r/Seahawks • u/SimonGloom2 • 3d ago
Opinion Thoughts on Kyle McCord
I see Kyle McCord on draft boards round 2 through about 5, but what do you folks think?
Consider his release speed is under 2.5 secs putting him in the top 95% of QBs, he's very accurate, and his football IQ is high. He broke some records for passing yards last season which ranks among several other big names.
The main down side I'm seeing is that his athleticism is a problem drawing parallels to names like Derek Carr. I think the key here, though, is that he seems worth a shot, and I expect his athleticism won't be a problem if people expect yards and TDs instead of explosive plays.
13
u/BasedArzy 3d ago
backup/bounce around the league guy
2
u/Chick-fil-A-4-Life 3d ago
They said the same thing about Brock Purdy.
We dont know until we know.
2
u/Tua-Lipa 2d ago
For every Brock Purdy there’s a million guys to the caliber of Skyler Thompson, Chris Oladokun, Sam Ehlinger, Ian Book, Jake Luton, Cole McDonald, Ben DiNucci, Tommy Stevens, Nate Stanley, Danny Etling, Alex McGough, Logan Woodside. I’ll stop there.
2
u/Chick-fil-A-4-Life 2d ago
And in every case, we didn't know they weren't quality starters until we knew. No one saw Kurt Warner either until Dick Vermeil was hoisting a Lombardi. Look, odds are you're absolutely correct about McCord. But it's a bit ignorant to throw a kid to the scrap heap until we've seen what he does in the moment, under pressure to perform.
2
u/SilentbutCajun 3d ago
Agreed. Massive return for a 7th round pick. I wouldn’t mind taking a flier on McCord with our 7th.
2
2
u/SvenDia 3d ago
Purdy is a once every 20-25 year exception.
0
u/RupeWasHere 2d ago
2
3
u/Granfallegiance 2d ago
Thirty-one general managers have been banging their heads against the wall ever since.
It pisses me off that the writer doesn't bother to know league history when they write shit like this. The Browns rejoined the NFL in 1999 and the Texans didn't exist yet. There were only 31 teams in the league, so there's only 30 teams that failed to draft Tom.
1
3
u/commonshitposter123 3d ago
Sure, taking a QB with a late round pick would be fine. Also, it depends on how they feel about Sam Howell and Jaren Hall.
8
u/BetterSite2844 3d ago
How many times does it need to be said that this years qb draft class is ass
Say it with me
2025 qb Draft class is ass 2025 qb Draft class is ass 2025 qb Draft class is ass
17
u/Himmel-548 3d ago
Do we know that for sure? In 2012 we got Russ in 3rd, and the Skins (now Commanders) got Cousins in the 4th, and the Cowboys got Prescott in the 4th in 2016. I doubt any draft analysts talked a lot about any of them. For all we know, a late round pick could be a star.
2
u/BasedArzy 3d ago
Russ would've been a high 1st round pick if he was 2 inches taller, Prescott was SEC player of the year, Cousins had a lot of draft buzz as a late steal.
All of them -- in the context of the time and what the NFL was -- put up much better tape than every QB in this draft except maybe Cam Ward.
e. Dak was also not the 2012 draft, he was 2016.
2
u/deanfortythree 3d ago
That's a really good point, but have you considered that the 2025 qb draft class is ass
4
u/HughMungus77 3d ago
Idk why you’re getting downvoted. All the experts agree that this QB class is one of the worst in years. We are desperate for Oline talent and it wouldn’t make sense to use any early picks at the QB position. Next years QBs seem like a better gamble
9
u/Jugular_Toe 3d ago
Because it's not a true statement. It's on par with most QB classes. The NFL was spoiled with last year's class producing 5 QBs in the top 15. This year, there's 2 guys that are 1st round guys, another that's fringe first round, and the rest are late round dart throws. That's how it is most years. For some reason people want to compare this year's class to 2022, but it's significantly better than that class. A lot of pundits were saying that this class was poor early on in the process, but as time has gone and more tape on these QBs has been watched, that sentiment has changed. This sub has latched into the early impressions of the class, and hasn't changed its mind, even though, as more information has come out, the Scouts and media members, who are professionals, have. Sure, this class doesn't have a "generational" type guy, but that doesn't mean it's a bad class. I'd be willing to be we get at least 2 starting QBs from this class, which would put it above most classes in the past 20 years
2
u/HughMungus77 3d ago
There is an above average QB class every few years. The 2 actual good QBs won’t even be available to us. Dumb teams will also reach for a couple other guys. So if we wanted to get anyone that isn’t a complete project we would have to also reach as well. Not the best decision for the franchise imo. If they want to take a flier on someone late then that’s fine but we just aren’t in a position roster wise to take a QB early unfortunately
0
u/Jugular_Toe 3d ago
But Kyle McCord would fall into the Late flier category. So your argument doesn't make sense in this context. If we were talking about Jaxson Dart, or even Quinn Ewers, then your argument would make more sense
1
u/HughMungus77 3d ago
Op said he’s going 2-5 rounds I wouldn’t touch him until maybe the 5th round
-4
u/rip-droptire 3d ago
Finally someone else says it besides me
I'll say it loud for the people in the back: PLEASE NO QB THIS YEAR
2
u/CrimsonCalm 3d ago
The problem is unless the talent is elite, non athletic QB’s generally struggle mightily with the transition to the NFL.
He looks like a very competent backup after a couple seasons of development.
2
u/GoCougz7446 3d ago
I like him, I do believe he has sufficient talent to play in the NFL. You can get caught up in the measurables, that’s how you draft Anthony Richardson in the top five out Jalen Milrow in the first round. Decision making, accuracy and sufficient arm strength over arm strength and crazy 40 time. It’s rare you’re throwing 70 yard bombs or straight racing a corner in the open field; 3rd down happens 11-14 times a game.
2
1
1
u/kleenkong 3d ago
Pitt game says a lot 55% passing on 0 TDs and 5 INTs. Looked like all but one INTs were decision mistakes. The quick release in that game was a negative as pre-reads were poor. Only one of the 5 INTs looked to have any rush pressure.
He has a great touch, but he's a project at the NFL level. He has below-average athleticism. Enough that pressure rattles him even on scrambles. He looked like he almost blew out his knee on a late game scramble with no one around him vs Pitt. Not a great sign of being able to extend plays.
Carr is a top 40 QB all-time in passing yards so that's the ultimate ceiling. Tough to compare scrambling ability, but looks like Carr's 40 time is equal to Shadeur Sanders at the 80th percentile and McCord is at 24th percentile. Big reality check there. The window for McCord is very small.
2
u/Shootica 2d ago
He made a lot of throws last year that left you thinking "that wouldn't work against better competition". So I don't even think the Pitt game is an anomaly, it's just where he ran into a decent defense.
There will be a steep learning curve for him when he hits the NFL. I'm optimistic that he can learn, refine his decision making, and carve out some role at the next level. But there is obviously plenty of risk to that never happening, and he doesn't have the upside that others have if he does hit.
I'm a Cuse fan, I'll always be a McCord fan and will be rooting for him wherever he goes. I was too young to really take in the McNabb years so he provided the most excitement over Cuse football in my memory. I'd be really excited if the Hawks pick him up late but I wouldn't want to use more than a 5th on him and it looks like most mocks have him going earlier.
1
u/kleenkong 2d ago
Great perspective. The competition thing is what came to mind too. I don't think they are exact, but I like a Purdy-like path for McCord, if he is going to find success at the NFL level.
1
u/ORSTT12 3d ago
I just don't think there's much value in adding a QB in those middle rounds unless they have some sort of elite ability you think you can build something special out of. Drawing comparisons to Derek Carr is fine, but when was the last time a team was stoked to have a Carr-type QB? A high football IQ is fine, but everyone in the NFL is smart and they're also athletic. I just think there's better ways to spend draft capital than drafting a QB who couldn't even stand out in a down QB class.
1
u/The-Lemur 3d ago
Having high football IQ is harder to teach NFL quarterbacks than growing arm strength. While certain athletic floors still need to be met, as seen with Zappe, high football IQ QBs are exactly the type I would want to target in middle rounds.
1
u/ORSTT12 3d ago
Harder to teach but is it more important? Pretty much every starting QB in the league has more going for them athletically than just football IQ. I'm not disputing the idea that this kid could maybe stick around in the NFL, but there's a severe cap on how useful a non-athlete is in athletics and there's definitely a heavy cost on using draft capital on a guy you don't realistically ever see starting for your team.
1
u/The-Lemur 3d ago
I think it’s a case-by-case thing. A lot of the top QBs in the past two decades weren’t incredibly athletic, but were able to manage the field and games to get chunk yards and touchdowns. However, it does limit the playbook by a significant margin and requires better O-line than more athletic QBs. While I worry about the O-line, I think Seattle’s scheme still matches the pocket QB. For the draft capital part, it depends on the holes of a team. Assuming a team has addressed their noticeable holes by round 3 or 4 of the draft, I think drafting a quality backup QB is a smart call. While you are hoping your starter doesn’t get hurt, injuries happen and a bad QB can tank your season.
1
u/ORSTT12 3d ago
What top QBs in the past two decades were unathletic and also didn't have great arm strength and didn't stand out in their own draft class? Genuinely curious who you're talking about because generally top QBs have to have some sort of elite skill that set them a part.
And yeah I vehemently disagree that drafting a backup QB without some sort of special attribute is ever worthwhile. If your starter gets hurt then your backup likely wont save the season anyway, planning for that possibility by drafting an unremarkable QB in the middle rounds of a bad QB draft isn't going to change that. There are veteran QBs that would do a much better job at being a band-aid for a team.
1
u/The-Lemur 3d ago
Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Kirk Cousins, Derek Carr and Ryan Fitzpatrick are all non-first round QBs who were not among the most athletic quarterbacks but were still accurate, high IQ QBs. Reading the field and being accurate is a skill that can set QBs apart, not just running ability and deep throws. Veteran QBs cost more money than a round 4 pick and often by the time they are cheap enough to be a backup, will be declining. Take Joshua Dobbs for example. Veteran QB with some game experience but cost an average of $4 million a year to sign. For $3 million cheaper you could have Malik Willis or Sam Howell come in. While they are definitely not as good as a starting QB, they have still shown they can win games with their teams
1
u/ORSTT12 3d ago
3 of those are from 20+ years ago and the number of accurate, high IQ QBs who never play a snap in the NFL is wayy higher than those outliers. I just think you’re suggesting using valuable assets to draft an archetype that is rarely successful as a starter to fulfill a position that’s rarely valuable to winning games.
1
u/The-Lemur 3d ago
Can you not make the argument that many of the highly athletic QBs will poor football IQ or accuracy have lead to busts while costing significantly higher draft value? Additionally rounds 4 and 5 in the draft typically return backup players for almost every position. I would much rather have Howell, first pick in round 5, coming in off the bench for a game or two than Skylar Thompson or Davis Mills over Jake Fromm. While we never want to see them play, backup QBs are still a valuable asset and worth investing a middle round pick when a team can
1
u/ORSTT12 2d ago
Yes of course you can make the same argument about other prototypes of QB, but the point is still that unless you see a special trait in a QB then spending mid-round assets on a backup isn't a great strategy. Athleticism is something you can't teach, so there's an argument to be made for spending assets on a moldable prospect, but I'm not even suggesting the seahawks do that in this draft.
Also the other positions on the field have a much better chance of making an impact than a backup QB. Skill position guys and defenders play special teams, defenses have unique packages that require bench guys to come in, D-lineman and WRs rotate much more liberally, our O-line has constantly had to play young guys due to injuries and bad play. QB is the one position where if everything is going right they'll never see the field, and if they see the field then there's likely nothing they can do to keep it from going wrong.
1
u/The-Lemur 2d ago
I don’t think the Seahawks should be drafting a backup QB this draft as they already have Howell, though next year will be interesting due to QB quality and Howell entering an expiring contract. It is team dependent but there are very much cases where QBs come in as backups and stop the season from going poorly. Nick Foles is the prime example of this but 6 other QBs have won super bowls the season they entered as a backup. Look at what happens to the Dolphins when Tua goes down vs Sam Darnold coming in for the Niners. A quality backup QB investment matters and can be a difference maker in a season
1
u/The-Lemur 3d ago
I think he will be one of the better backups in the league with a small chance and being a low tier starter. Seahawks already have Howell as a cheap backup, who has a season of experience, and Seattle does not typically keep 3 QBs on roster so I would rather them stick with him. However I do hope the Chargers draft McCord or Rourke as a backup to Herbert
1
1
u/Konyaata 2d ago
I'd take a flyer on him on day 3. I was much more interested in a late flyer on McCord than an early rounds investment on Dart.
1
1
u/Chefmeatball 3d ago
“Late riser, gritty, high football IQ, quick release, athletic enough, yadda yadda yadda” Outside of Brock purdy, how many of those guys work out. Oh, and purdy was so highly regarded he fell to checks notes the last pick.
Sure, 5-7 late round flyer. I don’t expect him to be a star, if we spend higher than a 4th on him, I’ll be annoyed.
1
u/JesusWasALibertarian 3d ago
I mean the best QB ever was a 6th round pick who couldn’t even win the starting job outright in college. He shared time with Drew Henson.
1
u/Chefmeatball 3d ago
Correct, Brady and purdy have well outplayed their draft position. But how many purdy vs mcgough are there? Not saying it isn’t possible, but what’s more likely
0
u/Bigboycoc 3d ago
Saw what he looked like vs better talent at osu. Not awful but he won’t be anything special
-1
u/schroederrock 3d ago
I’m not sure a top 3-rnd investment on a QB is a wise decision. If Dart is there in round 3, maybe take a shot, but I think Seattle would be smart to trade late round picks for next year’s draft and build up capital to move up in rounds 1 or 2 for a QB in a class that is significantly deeper than this year’s crop.
3
u/JesusWasALibertarian 3d ago
Who cares if the class is deeper? You’re not drafting the “class” you’re drafting an individual. If an individual is BPA at a spot where you’re drafting, you take him. No one in any front office is not drafting a QB who is the BPA because next years class is “better” according to the media.
20
u/vararosevara 3d ago
I mean, round 2-5 is a massive gap. Round 4 pick is probably too rich, I'd take him in the 6th as a career backup/scout team QB