ADVERTISEMENT

Word on the street is that the Panthers are taking Levis #1 overall

Was WanDale as good as Dotson?

No.

CRod was better than Lee and company who we had rushing that year.

UK OL was pretty good that year as well. Far better than our '21 OL. I think 4 of the 5 starters were either drafted or UDFAs.

Not a knock or praise for either QB, but who wouldn't take the better OL, a good RB, and 1 WR over 1st rd Dotson with no OL and no RBs?
 
Never underestimate the ego of the coaches and front office execs. They see the measurables and convince themselves they can mold him into Josh Allen, despite plenty of game film evidence to the contrary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike W 31
Levis also had a 4.0 coming out of high school with options to go to harvard, yale and Princeton (IIRC). So while being "cut" he's also got a very good head on his shoulders.
Counterpoint: eating banana peels and putting mayo in coffee.
 
Counterpoint: eating banana peels and putting mayo in coffee.
Ha! To each his own:

Levis had Popielaski for an honors English literature class as a freshman, learning primarily about mythology and reading, for example, The Count of Monte Cristo. He had Popielaski again as a senior for an honors British literature class, studying Hamlet and the like. Levis aced these classes like he aced every class. He graduated from Xavier with a 4.0 GPA.​
As an athlete, Levis is a perfect mix of football tough and quarterback savvy, which correlates directly to who he is as a student and person. He has long worked toward big-picture goals, of course, one of which is about to come to fruition, but his path to this point has been much more calculated and meticulous than his cliff-dive introduction to the visible and lucrative world of name, image and likeness.​
“I saw him a month or two months ago,” Popielaski said. “We were just chatting about his newfound fame, basically. The banana thing … I don’t think it was any expression of some maniacal tendency. It’s funny. You try to think of anecdotes where he did something stupid or got drunk one weekend or anything like that. No. I don’t think those things exist, really. He’s always been methodical and I think he’s used that template since he’s been here.”​
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister
Oh stop with the excuses for Levis. Your claim that he didn’t have a 10th of the talent around him that Clifford had at PSU is beyond’ idiotic. I watched several Kentucky games early last year to watch him given all the Kiper hype. Most of Levi’s’ passes were at or just beyond the LOS which made no sense given his “gun”. He finally completed a couple nice passes up the field but made two critical turnovers late in a winnable game—strip sack and fumble when running to get a first down. Levis had 3 years at PSU to beat out Clifford and simply didn’t. So given that Clifford outplayed Levis after he left, I think Franklin made the right call without question. Playing QB at any level involves more than having a gun for an arm but the so called draft experts keep praising Levis despite the fact that I haven’t seen much of that other stuff from him. I genuinely hope I am wrong and Levis turns out to be the next Josh Allen but I sure as hell wouldn’t be risking my job as an NFL GM by taking Levis in the first round.
You clearly don't hope you're wrong because your only concern is defending the move to keep Clifford.
 
No.

CRod was better than Lee and company who we had rushing that year.

UK OL was pretty good that year as well. Far better than our '21 OL. I think 4 of the 5 starters were either drafted or UDFAs.

Not a knock or praise for either QB, but who wouldn't take the better OL, a good RB, and 1 WR over 1st rd Dotson with no OL and no RBs?
Most would...in 2022 though was Kentucky better at any position on offense? Levis played well in 2021 IMO
 
Most would...in 2022 though was Kentucky better at any position on offense? Levis played well in 2021 IMO

In '22? PSU definitely had the advantage at every position. WR might have been the closest, but age/experience probably keeps us ahead.

The big issue for UK in '22 was OL. They couldn't run the ball and they couldn't protect the QB. Sound familiar?

Clifford and Levis both have the same results as QBs even though they have different attributes and styles. It's uncanny if you compare it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LandoComando
That would be the teams that are content with mediocrity I suppose.
I guess that if a rookie quarterback takes his team to the playoffs and wins the first round game, that is mediocrity. But in my mind, that's not too bad. Wouldn't you give a kid like that another year to prove himself?
 
Levis also had a 4.0 coming out of high school with options to go to harvard, yale and Princeton (IIRC). So while being "cut" he's also got a very good head on his shoulders.
Maybe. But his career experience amounts to “Pennsyltucky”. 🤣
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Obliviax
Read your post again...no mind reading needed
Don’t have to; you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. Let me try to explain it in terms your feeble mind can hopefully grasp. People can hope Levis has a successful NFL career while pointing out that he didn’t play better at Kentucky than Clifford did at PSU. Some of us can walk and chew gum at the same time.
 
Don’t have to; you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. Let me try to explain it in terms your feeble mind can hopefully grasp. People can hope Levis has a successful NFL career while pointing out that he didn’t play better at Kentucky than Clifford did at PSU. Some of us can walk and chew gum at the same time.
That wasn't the discussion. The discussion was the talent they had around him. It doesn't matter if Levis was better at Kentucky or Clifford was better at Penn State. It's who would have been better at Penn State.

You refuse to consider that it may have been Levis as your post clearly indicates which means your bias is preventing you from having any kind of rational conversation.

Why do you think Clifford isn't being talked about in the top 10? Why do you think a guy that is couldn't have potentially done better?
 
Don’t have to; you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. Let me try to explain it in terms your feeble mind can hopefully grasp. People can hope Levis has a successful NFL career while pointing out that he didn’t play better at Kentucky than Clifford did at PSU. Some of us can walk and chew gum at the same time.
I am really confused here. Methinks you have to define ‘played better’.

If a player played better wouldn’t that player get drafted higher? Don’t pro teams want players that ‘play better’?

Can you explain why a player that played worse is being called a Top Ten Overall pick …..maybe #1…..while the one ‘played better’ is unlikely to be drafted at all and his hoping for a FA tryout?

Now here is where you go all Quiniac Computer and spew out lines of stats. But stats reflect team play. Things like o line or difference in receivers. Or maybe the running backs or tight ends. How’s about the OC or how the system fit the player’s skill set? Even the quality of team defense just might affect a players stats. Just maybe quality of team opponents might factor in.

Is there any possibility that pro scouts consider all this? Would this impact how a pro team calculates which player ‘played better’?
 
That wasn't the discussion. The discussion was the talent they had around him. It doesn't matter if Levis was better at Kentucky or Clifford was better at Penn State. It's who would have been better at Penn State.

You refuse to consider that it may have been Levis as your post clearly indicates which means your bias is preventing you from having any kind of rational conversation.

Why do you think Clifford isn't being talked about in the top 10? Why do you think a guy that is couldn't have potentially done better?
But Levis wasn’t better at PSU…if he had been, Clifford would have transferred. That’s kind of the point.
 
I am really confused here. Methinks you have to define ‘played better’.

If a player played better wouldn’t that player get drafted higher? Don’t pro teams want players that ‘play better’?

Can you explain why a player that played worse is being called a Top Ten Overall pick …..maybe #1…..while the one ‘played better’ is unlikely to be drafted at all and his hoping for a FA tryout?

Now here is where you go all Quiniac Computer and spew out lines of stats. But stats reflect team play. Things like o line or difference in receivers. Or maybe the running backs or tight ends. How’s about the OC or how the system fit the player’s skill set? Even the quality of team defense just might affect a players stats. Just maybe quality of team opponents might factor in.

Is there any possibility that pro scouts consider all this? Would this impact how a pro team calculates which player ‘played better’?
Pro scouts don’t care as much about who played better as they do who they feel has the better tools and better potential. A lot of LB’s played better than Parsons in college, but who got drafted higher?
 
Pro scouts don’t care as much about who played better as they do who they feel has the better tools and better potential. A lot of LB’s played better than Parsons in college, but who got drafted higher?
Terrible example. Micah got screwed by the Wuhan virus, the B2G and Pa. Would have killed it in 2020 had it been a normal season.
 
Terrible example. Micah got screwed by the Wuhan virus, the B2G and Pa. Would have killed it in 2020 had it been a normal season.
Probably would have, but the point is he didn’t yet still got drafted high. How about another example…Danny Wuerffel…not many played better than him in college yet he didn’t get drafted until the fourth round.
 
But Levis wasn’t better at PSU…if he had been, Clifford would have transferred. That’s kind of the point.
Coaches don't always make the correct evaluation. Who knows if Levis would have been better or was better on practice. The point is where they're at now.

And if Levis magically got better when he left what does that indicate?
 
Probably would have, but the point is he didn’t yet still got drafted high. How about another example…Danny Wuerffel…not many played better than him in college yet he didn’t get drafted until the fourth round.
Because Wuerffel was surrounded by elite talent so his success was more about those around him. Same argument one would make for Bennett. They theory is if you put Wuerffel in Vandy during those years he's awful.

If Levis and Clifford were here at the same time and Levis leaves then becomes a first round pick while Clifford, who had far more talent around him, goes undrafted or someone takes a flyer on him late does it make you think for a second what could Levis had done in 2022? Or do your refuse to consider the fact Franklin may have made the wrong decision?

I'm good with the decision that was made. It worked out for everyone but Levis was always more talented. It was about whether he would play to that level. Maybe Franklin and his staff wasn't the best fit. Hopefully they are for Allar as we couldn't worry about what could have been. But posters continuing trying to put down Levis thinking that's being a good fan are insane. Levis > Clifford and we all know that. The only argument is Clifford fir scheme better which...
 
Because Wuerffel was surrounded by elite talent so his success was more about those around him. Same argument one would make for Bennett. They theory is if you put Wuerffel in Vandy during those years he's awful.

If Levis and Clifford were here at the same time and Levis leaves then becomes a first round pick while Clifford, who had far more talent around him, goes undrafted or someone takes a flyer on him late does it make you think for a second what could Levis had done in 2022? Or do your refuse to consider the fact Franklin may have made the wrong decision?

I'm good with the decision that was made. It worked out for everyone but Levis was always more talented. It was about whether he would play to that level. Maybe Franklin and his staff wasn't the best fit. Hopefully they are for Allar as we couldn't worry about what could have been. But posters continuing trying to put down Levis thinking that's being a good fan are insane. Levis > Clifford and we all know that. The only argument is Clifford fir scheme better which...
Clifford was the right choice…..for that time. He had all ready started for a full year, which makes a huge difference. He was better at the RPO which we were running a lot of then…..while Levis is a great straight ahead runner he doesn’t have the shiftiness and quickness the RPO requires of a QB. And we had a terrible O line which means we needed a QB that could scramble a lot.

Levis made an extremely wise move to go to Kentucky. They had a system that fit his skill set and a good O line allowing him to develop and show off those skills. Soon he will cash a huge check for that wise decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeatherHelmets
Clifford was the right choice…..for that time. He had all ready started for a full year, which makes a huge difference. He was better at the RPO which we were running a lot of then…..while Levis is a great straight ahead runner he doesn’t have the shiftiness and quickness the RPO requires of a QB. And we had a terrible O line which means we needed a QB that could scramble a lot.

Levis made an extremely wise move to go to Kentucky. They had a system that fit his skill set and a good O line allowing him to develop and show off those skills. Soon he will cash a huge check for that wise decision.
I totally disagree and I love the guy. He is a legend in SE Ohio when he won the HS state championship for St. Xavier with a dislocated shoulder.

SC had a lot of experience and still was under performing. The only time WL got in was in short yardage situations to run the ball. I really a game where he ran the ball several times in a row trying to run out the clock. We had ZERO short yardage game with our weak OL and iffy RBs (after losing out top to RBs to injury).

I think WL is a much better runner than SC. I think they both throw about the same. But it is clear WL has a much stronger arm.

My point is that if WL was given the chance to play and gain experience, he'd have been a better choice for PSU. My point is, SC was better only because he had experience. Given more experience, I am quite certain WL would have been better.

The fact is, WL is going to be a first round draft pick. SC will be lucky to be drafted at all. I know that college and NFL don't translate perfectly, but my eyes tell me that WL was a much more capable QB.
 
I totally disagree and I love the guy. He is a legend in SE Ohio when he won the HS state championship for St. Xavier with a dislocated shoulder.

SC had a lot of experience and still was under performing. The only time WL got in was in short yardage situations to run the ball. I really a game where he ran the ball several times in a row trying to run out the clock. We had ZERO short yardage game with our weak OL and iffy RBs (after losing out top to RBs to injury).

I think WL is a much better runner than SC. I think they both throw about the same. But it is clear WL has a much stronger arm.

My point is that if WL was given the chance to play and gain experience, he'd have been a better choice for PSU. My point is, SC was better only because he had experience. Given more experience, I am quite certain WL would have been better.

The fact is, WL is going to be a first round draft pick. SC will be lucky to be drafted at all. I know that college and NFL don't translate perfectly, but my eyes tell me that WL was a much more capable QB.
Running straight ahead on a called play is completely different than doing a RPO read, making the quick cuts, scrambling around. Levis is not an RPO guy. In this year’s offense he would have been better than Clifford ….but that was yesterday and yesterday is gone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mn78psu83
Running straight ahead on a called play is completely different than doing a RPO read, making the quick cuts, scrambling around. Levis is not an RPO guy. In this year’s offense he would have been better than Clifford ….but that was yesterday and yesterday is gone.
I don't think Clifford had that ability either.
 
Clifford was the right choice…..for that time. He had all ready started for a full year, which makes a huge difference. He was better at the RPO which we were running a lot of then…..while Levis is a great straight ahead runner he doesn’t have the shiftiness and quickness the RPO requires of a QB. And we had a terrible O line which means we needed a QB that could scramble a lot.

Levis made an extremely wise move to go to Kentucky. They had a system that fit his skill set and a good O line allowing him to develop and show off those skills. Soon he will cash a huge check for that wise decision.
And I'm not saying Franklin made the wrong choice. I think Levis leaving greatly benefited him. I'm not convinced we don't win more games if Levis was the starter for 2021 and 2022 than we did with Clifford but the reality is no one knows. It's all just an assumption.

I do hope that we adjust our offense to fit what the QB we recruited does best. If Levis wasn't a fit for the reasons you stated recruiting him was a mistake if we couldn't adapt the offense for him.
 
And I'm not saying Franklin made the wrong choice. I think Levis leaving greatly benefited him. I'm not convinced we don't win more games if Levis was the starter for 2021 and 2022 than we did with Clifford but the reality is no one knows. It's all just an assumption.

I do hope that we adjust our offense to fit what the QB we recruited does best. If Levis wasn't a fit for the reasons you stated recruiting him was a mistake if we couldn't adapt the offense for him.
I think that's a good point. A better choice is not the same as "wrong choice". SC was a good QB and really played well in the Rose Bowl. He was a gamer with limited physical abilities. He is just like the last few QBs we've had in Trace and Matt McGloin. With QBs like that, you have to have gamers someplace else. With Trace, it was Saquon. But the offense is really limited with they gamer is limited in the number of touches they get. If you have a great athlete at QB, that is a big advantage. PSU hasn't had that in quite some time...perhaps Robinson IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LandoComando
I think that's a good point. A better choice is not the same as "wrong choice". SC was a good QB and really played well in the Rose Bowl. He was a gamer with limited physical abilities. He is just like the last few QBs we've had in Trace and Matt McGloin. With QBs like that, you have to have gamers someplace else. With Trace, it was Saquon. But the offense is really limited with they gamer is limited in the number of touches they get. If you have a great athlete at QB, that is a big advantage. PSU hasn't had that in quite some time...perhaps Robinson IMHO.
Well said, and I honestly believe Allar has the potential to be our best QB since Kerry Collins. That's probably not fair to him but the next 2-3 years are going to be fun seeing what he's capable of doing. Hopefully, he gets to hear his name called on Day 1 of the 2025 draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obliviax
Oh stop with the excuses for Levis. Your claim that he didn’t have a 10th of the talent around him that Clifford had at PSU is beyond’ idiotic. I watched several Kentucky games early last year to watch him given all the Kiper hype. Most of Levi’s’ passes were at or just beyond the LOS which made no sense given his “gun”. He finally completed a couple nice passes up the field but made two critical turnovers late in a winnable game—strip sack and fumble when running to get a first down. Levis had 3 years at PSU to beat out Clifford and simply didn’t. So given that Clifford outplayed Levis after he left, I think Franklin made the right call without question. Playing QB at any level involves more than having a gun for an arm but the so called draft experts keep praising Levis despite the fact that I haven’t seen much of that other stuff from him. I genuinely hope I am wrong and Levis turns out to be the next Josh Allen but I sure as hell wouldn’t be risking my job as an NFL GM by taking Levis in the first round.
I can't see this guy's replies because I ignored him months ago but stop replying to him. I can tell from your response that he has his classic agenda, backhanding PSU by inferring it is the idiots at PSU and Franklin of course who had no clue about Levis and the juggernaut that he is. And spinning his Kentucky performance like he is the next Elway. Joke. He is as predictable as the sun will rise with his lame takes.
 
Oh stop with the excuses for Levis. Your claim that he didn’t have a 10th of the talent around him that Clifford had at PSU is beyond’ idiotic. I watched several Kentucky games early last year to watch him given all the Kiper hype. Most of Levi’s’ passes were at or just beyond the LOS which made no sense given his “gun”. He finally completed a couple nice passes up the field but made two critical turnovers late in a winnable game—strip sack and fumble when running to get a first down. Levis had 3 years at PSU to beat out Clifford and simply didn’t. So given that Clifford outplayed Levis after he left, I think Franklin made the right call without question. Playing QB at any level involves more than having a gun for an arm but the so called draft experts keep praising Levis despite the fact that I haven’t seen much of that other stuff from him. I genuinely hope I am wrong and Levis turns out to be the next Josh Allen but I sure as hell wouldn’t be risking my job as an NFL GM by taking Levis in the first round.
that all may be true. But WL if going to go in the first round of the NFL draft while SC may not get drafted at all.

So you are saying that you are a much better evaluator of football talent than 32 NFL team staffs and an army of draft analysts?
 
I can't see this guy's replies because I ignored him months ago but stop replying to him. I can tell from your response that he has his classic agenda, backhanding PSU by inferring it is the idiots at PSU and Franklin of course who had no clue about Levis and the juggernaut that he is. And spinning his Kentucky performance like he is the next Elway. Joke. He is as predictable as the sun will rise with his lame takes.
Didn't say any of that but, as usual, you're predictably wrong
 
Because Wuerffel was surrounded by elite talent so his success was more about those around him. Same argument one would make for Bennett. They theory is if you put Wuerffel in Vandy during those years he's awful.

If Levis and Clifford were here at the same time and Levis leaves then becomes a first round pick while Clifford, who had far more talent around him, goes undrafted or someone takes a flyer on him late does it make you think for a second what could Levis had done in 2022? Or do your refuse to consider the fact Franklin may have made the wrong decision?

I'm good with the decision that was made. It worked out for everyone but Levis was always more talented. It was about whether he would play to that level. Maybe Franklin and his staff wasn't the best fit. Hopefully they are for Allar as we couldn't worry about what could have been. But posters continuing trying to put down Levis thinking that's being a good fan are insane. Levis > Clifford and we all know that. The only argument is Clifford fir scheme better which...
Then why didn’t any colleges recruit Levis out of high school (except Franklin)? With all that talent dripping off him someone should have scooped him up. Clifford was better at PSU had a better year than Levis had at UK. I guess you can’t understand that Levis is being drafted based on potential, not what he’s done.
 
Then why didn’t any colleges recruit Levis out of high school (except Franklin)? With all that talent dripping off him someone should have scooped him up. Clifford was better at PSU had a better year than Levis had at UK. I guess you can’t understand that Levis is being drafted based on potential, not what he’s done.
I've said countless times he's being drafted on that potential
And that potential existed while at Penn State
 
I've said countless times he's being drafted on that potential
And that potential existed while at Penn State
No one recruited him out of high school, so apparently the potential wasn’t there at that point.
 
Or they missed it
Everyone missed it? Then the coach that did recruit him didn’t think he was good enough to start…and all the coaches on the staff didn’t think he was good enough…that’s a lot of people missing it. And when he gets drafted high and does nothing in the NFL, who will have missed it then?
 
Everyone missed it? Then the coach that did recruit him didn’t think he was good enough to start…and all the coaches on the staff didn’t think he was good enough…that’s a lot of people missing it. And when he gets drafted high and does nothing in the NFL, who will have missed it then?
Yeah, that's happened countless times
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT