College kids do a fraction of the preparation that pro's do. Especially with the spread/hurry-up offenses prevailing that level, the emphasis is on running the the same plays over-and-over and overwhelming defenders with the sheer number of snaps they have to play.
Contrast that with a pro playbook that has 170 plays that change from week-to-week. It is like night and day for QB's coming into the League from those types of programs. I don't know how you can weigh a QB's ability to make that step vs the talent they show on film. I think most GM's draft the talent and then hope the capacity for the playbook follows.
What's the "talent they show on film" in the context of the simplified offensive and defensive schemes that you describe, though — particularly when it comes to the quarterback position.
Yes, college kids have a fraction of the complexity, but they also have
a fraction of the time. Also, coaches like the Chip Kelly and Andy Reid run "execution" offenses that have a much smaller number of individual plays that actually are deployable in a large number of personnel and formation groupings.
Again, if you give me 170 plays, 4 days, and nothing else to do, I'm going to have them down pretty cold. Maybe you can't recall 90 facts that you've been working on since July if you have a full week to do it — maybe that seems like an impossible task to you.
Being able to thread a football through two linebackers and on the back shoulder of a wide receiver who's running 18 inches ahead of a corner? That's something that I couldn't do no matter how much time you gave me.
And that's something that
no one can know about a college prospect, because they are in a simplified offense and the players around them aren't as good.
This story is certainly
cool, but the difference between a top quarterback and John Skelton isn't "want to." That's foolishness.