*An on-going series of putting college QBs through our mathematical analysis. We don’t have all the needed data until the 2012 NFL Combine results are completely in (including most Wonderlic scores leaked), but we can assume (neutral) some of it and we have all the game performance/statistics.

See this link for details on our College QB rating system --  Predicting the Unpredictable…Projecting a College QB to the NFL with a Mathematical Formula and "Searching for the Next Aaron Rodgers" -- an Update on the 2012 QB class, and our "College QB Scouting Formula"...

 

The bar is set high for NFL QBs all of the sudden (maybe not all of the sudden). The days of "come in and sit for a season, or two," are about done.

The media loves Josh Freeman (2010)...no wait, they don't love Freeman (2011). Sam Bradford is the next ____ (2010)...no wait, now we need to trade Bradford (2011). Christian Ponder (2011) was "it" when he threw for 300+ yards in game that one time this year, but a few bad games later...and it's now in question, whether the #12 overall pick in the 2011 NFL Draft is the Vikings future or not. Ryan Fitzpatrick (first 4 games of 2011) is "awesome," worthy of a huge contract...several poor games later, and the Bills are whispered to be looking for a QB in the 2012 NFL Draft. People are even down on Mark Sanchez (2011). Sanchez just had the finest statistical season of his career, and is coming of two AFC finals appearances...and has averaged 10+ wins per season in his three years...but now he has to go. Most fans would currently rather have Matt Flynn, than 75% of the leagues current starting QBs...which is the best example of the impatient-hysteria of NFL fans (and some NFL executives/owners).

As a society (current day), instant gratification is paramount. We don't have time for anything short of rapid success from our young NFL QB. Perhaps, that actually is the right way to view it? Maybe impatience is a virtue when it comes to NFL QBs? Let me explain...

There aren't that many Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning-type QBs wondering around. We also know, that if a team gets hold of an elite QB...then that NFL franchise is set for a decade. Joe Flacco and Mark Sanchez are fine, but are they going to be elite? Are they going to be true difference makers, or just be ever-known as "solid?" If these "solid" QBs are not going to change a team's landscape for the next decade; and thus making them perpetual Super Bowl threats (and occasional champions)...then where is a franchise really going with these "solid" QBs?

I'm not slamming the impatience...I'm more embracing it. If an NFL team's top goal is to become "World Champs," then being a perpetual #3rd-15th best team in the NFL, year-after-year...isn't going to satisfy for long. Mark Sanchez can go to back-to-back conference finals, but he didn't win...and he didn't move the team ahead this year. To me, it's legit to ask the question (from a business owners aspect), "will a Sanchez or Flacco type QB get me to the next level perpetually?" If the answer is "no," how long do you "suffer" along with them, before making an investment in a new QB?

If you are only going to be a fringe playoff team for years with a particular QB...would you rather pass on mediocrity, and suffer until you do find the next great QB? Alternatively, would you rather lock into mediocrity right now...and spend three seasons finding out it's not all that you hoped, and then maybe an additional two seasons burning out the contract. At least a truly bad rookie QB (like a Blaine Gabbert), allows you to "fail fast and move on." A "solid" QB, can keep you lingering around...wondering, hoping.

A truly solid (not elite) QB, might have your franchise imprisoned for years...Joe Flacco, Alex Smith, etc. The type of QBs that are not good enough to get you the division title perpetually, nor have your team in the constant chase for the #1 seed in the conference, and ultimately...not good enough to win a Super Bowl, but also not bad enough to automatically get rid of said QB either. The type of QB that is just good enough to keep you out of the top 10-15 NFL Draft picks, and thus leaving you with statements like..."well, who else available is better than Alex Smith?" (as I heard driving in the car this a.m. in a discussion of whether the 49ers should re-sign Smith in 2012 or not).

In our statistical analysis of Matt Barkley (circa 2011), we don't think we are getting a potential elite NFL QB...we think we are getting a limited upside, but not a "bust" downside, NFL QB. An investment in Barkley (based on today), gets us a potentially "solid" NFL QB, at best. We'll get into the details on why we feel that way in a minute...

It's going to sound like we are slamming Barkley, but we don't mean to (and again, he's not even in the 2012 Draft...we're just pretending that he is). One of the main thrusts of this report out will be...we're being sold that Barkley is an "A-level" NFL QB, when maybe he is a B or B-. A QB that is a B-level prospect, is a 2nd-Round prospect/payroll...not a top-10 overall pick/payroll. We would then take an additional step further and ask, if a QB is not showing high-upside/elite tendencies...if he's just "solid," is it worth franchise's time, effort, and payroll?

The same Barkley vibe that I am writing now, I would have written similarly about a T.J. Yates or a Greg McElroy in 2011...QBs that have some interesting scouting/passing metrics in our system, and that we feel are worth a look at a certain point in the NFL Draft...but not top-10 overall picks. However, Barkley has the media adoration...and will be taken much higher than a Yates or McElroy. It may be a "USC-thing," I don't know. Something is pressing Barkley as the Andrew Luck consolation prize in the mainstream media, but looking at it closer...we see things that cause us to question the ceiling for Barkley at the next level.

Incomplete Barkley data, but...

We will not have all the data we will need on Matt Barkley to complete our formula until the NFL Combine process is over, but from what we do have from his 2011 performance, mixed with neutral assumptions on the items that we are missing...Barkley would grade right on the edge of a potentially decent/solid/good NFL QB in our system analysis. Barkley is very close to the (bad) edge on some of our passing metrics...and the more we look at it, the more that we lean towards a belief that Barkley will not achieve an elite NFL status.

Barkley's profile in our system shouts of a lesser-version of Mark Sanchez for an upside, and the downside of a mediocre NFL QB dependent upon personnel, coaching, etc. (i.e. Kyle Orton). Barkley is right on that fulcrum of a "solid," but not a spectacular NFL QB in our formula outputs. However, Barkley will likely be a top-10 NFL Draft pick in 2013...with all the Jon Gruden-esque accolades -- "this guy's a winner," "he works hard," "he just knows what to do with the ball." Most fans will gobble up all the Barkley praise and promise, and then will be left wanting after a year or two. Not that Barkley will be "bad," he's just not likely to be the savior that the media will make him out to be.

 

The 2011 Red-Flag concerning performance

The first thing that jumps out to us is looking at his 2011 performance through the lens of strength of competition. Barkley had three games with 5+ passing TDs in 2011, and all of them against inferior competition.

• Barkley threw for 5 TD/0 INT against Syracuse (5-7)

• Barkley threw for 6 TD/0 INT against UCLA (6-7)

• Barkley threw for 6 TD/1 INT against Colorado (3-10)

When you evaluate a QB more heavily on his performances against better competition, then the games (above) that "juice" Barkley overall stats tremendously...they mean virtually nothing to our ratings/evaluations. Barkley threw for a grand total of 39 TDs/7 INTs in 2011, but minus the three games above...it discounts down to 22 TDs/6 INTs. Still good results, but less jaw-dropping than his overall totals...but the media focus is always on the overall, with rare strength of opponent discrimination. 

Consider the games against lowly Minnesota (3 TD/0 INT) and Arizona (4 TD/1 INT), and then deduct these two games along with the three games above, and you now have Barkley with 15 TD/5 INT in 7 games against better competition. If we took out the high-pace Oregon game (4 TD/1 INT) as well...you are now at 11 TD/4 INT in the remaining six games...which is less than 2 passing TDs per game against stiffer defenses; and that's being kind to those defenses (Stanford, Utah, Notre Dame, Washington, Arizona State, Cal). When you start separating the chafe from the wheat with Barkley...we start to wonder -- is this the type of results that we would want to see in a QB that we might be about to invest heavily in for the next 5+ years?

It is tough to get a total read on Barkley (or Sanchez, Booty, Leinart, etc.), because the USC schedule was so flimsy. The Pac-10 is like an older-brother version of the WAC/Mountain West; high-octane offenses...limited defenses. The better teams that Barkley played against this season like Stanford and Oregon, are more known for their offensive prowess...not great defenses. USC/Barkley did not face a top-20 defense in 2011 (defenses based on lowest yards per game allowed). The toughest team-defenses that Barkley faced in 2011, were defenses ranked between 25th-35th overall (Cal, Stanford, Notre Dame, Utah)...and Barkley posted 9 TD/4 INT with 241.7 yards per game passing against that group. Not bad at all, just not pushing toward an elite level.

In what we feel were Barkley's six toughest opposing defenses faced in 2011, he had just one passing TD in 3 of those six games. Andrew Luck hasn't had less than two passing TDs in a game in his last 15 games period. The difference between solid-good...and great-elite among QBs, is the difference between multiple Super Bowl appearances, home playoff games/gate, and national TV/merchandise relevance...or the alternative of apathy and/or mediocrity.

To us, Andrew Luck is so superior to Matt Barkley...it really sours us (maybe a bit unfairly) on Barkley as an NFL investment. However, there are many who feel/assume that Barkley is the natural #2, to Luck's #1 (if they were both in this draft). The difference between "solid" and elite, to an NFL franchise, could not be more massive in it's financial impact.

In a conference where Barkley's USC team is the most dominant talent-wise, and loaded with great offensive weapons, facing mostly horrible defenses...are you going to bet millions of dollars, and hold your franchise hostage for 3-5 years, on a USC QB that throws for 250 +/- yards with 1-2 TDs per game against mildly tougher competition? A truly superior QB at USC, in the year 2011, should have video game-like numbers against most all teams...not just producing solid/OK against the good teams, and then racking it up by totally humiliating the bad teams. What do you think Andrew Luck would produce with USC's arsenal of athletic weapons?

When we look at this data on Barkley, the term "game manager" leaps to mind. Barkley could successfully lead an NFL team, but if you are looking for the next Brady, Brees, Manning, Rodgers...it doesn't appear to be Matt Barkley. At least, it doesn't appear that way at this point. Barkley has solid/good metrics in our system for a Junior QB, perhaps he builds upon them and moves forward with another season of college ball. However, what we see now...more scares us in terms of a potential top-10 NFL Draft pick, and millions in payroll allotted. Is Barkley NFL-worthy?...yes. Is Barkley the next NFL elite...in our analysis, no.

 

Physical issues?

It's not completely damning in the NFL to be closer to 6'2" in height, but it's not a great thing either. It is especially not wonderful if you are not a very mobile QB. Initial data shows Barkley closer to 6'2". Barkley does not appear to be an overly "mobile" QB...he rushed for only 14 yards on 28 carries this season. Barkley has -41 yards rushing in his three seasons as a USC starter, Andrew Luck has 957 rushing yards in that same span. We know that sacks are counted as negative rushing yards in college, but even ignoring the rushing yardage totals...we still do not see anything that shouts mobile with Barkley...we'll have to wait for his NFL Combine numbers to make a more accurate judgment. *Drew Brees is an obvious exception to the strong NFL elite trend of tall and/or mobile QBs.

Barkley appears to have a great throwing motion, and good velocity on his passes...so no issues that we see there. It did strike me that watching him on tape...that there are a lot of sideline/deep balls to his WRs, who are usually sprinting open by 2-3-4+ yards cushion. This scenario scares me on USC-type QBs...how much of all the excitement is the QB, and how much is the talent around him? Most capable QBs look good when their first read/option almost always beats his defender off the line of scrimmage; and USC has several highly-athletic weapons that opposing teams with limited defensive talent cannot contain all game. Barkley has great stat totals overall, but if the numbers are being over-inflated from huge games and big plays, against inferior competition...what do we really know about how Barkley translates to the next level?

 

NFL QB that Matt Barkley most compares to statistically in college...

Don't you hate it when prospects in any sport are compared to a player from the same team that has gone before them? We apologize in advance, but as we narrowed down a filter of similar QBs to Barkley in our database...and the two previous USC QBs came tumbling out as similar metrics/attributes across the board (we didn't plan it that way).

Mark Sanchez is the only one of the four QBs listed below in the comparison that had a "passing" grade in our mathematical scouting system (grading as a likely very good/possiblly elite NFL QB). Barkley is rating a notch, or two, below Sanchez overall for us as an NFL prospect (right now). John David Booty and Jimmy Clausen rated as NFL backups in our formulas, journeymen type NFL QBs at best. Barkley winding up between Sanchez and Booty, is a virtual "no-man's land," as it pertains to his outlook for elevating an NFL franchise to new heights.

 

QB	Yr	College	H	W	adj Comp Pct	Adj Yds per Comp	adj Pass per TD	adj Pass Per INT	x	Yds per game 35 Att	TDs per game 35 Att	INTs per game 35 Att
Barkley, Matt	2012	USC	74.1	220	65.2%	10.9	14.9	49.1		248.1	2.3	0.7
Sanchez, Mark	2009	USC	74.3	227	64.7%	11.3	11.4	38.3		256.7	3.1	0.9
Booty, John David	2008	USC	74.4	218	62.5%	10.8	14.1	101.7		236.6	2.5	0.3
Clausen, Jimmy	2010	Notre Dame	74.6	222	63.5%	11.0	19.7	126.3		244.7	1.8	0.3

Matt Barkley Overall Metrics Scouting Score = 0.801 (B-/C+ grade)

*A score of 0.850+ is where we see a stronger correlation of QBs going onto be elite, a score of 1.000+ is "rarefied air."

*The "adj" shown above, means "adjusted" output in our system analysis...based on strength of opponent

 

Summary

Matt Barkley will go back to USC, and have another big year in 2012...maybe the extra year will develop him further and show some statistical trends that push Barkley to the next level of prospect in our system. For now, we see Barkley as a very vanilla NFL QB prospect.

Barkley is not overly tall, overly mobile, nor is he doing anything spectacular (statistically) in games against elevated competition. We would not call him an NFL "bust" at all, but we would not call him a future NFL star either. Barkley will likely play in the NFL, and have some modicum of success...his success more reliant on the team, scheme, coach and surrounding talent. Barkley as a 2nd-Round NFL Draft selection...we like it. Barkley as a slightly lower expectation prospect, and sitting for a year or two behind an NFL veteran...that would be an ideal situation.

What's likely to happen to Barkley in the NFL (based on what we evaluate as of his Junior season)? Barkley will be drafted very high in 2013, and will have huge/instant expectations, and probably stumbles early (like most all young QBs do)...and by 2014, we are having the same discussion on him like we are on Ponder and Gabbert right about now.

Barkley is a solid NFL QB at best to us, and there are plenty of solid/serviceable QBs in the NFL. Do you really, really want that for your franchise for the next 3-5+ years? Do you want to spend multiples of millions of dollars on it? How much is a "solid" QB worth in the NFL?

 

 

Select a position from the tabs below to see stats and scouting information for that respective position.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•