[JohnR34231]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=17134.msg197039#msg197039 date=1502568278]
I think it is a little early to decide that Costello is "all hype".  Any special reason for saying that?
I do agree that if in fact he is, and Chryst turns out to be merely adequate, Shaw needs to do some serious soul searching about the way he and the staff recruit and develop quarterbacks.

Actually, I think it is a bit early to say that Costello is anything more than hype.  He hasn't seen any action as a collegiate quarterback, ergo... all we have to go on is hype (so far).

BC
[/quote]

I guess that's true if you want to look at it that way; any player who hasn't played yet is "all hype".
My point was that I don't think Costello has been overly hyped. I haven't heard any "next Andrew Luck" or other types of excessive praise. Also, referring to someone as "all hype" infers (to me, anyway) that you don't think they are all that good. That's what I was saying it is too early to determine.

[JohnR34231]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=17134.msg197039#msg197039 date=1502568278]
I think it is a little early to decide that Costello is "all hype".  Any special reason for saying that?
I do agree that if in fact he is, and Chryst turns out to be merely adequate, Shaw needs to do some serious soul searching about the way he and the staff recruit and develop quarterbacks.

Actually, I think it is a bit early to say that Costello is anything more than hype.  He hasn't seen any action as a collegiate quarterback, ergo... all we have to go on is hype (so far).

BC
[/quote]

I guess that's true if you want to look at it that way; any player who hasn't played yet is "all hype".
My point was that I don't think Costello has been overly hyped. I haven't heard any "next Andrew Luck" or other types of excessive praise. Also, referring to someone as "all hype" infers (to me, anyway) that you don't think they are all that good. That's what I was saying it is too early to determine.

[winflop]

So if Shaw doesn't play freshman QBs, and Costello hasn't seen a live snap in a game, how can you say he's all hype? For someone to be all hype they actually have to play and demonstrate that their abilities don't match up to the expectations that were set.

[winflop]

So if Shaw doesn't play freshman QBs, and Costello hasn't seen a live snap in a game, how can you say he's all hype? For someone to be all hype they actually have to play and demonstrate that their abilities don't match up to the expectations that were set.

[Hurlburt88]

"Untested and unproven" may be a more accurate description in these situations.  As I posted last week, would be great to get off to a fast start against Rice and see all 3 QB's. 

[Hurlburt88]

"Untested and unproven" may be a more accurate description in these situations.  As I posted last week, would be great to get off to a fast start against Rice and see all 3 QB's. 

[JohnR34231]

"Untested and unproven" may be a more accurate description in these situations.  As I posted last week, would be great to get off to a fast start against Rice and see all 3 QB's.

Yeah, I'm hopeful we will get to see enough of Costello this year to be able to get a decent read on his abilities. I have a feeling we won't though, assuming Chryst and Burns stay healthy.

[JohnR34231]

"Untested and unproven" may be a more accurate description in these situations.  As I posted last week, would be great to get off to a fast start against Rice and see all 3 QB's.

Yeah, I'm hopeful we will get to see enough of Costello this year to be able to get a decent read on his abilities. I have a feeling we won't though, assuming Chryst and Burns stay healthy.

[CTcard]

Yeah, I'm hopeful we will get to see enough of Costello this year to be able to get a decent read on his abilities. I have a feeling we won't though, assuming Chryst and Burns stay healthy.

Well, I am hopeful that we do not see enough of Costello this year to be able to get a decent read on his abilities.

To do so would require a meaningful number of snaps where the game remains in coubt. If we see Costello in that role it will mean that, at the least, Chryst has failed or been injured.

[CTcard]

Yeah, I'm hopeful we will get to see enough of Costello this year to be able to get a decent read on his abilities. I have a feeling we won't though, assuming Chryst and Burns stay healthy.

Well, I am hopeful that we do not see enough of Costello this year to be able to get a decent read on his abilities.

To do so would require a meaningful number of snaps where the game remains in coubt. If we see Costello in that role it will mean that, at the least, Chryst has failed or been injured.

[Robbie]

...Just guessing here - but I suspect [Josh Rosen] doesn't play real well with others.

Is this a comment about hot tubs?

[Robbie]

...Just guessing here - but I suspect [Josh Rosen] doesn't play real well with others.

Is this a comment about hot tubs?

[Chupacabra]

Rosen is right and not just in the micro. Most college football players are at school to play football, not go to class. The academics are secondary–if even considered in the first place. Also, this isn't new and trying to argue that this isn't the case is arguing about ideals not reality.

Even at Stanford, where many on this board are hailing as a paragon of virtue in this department, sure seems to have a lot of science, tech, and society or communications majors. I make no claim on the validity of these fields of studies but there isn't a biochemical engineering major on the roster (for example). Rosen is right, competing at a high level and putting in the work that is required to compete does interfere with studies.

Let's not pretend that we drive to Stanford Stadium or turn on ESPN to watch these guys study molecular physics or read Foucault. We watch football to see players run fast and hit each other hard. Should this be the case? Maybe not. But again, that's an argument about ideals and not reality.

[Chupacabra]

Rosen is right and not just in the micro. Most college football players are at school to play football, not go to class. The academics are secondary–if even considered in the first place. Also, this isn't new and trying to argue that this isn't the case is arguing about ideals not reality.

Even at Stanford, where many on this board are hailing as a paragon of virtue in this department, sure seems to have a lot of science, tech, and society or communications majors. I make no claim on the validity of these fields of studies but there isn't a biochemical engineering major on the roster (for example). Rosen is right, competing at a high level and putting in the work that is required to compete does interfere with studies.

Let's not pretend that we drive to Stanford Stadium or turn on ESPN to watch these guys study molecular physics or read Foucault. We watch football to see players run fast and hit each other hard. Should this be the case? Maybe not. But again, that's an argument about ideals and not reality.

[BostonCard]

Rosen is right and not just in the micro. Most college football players are at school to play football, not go to class. The academics are secondary–if even considered in the first place. Also, this isn't new and trying to argue that this isn't the case is arguing about ideals not reality.

Even at Stanford, where many on this board are hailing as a paragon of virtue in this department, sure seems to have a lot of science, tech, and society or communications majors. I make no claim on the validity of these fields of studies but there isn't a biochemical engineering major on the roster (for example). Rosen is right, competing at a high level and putting in the work that is required to compete does interfere with studies.

Let's not pretend that we drive to Stanford Stadium or turn on ESPN to watch these guys study molecular physics or read Foucault. We watch football to see players run fast and hit each other hard. Should this be the case? Maybe not. But again, that's an argument about ideals and not reality.

Point taken, but Stanford doesn't have a program in biochemical engineering.

More broadly, I don't think the fact that we don't watch football to see players study has any relevance to the importance of academics and football.  As long as the student-athletes are getting an appropriate education, that is all that matters.  What they major in is their business.  The deal is that in return for us getting to watch them run fast and hit each other, they get a free, rigorous education.  I think by that measure, Stanford does quite well.

Rosen does have a point in that schools often sacrifice the latter in the quest for the former.  Then again, Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year.

BC

[BostonCard]

Rosen is right and not just in the micro. Most college football players are at school to play football, not go to class. The academics are secondary–if even considered in the first place. Also, this isn't new and trying to argue that this isn't the case is arguing about ideals not reality.

Even at Stanford, where many on this board are hailing as a paragon of virtue in this department, sure seems to have a lot of science, tech, and society or communications majors. I make no claim on the validity of these fields of studies but there isn't a biochemical engineering major on the roster (for example). Rosen is right, competing at a high level and putting in the work that is required to compete does interfere with studies.

Let's not pretend that we drive to Stanford Stadium or turn on ESPN to watch these guys study molecular physics or read Foucault. We watch football to see players run fast and hit each other hard. Should this be the case? Maybe not. But again, that's an argument about ideals and not reality.

Point taken, but Stanford doesn't have a program in biochemical engineering.

More broadly, I don't think the fact that we don't watch football to see players study has any relevance to the importance of academics and football.  As long as the student-athletes are getting an appropriate education, that is all that matters.  What they major in is their business.  The deal is that in return for us getting to watch them run fast and hit each other, they get a free, rigorous education.  I think by that measure, Stanford does quite well.

Rosen does have a point in that schools often sacrifice the latter in the quest for the former.  Then again, Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year.

BC

[DC 86]

Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year.

BC

Many Stanford athletes have left school early and then completed their degree requirements during off-seasons or post-career. I don't think they value their education any less than those that graduate on the conventional schedule.

If Rosen has the chance to be a high draft choice it's understandable for him to take advantage of the opportunity rather than risk another injury; if he never pursues any further studies then his recent arguments are undermined, but if he continues taking classes down the road I don't see it as him not valuing education.

[DC 86]

Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year.

BC

Many Stanford athletes have left school early and then completed their degree requirements during off-seasons or post-career. I don't think they value their education any less than those that graduate on the conventional schedule.

If Rosen has the chance to be a high draft choice it's understandable for him to take advantage of the opportunity rather than risk another injury; if he never pursues any further studies then his recent arguments are undermined, but if he continues taking classes down the road I don't see it as him not valuing education.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17134.msg197176#msg197176 date=1502749056]
Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year.

BC

Many Stanford athletes have left school early and then completed their degree requirements during off-seasons or post-career. I don't think they value their education any less than those that graduate on the conventional schedule.

If Rosen has the chance to be a high draft choice it's understandable for him to take advantage of the opportunity rather than risk another injury; if he never pursues any further studies then his recent arguments are undermined, but if he continues taking classes down the road I don't see it as him not valuing education.
[/quote]

The Stanford athletes who leave early aren't publicly criticizing schools for making them chose between football and academics.  I agree that if he does decide to go pro, it doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't value academics, but that's not what I wrote... "Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year."  If Rosen elects to stay in school, it would send a powerful message that he does value academics more than football and would give his accusations some added credibility.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17134.msg197176#msg197176 date=1502749056]
Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year.

BC

Many Stanford athletes have left school early and then completed their degree requirements during off-seasons or post-career. I don't think they value their education any less than those that graduate on the conventional schedule.

If Rosen has the chance to be a high draft choice it's understandable for him to take advantage of the opportunity rather than risk another injury; if he never pursues any further studies then his recent arguments are undermined, but if he continues taking classes down the road I don't see it as him not valuing education.
[/quote]

The Stanford athletes who leave early aren't publicly criticizing schools for making them chose between football and academics.  I agree that if he does decide to go pro, it doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't value academics, but that's not what I wrote... "Rosen is in a unique position to show how much he values his education by not going pro after his junior year."  If Rosen elects to stay in school, it would send a powerful message that he does value academics more than football and would give his accusations some added credibility.

BC

[johnnyo53]

[quote author=johnnyo53 link=topic=17134.msg197020#msg197020 date=1502552385]
[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=17134.msg196852#msg196852 date=1502326361]
Hopefully Chryst or Costello will prove themselves so worthy in your eyes this season...!  I guess you think they're chopped liver (or at least unproven) right now ;)

Contrarian or controversial opinions don't have an exclusive hold on the truth.  Sometimes players and coaches share opinions because they're the right opinions.

CHRYST WAS MY GUY GOING INTO LAST YEAR, I ALWAYS THOUGHT HE WAS A GAMER, AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED MY OPINION ON THAT ASSUMING HE'S HEALTHY AND GIVEN THAT FRESHMEN QB'S WON'T EVER GET THE CHANCE UNDER SHAW.  BURNS BECAME WHAT I THOUGHT HE WAS AFTER A FEW GAMES, AND COSTELLO IS ALL HYPE.  CHRYST'S AND MAYBE BURNS' PROBLEM WAS A COACHING STAFF THAT OVERLOADS THE POSITION WITH PLAYBOOK INSTEAD OF TAILORING THE PLAYBOOK TO THE PLAYER.  THEY INHIBITED HOGAN THAT WAY TOO FOR QUITE A BIT OF HIS CAREER IMHO.  INDICATIVE OF THAT FACT IS HOW MANY TIMES WE GET A DELAY OF GAME PENALTY, FOLLOWED BY HAVING TO TAKE A SUBSEQUENT TIMEOUT.  I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF CONFIDENCE IN HOW THE QB POSITION IS RECRUITED AND DEVELOPED UNDER SHAVITAGREN.  REMEMBER, SHAW WASN'T THAT HIGH ON ANDREW LUCK, HE HAD OTHER RECRUITS RANKED HIGHER, AND OF COURSE STARTING NUNES AT ALL WAS ANOTHER EXAMPLE....  CHRYST MAY NEVER BE A GREAT THROWER, BUT HE COULD BE EFFECTIVE ENOUGH FOR US IF THE OTHER PIECES COME TOGETHER ON OFFENSE. MAYBE I'M WRONG (NO, THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE LOL) BUT THAT'S MY OUTLOOK.
[/quote]

I think it is a little early to decide that Costello is "all hype".  Any special reason for saying that?
I do agree that if in fact he is, and Chryst turns out to be merely adequate, Shaw needs to do some serious soul searching about the way he and the staff recruit and develop quarterbacks.
[/quote]

BECAUSE COSTELLO HAS DONE NOTHING TO ELEVATE HIMSELF ABOVE CHRYST AND BURNS, WHOM I CONSIDER TO BE AVERAGE TALENTS FROM WHAT THEY'VE SHOWED ME.  IF HE WAS THE SECOND COMING OF  "THE TRUTH" WE'D KNOW BY NOW.  I THINK CHRYST IS MENTALLY IF NOT PHYSICALLY TOUGHER THAN BURNS, BUT CHRYST REMINDS ME MORE OF SCOTT FROST AT QB THAN ANYBODY ELSE...

[johnnyo53]

[quote author=johnnyo53 link=topic=17134.msg197020#msg197020 date=1502552385]
[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=17134.msg196852#msg196852 date=1502326361]
Hopefully Chryst or Costello will prove themselves so worthy in your eyes this season...!  I guess you think they're chopped liver (or at least unproven) right now ;)

Contrarian or controversial opinions don't have an exclusive hold on the truth.  Sometimes players and coaches share opinions because they're the right opinions.

CHRYST WAS MY GUY GOING INTO LAST YEAR, I ALWAYS THOUGHT HE WAS A GAMER, AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED MY OPINION ON THAT ASSUMING HE'S HEALTHY AND GIVEN THAT FRESHMEN QB'S WON'T EVER GET THE CHANCE UNDER SHAW.  BURNS BECAME WHAT I THOUGHT HE WAS AFTER A FEW GAMES, AND COSTELLO IS ALL HYPE.  CHRYST'S AND MAYBE BURNS' PROBLEM WAS A COACHING STAFF THAT OVERLOADS THE POSITION WITH PLAYBOOK INSTEAD OF TAILORING THE PLAYBOOK TO THE PLAYER.  THEY INHIBITED HOGAN THAT WAY TOO FOR QUITE A BIT OF HIS CAREER IMHO.  INDICATIVE OF THAT FACT IS HOW MANY TIMES WE GET A DELAY OF GAME PENALTY, FOLLOWED BY HAVING TO TAKE A SUBSEQUENT TIMEOUT.  I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF CONFIDENCE IN HOW THE QB POSITION IS RECRUITED AND DEVELOPED UNDER SHAVITAGREN.  REMEMBER, SHAW WASN'T THAT HIGH ON ANDREW LUCK, HE HAD OTHER RECRUITS RANKED HIGHER, AND OF COURSE STARTING NUNES AT ALL WAS ANOTHER EXAMPLE....  CHRYST MAY NEVER BE A GREAT THROWER, BUT HE COULD BE EFFECTIVE ENOUGH FOR US IF THE OTHER PIECES COME TOGETHER ON OFFENSE. MAYBE I'M WRONG (NO, THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE LOL) BUT THAT'S MY OUTLOOK.
[/quote]

I think it is a little early to decide that Costello is "all hype".  Any special reason for saying that?
I do agree that if in fact he is, and Chryst turns out to be merely adequate, Shaw needs to do some serious soul searching about the way he and the staff recruit and develop quarterbacks.
[/quote]

BECAUSE COSTELLO HAS DONE NOTHING TO ELEVATE HIMSELF ABOVE CHRYST AND BURNS, WHOM I CONSIDER TO BE AVERAGE TALENTS FROM WHAT THEY'VE SHOWED ME.  IF HE WAS THE SECOND COMING OF  "THE TRUTH" WE'D KNOW BY NOW.  I THINK CHRYST IS MENTALLY IF NOT PHYSICALLY TOUGHER THAN BURNS, BUT CHRYST REMINDS ME MORE OF SCOTT FROST AT QB THAN ANYBODY ELSE...

[CTcard]

BUT CHRYST REMINDS ME MORE OF SCOTT FROST AT QB THAN ANYBODY ELSE...

Among ex-Stanford QBs, I think Randy Fasani is a much closer comparison to Chryst (first noted here by Outsider Fan).

Frost was smaller, better runner, and had a much poorer arm and delivery than Chryst.

Fasani and Chryst were both very big guys (Chryst 234#, Fasani 234# at NFL draft time), mobile for their size, had strong arms, but accuracy issues.

[CTcard]

BUT CHRYST REMINDS ME MORE OF SCOTT FROST AT QB THAN ANYBODY ELSE...

Among ex-Stanford QBs, I think Randy Fasani is a much closer comparison to Chryst (first noted here by Outsider Fan).

Frost was smaller, better runner, and had a much poorer arm and delivery than Chryst.

Fasani and Chryst were both very big guys (Chryst 234#, Fasani 234# at NFL draft time), mobile for their size, had strong arms, but accuracy issues.

[DC 86]

[quote author=johnnyo53 link=topic=17134.msg197227#msg197227 date=1502817089]
BUT CHRYST REMINDS ME MORE OF SCOTT FROST AT QB THAN ANYBODY ELSE...

Among ex-Stanford QBs, I think Randy Fasani is a much closer comparison to Chryst (first noted here by Outsider Fan).

Frost was smaller, better runner, and had a much poorer arm and delivery than Chryst.

Fasani and Chryst were both very big guys (Chryst 234#, Fasani 234# at NFL draft time), mobile for their size, had strong arms, but accuracy issues.
[/quote]

+1. Frost was a phenomenal athlete, not just quick and fast but extremely strong for his size (set records in the varsity weight room), however he tossed the ball like a shot put, so there was never any real optimism that he would throw the ball effectively in a pro style offense. Chryst's mechanics at least give some hope for continued development.

[DC 86]

[quote author=johnnyo53 link=topic=17134.msg197227#msg197227 date=1502817089]
BUT CHRYST REMINDS ME MORE OF SCOTT FROST AT QB THAN ANYBODY ELSE...

Among ex-Stanford QBs, I think Randy Fasani is a much closer comparison to Chryst (first noted here by Outsider Fan).

Frost was smaller, better runner, and had a much poorer arm and delivery than Chryst.

Fasani and Chryst were both very big guys (Chryst 234#, Fasani 234# at NFL draft time), mobile for their size, had strong arms, but accuracy issues.
[/quote]

+1. Frost was a phenomenal athlete, not just quick and fast but extremely strong for his size (set records in the varsity weight room), however he tossed the ball like a shot put, so there was never any real optimism that he would throw the ball effectively in a pro style offense. Chryst's mechanics at least give some hope for continued development.

[JohnR34231]

I agree that if Costello were the second coming of Andrew Luck there is a good chance we would know it by now. However, there is a big gap between the "second coming" and "all hype" (depending of course on your definition of the latter term).
I would like to see more of Costello before I decide where in that gap he belongs.

[JohnR34231]

I agree that if Costello were the second coming of Andrew Luck there is a good chance we would know it by now. However, there is a big gap between the "second coming" and "all hype" (depending of course on your definition of the latter term).
I would like to see more of Costello before I decide where in that gap he belongs.

[johnnyo53]

I agree that if Costello were the second coming of Andrew Luck there is a good chance we would know it by now. However, there is a big gap between the "second coming" and "all hype" (depending of course on your definition of the latter term).
I would like to see more of Costello before I decide where in that gap he belongs.

IF THE #1 RANKED QB WE HAVE COMING IN IS ALL THAT, WILL COSTELLO BE ANOTHER NUNES UNTIL SHAWVITAGREN FIGURES IT OUT?  IF YOU RECRUIT THE #1 GUY AND DON'T DEVELOP/PROMOTE/USE HIM QUICKLY, GOOD "LUCK" GETTING ANOTHER ONE...

[johnnyo53]

I agree that if Costello were the second coming of Andrew Luck there is a good chance we would know it by now. However, there is a big gap between the "second coming" and "all hype" (depending of course on your definition of the latter term).
I would like to see more of Costello before I decide where in that gap he belongs.

IF THE #1 RANKED QB WE HAVE COMING IN IS ALL THAT, WILL COSTELLO BE ANOTHER NUNES UNTIL SHAWVITAGREN FIGURES IT OUT?  IF YOU RECRUIT THE #1 GUY AND DON'T DEVELOP/PROMOTE/USE HIM QUICKLY, GOOD "LUCK" GETTING ANOTHER ONE...

[JohnR34231]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=17134.msg197235#msg197235 date=1502823574]
I agree that if Costello were the second coming of Andrew Luck there is a good chance we would know it by now. However, there is a big gap between the "second coming" and "all hype" (depending of course on your definition of the latter term).
I would like to see more of Costello before I decide where in that gap he belongs.

IF THE #1 RANKED QB WE HAVE COMING IN IS ALL THAT, WILL COSTELLO BE ANOTHER NUNES UNTIL SHAWVITAGREN FIGURES IT OUT?  IF YOU RECRUIT THE #1 GUY AND DON'T DEVELOP/PROMOTE/USE HIM QUICKLY, GOOD "LUCK" GETTING ANOTHER ONE...
[/quote]

Well, I expect Chryst to play one more year after this and Costello and Mills to battle it out to see who is his backup (in 2018) and ultimate replacement (2019). If Shaw is true to form we may not know that answer fully until a couple of weeks before the opener in 2019. As far as not getting another #1 is concerned, it's possible we lost JT Daniels to U$C because he thought he would get earlier playing time there. As far as using Mills early is concerned, I think the fact he is coming off a knee injury pretty much guarantees we won't do that.

[JohnR34231]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=17134.msg197235#msg197235 date=1502823574]
I agree that if Costello were the second coming of Andrew Luck there is a good chance we would know it by now. However, there is a big gap between the "second coming" and "all hype" (depending of course on your definition of the latter term).
I would like to see more of Costello before I decide where in that gap he belongs.

IF THE #1 RANKED QB WE HAVE COMING IN IS ALL THAT, WILL COSTELLO BE ANOTHER NUNES UNTIL SHAWVITAGREN FIGURES IT OUT?  IF YOU RECRUIT THE #1 GUY AND DON'T DEVELOP/PROMOTE/USE HIM QUICKLY, GOOD "LUCK" GETTING ANOTHER ONE...
[/quote]

Well, I expect Chryst to play one more year after this and Costello and Mills to battle it out to see who is his backup (in 2018) and ultimate replacement (2019). If Shaw is true to form we may not know that answer fully until a couple of weeks before the opener in 2019. As far as not getting another #1 is concerned, it's possible we lost JT Daniels to U$C because he thought he would get earlier playing time there. As far as using Mills early is concerned, I think the fact he is coming off a knee injury pretty much guarantees we won't do that.

[JJJ]

I put this on the Kickoff BBQ thread, but actually, it might fit here a little better. David Shaw on Rich Eisen show talks about Rosen and a lot of other topics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuDIXGcOyn8

[JJJ]

I put this on the Kickoff BBQ thread, but actually, it might fit here a little better. David Shaw on Rich Eisen show talks about Rosen and a lot of other topics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuDIXGcOyn8

[JohnR34231]

Well, here's one guy of the opinion that Rosen's brash personality may hurt him when draft time comes.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27277...kaepernick

[JohnR34231]

Well, here's one guy of the opinion that Rosen's brash personality may hurt him when draft time comes.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27277...kaepernick

[Stymie]

Well, here's one guy of the opinion that Rosen's brash personality may hurt him when draft time comes.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27277...kaepernick

The only thing that Rosen and Kaepernick share is a strong right arm.  Kaepernick had his chance,  but now is toast.  Rosen is the future for some lucky team.

[Stymie]

Well, here's one guy of the opinion that Rosen's brash personality may hurt him when draft time comes.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27277...kaepernick

The only thing that Rosen and Kaepernick share is a strong right arm.  Kaepernick had his chance,  but now is toast.  Rosen is the future for some lucky team.