Go Back   Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com > Football Talk > College Football & the 2014 NFL Draft
Home Forums Register FAQDonate Automatic Monthly Contribution Members List Mark Forums Read


College Football & the 2014 NFL Draft The future stars of the NFL

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-24-2014   #2641
bah007
Hall of Fame
 
bah007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spring, TX
Posts: 8,905
Rep Power: 123107 bah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by deucetx View Post
Heh, first, I'm not popping off. How folks are defensive about these guys is beyond me. I can reason in choosing many of those mentioned so don't get into the favoring one over the other as if they are paying my bills.
Obviously, that comment was not directed at you. It was directed at the people who get so emotionally involved in these prospects that they cannot even have a real discussion about them.

Quote:
But with that said I would say that is only part of a view of it. I don't like that Clowney slacked last year. I have a hard time believing he did otherwise. I think it's a crap move and not how the game should be played. Though I feel that way and don't approve it still doesn't stop me from understanding.

It's not just seeing a teammate go down with an injury. It's also the fact that teammate was spoken of to be a solid high draft pick as well. Not that many of those players that were in that pedigree that go down. But you have to add that soon after that someone writes an article at South Carolina that he could sit out the entire season since no matter he will most assured be a high draft pick with no risk of injury which he could lose with such a grievious setback i.e. Lattimore. Not only is this article written but it is then brought up on ESPN and discussed in high detail. So their words and thoughts were live and in color for him with this teammate on how much he could lose.

Guesswork but someone probably got in his ear as well. Agent, family member, whatever and that didn't help his mindset. We're still talking young men here. These guys are not 'generally' built for such life decisions and that is exactly what it is for him at that point. So he may have been influenced without even thinking he was. It still falls on him in the end but I can't act like I don't understand.

He's still a person and a young one. That means he can make poor decisions and choices like any other. Not going to condemn him to all hell and back (you're not but some seem to be) because of poor approach to his final season. It's his dream, his livelyhood, etc., that weighed along with the voices that such get from a hundred directions.
I don't have a problem with this take at all. I can understand why those thoughts would cross his mind. What I don't like is acting on them the way that Clowney supposedly did. To put yourself above the rest of your team as if you are the only one that matters is a huge red flag to me. That's all I'm saying. And it is hilarious to me that people are apparently ready to fight to the death to dispute that it may be a potential concern.
bah007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2642
Dan B.
Hall of Fame
 
Dan B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: by the construction
Age: 36
Posts: 6,754
Rep Power: 74774 Dan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bah007 View Post
I also think it is incredibly silly to give Clowney so much credit for South Carolina's success on defense. He has been a big part but it's not like he is covering up weaknesses for ten terrible guys behind him.

In Clowney's first two years South Carolina had seven defensive players drafted. And they are likely to have three more drafted this year in addition to Clowney. That makes ten players in three years not even counting Clowney. And that's just on defense.

They have been an incredible defense during his three years. But they weren't chopped liver before he got there either, ranking #46, #15, and #14 in the nation in the three years leading up to his arrival.
Clowney's first year was in 2011

USC defensive rankings (overall record and final rank in parenthesis):
2008: 28th (7-6 / NR)
2009 22nd (7-6 / NR)
2010: 49th (9-5 / #22)
2011: 13th (11-2 / #9)
2012: 13th (11-2 / #8)
2013: 11th (11-2 / #4)

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal..._all&year=2012

Their team and their defense was better with Clowney than it ever was without him. I'm not saying he's the sole reason for that, but the evidence is obvious. They were also better last year than ever before. Whether they could have been even better with a 100% Clowney is debatable -- maybe they go from #4 to National Champs, who knows? Clowney could also have sacrificed his individual stats for team success last year however, which is something that people typically don't crap all over athletes for.
Dan B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2643
IDEXAN
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Challis, ID
Age: 49
Posts: 8,090
Rep Power: 55069 IDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texecutioner View Post
Everyone always looks at BB as this draft wizard and it's far from being true.

If BB didn't have Brady he'd possibly be a DC somewhere right now. Brady carries his ass every season. He is a great coach, but he us far from being some draft guru other than making fancy trades to get a lot of picks.

BB is the same guy who passed on Dez Bryant that was sitting there at like the 26th pick of the NFL for a lousy player like McCourtney. Had they drafted Bryant, they'd have another SB ring no question.
My post was in response to another poster's (Double Barrel), question about what criteria, what insight the people who Draft for a living use in their decision making process, and I used the Belicheck remark as an example.
I'm sure there are those who have a better history in the Draft than the Pats HC, and there's probably also quite a few very wise picks he made during his time in NE. But you didn't comment directly on his remark about valuing "traits" over "production" ?
IDEXAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2644
IDEXAN
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Challis, ID
Age: 49
Posts: 8,090
Rep Power: 55069 IDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playoffs View Post
Field Yates.

As Gil Brandt says, teams draft based on their own projections within their positions. It's why a Tom Savage is drawing strong interest from NFL teams but, DraftTwitter is all up in arms...

Gil Brandt ‏@Gil_Brandt
"Field Yates" - Thank You !
And re Brandt's comment about "Always has been about projection, not college results.", that's interesting and sounds like another way of discounting a prospects production.
IDEXAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2645
Playoffs 
Subscribed Contributor
 
Playoffs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,312
Rep Power: 379526 Playoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respectedPlayoffs is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IDEXAN View Post
And re Brandt's comment about "Always has been about projection, not college results.", that's interesting and sounds like another way of discounting a prospects production.
Or it was about Tebow.
Playoffs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2646
bah007
Hall of Fame
 
bah007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spring, TX
Posts: 8,905
Rep Power: 123107 bah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan B. View Post
Clowney's first year was in 2011

USC defensive rankings:
2008: 28th
2009 22nd
2010: 49th
2011: 13th
2012: 13th
2013: 11th

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal..._all&year=2012
Yes, I know. Our numbers appear to be different.

https://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/mainpage.jsp

According to the NCAA's stats South Carolina's defense ranked in Total Defense:

2013 - #19
2012 - #11
2011 - #3
2010 - #46
2009 - #15
2008 - #14

They updated the website for the 2013 season:

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/22
bah007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2647
Texecutioner
Hall of Fame
 
Texecutioner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,810
Rep Power: 125690 Texecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IDEXAN View Post
My post was in response to another poster's (Double Barrel), question about what criteria, what insight the people who Draft for a living use in their decision making process, and I used the Belicheck remark as an example.
I'm sure there are those who have a better history in the Draft than the Pats HC, and there's probably also quite a few very wise picks he made during his time in NE. But you didn't comment directly on his remark about valuing "traits" over "production" ?
I really don't like his draft philosophy honestly. He has had a few great picks, but he isn't any draft guru. They pick system players and they don't like to pay guys because they think they always have some rookie who can fit the system, but it's taken BB years to get that defense back on track while he has used a lot of picks to do it and many have not been so great.

Honestly I wish I didn't have the concerns with Clowney. I agree 100% with all of the athletic talent and everything, but I think a lot of people forget about how important the player's mentality is in the long term that ends up effecting how good the guy really ends up being.
Texecutioner is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
Old 04-24-2014   #2648
Texecutioner
Hall of Fame
 
Texecutioner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,810
Rep Power: 125690 Texecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respectedTexecutioner is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bah007 View Post
Yes, I know. Our numbers appear to be different.

https://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/mainpage.jsp

According to the NCAA's stats South Carolina's defense ranked in Total Defense:

2013 - #19
2012 - #11
2011 - #3
2010 - #46
2009 - #15
2008 - #14

They updated the website for the 2013 season:

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/22
Those rankings might not be a good place to evaluate if they are anything like the NFL's system of ranking offenses and defenses. The NFL's are literally worthless and a huge compilation of stats that really don't tell the entire story. Not sure if college rankings are the same or not though.
Texecutioner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2649
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
 
WolverineFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,957
Rep Power: 113798 WolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IDEXAN View Post
Sorry don't have any documentation or reference here, but the other day on an ESPN NFL segment a young reporter named Fields who previously worked for Belichick/Patriots front office said he heard Belichick say once, "we don't draft for production, we draft traits". I take "traits" to me skills, maybe others might have a different interpretation ?
Traits = skill sets

Seattle drafts the same way.
__________________
"Those who stay will be champions."

- The Immortal Bo
WolverineFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2650
bah007
Hall of Fame
 
bah007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spring, TX
Posts: 8,905
Rep Power: 123107 bah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texecutioner View Post
Those rankings might not be a good place to evaluate if they are anything like the NFL's system of ranking offenses and defenses. The NFL's are literally worthless and a huge compilation of stats that really don't tell the entire story. Not sure if college rankings are the same or not though.
Not sure what you mean. All you do is click on the team and it gives you a listing of team and player stats and where they rank according to conference and the rest of the country.

Example, South Carolina team page from 2012:

https://web1.ncaa.org/football/exec/...r=2012&org=648
bah007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2651
Dan B.
Hall of Fame
 
Dan B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: by the construction
Age: 36
Posts: 6,754
Rep Power: 74774 Dan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respectedDan B. is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bah007 View Post
Yes, I know. Our numbers appear to be different.

https://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/mainpage.jsp

According to the NCAA's stats South Carolina's defense ranked in Total Defense:

2013 - #19
2012 - #11
2011 - #3
2010 - #46
2009 - #15
2008 - #14

They updated the website for the 2013 season:

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/22
I see the problem. I tried to use the NCAA site first, but every time I googled "2012 NCAA defense rank" or something it would only send me to the 2013 season for the NCAA site. So I used the second link (the yahoo one). I didn't realize that yahoo's default ranks the teams by points allowed rather than yards allowed. I prefer yards as a metric, so I think your numbers are more representative. I apologize.
Dan B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2652
bah007
Hall of Fame
 
bah007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spring, TX
Posts: 8,905
Rep Power: 123107 bah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respectedbah007 is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan B. View Post
I see the problem. I tried to use the NCAA site first, but every time I googled "2012 NCAA defense rank" or something it would only send me to the 2013 season for the NCAA site. So I used the second link (the yahoo one). I didn't realize that yahoo's default ranks the teams by points allowed rather than yards allowed. I prefer yards as a metric, so I think your numbers are more representative. I apologize.
No need to apologize. The site changing has been a thorn in my side all season. As I was doing research on prospects I had to keep going back and forth between the old site and the new one, and I don't like the layout of the new one at all.
bah007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2653
IDEXAN
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Challis, ID
Age: 49
Posts: 8,090
Rep Power: 55069 IDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedIDEXAN is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by WolverineFan View Post
Traits = skill sets

Seattle drafts the same way.
I dunno, sure that's what it means ? Maybe "traits" could also mean talents, or characteristics, or abilities ?
IDEXAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2654
CloakNNNdagger
Hall of Fame
 
CloakNNNdagger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
Rep Power: 266923 CloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respectedCloakNNNdagger is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playoffs View Post
Jamarcus was addicted to codeine and promethazine... Clowney doesn't even drink. He did drive over the speed limit, though, so there's that.

All feedback from teams who actually met and spent time with the kid are positive, very likeable, other prospects like him.

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/sho...32#post2305132



So ding him for his down year, but Clowney is not some bad kid. His personality is the polar opposite of someone like Mario, who was dark and even suicidal.
Agree 100%.

And keep in mind, he learned from his 1 st speeding ticket.........instead of being cited for going 40 mph over the speed limit, he ratcheted it down to only 29 mph over the limit with his 2nd incident. And, unlike MW, he was still in college. Maybe, it's just an innate "drive" within a gifted speed rusher.
CloakNNNdagger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2655
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
 
WolverineFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,957
Rep Power: 113798 WolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan B. View Post
Clowney's first year was in 2011

USC defensive rankings (overall record and final rank in parenthesis):
2008: 28th (7-6 / NR)
2009 22nd (7-6 / NR)
2010: 49th (9-5 / #22)
2011: 13th (11-2 / #9)
2012: 13th (11-2 / #8)
2013: 11th (11-2 / #4)
Perhaps we should keep in mind that Stephen Garcia was the starting QB from 2008-2010, while Connor Shaw was the QB from 2011-2013.

Garcia - 57.7% completions, 47 TD with 41 INT, 777 rush yds and 15 TD's
Shaw - 65.5% completions, 56 TD with 16 INT, 1683 rush yds and 17 TD's

Offensive rank by year

2008 - 97th
2009 - 103rd
2010 - 37th
2011 - 42nd
2012 - 44th
2013 - 32nd

The offense was awful in year 1 & 2 of Garcia, but improved greatly in his final year. That year was also the only year that Marshon Lattimore was fully healthy the entire season. He carried the team that year and won the SEC Freshman of the Year award. Shaw took over as QB in 2011 and managed to field the same caliber offense the next 2 years with an injured Lattimore and the best offense in his final year without Lattimore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan B. View Post
Their team and their defense was better with Clowney than it ever was without him. I'm not saying he's the sole reason for that, but the evidence is obvious. They were also better last year than ever before. Whether they could have been even better with a 100% Clowney is debatable -- maybe they go from #4 to National Champs, who knows? Clowney could also have sacrificed his individual stats for team success last year however, which is something that people typically don't crap all over athletes for.
Clowney deserves credit for the defense being better (as do others but he probably deserves the most), but as I pointed out above, I would not attribute his appearance as the reason for the team's overall success. Steve Spurrier took over an awful program that had floundered during his 6-year tenure until he found the right QB to run his offense.

Also, we all acknowledge that team's go where their Quarterback's take them. Well, once Connor Shaw took over at QB, this team went further than they have ever gone before. Did Clowney also contribute to this success? Most definitely. But I think people are getting way too caught up in the hype and giving Clowney the majority of the credit because that's the easy thing to do. Connor Shaw probably had more to do with USC's success the last few years than Clowney. That doesn't make him a better player (he's not) but he was a great college QB and a good QB can take a team farther than a good DE can.

Oh, and I'm a guy who's hoping that we take Clowney #1 if we can't trade out. But I also call it like I see it.
__________________
"Those who stay will be champions."

- The Immortal Bo
WolverineFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2656
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
 
WolverineFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,957
Rep Power: 113798 WolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respectedWolverineFan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IDEXAN View Post
I dunno, sure that's what it means ? Maybe "traits" could also mean talents, or characteristics, or abilities ?
Sorry, should have dropped in the obligatory IMO.

Traits could mean a lot of things, but IMO, when I hear coaches talking about traits I immediately think of skill sets before anything else.
__________________
"Those who stay will be champions."

- The Immortal Bo
WolverineFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2657
disaacks3
Site Contributor
 
disaacks3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Spring, TX
Section: 116 - Row M
Age: 45
Posts: 10,885
Rep Power: 158369 disaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respecteddisaacks3 is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Double Barrel View Post
I get the potential angle and I set it up as an easy-to-answer question.

You have the benefit of hindsight being 20/20 vision with your examples. If only teams had such insight before making those draft picks. There is no guaranteed pick in the draft process. NONE of these players can offer 100% certainty that they are going to be great NFL players. Tell me which players will be in the HoF now and then I give that person major respect in about a decade.

That said, I think it is a bit foolhardy to take fans to task for perceived inability to judge game tape when pro teams are looking at the same tape and still consider him a top draft pick.

ALL of these picks are based on POTENTIAL. That's kind of a Captain Obvious observation.

There are a lot of absolute statements being made that seem more like shots in the dark than actual legit analysis. That was my point, not the softball question I posed.

The only consistent knock on Clowney pertains to his 'motor', and even that evaluation has its share of critics.
It's also pretty damn Captain Obvious that NFL Front office types are often *gasp* WRONG.

It's also pretty obvious that some teams place far more value in certain players than others. The part you overlook is that they also have 20/20 hindsight of their own evaluative processes and yet they still miss; some teams far more than others.

In what's sure to be a shocking development, some of the same scouts singing the praises of top prospects this year have been utterly wrong before.

As you point out, nobody is a "lock", so why nitpick with folks who see flaws in certain players?
__________________
D.B. - That sounds like a nugget of reality wrapped in a layer of embellished hyperbole.
disaacks3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2658
thunderkyss 
& so it begins
 
thunderkyss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Age: 42
Posts: 36,263
Rep Power: 323680 thunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respectedthunderkyss is a quality contributor and well respected
Send a message via Yahoo to thunderkyss
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Double Barrel View Post

btw, don't blast me, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I'm looking forward to the draft to finally root for whoever they pick,
What's sad, is that we're probably going to get a great player, whether that's Bortles, Bridgewater, Manziel, Clowney, or whoever...... but there are going to be boos. Just like when we drafted Jj Watt.

We look worse than Philly fans when it comes to 1st round picks.
__________________

Last edited by thunderkyss; 04-24-2014 at 05:08 PM.
thunderkyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2659
mussop
Hall of Fame
 
mussop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,372
Rep Power: 117345 mussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respectedmussop is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bah007 View Post
Watt was also used primarily as an interior run stuffer because of his size and the Big Ten being so run-heavy. He wasn't a guy who got to rush from the edge on every play like Clowney.
Just pointing out that stats are not a true indicator of talent or impact.
__________________
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots." Albert Einstein
mussop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2014   #2660
HOU-TEX 
Ah, Football!
 
HOU-TEX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: P-land
Age: 44
Posts: 15,829
Rep Power: 168015 HOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respectedHOU-TEX is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Clowney, then what?

I've noticed the Falcons spending a lot of time with Clowney. I would assume they know they'll need to move up to #1 to get him, right? Otherwise, they're both wasting their time.
__________________
Kubiak: "They’re battling their tail off." Translation: They suck.
OB: "They played hard with great effort." Translation: They suck.
HOU-TEX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com > Football Talk > College Football & the 2014 NFL Draft
Home Forums Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ad Management by RedTyger