Originally Posted by badboy
The rep I've read is DBs just don't pay much attention to him & his yardage is because he is wide open on a small number of plays. That will not happen often in NFL. I don't mean to sound as if I am against Hill, I just did not watch him and he sounds risky.
That's not the case, as it will become a little more clear as I continue with the film study.
There are times that the D sent the CB in to defend the triple option and the safety bombed.
To say that DB doesn't pay attention to Hill is just nonsense.
How do you purposedly allow a receiver with deep speed to run past you.
Hell, if he drops 3 passes (which wasn't the case to begin with) and catches one, it would still be a long TD.
If the number of times that he gets open due to a mishap in a D that makes me all riled up about Hill, I would be a fool.
For some reason, it's hard for me to distinguish between badboy and beerlover at times, LOL - you guys are working so much in tune (martin is a bit different; probably because he diverts quite a bit of attention to small school prospects).
But at any rate, one of you mentioned that as scouts, one can find value in a case like this... where the QB is not all that good, and the system doesn't showcase the true talent of a receiver (even if it gives him wide-open chance at times).
We can say the same about the Stanford TE as many of his catches were also wide-open due to the scheme/mishap by the D.
I scratch out most of those plays.
But I do note how they run their route on those plays.
Like I said, if you don't pay attention to the details (their body's movement - whether they telegraph the play as a run rather than a pass; all sort of things) then you're more likely to miss out on a prospect (off-the-field problem is a different thing.)