I’ve landed in the Bay Area about an hour later than expected thanks to the fine folks at United not having a ladder big enough to take some duct tape off a wing, or something of that sort, that left us sitting on the runway for an hour at Sea-Tac.
But I digress.
Having landed, figured I’d just pass along a few links and notes before settling in at the the hotel.
— The national attention for Jake Locker keeps rolling in. Todd McShay, the draft expert for ESPN.com, writes that Locker is the No. 7 overall prospect in the 2010 draft as of today, and the No, 2 QB behind Sam Bradford.
Here are a couple of the key points McShay made:
“Multiple injuries have stunted Locker’s development and NFL scouts are obviously concerned about his long-term durability. Locker also has room to improve when it comes to reading defenses and seeing the entire field. However, when he’s at full strength and in a groove like he was last weekend, it is hard not to be enamored with Locker’s NFL potential. He’s a big, strong-armed quarterback with excellent mobility.
The value of playing in a pro-style offense that new head coach Steve Sarkisian brought with him from USC should not be underestimated, either. It is much easier for NFL scouts to evaluate a quarterback in a system that translates to the NFL game, especially now with the vast majority of teams in the country featuring the spread formation. In addition, Sarkisian’s influence can already be seen in Locker’s improved footwork and overall accuracy as a passer.
There’s no question in my mind that Locker would benefit in the long run by sticking around for his senior season. It would give him time to continue to polish his mechanics under Sarkisian, while increasing his game experience, which generally correlates to NFL success at the quarterback position. But I’m also a realist. Locker could easily emerge as a top-10 prospect if he avoids the injury bug and builds momentum off last Saturday’s upset of the Trojans. While I would like to see Locker return to Washington next fall, it’s hard to argue with a young man’s decision to cash in a winning lottery ticket in the ballpark of $30-45 million.”
— Some of you may have heard Lee Sterling on the Dave Mahler show yesterday say that Stanford would beat UW easily. Here’s a link breaking down why Sterling feels that way, picking Stanford to win by double digits.
— Some of you have asked about a time for the Oct. 10 Arizona game. That should come Monday.
— Former Seattle PI scribe Dan Raley has a writeup on the UW-USC game in his weekly Athlon’s Pac-10 notebook.
— Matt Hayes of The Sporting News uses UW’s quick rise into the rankings as proof that there is no “East Coast Bias.” Hate to say this as I don’t always agree with Hayes and I know some of you won’t agree with him on this, but I kind of think he has a point on this one concerning the East Coast bias. Hard to argue UW didn’t get an awful lot of attention and notice for beating USC (though I know it’s never enough when things are going well). The task for UW is to keep winning and prove those points beyond a shadow of a doubt, which is also the message Sarkisian is sending his players.
— Some of you have sent me notes asking why the USC-WSU game would be on FSN and not Stanford-UW. Remember, it would have been up here if Stanford had agreed to move the game. As for the initial pick, it’s simply the LA market. It’s by far the largest on the West Coast and USC is a prime draw there. Any USC game will outdraw anything else in that market and that makes a big difference in the overall rating. So any game involving USC is always going to be preferred just for the ratings alone.
All for now.