Jan 25, 2014; Mobile, AL, USA; North squad quarterback Logan Thomas of Virginia Tech (3) throws against the South squad during the first half of a game at Ladd-Peebles Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Derick E. Hingle-USA TODAY Sports
With players like Tom Savage and Zach Mettenberger ascending to buzzworthy status, and even lesser prospects like Bryn Renner generating a small amount of steam, there has been a forgotten man among the big-armed-but-flawed second-tier QB prospects in this year’s draft field.
Remember Logan Thomas, everyone?
Virginia Tech’s Thomas was supposed to be Tom Savage, the guy with the cannon who shot up imaginary draft boards once the media finally caught on.
Unfortunately, the media made up their minds early on Thomas, tossing him onto the scrap heap after his bad showing during Senior Bowl practices. Once Thomas was scrapped, it seemed no one was willing to give him a shot at redemption.
Meanwhile, the unknown quantity Tom Savage, pushed by wily old draftniks like Gil Brandt, became the man of the hour.
Now it may be Thomas’ turn to reclaim some of the spotlight he lost by making the supreme mistake of showing his warts in front of the media (a mistake Savage has yet to duplicate).
At last, Logan Thomas has a champion willing to sing his praises. Just as Tom Savage has Gil Brandt, Thomas now has Greg Cosell.
In a Yahoo piece published Monday, Cosell made his best case for Logan Thomas as, in his words, “the most intriguing quarterback prospect in this class.”
Cosell goes to great lengths to point out everything that is wrong with Thomas, and the list is very long. But Cosell also argues that, for all his obvious issues, there is a lot of be excited about with Thomas.
To give punch to his point, Cosell compares Thomas to a current NFL star who was maligned by some before the draft and still to this day has many detractors. Cosell says he thinks Thomas, warts and all, compares favorably to Panthers star Cam Newton
In fact, he thinks Thomas is a more pro-ready QB than Newton was before being drafted first overall in 2011.
“Here’s the reality, which to many is inconceivable given the negative perception of Thomas, and Newton’s relative success in the NFL after three seasons: Thomas is further along as a natural passer than Newton was at the equivalent point in time, having played more games in college, and learning an offense with far more complexities than Newton’s Auburn offense,” Cosell explains.
Cosell believes that Thomas presents a similar quandary for scouts to the one Newton represented. Yes, the talent is obvious, but there are so many concerns in other areas, including accuracy, touch, ability to read defenses, that you just don’t know where to rate the guy.
Newton’s talent was ultimately judged great enough to supersede all the concerns. He was taken first overall, and since that draft has become one of the NFL’s better quarterbacks, even though many of his rough edges still remain.
The question with Thomas is this: Does he have the raw physical talent to, like Newton, overcome all his disadvantages?
The consensus opinion, at least among draftniks and media types, would appear to be a resounding no. And that’s why Logan Thomas, unlike Tom Savage, Zach Mettenberger, Johnny Manziel and a few other quarterbacks with question marks, is not currently in the discussion as a first or second day pick.
Cosell clearly believes that Thomas is being unfairly neglected. Does he have a point?
Compared to a prospect like Savage, is Thomas really that much of a bad risk? He’s more mobile than Savage and did more at the college level.
So why is Savage buzzworthy while Thomas remains on the garbage pile? Is it only because Thomas blatantly failed in front of the media, during his bad Senior Day showing, while Savage has yet to give media observers a tangible reason to be down on him?
Cosell’s reputation in media circles is such that, after his assessment of Thomas, I think we’ll likely see a wider re-evaluation of the QB. Whether Cosell’s beliefs are shared in actual league scouting circles?
Who the heck knows?