PDA

View Full Version : Desean Jackson or Ted Ginn Jr?


Pages : [1] 2

TouchdownUSC
06-13-2007, 11:54 PM
if desean jackson and ted ginn jr were in the same draft, who would you select first?

jbeans187
06-14-2007, 12:01 AM
Similar players, but DeSean is definetly the better all around wr

Sniper
06-14-2007, 12:06 AM
Jackson for me. Better route runner, I think he's faster.

TouchdownUSC
06-14-2007, 12:09 AM
i voted jackson too. wouldnt suprise me if ginn ever makes a position change to corner back in the nfl either

Phrost
06-14-2007, 12:31 AM
I remember a similar thread recently, actually it asked the exact same thing with a poll also. Search before you make.

I voted Ted Ginn Jr by the way.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-14-2007, 01:01 AM
Jackson by a mile.

TouchdownUSC
06-14-2007, 01:31 AM
my bad, i only remember seeing a peterson vs. mcfadden one

Caddy
06-14-2007, 02:38 AM
Both are similar players and offer similar positives and negatives but at this point in time I'm leading towards Ted Ginn. Once Jackson gets another year under his belt then I may very well change my mind.

duckseason
06-14-2007, 03:23 AM
I remember a similar thread recently, actually it asked the exact same thing with a poll also. Search before you make.

I voted Ted Ginn Jr by the way.

You mean this one?
http://nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8765&highlight=desean+jackson+ted+ginn

The one where you twice commented on the absence of a poll? Interesting.

poll? ten ch
I can't believe the thread starter didn't add a poll.
"search before you make."

Very interesting indeed.

theogt
06-14-2007, 09:16 AM
There should be an option for neither.

ElectricEye
06-14-2007, 09:27 AM
Jackson. A bit skinny, but more developed as a receiver already.

HoopsDemon12
06-14-2007, 05:15 PM
Jackson. A bit skinny, but more developed as a receiver already.

ill take jackson simply because he is more of a reciever at this stage of his career... and he is younger than ginn... so i take him

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-14-2007, 09:28 PM
Jackson can be a #1 WR in the league Ginn will be lucky to be a good slot WR.

keylime_5
06-14-2007, 09:49 PM
I am positive that in a passing style Jeff Tedford offense that Ted Ginn would've put up even better numbers than Jackson. Freakin' Goeff McArthur had great numbers in that system as well as about a dozen other crappy WRs. Ginn's highlight film was better, and he made big plays in big games at WR and KR/PR. Ginn is bigger and his hands aren't any worse than Jackson's. Can't really compare their routes, neither was asked to run anything complicated. Ginn is better to date, but Jackson has another year before you can really compare their college careers. It doesn't hurt for Ginn that he is bigger AND faster than Jackson (and less of a jerk, but let's not get into that)

Michigan
06-14-2007, 10:05 PM
Ginn for me, and by quite a margin.

Acreboy
06-14-2007, 10:07 PM
Jackson, better WR.

holtfan92
06-14-2007, 10:39 PM
Jackson is better. He knows how to run routes and can actually be a #1 or #2 option on a team in the NFL.

Phrost
06-14-2007, 11:29 PM
Ginn for me, and by quite a margin.

It seems that the people that actually have watched Ginn, picked Ginn.

duckseason
06-14-2007, 11:35 PM
It seems that the people that actually have watched Ginn, picked Ginn.

There is not one person who frequents this site that hasn't seen Ginn. You can't definitively say the same about Jackson. The disparity of national exposure between the two is actually quite vast.

I think what you meant to say was "It seems that the people who have only watched Ginn, picked Ginn."

Phrost
06-14-2007, 11:39 PM
There is not one person who frequents this site that hasn't seen Ginn. You can't definitively say the same about Jackson. The disparity of national exposure between the two is actually quite vast.

I think what you meant to say was "It seems that the people who have only watched Ginn, picked Ginn."

Do I smell bacon?

Edit: I was hoping someone wouldn't say that.

duckseason
06-14-2007, 11:42 PM
Do I smell bacon?
I dunno, have you been digging through your mom's panty drawer again?

Phrost
06-14-2007, 11:45 PM
I dunno, have you been digging through your mom's panty drawer again?

How'd you know? Its like an off again on again thing.

thebow305
06-14-2007, 11:54 PM
Jackson for me. Better route runner, I think he's faster.

You think Jackson is faster?? Oh well that solves everything.... I am a believer now! Ginn is faster than Jackson by quite a margin. Jackson may be shiftier, but there is no one except maybe Champ and Deion in his prime that could run stride for stride with Ted Ginn Jr. He was invited to the Olympics as a sprinter his sophomore year I believe... maybe even before he got to Ohio State, I can't remember. People forgot that there was talk before his injury that he would break Deions 40 at the combine. Jackson is a more polished reciever, but Ginn is more of a gamebreaker at this point. Ginn has only played reciever for two years, give him time, Jackson came to Cal as a 5 star wideout, Ginn came to OSU as a 5 star DB. Jackson is more a polished reciever?? What a shocker! There's already been a thread about this anyway... great job!

Phrost
06-15-2007, 12:06 AM
You think Jackson is faster?? Oh well that solves everything.... I am a believer now! Ginn is faster than Jackson by quite a margin. Jackson may be shiftier, but there is no one except maybe Champ and Deion in his prime that could run stride for stride with Ted Ginn Jr. He was invited to the Olympics as a sprinter his sophomore year I believe... maybe even before he got to Ohio State, I can't remember. People forgot that there was talk before his injury that he would break Deions 40 at the combine. Jackson is a more polished reciever, but Ginn is more of a gamebreaker at this point. Ginn has only played reciever for two years, give him time, Jackson came to Cal as a 5 star wideout, Ginn came to OSU as a 5 star DB. Jackson is more a polished reciever?? What a shocker! There's already been a thread about this anyway... great job!

this post > all

Sniper
06-15-2007, 12:23 AM
You think Jackson is faster?? Oh well that solves everything.... I am a believer now! Ginn is faster than Jackson by quite a margin. Jackson may be shiftier, but there is no one except maybe Champ and Deion in his prime that could run stride for stride with Ted Ginn Jr. He was invited to the Olympics as a sprinter his sophomore year I believe... maybe even before he got to Ohio State, I can't remember. People forgot that there was talk before his injury that he would break Deions 40 at the combine. Jackson is a more polished reciever, but Ginn is more of a gamebreaker at this point. Ginn has only played reciever for two years, give him time, Jackson came to Cal as a 5 star wideout, Ginn came to OSU as a 5 star DB. Jackson is more a polished reciever?? What a shocker! There's already been a thread about this anyway... great job!

I meant game speed, calm down. Ginn is not more of a gamebreaker. Jackson can actually run more than 5 patterns. Let's see:

Ginn 59/781/9 (with the Heisman winner throwing to him) 19 PR for 238 yards 1 TD 9 KR for 240 yards 1 TD

Jackson 59/1060/9 25 PR for 455 yards and 4 TD Only returned 2 kicks but for 40 yards

Jackson is faster game speed wise, Ginn is a glorified track star. Oddly enough, you didn't comment on the fact that I said he's a better route runner.

thebow305
06-15-2007, 12:39 AM
I meant game speed, calm down. Ginn is not more of a gamebreaker. Jackson can actually run more than 5 patterns. Let's see:

Ginn 59/781/9 (with the Heisman winner throwing to him) 19 PR for 238 yards 1 TD 9 KR for 240 yards 1 TD

Jackson 59/1060/9 25 PR for 455 yards and 4 TD Only returned 2 kicks but for 40 yards

Jackson is faster game speed wise, Ginn is a glorified track star. Oddly enough, you didn't comment on the fact that I said he's a better route runner.

That's pretty hilarious if you ask me..... You mention the one off year from Ginn, not his two previous gamebreaking years, that really made him the threat he was and top recognizable returner in the country. And you compare that to Jackson's ONE breakout season, oddly enough, comparable to the previous years when Ginn was THAT threat. I guarantee coordinators will be more aware of Jackson's ability this year and you will see a stat production dropoff similar to Ginn's this past year. Teams STOP KICKING TO HIM. Or they simply kick away from him, or out of bounds. It's kind of tough to return kicks that go out of bounds, you know.

Is it really all that funny that I didn't comment about your claim that Jackson is a better Route Runner??? The way I see it, if you had read ALL of my previous post, I stated "Jackson is the more polished reciever at this point." As I also stated OF COURSE HE IS.... HE WAS A FIVE STAR WIDEOUT IN HIGH SCHOOL. GINN PLAYED DEFENSIVE BACK IN HIGH SCHOOL! Two TOTALLY DIFFERENT positions. I hate to just say people are idiots, just to say it, but YOU'RE AN IDIOT! Trying to be all smooth.... Try speaking of something that you have knowledge of please.

Phrost
06-15-2007, 12:42 AM
To add to thebows statement. Ginn's route running will improve with time. He is still fairly new to the position and the only thing that will make him better at WR is snaps and time.

thebow305
06-15-2007, 12:47 AM
To add to thebows statement. Ginn's route running will improve with time. He is still fairly new to the position and the only thing that will make him better at WR is snaps and time.

Exactly....

Sniper
06-15-2007, 12:48 AM
That's pretty hilarious if you ask me..... You mention the one off year from Ginn, not his two previous gamebreaking years, that really made him the threat he was and top recognizable returner in the country. And you compare that to Jackson's ONE breakout season, oddly enough, comparable to the previous years when Ginn was THAT threat. I guarantee coordinators will be more aware of Jackson's ability this year and you will see a stat production dropoff similar to Ginn's this past year. Teams STOP KICKING TO HIM. Or they simply kick away from him, or out of bounds. It's kind of tough to return kicks that go out of bounds, you know.

Is it really all that funny that I didn't comment about your claim that Jackson is a better Route Runner??? The way I see it, if you had read ALL of my previous post, I stated "Jackson is the more polished reciever at this point." As I also stated OF COURSE HE IS.... HE WAS A FIVE STAR WIDEOUT IN HIGH SCHOOL. GINN PLAYED DEFENSIVE BACK IN HIGH SCHOOL! Two TOTALLY DIFFERENT positions. I hate to just say people are idiots, just to say it, but YOU'RE AN IDIOT! Trying to be all smooth.... Try speaking of something that you have knowledge of please.

I don't really give a flying **** whether he played DB, WR, OT, DE, P or Defensive Coordinator. The fact remains that Jackson is a better receiver and more of a game changer than "I Run 5 Patterns" Ginn. Maybe if you stopped riding Ginn's dick for once you could see that.

Sniper
06-15-2007, 12:52 AM
To add to thebows statement. Ginn's route running will improve with time. He is still fairly new to the position and the only thing that will make him better at WR is snaps and time.

The thread asked DeSean Jackson vs. Ted Ginn. I answered Jackson because to me, he's a better receiver and a better returner. Sorry I'm not blowing Ginn like others are.

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-15-2007, 01:40 AM
You think Jackson is faster?? Oh well that solves everything.... I am a believer now! Ginn is faster than Jackson by quite a margin. Jackson may be shiftier, but there is no one except maybe Champ and Deion in his prime that could run stride for stride with Ted Ginn Jr. He was invited to the Olympics as a sprinter his sophomore year I believe... maybe even before he got to Ohio State, I can't remember. People forgot that there was talk before his injury that he would break Deions 40 at the combine. Jackson is a more polished reciever, but Ginn is more of a gamebreaker at this point. Ginn has only played reciever for two years, give him time, Jackson came to Cal as a 5 star wideout, Ginn came to OSU as a 5 star DB. Jackson is more a polished reciever?? What a shocker! There's already been a thread about this anyway... great job!your argument has no relevance to it whatsoever. Desean Jackson runs in the high 4.2s.Thats more than fast enough for a WR.
Ginn more of a gamebreaker?doubt it.How many Cal games do you watch?Probably not alot.Without Desean Cal would basically have no pass offense.As for more of a gamebreaker.Cal's offense doesnt have any consistency to it.It relies soley on the big play.
I could really careless if Ginn came in as a 5 star recruit for DB whereas Desean came in as a 5 star recruit for WR.That doesnt matter at all.It doesnt change the fact that Desean is a much better WR than Ginn.

Phrost
06-15-2007, 01:43 AM
your argument has no relevance to it whatsoever. Desean Jackson runs in the high 4.2s.Thats more than fast enough for a WR.
Ginn more of a gamebreaker?doubt it.How many Cal games do you watch?Probably not alot.Without Desean Cal would basically have no pass offense.As for more of a gamebreaker.Cal's offense doesnt have any consistency to it.It relies soley on the big play.
I could really careless if Ginn came in as a 5 star recruit for DB whereas Desean came in as a 5 star recruit for WR.That doesnt matter at all.It doesnt change the fact that Desean is a much better WR than Ginn.

So you voted Ginn? joke

Go_Eagles77
06-15-2007, 03:42 AM
I honestly like both of them a lot and would love to have either of them on my team, but I'd give the slight edge to Jackson.

RaiderNation
06-15-2007, 04:07 AM
i voted jackson cuz i think hes a overal better wr

Addict
06-15-2007, 04:12 AM
So you voted Ginn? joke

:o a secret message! how cool!

Sniper
06-15-2007, 04:24 AM
:o a secret message! how cool!

Oh man not another one.

dware_94
06-15-2007, 04:34 AM
both are very explosive but i'm going with jackson because he's younger and not as raw as ginn as a WR

Iamcanadian
06-15-2007, 08:41 AM
Yep, the NFL is full of #1 or #2 WR's who are 5'10", 155lbs which I'm guessing Jackson will be measured at. Ya that's going to stand up every game in the NFL. Even Moss and Smith, 2 great NFL small receivers both weigh 185lbs. Jackson will never be anything more than a #3 slot receiver and a kick/punt returner in the NFL. Jackson is simply too small to ever be a star in the NFL. One solid hit and his career could be very short. Jackson may run better routes but how is he going to avoid being knocked off them as people bump him all the time. He cannot come over the middle and will have to try to be OK outside the hash marks.

keylime_5
06-15-2007, 09:12 AM
Jackson's game speed is not faster than Ginn's. I've not seen a player with breakaway speed like Teddy's since Deion Sanders. Ginn has been a WR a grand total of 3 years, his route running isn't bad at all if you consider that. It's not like guys such as Randy Moss or Braylon Edwards ran different routes in college, in fact they used the fly pattern probably just as much as Ginn in college, yet no one hates on their route running skills anymore.

Like I said about the whole stat comparison - Jackson plays in the PAC 10 and in a system that is pass heavy and has produced big stats for crappy QBs and WRs who sucked in the NFL. Not saying that Desean is gonna suck, just that his stats are inflated in that league and system. Ginn had a heisman winner throwing to him, but that was still a run first offense in the Big Ten, and Troy distrubited the ball like Tom Brady. He did have 8 grabs for 100 yds. and a TD against michigan, and his last play as a college player was a KR touchdown.

duckseason
06-15-2007, 11:07 AM
Like I said about the whole stat comparison - Jackson plays in the PAC 10 and in a system that is pass heavy and has produced big stats for crappy QBs and WRs who sucked in the NFL. Not saying that Desean is gonna suck, just that his stats are inflated in that league and system.
This is false. Cal actually runs a very balanced offense. Ever heard of Marshawn Lynch and Justin Forsett? The team rushed the ball a total of 427 times last year. They threw it 413. That is not a pass first offense at all. Both teams scored through the air roughly 55% of the time, although tOSU scored 6 more passing TD's. So that pretty much deflates everything you're saying here. Both players had 59 catches and 9 TD's last year. Desean just had a lot more yards and was a better and more electrifying return man. Ginn had just as much of an opportunity to post better stats. But he didn't. Stop making excuses.

Ginn had a heisman winner throwing to him.
Exactly. Smith was college footballs best QB last year. His 161.9 rating is far superior to the 141.6 posted by Longshore. Also, the Buckeyes as a whole gained more yards per pass attempt. Yet Jackson had a far superior YPC. Interesting.

P-L
06-15-2007, 11:39 AM
DeSean Jackson. Their speed is nearly identical and Jackson is more polished.

constant cough
06-15-2007, 12:02 PM
This is one of those polls where I've voting with the mob and feel totally justified in doing so.

rainbeaukid2
06-15-2007, 12:13 PM
jackson because he is a much better all-around receiver, and i believe that he is also a better returner than ginn is

OhioState
06-15-2007, 12:16 PM
Jackson's game speed is not faster than Ginn's. I've not seen a player with breakaway speed like Teddy's since Deion Sanders. Ginn has been a WR a grand total of 3 years, his route running isn't bad at all if you consider that. It's not like guys such as Randy Moss or Braylon Edwards ran different routes in college, in fact they used the fly pattern probably just as much as Ginn in college, yet no one hates on their route running skills anymore.

Like I said about the whole stat comparison - Jackson plays in the PAC 10 and in a system that is pass heavy and has produced big stats for crappy QBs and WRs who sucked in the NFL. Not saying that Desean is gonna suck, just that his stats are inflated in that league and system. Ginn had a heisman winner throwing to him, but that was still a run first offense in the Big Ten, and Troy distrubited the ball like Tom Brady. He did have 8 grabs for 100 yds. and a TD against michigan, and his last play as a college player was a KR touchdown.

Exactly my thoughts. I think that Ginn has beaten better CB's and that the pac-10 was pretty weak there last year. Also sniper, no one has faster game speed than Ted Ginn, no one

duckseason
06-15-2007, 12:41 PM
Also sniper, no one has faster game speed than Ted Ginn, no one
Says who? An Ohio St. fan? What makes your opinion any more factual than his?
When speaking of players with such great explosiveness, I think the difference is negligible either way. Watching the both of them, it's silly to say one is noticeably faster than the other. You'd have to be on the field with them to notice much of a difference if there were one anyway. I'm not saying Jackson is faster. I'm saying I don't know who is faster because it's nearly impossible for me to say based off what I've seen on the TV screen. Have you played against either of them?

Your statement above is ridiculous. There are a lot of extremely explosive guys playing this game. Ginn is not other-worldly. There is no need to minimize the attributes of others in order to point out the strengths of another. We all know Ginn is among the very fastest players in this game.

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-15-2007, 12:49 PM
Yep, the NFL is full of #1 or #2 WR's who are 5'10", 155lbs which I'm guessing Jackson will be measured at. Ya that's going to stand up every game in the NFL. Even Moss and Smith, 2 great NFL small receivers both weigh 185lbs. Jackson will never be anything more than a #3 slot receiver and a kick/punt returner in the NFL. Jackson is simply too small to ever be a star in the NFL. One solid hit and his career could be very short. Jackson may run better routes but how is he going to avoid being knocked off them as people bump him all the time. He cannot come over the middle and will have to try to be OK outside the hash marks.
From what Ive heard is that jackson is now 175.

Sniper
06-15-2007, 03:38 PM
Exactly my thoughts. I think that Ginn has beaten better CB's and that the pac-10 was pretty weak there last year. Also sniper, no one has faster game speed than Ted Ginn, no one

Convincing argument. No one has better straight line speed then Ginn, this is one fact I will not argue with you. Jackson has more agility and quickness and it takes him less time to get into top gear. But if they were running 40s or something straight line, I'd take Ginn. As a football player, gimme Jackson.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-15-2007, 06:17 PM
Exactly my thoughts. I think that Ginn has beaten better CB's and that the pac-10 was pretty weak there last year. Also sniper, no one has faster game speed than Ted Ginn, no one

Yes, let's ignore the fact that Ginn has also had much more pressure taken off him by very good wide receivers playing opposite of him, often drawing the opponents #1 corner leaving Ginn to play against the #2.

Let's also ignore the fact that Jackson had his best game of the season with Antoine Cason covering him.

No matter how many excuses you want to make for Ginn, Jackson looked more comfortable playing wideout last year than Ginn ever looked in college. You can say that Ginn had to make a position switch or whatever, but Jackson, at this point is a better and younger player.

thebow305
06-15-2007, 06:53 PM
Jackson's game speed is not faster than Ginn's. I've not seen a player with breakaway speed like Teddy's since Deion Sanders. Ginn has been a WR a grand total of 3 years, his route running isn't bad at all if you consider that. It's not like guys such as Randy Moss or Braylon Edwards ran different routes in college, in fact they used the fly pattern probably just as much as Ginn in college, yet no one hates on their route running skills anymore.

Like I said about the whole stat comparison - Jackson plays in the PAC 10 and in a system that is pass heavy and has produced big stats for crappy QBs and WRs who sucked in the NFL. Not saying that Desean is gonna suck, just that his stats are inflated in that league and system. Ginn had a heisman winner throwing to him, but that was still a run first offense in the Big Ten, and Troy distrubited the ball like Tom Brady. He did have 8 grabs for 100 yds. and a TD against michigan, and his last play as a college player was a KR touchdown.

GREAT post.... period.

thebow305
06-15-2007, 06:54 PM
your argument has no relevance to it whatsoever. Desean Jackson runs in the high 4.2s.Thats more than fast enough for a WR.
Ginn more of a gamebreaker?doubt it.How many Cal games do you watch?Probably not alot.Without Desean Cal would basically have no pass offense.As for more of a gamebreaker.Cal's offense doesnt have any consistency to it.It relies soley on the big play.
I could really careless if Ginn came in as a 5 star recruit for DB whereas Desean came in as a 5 star recruit for WR.That doesnt matter at all.It doesnt change the fact that Desean is a much better WR than Ginn.

It just proves he is more polished, which is what I said, or did you jsut ignore my entire previous post? Thanks for nothing.

no love
06-15-2007, 07:32 PM
GREAT post.... period.

Eh you obviously didn't read the reply that pointed out that Cal actually ran the ball more than they did pass.

Here is my argument for Jackson, I have seen both play. And Jackson IS faster on the field. Bc I define game speed as a combo of quicks and speed. Gin is faster in a straight line, but his game speed quickness is not what Jacksons is. Everyone says Jerry Rice had great game speed, Jerry Rice who ran a 4.5-4.6 40, sure he didn't have BREAKAWAY speed like Gin, but his speed in and out of cuts and routes was why people said he had great game speed. Semantics? Yes, but its true.

As far as a statistical argument, its really hard to say bc they did not play in the same conference. And I don't buy the notion that Pac-10 d's are THAT much weaker (But that is another argument altogether). And the one team both players played was the Gophers. Gin had 3 receptions for 22 yards, while Jackson had 7 receptions for 114 yards and 3 td's.

Rather than going into all the instances where Gin was basically shut down for the majority of the game, I will give him the fact that he is inconsistent and not going to consistently put up a lot of catches. BUT everyone who is for Gin, argues that Gin is the better playmaker...

Gin failed to register an "explosive" reception (a reception of over 20 yards) in five games not including the National Championship bc he was hurt.

Jackson managed an "explosive" reception in EVERY SINGLE GAME. And never was he contained to an average ypc of below 10. Gin had a ypc of below 10 four times, not including a game when he had 9.9 ypc.

Bottom line, Jackson made explosive plays more consistently. Jackson is a better guy for RAC when the DB is infront of him and despite Jackson's size he fights for the ball better in the air. And Jackson may be a better return man, its debatable. The fact that people who argue for Gin say he is raw and will become better than Jackson is only assuming that Jackson will for some reason stay static and not get better. The way that I see it, is with Jacksons skill set, better in-and-out of breaks, drive to fight for the ball in the air, and willingness to go over the middle, he will improve just as fast if not faster than Gin in the NFL. The players in the NFL are usually all so close, that its all about who really really works at their craft and I just feel like Jackson has more heart than Gin (pure speculation), who has stated he likes cornerback more.

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-15-2007, 08:11 PM
It just proves he is more polished, which is what I said, or did you jsut ignore my entire previous post? Thanks for nothing.no Id didnt ignore your post.As I said it doesnt matter that Ginn was a DB coming into college and Desean being a WR coming into college.It doesnt change the fact that Desean is a better WR.

TouchdownUSC
06-15-2007, 08:41 PM
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion but it seems like the majority of people who picked Ginn are Ohio State fans. People say "Ginn would be as productive as Jackson if he played for Cal"...what crap is this, Ted Ginn had the heisman trophy winner throwing to him and was on the number 1 team in the country last year. I think Jackson is the best WR easily in college football going into this season

etk
06-15-2007, 08:50 PM
I guarantee coordinators will be more aware of Jackson's ability this year and you will see a stat production dropoff similar to Ginn's this past year. Teams STOP KICKING TO HIM. Or they simply kick away from him, or out of bounds. It's kind of tough to return kicks that go out of bounds, you know.



I will be interested in how his production is affected this year by those factors. It seems to happen to all the great returners like Ginn & Hester too.

Makaveli
06-15-2007, 08:55 PM
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion but it seems like the majority of people who picked Ginn are Ohio State fans. People say "Ginn would be as productive as Jackson if he played for Cal"...what crap is this, Ted Ginn had the heisman trophy winner throwing to him and was on the number 1 team in the country last year. I think Jackson is the best WR easily in college football going into this season

yeah i agree completely with that statement...btw im taking it that you are a USC fan, but just how crazy would USC be with Desean Jackson? since Desean was so close to going to USC

dcarey20
06-15-2007, 09:22 PM
As of right now, I'll stick with Ginn, and I'm a Maryland fan lol. I like both of them, but I won't put DeSean ahead of Ginn right now. You could argue that Jackson has the upper hand in the route running department, but I do feel Ginn is ridiculed far too much for his receiving skills. I guess I'll give the receiving to Jackson, but barely. I'll obviously take Ginn every day for return jobs. I think he accelerates faster, which I love in a return man. Ginn just hits the holes and outruns guys. Not alot of dancing. Jackson could be a special return guy, but again, Ginn's ranked much higher for me.

Ginn was one of my favorite players in the 07 draft, but I like Jackson alot too. As of now, Ginn has my vote. I For me, his game speed is easily superior than Jackson's, although Jackson is a bit better as a receiver at this point in his college career.

Staubach12
06-15-2007, 09:58 PM
They're quite similar players, as already noted by countless others. I'll take DeSean because he's got a much better skills as a WR. Much more polished. He still does have that Ginn-esque potential, too.

KILLERSANTA
06-15-2007, 10:09 PM
jackson By a mile...This thread is kinda a joke.........

Sniper
06-15-2007, 10:14 PM
Yes, let's ignore the fact that Ginn has also had much more pressure taken off him by very good wide receivers playing opposite of him, often drawing the opponents #1 corner leaving Ginn to play against the #2.

Let's also ignore the fact that Jackson had his best game of the season with Antoine Cason covering him.

No matter how many excuses you want to make for Ginn, Jackson looked more comfortable playing wideout last year than Ginn ever looked in college. You can say that Ginn had to make a position switch or whatever, but Jackson, at this point is a better and younger player.

Top notch point.

Green Bay Scat
06-15-2007, 10:30 PM
Earl Bennett...

Sniper
06-15-2007, 11:26 PM
Earl Bennett...

Stop, it's annoying. We know you love EB. You don't need to do this in every thread about receivers, especially one that doesn't involve EB.

Green Bay Scat
06-15-2007, 11:40 PM
Listen, if they keep makin **** about Jackson or Ginn, im gonna say the same thing, how can an opinion change in a month when there hasnt be anything to make them think otherwise. Its jackson and it isnt even close so just stop this thread and keep it dead. Besides EB is a better WR than both

Sniper
06-15-2007, 11:51 PM
Listen, if they keep makin **** about Jackson or Ginn, im gonna say the same thing, how can an opinion change in a month when there hasnt be anything to make them think otherwise. Its jackson and it isnt even close so just stop this thread and keep it dead. Besides EB is a better WR than both

I'm fully aware that EB is a better receiver. I didn't see the other thread, my bad. Bennett is a better WR, the other two better returners.

Sniper
06-15-2007, 11:53 PM
Last thing on this topic...Bennett, for my money, is the best WR in the SEC and probably the country (him and a healthy Manningham. Doucet is close) However, Jackson and Ginn are more all-around threats because of the dimension they add in the return game.

thebow305
06-16-2007, 01:20 AM
no Id didnt ignore your post.As I said it doesnt matter that Ginn was a DB coming into college and Desean being a WR coming into college.It doesnt change the fact that Desean is a better WR.

Dude, are you arguing with yourself!? I already said this.... I will give him that Jackson is the better reciever... right now. He has tons more experience at the position already, bottom line. That's all that can be said. Jackson looks like and plays like a reciever. Ginn is a DB, playing as a WR right now, a utility man at best right now. The fastest man in the biz right now, give him time, Jackson is better now, Ginn could be very special very soon though, as a WR, he already is as a returner.

thebow305
06-16-2007, 01:25 AM
Last thing on this topic...Bennett, for my money, is the best WR in the SEC and probably the country (him and a healthy Manningham. Doucet is close) However, Jackson and Ginn are more all-around threats because of the dimension they add in the return game.

I would take at least 5 wideouts easily over Earl Bennett, i don't know where lovefest for him is coming from.

1) DeSean Jackson
2) Limas Sweed
3) Mario Manningham
4) Marcus Monk
5) Early Doucet

And it's not even close!

Green Bay Scat
06-16-2007, 01:36 AM
thebow, those are all prospect with well know athletic stats. Do you know what he runs or jumps, or does it really matter? i mean production means nothing. I see EB becomin an Anquan Bolden type of player, where everyone over looks him and he will end up havin a HOF career and play with a Chip on his shoulder. just read my sig bow, hes produce on a BELOW average team in the toughest conference as the PRIMARY reciver. it takes skill to do what he does and also he is smart, as Vandy is an Academic school so u know he aint talkin like vince young "I like football, football like me". Honestly i hate arguin about this cause its just your opinion, and unless EB thinks hes god, he will do better this year, if he does think hes god, i look for a crappy year. I respect who you think is better because they have better "pro" projections but EB is what he is, a reliable, proven SEC WR

Phrost
06-16-2007, 01:44 AM
jackson By a mile...This thread is kinda a joke.........

You are a joke and we should just quit arguing. It will be decided in a few years when we all see who has a better career so far.

Sniper
06-16-2007, 03:01 AM
I would take at least 5 wideouts easily over Earl Bennett, i don't know where lovefest for him is coming from.

1) DeSean Jackson
2) Limas Sweed
3) Mario Manningham
4) Marcus Monk
5) Early Doucet

And it's not even close!

Thanks for the thrilling, analytical and convincing argument. Oddly enough, the 5 wideouts you mentioned are all from big name schools and are on TV regularly. Possibility you haven't watched EB play? Because if you had, you'd be singing a different tune.

Green Bay Scat
06-16-2007, 03:14 AM
my fav part is the fact that EB WAS voted the best WR in the SEC by all the coaches, so there goes #4,5

KILLERSANTA
06-16-2007, 06:20 AM
You are a joke and we should just quit arguing. It will be decided in a few years when we all see who has a better career so far.

****Eyes Rolling to Back of head****

Phrost
06-16-2007, 06:22 AM
****Eyes Rolling to Back of head****

My balls itch.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 04:24 PM
This is false. Cal actually runs a very balanced offense. Ever heard of Marshawn Lynch and Justin Forsett? The team rushed the ball a total of 427 times last year. They threw it 413. That is not a pass first offense at all. Both teams scored through the air roughly 55% of the time, although tOSU scored 6 more passing TD's. So that pretty much deflates everything you're saying here. Both players had 59 catches and 9 TD's last year. Desean just had a lot more yards and was a better and more electrifying return man. Ginn had just as much of an opportunity to post better stats. But he didn't. Stop making excuses.


Exactly. Smith was college footballs best QB last year. His 161.9 rating is far superior to the 141.6 posted by Longshore. Also, the Buckeyes as a whole gained more yards per pass attempt. Yet Jackson had a far superior YPC. Interesting.

Tedford's offense inflates Wr and Qb stats. Ginn went up against Justin King, Aaron Ross, Leon Hall, etc. last year. PAC 10 DBs are a joke. They have like 3 good ones total per year. It's a little easier to burn those PAC 10 corners than it is to burn those big ten corners......Despite Smith winning the heisman he was in a very conservative Jim Tressel offense, and only got to 2500 yards simply becaue the Buckeyes got the lead so early and ran the clock out. Cal pretty much had to try and score every possesion. They had a balanced Run/Pass offense yeah, but Longshore threw 66 more passes than Smith, and he didn't have a guy like Gonzalez to throw 50 more passes to. I don't think Jackson torched Aaron Ross or Leon Hall like Ginn did. Ginn has the NCAA record for return TDs too, not Desean.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 04:28 PM
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion but it seems like the majority of people who picked Ginn are Ohio State fans. People say "Ginn would be as productive as Jackson if he played for Cal"...what crap is this, Ted Ginn had the heisman trophy winner throwing to him and was on the number 1 team in the country last year. I think Jackson is the best WR easily in college football going into this season

Read my above post. Cal attempted 66 more passes, threw against lousy Pac 10 defenses, and a higher percent of their throws were intended for Jackson. You gotta read the story behind the stats. I'm sure pro scouts will agree with me when I tell you that Ginn is a better football player - bigger, faster, just as explosive in both the receiving game and the return game. Guys on this board for some odd reason give Ginn a lot of crap, but I tell you as an Ohio State fan watching Ginn, not once have I heard any of my fellow fans complain about Ginn's route running or anything. None of us were like, "Ginn you gotta step up now", because when we needed him he delivered. Whenever he wasn't catching passes was from OSU having a big lead, or because Gonzalez or Holmes was making big plays. When you have that good of a complimentary receiver, you don't need to throw to Ginn as much. Thus is why Jackson had more yards but wasn't as good.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-16-2007, 04:40 PM
Um, Keylime?

Cal spread the ball around more than Ohio State. Cal had 4 receivers catch over 30 passes while Ohio State had two. About 26% of Longshore's completions were to Jackson, while about 30% of Smith's were to Ginn.

But right now we're talking pro potential, which means that talking about statistical production is only a small part of the equation. Right now Jackson is 2 years younger than Ginn, has produced at a substantially higher level in his first two years when compared to Ginn's first two years, is more comfortable at his position than Ginn, who's already entering the NFL, and as far as I can see it, has more pro potential due to being substantially more maneuverable at top speed.

duckseason
06-16-2007, 04:58 PM
Um, Keylime?

Cal spread the ball around more than Ohio State. Cal had 4 receivers catch over 30 passes while Ohio State had two. About 26% of Longshore's completions were to Jackson, while about 30% of Smith's were to Ginn.

But right now we're talking pro potential, which means that talking about statistical production is only a small part of the equation. Right now Jackson is 2 years younger than Ginn, has produced at a substantially higher level in his first two years when compared to Ginn's first two years, is more comfortable at his position than Ginn, who's already entering the NFL, and as far as I can see it, has more pro potential due to being substantially more maneuverable at top speed.
Nice post.

I'd also like to address the whole "conservative Tressel offense" card he is playing.

Smith averaged 8.2 yards per attempt.
Longshore averaged 8.0.

Sounds about even as far as going down the field with it. But I guess the fact that Jackson averaged 5 more yards per catch is just because he was facing weak Pac-10 corners such as Antoine Cason and the like. Obviously that is the reason. It has nothing to do with his ridiculous explosiveness/shiftiness/vision/overall outstanding ability with the ball in his hands. I mean, it's a proven fact that Pac-10 players are slower and weaker, right? I mean, he wouldn't have been able to match up with those powerhouses such as Northern Illinois, Cincinnati, Bowling Green, Michigan St, Indiana, Illinois and Northwestern. Of course not. And any stats he would've accumulated against such patsies would be exclusively attributable to the fact that he plays in such a "pass heavy" offense. Funny how a team like tOSU scored 6 more TD's through the air last year, yet Tedford's offense is the one that produces inflated stats. Huh.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 05:35 PM
Yes, but Longshore had 66 more attempts, over 500 more yards, and had crappy Pac 10 coverage. How many guys with 50 catches did Cal have? OSU had 2 guys, two different #1 options in Gonzo and Ginn...both were first rounders, it's not like Ginn was the only go to guy they had at WR, Gonzo was a great go to guy too. Jackson was by far Cal's best receiver, the clear cut #1, go to guy. You can't just look at the stats and see who's QB was better and match that up with the receiver's stats, that is a BIG big big fallacy.

I am right about Ohio State being conservative and sitting on leads BTW. Smith never really drove down the field throwing the ball once the OSU lead exceeded 10 or so. They'd just run and then throw on 3rd downs. Cal was always playing catchup or trying to take the lead, therefore much more aggresive in their offense more often than tOSU.

...And don't diss on Illinois, Vontae Davis is a future first round pick.
And Antoine Cason is vastly overated. He got burned about every game last year. He has good pro potential, but he is not gonna shut any good receivers down at this point.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-16-2007, 05:47 PM
You're not reading a word anyone is writing, are you?

Cal had two wideouts with 46 catches each. The third leading receiver of Ohio State had only 29 catches. Jackson was by no means the unquestioned go-to guy and played in an offense which spread the ball around early and often.

And what is this "Cal playing catchup or trying to take the lead"? They won most of their games big and ran the ball more effectively than Ohio State.

I'm also confused on this point. If Ohio State's offense was really that conservative, would they have won their games by an average of 26 points?

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 05:53 PM
Cal had better running and passing stats than Ohio State, yet Ohio State had a far better Offensive Line, a far far better QB, and 2 RBs who were very very good, not any flaw in their game last year. What does that tell you about Pac 10 defenses, hmm?

Ohio State would get leads, play very conservative ball, yet they would still win by big big margins. It's not like both of those things can't happen. They'd run on 1st and 2nd down every times when they had a double digit lead, and would only pass on third downs or if they got close to the redzone possibly. Read that whole thing I just wrote before about why Cal's other receivers having 30+ catches being reason for Jackson being better than somebody is a fallacy, because that's all it is in this case.

Cal was more aggressive more often than OSU btw, just Tedfords' style compared to uber-conservative Tressel's. Not entirly because OSU had more leads and bigger leads more often last year, but that's part of it.

duckseason
06-16-2007, 05:55 PM
Yes, but Longshore had 66 more attempts, over 500 more yards, and had crappy Pac 10 coverage. How many guys with 50 catches did Cal have? OSU had 2 guys, two different #1 options in Gonzo and Ginn...both were first rounders, it's not like Ginn was the only go to guy they had at WR, Gonzo was a great go to guy too. Jackson was by far Cal's best receiver, the clear cut #1, go to guy. You can't just look at the stats and see who's QB was better and match that up with the receiver's stats, that is a BIG big big fallacy.

I am right about Ohio State being conservative and sitting on leads BTW. Smith never really drove down the field throwing the ball once the OSU lead exceeded 7. They'd just run and then throw on 3rd downs. Cal was always playing catchup or trying to take the lead, therefore much more aggresive in their offense more often than tOSU.

...And don't diss on Illinois, Vontae Davis is a future first round pick.
Of course stats don't tell the whole story. Not at all. We're merely using them to refute the fallacies about Cal and Jackson that you've perpetuated throughout the thread. My original post was in response to your ridiculous claim that Cal was a pass heavy team. Pretty much everything you've said about Cal is cast in a unnecessarily negative light and generally false. I use stats to reinforce what I am saying as an illustrative aid. Stats only tell part of the story. But that part shouldn't be ignored. Sometimes they are very meaningful, sometimes worthless. What you should be taking from the stats I am posting, is that your perception of Cal football is quite blurry and needs retuning. For example, in your above post you claim that Cal was constantly coming from behind all year. Not true. They had their fair share of blowouts as well. For you to say that tOSU just sat back and didn't play for half of every game is false. It was sometimes true for both teams, and the fact remains that tOSU scored more TD's than Cal. In other words, Ginn had ample opportunity to post more impressive stats than Jackson. PMD already showed you that Ginn was a bigger part of tOSU's offense than Jackson was for Cal. Yeah, you had Gonzalez. Cal actually spread the ball around though. You've already lost the statistics argument. So if you want to talk about something else that's fine, but just quit throwing around statements about Cal that came straight from your ass. It's understandable that you may not have seen them play much. Many (not all, so nobody jump on me here, you know it's generally true) people in your neck of the woods seem quite ignorant to football west of the Rockies. I don't have a huge problem with that. But at least do a bit of research before you spout off a whole reel of inaccuracies. There are plenty of people here who will spot them immediately and correct you.

duckseason
06-16-2007, 05:56 PM
Cal had better running and passing stats than Ohio State, yet Ohio State had a far better Offensive Line, a far far better QB, and 2 RBs who were very very good, not any flaw in their game last year. What does that tell you about Pac 10 defenses, hmm?

Ohio State would get leads, play very conservative ball, yet they would still win by big big margins. It's not like both of those things can't happen. They'd run on 1st and 2nd down every times when they had a double digit lead, and would only pass on third downs or if they got close to the redzone possibly. Read that whole thing I just wrote before about why Cal's other receivers having 30+ catches being reason for Jackson being better than somebody is a fallacy, because that's all it is in this case.

Cal was more aggressive more often than OSU btw, just Tedfords' style compared to uber-conservative Tressel's. Not entirly because OSU had more leads and bigger leads more often last year, but that's part of it.

Wow, now he's pretending as though Cal didn't have a ton of NFL talent last year either.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 05:59 PM
It's not taking anything at all away from Cal by saying that Ohio State had a better offensive line and a much much better QB than Cal last year.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 06:02 PM
...But the fact remains that Ginn was not as dreadfully important to OSU's offensive output as Jackson was. (This is all relative though, because without Ginn in the game the double team goes on Gonzalez and the offense gets worse.) Jackson was the go to guy for Cal. Ginn had Gonzalez to take pressure off of him and vice versa, both were considered go to guys last year for Troy Smith. And Ohio State did spread the ball around a whole lot last year in the passing game, but like I said Troy only threw about 300 passes, not 360+ like Longshore.

duckseason
06-16-2007, 06:04 PM
It's not taking anything at all away from Cal by saying that Ohio State had a better offensive line and a much much better QB than Cal last year.

Yes it is. By saying "much much" would imply that Longshore is a slouch. I'll be laughing in your face when he is drafted at a much much higher slot than Smith was. Also, while blinding yourself with tOSU's greatness, you fail to mention all the great players Cal had last year. Sure tOSU was the better overall team. But not "much much" better.

duckseason
06-16-2007, 06:06 PM
...But the fact remains that Ginn was not as dreadfully important to OSU's offensive output as Jackson was. (This is all relative though, because without Ginn in the game the double team goes on Gonzalez and the offense gets worse.) Jackson was the go to guy for Cal. Ginn had Gonzalez to take pressure off of him and vice versa, both were considered go to guys last year for Troy Smith. And Ohio State did spread the ball around a whole lot last year in the passing game, but like I said Troy only threw about 300 passes, not 360+ like Longshore.

Okay, well now you're chalking up points for Jackson. The fact that Gonzalez apparently took so much pressure off Ginn should have been an aid, not a detriment.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 06:11 PM
Like a mediocre Jeff Tedford QB is gonna get drafted in the first 4 rounds? Longshore probably wont go in the 7 rounds of the draft unless he has dramatice improvement. Pro potential aside, Troy Smith won the heisman trophy by the highest % ever, so saying he is much much better than Longshore is borderline understatement.

TouchdownUSC
06-16-2007, 06:17 PM
...so much Ohio State and Big Ten bias on this site its unreal. The Pac 10 has some great defensive backs and corners. People put the Big Ten on a freakin pedistal when in reality it really isnt any stronger than the Pac 10. Teams like Cal, USC, Oregon and Oregon State could handle the majority of Big Ten teams.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-16-2007, 06:17 PM
I'm confused, are we arguing which team was better, which player was better in college, or which player will be the better pro?

Ginn has little claim to being the better player, and that's just what it is. Jackson is younger, more polished, more shifty, and fights cornerbacks much harder. There isn't a single aspect outside of top end speed that Ginn has over Jackson, and top end speed doesn't mean a whole lot if you don't have the skills to make use of it.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 06:19 PM
Okay, well now you're chalking up points for Jackson. The fact that Gonzalez apparently took so much pressure off Ginn should have been an aid, not a detriment.

You can say that having Gonzalez helped him, but I don't think it works the against Ginn in this case. It just allowed him to show how good he is. If Jackson had Gonzalez on his team, then that would probably take away from his catches too. Remember Gonzo had more catches on 3rd downs than any other WR in the country last year, and there is only 1 football.

TouchdownUSC
06-16-2007, 06:19 PM
I think their is an excellent chance Ginn wont be playing WR in a few years in the NFL. i could see him being moved to corner back

duckseason
06-16-2007, 06:20 PM
Like a mediocre Jeff Tedford QB is gonna get drafted in the first 4 rounds? Longshore probably wont go in the 7 rounds of the draft unless he has dramatice improvement. Pro potential aside, Troy Smith won the heisman trophy by the highest % ever, so saying he is much much better than Longshore is borderline understatement.

Interesting. Seems to me as though QB's who worked under the tutelage of Tedford have a long history of being drafted very highly in the draft. Huh. Yes indeed, Troy Smith was the QB of one of the best teams in the nation last year. He played extremely well, and I wouldn't want to take any of that away from him. Where these guys will be/were drafted is irrelevant so we can just drop that.

But don't you think that by Ginn having such a great QB throwing to him, and Jackson having such a crappy one, isn't that an argument favoring Jackson? I mean, they posted very similar stats, yet Jackson did it with some garbage ass tin-armed QB throwing to him. Hmm. Interesting. Seems to me that Troy Smith was so great, what with being the widest-margin-ever Heisman winner, that he could be throwing to any old Joe and they could get 9 TD's. Right? Isn't that what you're saying here?

duckseason
06-16-2007, 06:23 PM
You can say that having Gonzalez helped him, but I don't think it works the against Ginn in this case. It just allowed him to show how good he is. If Jackson had Gonzalez on his team, then that would probably take away from his catches too. Remember Gonzo had more catches on 3rd downs than any other WR in the country last year, and there is only 1 football.

Hmm. So you're saying that Gonzo was your go-to guy in critical situations, yet somehow Ginn is better than Jackson. Very interesting take.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 06:33 PM
Ginn was the go to guy too. They had 2 go to guys at WR, so Troy could just throw to which ever one was open, duh.

Tedford's guys have been drafted highly in the past, but scouts and GMs have been considering a QB coached by Tedford as a negative now since so many have been NFL busts. That was a big red flag on Aaron Rodgers if you remember, and probably a factor in why Smith was picked over him in 2005. That is all about pro potential though, which doesn't matter at all in this argument. Smith was a great great college QB, he was clearly the best signal caller last year in CFB. You don't have to be a good pro prospect to be a great great college one.

And Like I said, it doesn't matter that Longshore is worse than Smith if he had more yards and attempts and the like in the PAC 10. Some systems are more stat friendly to QBs and WRs, and Jackson was clearly the top target at Cal.

And we can argue about stats mattering all day for which of the two is better, but it really doesn't matter. There have been 100s of college receivers who did not have great great stats yet were still better WRs than others with better stats and good skills.

elway777
06-16-2007, 06:36 PM
Jackson at this point of his career is already a more balanced receiver than Tedd Ginn.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 06:40 PM
No crap, Jackson has been a WR all his life, he has more polish due to experience. Ginn was a CB and a QB in high school. Ohio State moved him to WR where he has been playing for 3 years total, and since he is not that experienced at the position he only ran about 5 kinds of routes during his tenure there. Ginn is very raw for a WR due to position change, but that doesn't mean that he won't get better than he already is (which is very very good). Chris Gamble was a WR who moved to CB and his draft stock fell in 2004 b/c of this, yet he is a great pro CB now, even though he was very raw in college at the position.

Sniper
06-16-2007, 09:19 PM
Like a mediocre Jeff Tedford QB is gonna get drafted in the first 4 rounds? Longshore probably wont go in the 7 rounds of the draft unless he has dramatice improvement. Pro potential aside, Troy Smith won the heisman trophy by the highest % ever, so saying he is much much better than Longshore is borderline understatement.

You mean besides the three QBs coached by Tedford that have gone in the first round? You make it seem like Cal had nobody. Marshawn Lynch just wanted to drop by and say hello to you. I think he won the Pac 10 POY and was the #12 overall pick. Yeah, he just wanted to say what's up.

Phrost
06-16-2007, 09:24 PM
Big ten national champions are a little more numerous than Pac 10.

Man_Of_Steel
06-16-2007, 09:34 PM
Ted Ginn Jr

duckseason
06-16-2007, 09:37 PM
Big ten national champions are a little more numerous than Pac 10.
First of all, what is the relevance? Second, prove it. I count 2 Big Ten National Champions since 1990. How far back do you want to go? Seems the Pac-10 has been winning them with more frequency here of late, and I'd imagine we have more all-time as well. I don't feel like counting, but we've got a lot. Not that it matters at all in this discussion. Anybody got the stats on this?

Phrost
06-16-2007, 09:45 PM
First of all, what is the relevance? Second, prove it. I count 2 Big Ten National Champions since 1990. How far back do you want to go? Seems the Pac-10 has been winning them with more frequency here of late, and I'd imagine we have more all-time as well. I don't feel like counting, but we've got a lot. Not that it matters at all in this discussion. Anybody got the stats on this?

I wanna go all the way if you want.

P-L
06-16-2007, 10:22 PM
No crap, Jackson has been a WR all his life, he has more polish due to experience. Ginn was a CB and a QB in high school. Ohio State moved him to WR where he has been playing for 3 years total, and since he is not that experienced at the position he only ran about 5 kinds of routes during his tenure there. Ginn is very raw for a WR due to position change, but that doesn't mean that he won't get better than he already is (which is very very good). Chris Gamble was a WR who moved to CB and his draft stock fell in 2004 b/c of this, yet he is a great pro CB now, even though he was very raw in college at the position.

Let me understand what you are saying. Because Ginn isn't as polished and is still new to the position, that makes him better than Jackson? So, you're basing your entire argument on the hopes or expectations that Ginn will improve? How exactly does the amount of improvement Ginn makes in the future have anything to do with who is better right now? Jackson is more polished (you admitted this yourself), has more experience at the position, is only a fraction of a step slower (if that), has better hands, is far superior at running in and out of cuts, and has out-produced Ginn. So, what exactly makes Ginn better? It seems like you are using Jackson being more polished and having more experience against him.

Phrost
06-16-2007, 10:25 PM
Ginn's potential > Desean Jackson potential

by a hair

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 10:28 PM
Pac 10 national championships? I think that should have a different category than USC national championships because they seem to be the only team in that conference that plays defense year in and year out. Take out USC and the Pac 10 wins a title once in a blue moon.

Makaveli
06-16-2007, 10:29 PM
keylime you keep digging yourself a deeper hole, you keep saying stuff that would give the advantage to DESEAN JACKSON not Ted Ginn...for some reason you say Anthony Gonzales takes pressure off ginn so that makes him better than Jackson? Ginn had the heisman winning QB and that gives him the advantage over Jackson, who you consider that Cal has a crap QB? Cal, has no other players, and that Desean Jackson was their go to guy, their focal point, thats a really disrespectful comment towards Marshawn Lynch, you miss out things that were already mentioned, face it you are being stubborn, how bout u watch some games other than Ohio State

Phrost
06-16-2007, 10:31 PM
Pac 10 national championships? I think that should have a different category than USC national championships because they seem to be the only team in that conference that plays defense year in and year out. Take out USC and the Pac 10 wins a title once in a blue moon.

Too true. Without USC, its not even worth being its own conference.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 10:33 PM
Ginn is still bigger and probably a little better of an athlete. He can probably fill out to about 190 or so it seems. His frame is not as slender as Jackson's, who would probably max out at around 180 since he's probably about 170 now after having gained some weight. If Jackson was about 190-200 lbs. he'd be a lot better prospect really. 170 is really small for a pro WR, and I wouldn't be suprised if his playing weight right now is around 160something (165?). There are plenty of 180 lb. WRs in the NFL, but 165 and 170 is pushing it. That plus the whole ? about Jackson playing in Tedford's offense (which probably isn't that big of a deal, I wouldn't worry about that for his pro potential).

duckseason
06-16-2007, 10:37 PM
Pac 10 national championships? I think that should have a different category than USC national championships because they seem to be the only team in that conference that plays defense year in and year out. Take out USC and the Pac 10 wins a title once in a blue moon.

You can say the exact same thing about the Big 11 with Michigan

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 10:38 PM
keylime you keep digging yourself a deeper hole, you keep saying stuff that would give the advantage to DESEAN JACKSON not Ted Ginn...for some reason you say Anthony Gonzales takes pressure off ginn so that makes him better than Jackson? Ginn had the heisman winning QB and that gives him the advantage over Jackson, who you consider that Cal has a crap QB? Cal, has no other players, and that Desean Jackson was their go to guy, their focal point, thats a really disrespectful comment towards Marshawn Lynch, you miss out things that were already mentioned, face it you are being stubborn, how bout u watch some games other than Ohio State

Lynch has nothing to do with this conversation. I'm talking about the go to guy in the passing game here. Gonzalez took away from Ginn's catches, that's why Ginn doesn't have the 1000 yard years, that and under Tressel OSU receivers usually never get 1000 yard years (Jenkins did it once, Holmes never did it, but in John Cooper's more aggresive offense it happened a lot more). I'm saying you can't use the stats to compare them. Smith was great, but he spread the ball more and OSU sits on big leads and gets conservative. I think I've said that stuff a million times, none of it lends anything to Jackson. He is in a WR friendly offense and plays against crappy PAC 10 DBs. Those two things are big points to why he gets 1000 yards compared to Ginn's 800-900.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 10:40 PM
You can say the exact same thing about the Big 11 with Michigan

Ohio State has many more titles than Michigan (depending who you ask), and Penn State is always good. Minnesota has a couple too. Don't want to argue about this stuff though.

Sniper
06-16-2007, 10:44 PM
Ohio State has many more titles than Michigan (depending who you ask), and Penn State is always good. Minnesota has a couple too. Don't want to argue about this stuff though.

Or Michigan and Ohio State both have 7. Let's not allow facts to ruin a good story. ;)

Sniper
06-16-2007, 10:46 PM
I'm also going by "consensus" national titles

duckseason
06-16-2007, 10:49 PM
Ohio State has many more titles than Michigan (depending who you ask), and Penn State is always good. Minnesota has a couple too. Don't want to argue about this stuff though.

No, they really don't. But you're right, they have won more in recent history. Anyway, my point is that the Big-11 is currently more top-heavy than the Pac-10. There are no gimme's out here, except for maybe 1 team a year. That team is currently Stanford. Everybody else can beat each other in a given week. Look no further than USC's losses against Oregon St and UCLA, and their struggles against Washington St. (28-22) Washington (26-20) Arizona St. (28-21) Arizona (20-3) and Cal (23-9). Those were all hard fought games on both sides of the ball. See, we actually play football every week out here. Not just a few times a year while trampling a bunch of patsies. USC was fortunate they got through their conference schedule with just 2 losses. It's extremely tough to go undefeated in the Pac-10.

duckseason
06-16-2007, 10:56 PM
Oh yeah, btw- Every single Pac-10 Team has had a share of the conference championship at least once in the last 14 years. What about the Big 10?

draftguru151
06-16-2007, 10:58 PM
Lynch has nothing to do with this conversation. I'm talking about the go to guy in the passing game here. Gonzalez took away from Ginn's catches, that's why Ginn doesn't have the 1000 yard years, that and under Tressel OSU receivers usually never get 1000 yard years (Jenkins did it once, Holmes never did it, but in John Cooper's more aggresive offense it happened a lot more). I'm saying you can't use the stats to compare them. Smith was great, but he spread the ball more and OSU sits on big leads and gets conservative. I think I've said that stuff a million times, none of it lends anything to Jackson. He is in a WR friendly offense and plays against crappy PAC 10 DBs. Those two things are big points to why he gets 1000 yards compared to Ginn's 800-900.

The two had the same amount of receptions.

You keep saying things about how such and such does count for Jackson, but I haven't seen an argument why Ginn is better than Jackson other than speed, which is so close it really doesn't matter. Also Jackson weighs 175, 3 pounds less than Ginn. As far as I can see, you're entire argument is Ginn's speed and his potential because he played WR for 3 years.

Also, a bit of a rant about the 3 year WR crap. So what he didn't play WR in high school. How much do WRs in high school really learn? How to catch? How to run routes? Do you really think high school teaching would change it that much? As far as I'm concerned, Ginn played WR in college for 3 years and did not improve a great deal, and the argument about him being raw at the position is not a valid excuse for his hands and route running.

keylime_5
06-16-2007, 11:04 PM
Hello, Ginn played against some pretty good CBs in his day. He torched most of them. The PAC 10's DBs are really pathetic compared to the Big Ten's. Jackson just got more deep passes than Ginn b/c he burned crappier DBs covering him. It's common knowledge how crappy those Pac 10 corners are, they usually have about 3 or so decent ones a year (and Hughes was on Jackson's team, so that's minus one). They had the same catches, but Jackson caught more deep balls apparently, the Pac 10 has crappier DBs, put 2 and 2 together. Ginn is faster than Jackson but Jackson had more long balls, that kinda proves the point about Pac 10 corners kinda.

Besides that, there are a lot of guys who had more yards than Ginn last year, doesn't mean that those guys are better receivers than Teddy at all. Gimme a break. The stat argument doesn't hold water at all - you only have to go on the opinion of watching them and see who is better and such. Totally objective, the stats don't tell the story.

Phrost
06-16-2007, 11:06 PM
Ok heres a good question. Will Desean Jackson go higher than #9 overall?

draftguru151
06-16-2007, 11:08 PM
You still have yet to explain why Ginn is better.

And stop using the garbage competition argument, I'm sure those Bowling Green and Northern Illinois CBs are top notch players.

DLS42
06-16-2007, 11:16 PM
As the most bias person here, i will say D-Jax. Both are similar players, skinny fast WR who run the deep route well. Both can return punts and kicks but in that departament i give the edge to D-jax. Also i think that Jackson runs the middle routes better than Ginn because he doesnt immediatly look to break it the outside. From what i have seen from Ginn prolly 7 games in 2 years, he seems to try and get the big play every time. While that may work in high school and college that wont work in the NFL. Jackson still has some spotty hands and gives up on the play sometimes. I give him the overall edge well because im a cal fan. Lets face it.

duckseason
06-16-2007, 11:19 PM
Hello, Ginn played against some pretty good CBs in his day. He torched most of them. The PAC 10's DBs are really pathetic compared to the Big Ten's. Jackson just got more deep passes than Ginn b/c he burned crappier DBs covering him. It's common knowledge how crappy those Pac 10 corners are, they usually have about 3 or so decent ones a year (and Hughes was on Jackson's team, so that's minus one). They had the same catches, but Jackson caught more deep balls apparently, the Pac 10 has crappier DBs, put 2 and 2 together. Ginn is faster than Jackson but Jackson had more long balls, that kinda proves the point about Pac 10 corners kinda.

Besides that, there are a lot of guys who had more yards than Ginn last year, doesn't mean that those guys are better receivers than Teddy at all. Gimme a break. The stat argument doesn't hold water at all - you only have to go on the opinion of watching them and see who is better and such. Totally subjective, the stats don't tell the story.
I agree that the stats don't tell the whole story. I've seen plenty from both players, and I think Jackson is the better overall player. I think he's better when it comes to pretty much every aspect of being a WR. Like many have said, I can really only give Ginn the edge when it comes to top end speed. I think the poll is quite telling, especially considering the extreme level of Big 10 bias usually found on this board.

As far as Pac 10 corners go, I won't debate it. There are far more corners in the NFL that came from the Big-11 (aka Michigan and tOSU). The level of play is certainly very high though. We cultivate top notch corners just like the Big-10, and we've got plenty great athletes at the position on a perpetual basis. Don't forget that this is a conference that has traditionally been known for it's great QB's and has always had excellent skill players on offense. Not very easy to look great as a corner. Yet, we still produce our share. In fact, CB is one of our deepest positions here at Oregon. We've got a ton of great athletes at the position. The primary reason for our struggles last year were not just injuries, but a glaring lack of a consistent pass rush. Our corners are legit though. Top flight athletes to be sure. Certainly no more easily burned than the average kid in the Big-11.

Sniper
06-17-2007, 12:11 AM
Ok heres a good question. Will Desean Jackson go higher than #9 overall?

Probably not, but possibly. He could go right around that area at 180-185 lbs. Here's another good question. Has anyone come out and supported the drafting of a slot receiver at #9 for the Dolphins? Nope. This is how bad teams consistently stay bad. If you don't draft well, you don't make any progress. That may have been one of the dumbest questions I've ever seen.

By the way, you're telling me in 3 years a great coach in Jim Tressel (yes he's great, yes that hurt to say it" couldn't teach Ted Ginn to run more than 5 patterns? I don't care if he's a natural CB (which would actually help him in the knowledge of routes). The fact that he runs 4-5 routes, one of which a bubble screen and the other a end around, so that's really 2-3 routes, after 3 years of Big 10 college football is downright pathetic.

Phrost
06-17-2007, 12:27 AM
Probably not, but possibly. He could go right around that area at 180-185 lbs. Here's another good question. Has anyone come out and supported the drafting of a slot receiver at #9 for the Dolphins? Nope. This is how bad teams consistently stay bad. If you don't draft well, you don't make any progress. That may have been one of the dumbest questions I've ever seen.

By the way, you're telling me in 3 years a great coach in Jim Tressel (yes he's great, yes that hurt to say it" couldn't teach Ted Ginn to run more than 5 patterns? I don't care if he's a natural CB (which would actually help him in the knowledge of routes). The fact that he runs 4-5 routes, one of which a bubble screen and the other a end around, so that's really 2-3 routes, after 3 years of Big 10 college football is downright pathetic.

The limited routes he ran in college were the only ones necessary at the time.

elway777
06-17-2007, 12:44 AM
Ginn is not the better athlete.

Besides being a tad faster then Djack, Ginn is not near as elusive as him and I doubt was all state in 3 sports in high school.

Phrost
06-17-2007, 12:46 AM
Ginn is not the better athlete.

Besides being a tad faster then Djack, Ginn is not near as elusive as him and I doubt was all state in 3 sports in high school.

Ginn not elusive. GIve me a break.

elway777
06-17-2007, 12:50 AM
Ginn not elusive. GIve me a break.


Go back and watch a Ginn highlight and tell me how many time he makes the defender IN FRONT OF HIM miss by simply juking.

Phrost
06-17-2007, 01:11 AM
Go back and watch a Ginn highlight and tell me how many time he makes the defender IN FRONT OF HIM miss by simply juking.

He doesn't have to juke. :)

Sniper
06-17-2007, 01:28 AM
He doesn't have to juke. :)

Right. Good luck blowing past corners in the NFL with his vast array of route knowledge

Phrost
06-17-2007, 01:43 AM
I wanna see what Scott thinks about this.

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 03:11 AM
I wish this topic would die, but I like Duckseason posts cause hes so insiteful

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-17-2007, 03:32 AM
He doesn't have to juke. :)he will in the NFL.

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-17-2007, 03:44 AM
Im just curious as to why people are still argueing over this.Its been proven in this thread that Desean Jackson is the better prospect.I also dont get why people are trying to say Ginn will have a better NFl career because of his potential.Even though they totally neglect the fact that Desean Jackson also has alot of potential.Not only is Desean Jackson the safer pick but he also has alot of potential.Probably more than Ginn does.Is quite obvious that the people who are trying to say Ginn will have a better NFL career based off of nothing have probably never seen Desean Jackson play.


Ok heres a good question. Will Desean Jackson go higher than #9 overall?
no thats a very crappy question.especially since its totally irrelevant.

Iamcanadian
06-17-2007, 04:53 AM
Would someone please list the NFL WR's who measure in at 5'10" and weight around 160lbs. Jackson is not going to be drafted as high as Ginn because at that height and weight, he is going to have a very hard time being much more than a KR and #3 slot receiver. He'll never be able to take the pounding in the NFL.
Say what you want about Ginn's potential as a pro, he was drafted #9 which speaks volumns about how pro teams view him and if Miami had passed on him Houston was ready to draft him at #10 indicating that even with limited workouts because of injury, his upside is truly immense. Jackson is simply TOO SMALL and will never be a top 10 pick because of it. He can get by in college playing at 166lbs if he even weighs that, I suspect, he's in the 155lbs range. The small receivers in the NFL like Moss and Smith weigh in at 185lbs. Ginn weighs 178lbs and can easily reach the 185 mark, I doubt Jackson has the build to add any weight.

Sniper
06-17-2007, 05:30 AM
Would someone please list the NFL WR's who measure in at 5'10" and weight around 160lbs. Jackson is not going to be drafted as high as Ginn because at that height and weight, he is going to have a very hard time being much more than a KR and #3 slot receiver. He'll never be able to take the pounding in the NFL.
Say what you want about Ginn's potential as a pro, he was drafted #9 which speaks volumns about how pro teams view him and if Miami had passed on him Houston was ready to draft him at #10 indicating that even with limited workouts because of injury, his upside is truly immense. Jackson is simply TOO SMALL and will never be a top 10 pick because of it. He can get by in college playing at 166lbs if he even weighs that, I suspect, he's in the 155lbs range. The small receivers in the NFL like Moss and Smith weigh in at 185lbs. Ginn weighs 178lbs and can easily reach the 185 mark, I doubt Jackson has the build to add any weight.

Jackson can get to 180. You say he's gonna have a hard time being more than a KR and #3? What do you think Ginn will be? Cam Cameron said they drafted a returner. Not a receiver, a returner at the #9 pick. Speaks volumes as to Ginn's receiving skills. By the way, sweet name.

duckseason
06-17-2007, 05:34 AM
Would someone please list the NFL WR's who measure in at 5'10" and weight around 160lbs. Jackson is not going to be drafted as high as Ginn because at that height and weight, he is going to have a very hard time being much more than a KR and #3 slot receiver. He'll never be able to take the pounding in the NFL.
Say what you want about Ginn's potential as a pro, he was drafted #9 which speaks volumns about how pro teams view him and if Miami had passed on him Houston was ready to draft him at #10 indicating that even with limited workouts because of injury, his upside is truly immense. Jackson is simply TOO SMALL and will never be a top 10 pick because of it. He can get by in college playing at 166lbs if he even weighs that, I suspect, he's in the 155lbs range. The small receivers in the NFL like Moss and Smith weigh in at 185lbs. Ginn weighs 178lbs and can easily reach the 185 mark, I doubt Jackson has the build to add any weight.



Well, to be fair, Jackson is listed on the Cal website at 6' 0" 172. Sure those sites aren't always accurate, but Ginn's listing on tOSU's site was quite similar last year, iirc. Also, you need look no further than another former great tOSU WR. Terry Glenn. He was small as hell coming out. He was the 7th pick in the '96 draft. I doubt he was much bigger than Jackson. Next 2 WR's off the board that year? Eddie Kennison and Marvin Harrison. They were pretty slim as well. Shoot, Marvin doesn't look much bigger than Jackson even today. He seems to be doing just fine. Jackson will likely fill out a bit more over the next few years just like these other guys did. Santonio Holmes is another small ass tOSU WR who was drafted highly. Another thing to consider is the NFL's handcuffing of DB's. The emphasis on offensive production only helps smaller WR's like this. Which may have factored into the dolphins decision regarding Ginn, or they just really wanted their own Devin Hester. Bad. And Jackson isn't the type to back down anyway. He plays with a nasty streak, and will fight for the ball. Like Steve Smith. He'll be fine. And it just seems like an odd thing to bring up in a thread comparing him to Ginn. There really isn't much of a difference in stature between these two. I think the very minimal size difference can be made up by Jackson in the next year and a half. Which is how much older Ginn is. I'd also be interested to see who is actually stronger. Jackson looks pretty cut.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-17-2007, 05:57 AM
Would someone please list the NFL WR's who measure in at 5'10" and weight around 160lbs. Jackson is not going to be drafted as high as Ginn because at that height and weight, he is going to have a very hard time being much more than a KR and #3 slot receiver. He'll never be able to take the pounding in the NFL.
Say what you want about Ginn's potential as a pro, he was drafted #9 which speaks volumns about how pro teams view him and if Miami had passed on him Houston was ready to draft him at #10 indicating that even with limited workouts because of injury, his upside is truly immense. Jackson is simply TOO SMALL and will never be a top 10 pick because of it. He can get by in college playing at 166lbs if he even weighs that, I suspect, he's in the 155lbs range. The small receivers in the NFL like Moss and Smith weigh in at 185lbs. Ginn weighs 178lbs and can easily reach the 185 mark, I doubt Jackson has the build to add any weight.

Every time you talk about Jackson he keeps getting smaller. Now he's 5-10 and probably 155 lbs?

keylime_5
06-17-2007, 09:26 AM
Just because some stupid internet poll says one player is better than the other it doesn't give it any creedance at all - especially on this board where the Ginn haters outweight the Ginn supporters about 10-1. I've seen many neutral draft boards that love Ginn. This one for some reason tends to hate on him.

What is this Ginn doesn't juke crap? He makes cuts at top speed to fly past guys, what more do you want?

draftguru151
06-17-2007, 10:28 AM
That isn't juking, it's cutting, he changes angles, that isn't a juke.

keylime_5
06-17-2007, 11:36 AM
Juking, cutting, same thing pretty much. Jukes are pretty lousy if you ask me, it seems like 9 times out of 10 when Barry Sanders did all that fancy juking crap in the backfield he'd lose yards, and 1 out of 10 he'd break it for a big 40 yard touchdown. I haven't seen anyone ever catch Ginn when he's in that 3rd gear top speed.

TouchdownUSC
06-17-2007, 12:00 PM
Jackson looks very similar in stature to Ted Ginn. i would be surprised if they measure out to be pretty much the same size either

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 12:19 PM
Just because some stupid internet poll says one player is better than the other it doesn't give it any creedance at all - especially on this board where the Ginn haters outweight the Ginn supporters about 10-1. I've seen many neutral draft boards that love Ginn. This one for some reason tends to hate on him.

What is this Ginn doesn't juke crap? He makes cuts at top speed to fly past guys, what more do you want?

I love ginn and think hes gonna be a very solid, even special WR in the league, i just dont like tOSU

no love
06-17-2007, 01:44 PM
Like a mediocre Jeff Tedford QB is gonna get drafted in the first 4 rounds? Longshore probably wont go in the 7 rounds of the draft unless he has dramatice improvement. Pro potential aside, Troy Smith won the heisman trophy by the highest % ever, so saying he is much much better than Longshore is borderline understatement.

I don't know about that. Longshore is a big strong armed QB who stands tall in the pocket. The NFL loves these prototypical guys. He has great size at 6-5 233 and a good arm with nice deep touch. As much as his inconsistency drives me crazy, his pro potential is up there.

If Longshore has just one very productive year, expect him to get drafted on the first day. Bc its not like he has been terrible, he just hasn't lived up to his potential, couldn't play big in big games.

Smith has a career 62.7% accuracy. While Longshore has a career 60.6%...really its not that far off.

Look at Trent Edwards, only had one productive year and was drafted in the third, a Pac-10 qb who had only one semi good year but still drafted 2 rounds above Smith. The NFL could give a crap about the Heisman and it had no effect on Smiths draft status.

Makaveli
06-17-2007, 02:26 PM
Keylime, im geussing youve never saw Desean Jackson play, and I hate to post up a youtube vid, but just look how Desean just completely messes up an Oregon corner, which shows how good his route running is:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tpaV2IxXQK0

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-17-2007, 02:55 PM
Another thing is that people rave about Ted Ginn and his return abilities.

DeSean Jackson, California 13 25 455 4 18.20
Ted Ginn Jr., Ohio St. 13 24 266 1 11.08
lets see they both played in 13 games.Desean Jackson only had one more punt return than Ginn did.But had 3 more TDs.Had a 18.2 yrds/punt ret.
Ginn had 11.08 yards/punt ret.And Desean had 200 more yards than Ginn did.

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 03:11 PM
Hey EB is return Kicks and Punts, lets see how that turns out DTIOW. I got Earl Bennett for Heisman u got D-Jack. Lets see whos closer at the end

rainbeaukid2
06-17-2007, 03:16 PM
also, someone brought up about how ginn was way faster than jackson is, i don't see how you can be much faster than this

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lo9e2Jf7R0o&mode=related&search=

keylime_5
06-17-2007, 03:28 PM
When we were comparing Smith and Longshore, I don't see how pro potential has anything to do with who had a better QB throwing to them. Smith was a MUCH much much much better college QB than Longshore so far. Jason White was too, he was never a pro prospect. I'm just talking about how good people are in college.

I you guys are just gonna keep looking at stats and using that for a basis of who is a better player you are wasting your time. Lots of WRs had more stats than Ginn who weren't even drafted. Fallacy.

draftguru151
06-17-2007, 03:35 PM
What does Smith being better have to do with anything? Doesn't that help Ginn?

duckseason
06-17-2007, 03:45 PM
also, someone brought up about how ginn was way faster than jackson is, i don't see how you can be much faster than this

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lo9e2Jf7R0o&mode=related&search=

Haha. I remember that play. I actually made a post about it detailing the block and laughing at the UCLA dude who got up and tried to run off the field and then went right back down in a daze. IIRC, most people on here were watching some other premium matchup at the time.

rainbeaukid2
06-17-2007, 03:48 PM
Haha. I remember that play. I actually made a post about it detailing the block and laughing at the UCLA dude who got up and tried to run off the field and then went right back down in a daze. IIRC, most people on here were watching some other premium matchup at the time.

i was watchin it too, the best part is is that someone at my practice last year did the same thing, where they got up and started to run but then just fell back down

duckseason
06-17-2007, 03:48 PM
Yeah, not that it matters a ton in this discussion, but Longshore is a very good QB. No college QB is "much much much much much" better than him. He's in the upper tier. Stop acting like he plays DIII.

duckseason
06-17-2007, 03:53 PM
i was watchin it too, the best part is is that someone at my practice last year did the same thing, where they got up and started to run but then just fell back down

Haha. Nice. Yeah, I think most people were watching VaTech/Miami or Oklahoma/Texas AM.

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 03:55 PM
when i got my concussion, i started joggin off the field, and then i mentally blacked out, woke up with like 10 mins remanin, and though the school season didnt even start, and i didnt know what day it was, it was like our 6th game, i thought it was the first. It felt really good...

rainbeaukid2
06-17-2007, 03:58 PM
when i got my concussion, i started joggin off the field, and then i mentally blacked out, woke up with like 10 mins remanin, and though the school season didnt even start, and i didnt know what day it was, it was like our 6th game, i thought it was the first. It felt really good...

ya, concusssions are trippy things. so far i have had 3 in the last 3 years. one time i was playing football, got hit, and then i woke up in the nurses office, blacked out again and woke up at the doctors office, and then i blacked out once more and i woke up about to go into the CT scan at the hospitals emergency room

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 03:59 PM
ya, concusssions are trippy things. so far i have had 3 in the last 3 years. one time i was playing football, got hit, and then i woke up in the nurses office, blacked out again and woke up at the doctors office, and then i blacked out once more and i woke up about to go into the CT scan at the hospitals emergency room

yea i dont like playin football with cinder blocks ether.... i put my head down and his knee hit me right in the middle, and it shocked it. THe RB was also takin steroids and was a coke addict, i found out later. My coaches always say put ur head through the gaps on Goaline D, but they never said keep it up, lol....

edit - he didnt score on that play ether lol

Sniper
06-17-2007, 04:00 PM
Juking, cutting, same thing pretty much. Jukes are pretty lousy if you ask me, it seems like 9 times out of 10 when Barry Sanders did all that fancy juking crap in the backfield he'd lose yards, and 1 out of 10 he'd break it for a big 40 yard touchdown. I haven't seen anyone ever catch Ginn when he's in that 3rd gear top speed.

Seemed to work out for Barry didn't it? Last I checked he was pretty good.

Sniper
06-17-2007, 04:01 PM
Hey EB is return Kicks and Punts, lets see how that turns out DTIOW. I got Earl Bennett for Heisman u got D-Jack. Lets see whos closer at the end

Earl won't sniff the Heisman. Not because of a lack of talent, rather thanks to his lousy supporting cast.

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 04:04 PM
Earl won't sniff the Heisman. Not because of a lack of talent, rather thanks to his lousy supporting cast.

you know, i can dream, but ur right, he wont catch more than 10tds..... sigh such good talent playin on such a below average team, though i think Vandy will go 7-5 this year

rainbeaukid2
06-17-2007, 04:04 PM
yea i dont like playin football with cinder blocks ether.... i put my head down and his knee hit me right in the middle, and it shocked it. THe RB was also takin steroids and was a coke addict, i found out later. My coaches always say put ur head through the gaps on Goaline D, but they never said keep it up, lol....

edit - he didnt score on that play ether lol

you didn't really stand a chance there. i was going for a pick on D, a teammate flew over from safety(i was playing corner) and layed out for it, his head hitting mine, i never even saw what hit me

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 04:06 PM
you didn't really stand a chance there. i was going for a pick on D, a teammate flew over from safety(i was playing corner) and layed out for it, his head hitting mine, i never even saw what hit me

lol ive seen that happen to one of our guys durin practice. He wasnt the same the rest of the season and SINGLE HANDEDLY lost 2 games for us, which wouldve allowed us to go to the playoffs.

rainbeaukid2
06-17-2007, 04:11 PM
lol ive seen that happen to one of our guys durin practice. He wasnt the same the rest of the season and SINGLE HANDEDLY lost 2 games for us, which wouldve allowed us to go to the playoffs.

i didn't get that chance, it was in practice and i was out for the next 3 weeks

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 04:15 PM
i played the next game, and i played pretty good. Its funny, it was almost like a restart button

keylime_5
06-17-2007, 05:30 PM
What does Smith being better have to do with anything? Doesn't that help Ginn?

I said that Smith was a much much better college QB than Longshore, and that OSU had a better OL and receivers but was still below Cal statsically in passing and rushing to attest to how bad the PAC 10 defenses are. Not that I needed that as proof, it's common knowledge that the PAC 10 is a much worse defensive conference than the Big 10, ACC, or SEC. I seriously doubt that Jackson would've gotten 1000 yards like he did in one of those three leagues.

Sniper
06-17-2007, 06:16 PM
I said that Smith was a much much better college QB than Longshore, and that OSU had a better OL and receivers but was still below Cal statsically in passing and rushing to attest to how bad the PAC 10 defenses are. Not that I needed that as proof, it's common knowledge that the PAC 10 is a much worse defensive conference than the Big 10, ACC, or SEC. I seriously doubt that Jackson would've gotten 1000 yards like he did in one of those three leagues.

Okay now you're getting ridiculous. Jackson is an incredible playmaker. Just because you're a big Ginn fan doesn't mean you have to diminish everything Jackson does.

keylime_5
06-17-2007, 06:24 PM
I'm not taking stuff away from Jackson, he's a great player too and I think he's gonna be a star in the NFL in a couple of years. He'll probably be a top 10, maybe top 15 pick and do what Ginn does in Miami for some other team (unless Miami is stupid enough to draft an undersized PR/WR in consecutive drafts). But Ginn is a better player by a small margin.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-17-2007, 06:27 PM
I have yet to see you offer any sort of evidence beyond stating that Ginn's teammates were better and degrading the Pac-10. Both of which are entirely irrelevant if you're trying to compare pro potential.

jriles0522
06-17-2007, 06:47 PM
Ginn and it's not even close. Jackson's good yea, but there are a lot of receivers you can plug into that cal offense that would put up comparable numbers.

Green Bay Scat
06-17-2007, 06:50 PM
D-Jack is apples, T-Ginn is Bananas

Phrost
06-17-2007, 07:02 PM
Ginn and it's not even close. Jackson's good yea, but there are a lot of receivers you can plug into that cal offense that would put up comparable numbers.

yep, even though this is from an Ohio fan

duckseason
06-17-2007, 08:37 PM
I said that Smith was a much much better college QB than Longshore, and that OSU had a better OL and receivers but was still below Cal statsically in passing and rushing to attest to how bad the PAC 10 defenses are. Not that I needed that as proof, it's common knowledge that the PAC 10 is a much worse defensive conference than the Big 10, ACC, or SEC. I seriously doubt that Jackson would've gotten 1000 yards like he did in one of those three leagues.
Alright, I'm going to squash this myth once and for all. First, stop lumping the Big11 in with the SEC. We all know the SEC is the elite conference. They produce the most NFL talent, and they are known for their stingy defenses. The Big11 is no more like them than the Pac10 is. The only knock on them is that they field 12 teams. They certainly have their patsies like any other conference. Let us not forget that we are talking about entire conferences, k? So anyway, the SEC is the best. So we'll move on to the others.

First of all, I'm not gonna sit here and homer it up and say that the Pac10 is definitively better on Defense than the Big11 or the ACC. I am merely going to point out why we are unquestionably at least on the same level. Exhibit A would be my earlier post highlighting the tremendous parity we have in this conference. So reference that. I'm not typing it again. In summary, every team other than Stanford is currently competing with each other on a weekly basis. There are no gimmes in this conference other than Stanford. No other major conference can say that. None. To further illustrate this point, every single Pac10 team has tied for or outright won the conference championship at least once in the last 14 years. In other words, we are not top heavy like these myth mongers would like people to believe. SC might just be the most feared team in the country for the last several years, but they still struggle in their own conference. When was the last time Michigan or tOSU struggled with the big-11 bottom feeders? Once in a blue moon? Yeah. So anyway, that is my first point. We actually have a balanced conference. But I'm sure that has nothing to do with defense. We just throw the ball on every play and have nothing but shootouts. Right. Check the archives. That is a myth.

However, we do indeed seem to play a generally more offensive minded brand of football out here. Many of our HC's have backgrounds as OC's, and none of them play a vanilla offense like you might see in some of the other major conferences. These vast differences in game philosophy make national total defense statistics nearly meaningless when comparing an entire conference against another. The fact that SC was recognized by most as one of the best defenses in the country last year, yet teams like TCU, Wyoming, W Mich and Boise State were ranked ahead of them, proves my point.

Now, of course we have our share of weaker defenses every year. I'm not going to argue that. It is fact. I know my Ducks struggled mightily at times despite our talent level. It may have been our worst year ever as far as injuries on that side of the ball. We were decimated. But, other teams across the country suffered the same. So what. Anyway, my point is that every conference has numerous teams that struggle on the defensive side of the ball. In any given year, we struggle no more than the Big11 or ACC. This past year, SC, UCLA, Cal and Arizona were all very good on defense. Oregon St wasn't anything to sneeze at either. All of those units had guys that were drafted. So did every other team other than ASU. In fact, despite USC having a tremendous down year in this regard, and Michigan having perhaps it's best ever with 7 draftees, the Big11 had 20 defensive players drafted, and the Pac10 had 16. So you have one more team, and four more draft picks, and our powerhouse only sent 2, even though we all know they have as much if not more talent on a year to year basis as the Wolverines do. Sounds like a push, if not a strong argument for the Pac10 talent level on that side of the ball. We'll call it a push though. Now, this little stat doesn't mean a ton, but it does refute the argument that the talent level in the Pac10 is somehow less-than. At least it's somewhat even from top to bottom, unlike the Big11. You guys have your quality teams each year, and we have ours. Sometimes you're better at the top, sometimes we are. For every year that a team like UCLA struggles on defense, a team like Penn St. struggles in the Big10. So quit with the BS myths. Don't forget that Northwestern, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, Michigan St, and Minnesota are just as much a part of your conference as Michigan, Iowa, Ohio St. and Wisconsin. Yeah, all those teams are perennial juggernauts on defense. Gimme a break. You've got at least 3 Stanfords there when it comes to defense. Honestly, the Big11 is nowhere near the ACC as far as defense goes now that I take a closer look. I give them the nod over the Pac10 as well. The ACC has it's weak teams too, but overall they play very good defense from team to team. So in summary, the Big11 is vastly overrated as an entire conference. Especially defensively, when you put them in the same convo as the SEC and ACC and act as though they are far superior to the Pac10.

As far as head to head examples, look no further than Sep 20 '03. Michigan vs Oregon. What team shattered Chris Perry's heisman hopes by holding him to just 26 yards on the ground? Who knocked off the 5th ranked team in the country by allowing only 6 points in the first half? Yeah. That weak ass pac10 defense shut down the best offense in the big10 that year, allowing a grand total of -3 yards on the ground. While our pass-heavy little weak ass sissy offense pounded out 127 yards on the ground against the big bad Big11 smashmouth defense. That Michigan team came into that matchup averaging 307 yards rushing in it's previous 3 games.

This past year, I think Cal's defense looked just as good against Minnesota as any other Big11 team did.

Let's not forget SC's drubbing of Michigan in the bowl game. I count no less than 7 Pac10 teams who did a better job keeping the trojans in check. Hmm. And that was the 2nd best offering from the Big11. Funny how both powerhouses got smashed in their bowl games.

I can find countless examples of Pac10 defenses holding their own against some of the nations toughest opponents. Remember that middle of the pack OSU team that visited death valley a few years ago? Losing 22-21 despite 3 missed pat's? Derek Anderson, Dwight Wright and Joe Newton were the offensive stars of that game. Not Jamarcus Russell, Justin Vincent or Joseph Addai.

So quit with the BS. For every little lame ass argument you come up with to try and bash Pac10 defenses, I can come up with a stronger one backing them. Like I said, I'm not claiming that we are anything better than the other major conferences. Just that we are just as much of a force on defense as the likes of the Big11. This is not a mid-major. California produces more college football players than any other state. You think there might be a great athlete or two mixed in there? Where do you think all those kids go to school? Where do all those huge Samoans go to school? Yes, the west coast does exist. Just because a lot of our games come on a few hours after your bed time doesn't mean that we don't play great football out here.

TouchdownUSC
06-17-2007, 10:54 PM
couldnt have said it better myself duckseason. i am not a big 10 hater but these people who act like its the SEC are nuts. so many of the top teams in the Pac 10 could handle a huge portion of the Big 10...USC, Cal, Oregon and Oregon St all come to mind. i think the Pac 10 might be the most underrated conference ever.

Sniper
06-17-2007, 11:05 PM
couldnt have said it better myself duckseason. i am not a big 10 hater but these people who act like its the SEC are nuts. so many of the top teams in the Pac 10 could handle a huge portion of the Big 10...USC, Cal, Oregon and Oregon St all come to mind. i think the Pac 10 might be the most underrated conference ever.

Yes, USC smoked Michigan. But that last part of your post is ridiculous. Cal isn't that good, Oregon has no quarterback and Oregon State got lucky against USC. Then again, it will be a good barometer for when Oregon plays Michigan.

TouchdownUSC
06-17-2007, 11:21 PM
Cal isnt that good? what teams in the Big 10 do you think would beat Cal? Yeah, Oregon does have a QB situation but they could still hold their own with at least half the teams in the Big 10 and Oregon St is still way way better than most people give them credit for. Whats so great about the Big 10, Ohio State, Michigan, and an okay Wisconsin team?

Sniper
06-17-2007, 11:32 PM
Cal isnt that good? what teams in the Big 10 do you think would beat Cal? Yeah, Oregon does have a QB situation but they could still hold their own with at least half the teams in the Big 10 and Oregon St is still way way better than most people give them credit for. Whats so great about the Big 10, Ohio State, Michigan, and an okay Wisconsin team?

That "okay" Wisconsin team finished 5th in the country last year there buddy. All 3 of those teams and possibly Penn State would beat Cal this year.

keylime_5
06-17-2007, 11:36 PM
didn't bother reading a book on something totally PAC 10 homer bogusness. Pac 10 defenses suck other than USC, period. There might be a decent one here or there every once in a while, but that whole conference is built on offense just like the Big Ten is pretty much built on running games.

to paranoidmoonduck - what evidence do you want? This is about 100% subjective. There's no facts floating around that any one player is better than anyone else.

HoopsDemon12
06-17-2007, 11:57 PM
ya, concusssions are trippy things. so far i have had 3 in the last 3 years. one time i was playing football, got hit, and then i woke up in the nurses office, blacked out again and woke up at the doctors office, and then i blacked out once more and i woke up about to go into the CT scan at the hospitals emergency room

ya ive had 13......

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-18-2007, 12:14 AM
Ginn and it's not even close. Jackson's good yea, but there are a lot of receivers you can plug into that cal offense that would put up comparable numbers.No not alot of WRs could put up those #s.Not only that but Jackson is the much better WR.

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 12:45 AM
did wisconsin even play anyone big outside of a few top big 10 teams? i personally think the whole conference was overrated last year and they just made each other look good. by the way, there is no way Penn State would beat Cal. sorry

reese
06-18-2007, 12:56 AM
why wouldnt penn st. beat cal?

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 02:16 AM
because they have no real offense while Cal has a good offense and defense. cal has far more playmakers

Paranoidmoonduck
06-18-2007, 03:15 AM
didn't bother reading a book on something totally PAC 10 homer bogusness. Pac 10 defenses suck other than USC, period. There might be a decent one here or there every once in a while, but that whole conference is built on offense just like the Big Ten is pretty much built on running games.

to paranoidmoonduck - what evidence do you want? This is about 100% subjective. There's no facts floating around that any one player is better than anyone else.

I want some reasoned out examples of where Ginn's game adapts better to the pro level than Jackson. I might agree, I might not, but we'll never know until you try.

You want to rip Pac-10 defenses? How about Cal's, which destroyed Texas A&M? How about Washington St's, which, save for one long run by Kenny Irons, completely shut down a fantastic Auburn running game? How about the impressive effort made by Arizona's defense all last year?

I'm sick of the crap the Pac-10 takes in general, and you stating that one player is definitely better than another based on that argument is silly and, in this case, more than a bit ridiculous.

For the record, the Pac-10 was 2-0 vs. the Big Ten last year.

keylime_5
06-18-2007, 10:41 AM
did wisconsin even play anyone big outside of a few top big 10 teams? i personally think the whole conference was overrated last year and they just made each other look good. by the way, there is no way Penn State would beat Cal. sorry

They handled Arkansas pretty good down in Orlando. Pretty fun game to watch that one. Penn State beat Tennessee too, even with the lousy Morelli at QB.

Duck, The Pac 10 was 2-0 against the big ten but one of those was USC beating Michigan which doesn't really affect what I was talking about since I said that USC does have good defenses always now with Carroll. The other game was NW/AZST I think, could be wrong. Just because AZST beats some crappy NW team who's coach died means that the PAC 10 has credible defenses? Gimme a break. From what I've seen of the PAC 10 recently the only defense that has looked like a normal team was SC's.

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 11:11 AM
haha, yeah Penn State BARELY beat Tennesee...what a miracle that game was for them.

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 11:17 AM
also, didnt wisconsin finish 7th? they barely beat arkansas too, so i wouldnt quite say they "handeled" arkansas." yeah, they were undefeated all season long except for michigan, but they played crap teams like buffalo, san diego state and bowling green. what team couldnt finish well with that schedule?

Paranoidmoonduck
06-18-2007, 03:13 PM
Duck, The Pac 10 was 2-0 against the big ten but one of those was USC beating Michigan which doesn't really affect what I was talking about since I said that USC does have good defenses always now with Carroll. The other game was NW/AZST I think, could be wrong. Just because AZST beats some crappy NW team who's coach died means that the PAC 10 has credible defenses? Gimme a break. From what I've seen of the PAC 10 recently the only defense that has looked like a normal team was SC's.

The other game was California thrashing Minnesota 42-17. You're welcome to whatever opinion of whatever conference or player you please, but you haven't offered up a bit of real support for Ginn.

keylime_5
06-18-2007, 03:46 PM
I think Cal's mighty defense was ranked 91st in the country last year. Hardly decent. Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa sometimes, Illinois sometimes, and Purdue sometimes all have good or decent defenses. Not to mention nonconference teams Ginn faced like Texas and Notre Dame (Just kidding :)). Jackson faced a mighty USC defense, a good Tennessee defense, and......wow that's it. Sorry, but Cal's opponents last year were pretty flat on defense. Against SC and Tennessee combined I think Jackson had like 120 and a TD combined. Not bad, but it's not like that makes up for the other easier opponents. I'm telling you that Jackson getting an 18 yard average is 100% on the weak opponents. Against Big Ten, SEC, or ACC competition it would've been around 14.

Ginn had about 14 ypc against good competition. Leon Hall, Aaron Ross, Justin King, Charles Godfrey, Tracy Porter, Vontae Davis.....those are the quality corners he faced last year. Not gonna get into the 2004 or 2005 corners. Jackson had Terrell Thomas and Antoine Cason.

Paranoidmoonduck
06-18-2007, 03:55 PM
And...?

As I recall, Ginn was rarely shadowed by the other teams top corner. The top corner usually faced Gonzalez while Ginn was covered by the fastest corner on the defense with deep help from a safety. I know that Leon Hall spent minimal time covering him and that Ross spent most of his time on Gonzalez as well.

And I'm still waiting for some player breakdown that shows Ginn to be the better player.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
06-18-2007, 04:14 PM
And I'm still waiting for some player breakdown that shows Ginn to be the better player.

The other guy knows he can't do it, just too much of a homer to admit Jackson is better in EVERY aspect of the game. Hell, Jackson may even be faster than Ginn.

duckseason
06-18-2007, 04:42 PM
I think Cal's mighty defense was ranked 91st in the country last year. Hardly decent. Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa sometimes, Illinois sometimes, and Purdue sometimes all have good or decent defenses. Not to mention nonconference teams Ginn faced like Texas and Notre Dame (Just kidding :)). Jackson faced a mighty USC defense, a good Tennessee defense, and......wow that's it. Sorry, but Cal's opponents last year were pretty flat on defense. Against SC and Tennessee combined I think Jackson had like 120 and a TD combined. Not bad, but it's not like that makes up for the other easier opponents. I'm telling you that Jackson getting an 18 yard average is 100% on the weak opponents. Against Big Ten, SEC, or ACC competition it would've been around 14.

Ginn had about 14 ypc against good competition. Leon Hall, Aaron Ross, Justin King, Charles Godfrey, Tracy Porter, Vontae Davis.....those are the quality corners he faced last year. Not gonna get into the 2004 or 2005 corners. Jackson had Terrell Thomas and Antoine Cason.
You need to read my post and understand it. Cal faced a tougher schedule than most every Big11 team. Not only is that obvious to the naked eye, but various computers say the same. In fact, the Pac10 as a whole played the toughest schedule according to many computers. Other solid defenses you neglected to mention that Cal faced are Arizona, Oregon St, UCLA, and Texas AM. Your argument is especially ridiculous in the fact that it is more fitting for a top of the heap Big11 team. Such as Wisconsin. You wanna talk about a patsy laden schedule. Buffalo? Western Illinois? On a 12 game slate you only have 3 teams who even have a chance to beat you? You're playing as a double digit favorite nearly every weak? Yeah. OK.

The fact that you refused to read my earlier post, yet you're still trying to argue this speaks volumes. I already addressed all these issues, and there was nothing homerific about it. See, directing people's attention to reality by stating the obvious is not homerific. Merely claiming that the Pac10 is unquestionably on the same level as the Big11 is not being a homer. I already admitted the ACC and SEC have a leg up defensively. I demand that due respect be given to the Pac10. You demand that the Big11 be seen as something it isn't.

Where the homer talk comes in, is when you start acting like your conference can do no wrong. When you lump the collective defensive prowess of your conference in with the likes of the SEC. When you ignore the glaring weaknesses of your own conference while exaggerating those of another. When you spout off reels of inaccuracies in order to support your homer-centric argument. YOU are the guy who is standing eye to eye, yet acting as though he is atop some mountain looking down on the lowly Pac10. We all know there is great football being played out in the midwest. I get up at 9:00 on most saturdays just so I can watch a few of their games. Why can't you admit the same about the west? Could it be that you don't pay much attention and therefore are just ignorant to what goes on out here?

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 05:40 PM
couldnt have said it better....

Sniper
06-18-2007, 07:54 PM
haha, yeah Penn State BARELY beat Tennesee...what a miracle that game was for them.

Um they won by 10. "Miracle"? Um, no.

keylime_5
06-18-2007, 07:59 PM
Blah blah blah, the Pac 10 conference as a whole always has worse defenses than the Big Ten, SEC, and ACC on any given year. No way around it.

Ross and Hall didn't cover Ginn the whole game, but Ginn sure as hell burnt both of them for touchdowns last season, and Ginn burnt Hall about 3 or 4 other times too. I'm sure JAckson could burn those guys too probably, but still - Ginn's competition was steeper than Jackson's and the fact that the DBs Jackson faced were a lot less competent led to Jackson getting a higher YPC total. That's all there is to it. Comparing them with stats is a fallacy in that regard, they both lived up to the hype statistically.

Ginn's hands are fine, his routes need work but he has improved his route running from his freshman year dramatically (his first as a WR). Jackson is more polished at this point in his career than Ginn was, but Ginn's potential is through the roof. Ginn is bigger and faster so he is a better prospect IMO, but I'd take either one for my team in a heartbeat. Pick your poison.

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-18-2007, 08:39 PM
Ginn's hands are fine, his routes need work but he has improved his route running from his freshman year dramatically (his first as a WR). Jackson is more polished at this point in his career than Ginn was, but Ginn's potential is through the roof. Ginn is bigger and faster so he is a better prospect IMO, but I'd take either one for my team in a heartbeat. Pick your poison.
Yah I guess Ginn has all the potential in the world and Jackson has none.Faster?by how much?I could easily say Desean is faster.

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 08:56 PM
So despite everything that Jackson is better at the 3 pounds and the slight margin than Ginn has in speed (if there is any at all) makes him a better prospect. Well that convinced me.

keylime_5
06-18-2007, 09:47 PM
More like 10 lbs. And Ginn is absolutely, definitely faster. His 40 is about 4.32 or so without a lisfranc injury, and the forty doesn't tell the whole tale of speed. And the difference between 180 and 170 is blown up in the NFL. DeSean Jackson is just a Dennis Northcutt with much better hands at 170.

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-18-2007, 09:55 PM
And Ted Ginn is an Alvis Whitted who was just drafted higher.

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 10:05 PM
who had more returns last year, Ginn or Jackson? i want to say Jackson...

keylime_5
06-18-2007, 10:07 PM
Ginn is more like a rawer Joey Galloway with a little Devin Hester in him but with way more upside.
...And ginn has the NCAA record for career return touchdowns. I think he had 4 as a true freshman after only starting as only the PR for about 8 games or so, not the full 13.

Sniper
06-18-2007, 10:10 PM
Ginn is more like a rawer Joey Galloway with a little Devin Hester in him but with way more upside.
...And ginn has the NCAA record for career return touchdowns. I think he had 4 as a true freshman after only starting as only the PR for about 8 games or so, not the full 13.

How many does Ginn have? Jackson has 5 in two years. I'm gonna guess he's gonna end up with more than Ginn.

keylime_5
06-18-2007, 10:18 PM
Not sure, I think 8 but I could be off by one or so. If that's right then that means that Jackson needs 3 to tie and 4 to pass. Doesn't seem too likely, it's not easy to get 3 or 4 return TDs in a year, especially after you've killed other teams for 2 straight years in which they don't give you stuff to return (either kick it out of bounds or boot high, shorter kicks). That's what happened to Ginn anyways and why his return TD total dropped off after his first year. That said I wouldn't be suprised at all to see Jackson tie Ginn's record.

Also, I think Ginn had at least 2 return TDs called back including 1 against Indiana on a call that didn't make any sense and there was no foul.

Sniper
06-18-2007, 10:27 PM
Not sure, I think 8 but I could be off by one or so. If that's right then that means that Jackson needs 3 to tie and 4 to pass. Doesn't seem too likely, it's not easy to get 3 or 4 return TDs in a year, especially after you've killed other teams for 2 straight years in which they don't give you stuff to return (either kick it out of bounds or boot high, shorter kicks). That's what happened to Ginn anyways and why his return TD total dropped off after his first year. That said I wouldn't be suprised at all to see Jackson tie Ginn's record.

Also, I think Ginn had at least 2 return TDs called back including 1 against Indiana on a call that didn't make any sense and there was no foul.

I think he will. Jackson had 4 last year and only one his freshman year. Coincidentally, he also only returned one punt his freshman year. I think Jackson gets the record.

keylime_5
06-18-2007, 10:34 PM
If Pac ten special teams are any worse than their defenses he will :). It's hard to tell, and like I said, return touchdowns are a lot harder to score than on offense. If a team doesn't want you to return one then they won't kick it to you.

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 10:42 PM
whats all this crap about Pac 10 having bad defenses? that is totally bogus. stop glorifying the big 10. they are a good conference but you keep trying to belittle the Pac 10 and in reality the Big 10 really is not any better. Your hailed Ohio State and Michigan defenses sure didnt look to impressive to say the least when they played outside teams in their bowl games....

also i wouldnt at all be suprised if Jackson breaks Ginn's record. hes gotta be close to it already

TouchdownUSC
06-18-2007, 10:46 PM
Um they won by 10. "Miracle"? Um, no.

wasnt their some kind of last minute fumble/turnover by Tennesee
that Penn State scored off of though that basically ended the game with a Penn State win?

draftguru151
06-18-2007, 10:48 PM
More like 10 lbs. And Ginn is absolutely, definitely faster. His 40 is about 4.32 or so without a lisfranc injury, and the forty doesn't tell the whole tale of speed. And the difference between 180 and 170 is blown up in the NFL. DeSean Jackson is just a Dennis Northcutt with much better hands at 170.

Can you please tell me the difference between 178 and 175? Last time I checked it's 3, but I'm not that good in math. And pretty much everyone in here, other than you, has accepted the speed is so close it really does not benefit either player.

elway777
06-18-2007, 11:13 PM
A better arguement would be DJack vs. Mario Manningham.

Sniper
06-18-2007, 11:17 PM
whats all this crap about Pac 10 having bad defenses? that is totally bogus. stop glorifying the big 10. they are a good conference but you keep trying to belittle the Pac 10 and in reality the Big 10 really is not any better. Your hailed Ohio State and Michigan defenses sure didnt look to impressive to say the least when they played outside teams in their bowl games....

also i wouldnt at all be suprised if Jackson breaks Ginn's record. hes gotta be close to it already

You mean how Michigan had the #1 run defense in the whole country? Yeah, really "glorifying" them.

Sniper
06-18-2007, 11:18 PM
A better arguement would be DJack vs. Mario Manningham.

Why's that? Manningham doesn't return kicks. Ginn and Jackson are very similar players.

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-18-2007, 11:43 PM
Why's that? Manningham doesn't return kicks. Ginn and Jackson are very similar players.
neither does Jackson.I think he was saying that we should be debating over whos the better WR prospect.Manningham or Jackson.

rainbeaukid2
06-18-2007, 11:47 PM
neither does Jackson.I think he was saying that we should be debating over whos the better WR prospect.Manningham or Jackson.

jackson does return kicks/punts

elway777
06-18-2007, 11:48 PM
neither does Jackson.I think he was saying that we should be debating over whos the better WR prospect.Manningham or Jackson.

Yup, one look at this poll tells it all.

soybean
06-18-2007, 11:50 PM
jackson does return kicks/punts

(10 characters)

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-18-2007, 11:51 PM
jackson does return kicks/puntsI never said he didnt return punts.But he only returned 2 kickoffs last year.

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 12:09 AM
You mean how Michigan had the #1 run defense in the whole country? Yeah, really "glorifying" them.

Yeah, but look at Michigan's schedule. Sure they shut down teams like Bowling Green's run game. no question. They didnt shut down Ohio State's run game though. Michigan's defense didn't defend the pass very well at all against USC too....they had a good defense but i think it was a bit overrated, just my opinion

keylime_5
06-19-2007, 09:37 AM
Can you please tell me the difference between 178 and 175? Last time I checked it's 3, but I'm not that good in math. And pretty much everyone in here, other than you, has accepted the speed is so close it really does not benefit either player.


Ginn is 178, but you can't assume that Jackson measures at 175. 168 is more like it and that's about what his listed weight is anyway. 178-168=10. Yay, do I get an A in math now?

keylime_5
06-19-2007, 09:39 AM
Yeah, but look at Michigan's schedule. Sure they shut down teams like Bowling Green's run game. no question. They didnt shut down Ohio State's run game though. Michigan's defense didn't defend the pass very well at all against USC too....they had a good defense but i think it was a bit overrated, just my opinion

Michigan's run D was good. They couldn't stop Troy Smtih, that's probably why the Bucks opened up the running game so well on them. Plus Pittman, Wells, and our O-Line was no joke. But Michigan had Alan Branch, Terrance Taylor, LaMarr Woodley, Rondell Biggs, David Harris, Prescott Burgess and Shawn Crable up front. Pretty good front 7. Don't compare PAC 10 defenses to the SEC, ACC, or BIG 10, it just doesn't work.

keylime_5
06-19-2007, 09:39 AM
Why's that? Manningham doesn't return kicks. Ginn and Jackson are very similar players.

Because they're actually the same year unlike Ginn who is already in the league

draftguru151
06-19-2007, 09:45 AM
Ginn is 178, but you can't assume that Jackson measures at 175. 168 is more like it and that's about what his listed weight is anyway. 178-168=10. Yay, do I get an A in math now?

Hooray for knowing that Jackson is up to 175 now and not the 166 he was last year.

Iamcanadian
06-19-2007, 11:18 AM
Can you please tell me the difference between 178 and 175? Last time I checked it's 3, but I'm not that good in math. And pretty much everyone in here, other than you, has accepted the speed is so close it really does not benefit either player.

I don't know, my instincts tell me to be very wary about Jackson's weight. Everybody is putting pounds on him but that isn't always so easy to accomplish. I smell a player who will turnout to be under 160lbs and I won't believe more until his official weight is in no matter what rumours are circulating. He could easily be 20lbs lighter than Ginn and that makes him a very suspect pro prospect.
If he can get up to 170+ lbs, he'll go pretty high but I have my doubts.

keylime_5
06-19-2007, 11:22 AM
I'll believe the 175 when I see it. He came to Berkeley at about 150 something. I doubt he's really 175, my money is on 160-something at the combine.

Sniper
06-19-2007, 12:11 PM
Yeah, but look at Michigan's schedule. Sure they shut down teams like Bowling Green's run game. no question. They didnt shut down Ohio State's run game though. Michigan's defense didn't defend the pass very well at all against USC too....they had a good defense but i think it was a bit overrated, just my opinion

I didn't say they were the #1 pass D did I? Kind of hard to do when you have Morgan Trent and Ryan Mundy in your secondary. USC tried to run the ball in the first half and came out of there with the game tied 3-3. Then, they opened it up and won 32-18. Coincidence?

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-19-2007, 12:47 PM
Yah you guys are right Desean Jackson will put no more weight on him and he'll shrink to 140 pounds.

Vikes99ej
06-19-2007, 01:13 PM
I'll take Desean Jackson, please.

keylime_5
06-19-2007, 01:58 PM
Yah you guys are right Desean Jackson will put no more weight on him and he'll shrink to 140 pounds.

Well the speed receivers usually don't gain that much weight over their college careers to maintain their agility and top speed. I can't see him getting up to 180 without hurting his speed. He'll probably have to play in the 170s as a pro, which is about as small as the smallest nonkicker in the NFL.

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 04:48 PM
im humored by the fact you keep trying to bring up SEC defenses and Big 10 defenses as if they were on par with each other...

Sniper
06-19-2007, 04:51 PM
im humored by the fact you keep trying to bring up SEC defenses and Big 10 defenses as if they were on par with each other...

You mean how Michigan had one of the country's top defenses?

Phrost
06-19-2007, 04:57 PM
You mean how Michigan had one of the country's top defenses?

and OSUs ability to put pros into the league regularly?

duckseason
06-19-2007, 04:59 PM
You mean how Michigan had one of the country's top defenses?

So did Rutgers. But that doesn't put the Big East anywhere near the SEC. How does Michigan State's defense stack up against Georgia's? Would you rather have Minnesota's defense, or that of Tennessee? Indiana or Alabama?

Sniper
06-19-2007, 05:03 PM
So did Rutgers. But that doesn't put the Big East anywhere near the SEC. How does Michigan State's defense stack up against Georgia's? Would you rather have Minnesota's defense, or that of Tennessee? Indiana or Alabama?

Top to bottom, give me the SEC. TDUSC made it sound like the entire Big 10 had no business being near the SEC.

Green Bay Scat
06-19-2007, 05:03 PM
hey Vandy Held Michigan to 27, ohio state didnt....lol

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 05:06 PM
You are nuts if you think the Big 10 as a conference should be lumped defensively next to the SEC. thats like me saying USC has a good defense so the whole Pac 10 is as good as the SEC.

Michigan had a good defense within its conference. Look at all the Big 10 teams that have mediocore at best defenses...

Phrost
06-19-2007, 05:09 PM
USC is poop. They lost to Oregon State.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 05:11 PM
Top to bottom, give me the SEC. TDUSC made it sound like the entire Big 10 had no business being near the SEC.

That's what he's saying. Of course Michigan has a good defense. Sounded to me like he was talking about the conference as a whole. I think we all know that Michigan and Ohio St. have some pretty damn good defenses from year to year.

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 05:12 PM
USC is poop. They lost to Oregon State.


Wow. Oregon State is solid. USC played a hell of a lot harder schedule than Ohio State last year. Ohio State flat out got embarrassed in the championship game because they got exposed for playing a weak schedule. Once they went up against good competition they were destroyed. i got nothing against Ohio State either. I cant even remember the last time USC got blown out

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 05:13 PM
That's what he's saying. Of course Michigan has a good defense. Sounded to me like he was talking about the conference as a whole. I think we all know that Michigan and Ohio St. have some pretty damn good defenses from year to year.

good to know at least somebody understands

Phrost
06-19-2007, 05:15 PM
Wow. Oregon State is solid. USC played a hell of a lot harder schedule than Ohio State last year. Ohio State flat out got embarrassed in the championship game because they got exposed for playing a weak schedule. Once they went up against good competition they were destroyed. i got nothing against Ohio State either. I cant even remember the last time USC got blown out

So if they played ten games who would win more Florida or tOSU?

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 05:16 PM
So if they played ten games who would win more Florida or tOSU?

10 games against who?

duckseason
06-19-2007, 05:16 PM
USC is poop. They lost to Oregon State.

Which is the equivalent of Ohio St. losing to Michigan St.

Hmmm. Too bad things like that never happen because mid-level big11 teams can't even compete with the conference powerhouses. Thanks for pointing out the tremendous depth we enjoy in this conference. I think most people are already aware of it though.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 05:18 PM
So if they played ten games who would win more Florida or tOSU?

Judging by the outcome of the last game, Florida would come out on top. But who knows. Tressel is a tremendous coach, and tOSU had ridiculous talent on that team. All we know is that Florida spanked them pretty badly when it mattered.

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 05:19 PM
Which is the equivalent of Ohio St. losing to Michigan St.

Hmmm. Too bad things like that never happen because mid-level big11 teams can't even compete with the conference powerhouses. Thanks for pointing out the tremendous depth we enjoy in this conference. I think most people are already aware of it though.

Yep...nobody is safe in the Pac 10.

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 05:20 PM
Judging by the outcome of the last game, Florida would come out on top. But who knows. Tressel is a tremendous coach, and tOSU had ridiculous talent on that team. All we know is that Florida spanked them pretty badly when it mattered.

Yeah, its hard to tell but if it was a lot closer you could make an arguement. the fact that it was a masacare almost leaves no room for arguement though

draftguru151
06-19-2007, 05:30 PM
And didn't USC beat Michigan, pretty badly at that? So if USC is poop, what does that make Michigan?

Sniper
06-19-2007, 05:35 PM
So if they played ten games who would win more Florida or tOSU?

Probably 5-5. I just can't see Chris Leak being consistently that good.

duckseason
06-19-2007, 05:36 PM
And didn't USC beat Michigan, pretty badly at that? So if USC is poop, what does that make Michigan?

poopier? the poopiest? stale poop? dog poop? bird turd? bat guano?

good question.

Phrost
06-19-2007, 05:37 PM
diarrhea..

duckseason
06-19-2007, 05:37 PM
Probably 5-5. I just can't see Chris Leak being consistently that good.

Yeah, winning games week in and week out in the horrendous SEC is something that inconsistent QB's do quite often.

Sniper
06-19-2007, 05:44 PM
Yeah, winning games week in and week out in the horrendous SEC is something that inconsistent QB's do quite often.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=146526

It's a good thing only the QB is responsible for winning games. Not a sick defense or weapons like Percy Harvin. One look at that tells me he's somewhat inconsistent link. In the SEC title game I could have sworn he was drunk the way he was playing, and then a month later he looks like Tom Brady against OSU. Look, he wins games, yes, but that doesn't mean he isn't inconsistent. He's got good weapons to work with, a defense that just had 2 first rounders this year with a third in Derrick Harvey on his way next year, and the best young coach in the NCAA.

TouchdownUSC
06-19-2007, 05:47 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=146526

It's a good thing only the QB is responsible for winning games. Not a sick defense or weapons like Percy Harvin. One look at that tells me he's somewhat inconsistent link. In the SEC title game I could have sworn he was drunk the way he was playing, and then a month later he looks like Tom Brady against OSU. Look, he wins games, yes, but that doesn't mean he isn't inconsistent. He's got good weapons to work with, a defense that just had 2 first rounders this year with a third in Derrick Harvey on his way next year, and the best young coach in the NCAA.


and Ohio State didnt have good weapons?

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-19-2007, 06:27 PM
Because they're actually the same year unlike Ginn who is already in the leagueno because they're both better prospects than Ginn is and are much closer together in talent.

keylime_5
06-19-2007, 09:26 PM
no because they're both better prospects than Ginn is and are much closer together in talent.

Hah that's a good one. You should do stand up. Ginn was only like the #3 overall player in the class of 2004 - which was a much better class than in 2005. I think Peterson was top in 04. Ginn is only an olympic athlete type who is the fastest man on the field in every game and is a threat to score every time he gets the ball. Manningham is like 6-0/180 and Jackson is like 5-11/165. Neither will be drafted as high as 9th overall either. Both times Ginn and Manningham met Ginn was by far the better player in that game.

The mass hatred for a great guy like Ted Ginn Jr. on this board really baffles me. Every other board he's not loathed except this one it seems. Very strange.

elway777
06-19-2007, 09:31 PM
Now Ginn is a victim. haha

doingthisinsteadofwork
06-19-2007, 09:34 PM
The mass hatred for a great guy like Ted Ginn Jr. on this board really baffles me. Every other board he's not loathed except this one it seems. Very strange.THeres never been mass hatred for Ginn.Its just the homers see him as a flawless WR.