Nothing he did at Kentucky points to success in the NFL? R U serious? Announcers salivated over his quick release. And drooled over the cannon of an arm. His ability to throw the length of the field or fire it into a tight window. His ability to run the ball. Coaches raved about his fire and leadership, making the whole team play better. And more.
Announcers salivated because they felt they should because of what guys like Kiper said. I didn’t see all this you’re talking about…he rarely threw deep, he overthrew short passes all the time, he missed more windows than he hit, and he was turnover prone. He was very similar to Clifford and had worse stats.
IDK, games I saw the announcers were actually watching the game they were announcing.
They drooled over Richardson and Hooker as well…it’s what they do. Any QB being discussed as a high draft pick gets drooled over.
That has nothing to do with being a better college QB. Hack went in the second round…was he better than McSorley?
www.mediaite.com
He got way more hype in 2021 because of how he played and who he beat
His 2021 season wasn’t all that great either and the talent around him is why he had the success he did have. They also played a weak schedule. It’s funny, you criticize Clifford for the same things you praise Levis for.
Criticized Clifford? What? My only criticism of him was I'd rather see what Allar could do. After the Purdue game he was fine. I even defended him for the Ohio State game
Right--he was highly touted and went in the second because he lacked talent. Absolutely. You have this false notion that talent is determined by if kids play at Penn State how you want them to. Trace was an overachiever that is a great PS/3rd QB because he can play Lamar or another mobile QB in practice.
Hack wasn’t very good in high school, wasn’t very good in college, and never took a snap in the NFL…something was lacking and if it wasn’t talent, I’m not sure what it was. Trace, on the other hand, got to four state championships in high school and won three of them, won a ton of games at PSU and won a conference championship, and is still in the NFL…you can call that overachieving, but I call that talent.
Why can’t I? I can’t believe you don’t. At some point talent has to show up as results, otherwise it’s not really talent.
The fact you want to say Trace had more talent than Hack ended your attempt at pretending you weren't irrational.
I say that based on actual results at all levels…what are you basing your argument on, your opinion? Trace was a better high school QB, a better college QB, and a better NFL QB, but obviously Hack had more talent (eye roll). I had more talent in baseball than Barry Bonds, but it just didn’t show up in the results.
Guilty....he's not or was not a better college QB than Clifford.
You play to win the game moron. I'll take Trace over Hack every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Not only was Trace a better College QB......he's proven to be a better NFL QB. One is home coaching HS and the other is still in the NFL.
Because Trace us the perfect PS/3rd guy to simulate dual threat QBs. Players don't always fully reach their potential despite their talent
