due to Mond's limitations or coaching philosophy I don't know. Early in the year I was intrigued by his physical tools, but the more I watched the more inconsistencies I saw.

Not sure I agree with that.  The Aggies averaged almost 33 points per game . . . ball control sort of implies a grind it out, 23 - 21 game.  Maybe I'm still traumatized from the previous Panthers regime.

I do agree, the Aggies did very well keeping the clock in their favor.  But the offense was pretty balanced, more passes than runs overall.  Very similar to Florida's offense for that matter.

[Varking]

22 minutes ago, BrianS said:

Not sure I agree with that.  The Aggies averaged almost 33 points per game . . . ball control sort of implies a grind it out, 23 - 21 game.  Maybe I'm still traumatized from the previous Panthers regime.

I do agree, the Aggies did very well keeping the clock in their favor.  But the offense was pretty balanced, more passes than runs overall.  Very similar to Florida's offense for that matter.

Their running back was like 5th in the SEC in total yards, wasn’t he? Texas AM as a team averaged 5.5 yards per carry in the SEC. That was the best. They were also third in rushing touchdowns. They were 9th in the SEC is passing yards per game. 2nd in rushing yards per game. 
 

Their offensive line only gave up 7 sacks all year. The next closest was 16 sacks given up. 
 

Basically their offensive line dominated all year and their run game, efficiency-wise was the best in the conference at 5.5 a clip. They leaned heavily on their run game and ran more than they threw. Not sure where your saw they passed more. 

Edited April 2, 2021 by Varking

[LinvilleGorge]

6 minutes ago, Varking said:

Their running back was like 5th in the SEC in total yards, wasn’t he? Texas AM as a team averaged 5.5 yards per carry in the SEC. That was the best. They were also third in rushing touchdowns. They were 9th in the SEC is passing yards per game. 2nd in rushing yards per game. 
 

Their offensive line only gave up 7 sacks all year. The next closest was 16 sacks given up. 
 

Basically their offensive line dominated all year and their run game, efficiency-wise was the best in the conference at 5.5 a clip. They leaned heavily on their run game and ran more than they threw. Not sure where your saw they passed more. 

All of that plus their overall D was #9 in the country and #1 in the SEC.