Originally Posted by 76Texan
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.)
I have often mentioned in PMs during college seasons to Beerlover how much we think alike and how we evaluate players. However, we often disagree. He is all over Hill while Rmartin65 & I are a bit more reluctant. We break down the same way on LSU's Randle btw.
ALso note that ny comment was I've read defenses often disregarded Hill. I have not seen that myself as I did not watch him. I do appreciate the work you put in on film work.