PDA

View Full Version : why does d-unit like slow players?


pocketaces
03-28-2007, 05:03 PM
d's favorite wideout is dwayne jarrett who just ran a 4.67 40. i cant remember a w.r thats been drafted in the first round running over a 4.6

d's favorite c.b. is daymeion hughs who just ran a 4.65 40. ive seen mocks with him in the 3rd round lately.

d's favorite r.b. is marshawn lynch who ran in the mid 4.5s compared to petersons 4.36. is also on record as saying lynch will be the better pro which is crazy imo.

so why the love for all the slow guys d?

TNewFan41
03-28-2007, 05:18 PM
Dude, 40 times DON'T MEAN ANYTHING. Ed Reed ran a 4.54, and I don't think anyone is complaining about his speed. Football speed matters, not 40 times.

D-Unit
03-28-2007, 05:39 PM
d's favorite wideout is dwayne jarrett who just ran a 4.67 40. i cant remember a w.r thats been drafted in the first round running over a 4.6

d's favorite c.b. is daymeion hughs who just ran a 4.65 40. ive seen mocks with him in the 3rd round lately.

d's favorite r.b. is marshawn lynch who ran in the mid 4.5s compared to petersons 4.36. is also on record as saying lynch will be the better pro which is crazy imo.

so why the love for all the slow guys d?
Slow? You just mean a slow 40 time. That's all. I'd like to see 40 times of players before a game, during a game and after a game. I would love to see that! I would love to see who's still fast after a hard fought game. Some people fail to realize that football is not a track event. There are soo many other factors involved.

DJ's 4.67 is the slower time. He also ran a 4.62... people are saying it was on an incline too, I dunno about the truthfulness, but I didn't expect him to run a 4.4 or anything. Vince Young ran a 4.6...

Quite honestly, I don't think you can just grade a player off of their 40 time. 40 times don't make a football player. You have to include it in part of their grade and make up, but you also have many other factors involved. Too much to even list and it differs for every position. Take WR for example...

Speed, Height, Weight, Upper Body Strength, Lower Body Strength, Vertical, Atleticism, Hands, Hand Size, Hand Strength, Hand Eye Coordination, Technique (a thousand variables in that alone), Instinct, Football Smarts, Route Running, Ability to Adjust to the ball, Conditioning, Endurance threshold, Competitiveness, Confidence, Clutch ability, Big game player, College Production, Signs of progression in college, Experience, Playing Style.... those are just some of the physical grades.

Then you have character/personal grades... Maturity, Life Style, Family Life, Family Surroundings, Family Genes, Intelligence, Work Ethic, Fast Learner, Good Student, Study Habits, Can he speak well, Can he communicate clearly, Good member of the community, Recommendations from others, How he was brought up, and on and on and on...

So back to 40 times... A lot of people guage a player off that 40 time alone and start talking about moving a player up and down big boards.... how he deserves to go here and there because of it... I guess you can safely say, I'm not one of those guys.


I think Calvin Johnson is the best WR prospect in the history of football and will be the greatest WR out of this draft class. DJ is just a personal favorite.

Hughes amazed me throughout his college career. What can I say? I believe what my eyes show me.

Lynch may or may not have a better career than AD, but a lot depends on the team they go to. A Lot. As far as skill set, I think Lynch has a better chance of succeeding in the NFL because of his running style, compact body, and all around game. I liken him to Shaun Alexander. I liken AD to Eddie George.

TNewFan41
03-28-2007, 05:42 PM
You tell them D-Unit!

Burns336
03-28-2007, 06:10 PM
Dude, 40 times DON'T MEAN ANYTHING. Ed Reed ran a 4.54, and I don't think anyone is complaining about his speed. Football speed matters, not 40 times.

flip flop boy is back at it again i see.

pocketaces
03-28-2007, 08:29 PM
Slow? You just mean a slow 40 time. That's all. I'd like to see 40 times of players before a game, during a game and after a game. I would love to see that! I would love to see who's still fast after a hard fought game. Some people fail to realize that football is not a track event. There are soo many other factors involved.

DJ's 4.67 is the slower time. He also ran a 4.62... people are saying it was on an incline too, I dunno about the truthfulness, but I didn't expect him to run a 4.4 or anything. Vince Young ran a 4.6...

Quite honestly, I don't think you can just grade a player off of their 40 time. 40 times don't make a football player. You have to include it in part of their grade and make up, but you also have many other factors involved. Too much to even list and it differs for every position. Take WR for example...

Speed, Height, Weight, Upper Body Strength, Lower Body Strength, Vertical, Atleticism, Hands, Hand Size, Hand Strength, Hand Eye Coordination, Technique (a thousand variables in that alone), Instinct, Football Smarts, Route Running, Ability to Adjust to the ball, Conditioning, Endurance threshold, Competitiveness, Confidence, Clutch ability, Big game player, College Production, Signs of progression in college, Experience, Playing Style.... those are just some of the physical grades.

Then you have character/personal grades... Maturity, Life Style, Family Life, Family Surroundings, Family Genes, Intelligence, Work Ethic, Fast Learner, Good Student, Study Habits, Can he speak well, Can he communicate clearly, Good member of the community, Recommendations from others, How he was brought up, and on and on and on...

So back to 40 times... A lot of people guage a player off that 40 time alone and start talking about moving a player up and down big boards.... how he deserves to go here and there because of it... I guess you can safely say, I'm not one of those guys.


I think Calvin Johnson is the best WR prospect in the history of football and will be the greatest WR out of this draft class. DJ is just a personal favorite.

Hughes amazed me throughout his college career. What can I say? I believe what my eyes show me.

Lynch may or may not have a better career than AD, but a lot depends on the team they go to. A Lot. As far as skill set, I think Lynch has a better chance of succeeding in the NFL because of his running style, compact body, and all around game. I liken him to Shaun Alexander. I liken AD to Eddie George.

very nice response. i was just giving you a hard time anyway. interesting that you compare lynch to alexander because alot of the sites/mags ive seen compare A.D. to alexander.

D-Unit
03-28-2007, 08:57 PM
Adrian Peterson = Shaun Alexander??? I'm dumbfounded.

thule
03-28-2007, 10:12 PM
It's just d=unit's pity for west coast players :P

LSUALUM99
03-29-2007, 12:39 AM
The real crux of the issue is that D-Unit values College Production more than measurables.

Thule and I tend to value measurables more than many people here.

To me, there are just so many variables trying to equate one player's production in college to another that it's almost impossible. Measurables however are by definition impartial characteristics.

That being said, you can't just go on measurables. The skill set must meet a 'minimum standard' to even matter, but after that it's more about what the player can do on the football field.

I do think that Hughes in the third round is a reach now too. His 40 time is absolutely below the 'minimum standard' for starting CB's in the NFL. I can't see spending anything more than a 6th round pick on him.

Jarrett, I wouldn't draft him before round 3 now. His 40 time is approaching the 'doesn't meet minimum standards'.

Lynch's 4.5 is still good enough for minimum standards so his times don't bother me.

thule
03-29-2007, 07:08 AM
Ya if I had to factor the three main characters it would go

1)Character
2)Raw Potential
3)College Production

For instance...guys like Lynch/Meriweather/Lendale White last year...all scare me because of their thug appeal. Don't get me wrong...I'm more than willing to draft a player with issues..but that is what the late round picks are for. Ramonce Taylor is someone I really like...on the second day...I was even mildly intrigued by Ryan Moore before the combine.

But you look at the best players in the NFL and what do they have in common...Character. You look at the Patriots who always seem to be drafting on character to some point. Teams that succeed in the NFL have great work ethic and willingness to work together for one goal.

Caddy
03-29-2007, 07:12 AM
d's favorite wideout is dwayne jarrett who just ran a 4.67 40. i cant remember a w.r thats been drafted in the first round running over a 4.6



Larry Fitzgerald ran a 4.63 but I would take him on my team any day of the week.

JJJ888
03-29-2007, 08:49 AM
With a wide receiver like Jarrett specifically, speed is not the all-important factor. Jarrett is able to use his body to creat separation, whereas lots of other wide receivers have to use their legs. Furthermore, Jarrett may not need the separation that other wide receivers get because of his tremendous hands.

I seriously doubt that if you timed a number of the "big-time" wide receivers in the NFL right now that they'd run faster than Jarrett.

bigmac076
03-29-2007, 08:51 AM
Ya if I had to factor the three main characters it would go

1)Character
2)Raw Potential
3)College Production

For instance...guys like Lynch/Meriweather/Lendale White last year...all scare me because of their thug appeal. Don't get me wrong...I'm more than willing to draft a player with issues..but that is what the late round picks are for. Ramonce Taylor is someone I really like...on the second day...I was even mildly intrigued by Ryan Moore before the combine.

But you look at the best players in the NFL and what do they have in common...Character. You look at the Patriots who always seem to be drafting on character to some point. Teams that succeed in the NFL have great work ethic and willingness to work together for one goal.

hmmmmm Ramonce Taylor, doesn't ring a bell really. How good is this kid?

FinChase
03-29-2007, 09:03 AM
hmmmmm Ramonce Taylor, doesn't ring a bell really. How good is this kid?

He spent two years at Texas before he got thrown off the team. He's got some definite character issues to consider. But the guy is a real talent, and can play both RB and WR, although I think RB is his natural position. I would definitely be in favor of spending a 2nd day pick on him.

FinChase
03-29-2007, 09:07 AM
D-Unit, you're probably Jarrett's biggest supporter on this board. I've been intrigued by him also; he really impressed me in the Rose Bowl last year. I'm not concerned by his 40 time 'cause I don't think that's his football speed, but I am concerned by his struggles with press coverage against guys like Houston. You've no doubt watched him more than I have; is this a legitmate criticism?

LSUALUM99
03-29-2007, 11:08 AM
Larry Fitzgerald ran a 4.63 but I would take him on my team any day of the week.


Yes, and for every 1 player that ran a 4.63 that succeeded there are many that didn't.

LonghornsLegend
03-29-2007, 12:07 PM
hmmmmm Ramonce Taylor, doesn't ring a bell really. How good is this kid?

he'd be great if we werent sticking with jones, he would do the same things except catch alot better out of the backfield, with amazingng quickness....jones is just more bulky and probably stronger


he's not worth a first day pick, but whoever scoops him 2nd day will have alot of talent to work with

TNewFan41
03-29-2007, 01:24 PM
flip flop boy is back at it again i see.

that makes no sense, but ok.

bigbluedefense
03-29-2007, 01:29 PM
Everything I wanted to say has already been said.

Me personally, I value college production more than 40 times. They play with pads on, so you have to see how fast they are with the pads. Instincts are more important than speed anyway. You can be fast as hell, if youre running the wrong way it doesn't mean anything.

Achilles33
03-29-2007, 01:43 PM
The way I see it, you can value 40 times if you would like, but only to a certain degree. Now some players just turn it on during the game and time horribly in shorts, some time great in shorts and play slow on the field, and some just aren't fast but have other attributes that make up for it, and in this case Jarrett does. I think he would be a great addition to this Dallas team even with a 5.0 40. Speed is not his game, and it never will be. His ability to go up and get the ball, his incredible hands, and his ability to shield defenders from the ball is remarkable.

bigmac076
03-29-2007, 01:46 PM
he'd be great if we werent sticking with jones, he would do the same things except catch alot better out of the backfield, with amazingng quickness....jones is just more bulky and probably stronger


he's not worth a first day pick, but whoever scoops him 2nd day will have alot of talent to work with
and we are sticking with Jones right? So no need to speculate on Lawrence Phillips v2.0. YEAH I WENT THERE.

TNewFan41
03-29-2007, 01:50 PM
I wish we weren't sticking with jones.........oh well.

TNewFan41
03-29-2007, 02:08 PM
flip flop boy is back at it again i see.

Whatever. I am done with this site. No one listens to me, so forget it.

thule
03-29-2007, 02:12 PM
Whatever. I am done with this site. No one listens to me, so forget it.

Hip Hip Hooray!!! What a beautiful day.

thule
03-29-2007, 02:15 PM
hmmmmm Ramonce Taylor, doesn't ring a bell really. How good is this kid?

I would compare him to a poor man's Reggie Bush. He has versatility out of the backfield like fins said. He also would be an asset in the return game. There is room for him on the roster however he would have to outperform Thompson. He has potential to be a spark plug type player for our offense.

Achilles33
03-29-2007, 02:18 PM
I think that is an accurate assesment thule. He is a poor mans reggie bush. He has great speed and quickness, and is an explosive returner. He could be a nice 3rd down, situattional home-run hitting back somewhere. Julius does posses an adequete home-run threat himself, but it never hearts to add depth and explosivness, especially in the 2nd day. If it weren't for his off the field problems, and if he had played a at Texas this past season anything close to his sophmore year, there is no doubt in my mind he is right up there with Peterson and Lynch. He has that kind of talent. We shall see how draft days unfolds.

bigmac076
03-29-2007, 02:20 PM
Whatever. I am done with this site. No one listens to me, so forget it.
you're just figuring this out?

D-Unit
03-29-2007, 02:37 PM
I feel really mad because I typed up a huge long post in reply last night, and it got lost cause I was using my wife's laptop and couldn't stand IE so I installed Firefox and in the process it got lost. Gah!

Anyways, here's my take on it in a nutshell. College production can be a good indicator of NFL success, but by all means, it is not the only indicator and definately not an automatic indicator in determining the success of a player. I also believe that you cannot rely on statistics alone in evaluating college production. I don't think that they equate fairly. There are factors such as the competition level, the way the player was used, the system that was run, the surrounding talent level of supporting teammates, and so on and so forth. I guess the way I like to evaluate players is on their college play and not so much college production. The way they play on the field is important to me. To say I highly value college production is wrong.

The first thing that usually jumps out for me when I watch a player is seeing their athleticism... seeing the way they move and control their body. You can usually see how smooth they are by seeing them run, jump or make their cuts. Dwayne Bowe is a player that stands out in that regard. For a position like receiver, in addition to athleticism, I like to see how they performed in clutch situations (as every down in the NFL seems to have do or die importance), I like to see big play ability (created by thier own doing... say adjusting to a poorly thrown ball or avoiding a would be tackler or outworking their defender, etc.), I like to see consistency (and the better they are against top competition, the better), I like to see how they use their strengths to make plays as every player has different talents.

It's not college production that I put in such high regard, but rather it's their college play and how they go about taking care of business.

As far as measurables go, I think that measurables are there to justify what the player has shown on the field. When you get a player with a great college resume and he shows great measurables, then you have a player with a high chance of succeeeding in the NFL... and those players get drafted quickly.

Players based off great measurables whose college play didn't quite match their talent level often are tagged as players with great raw potential and a high ceiling. That is not a bad thing, but measurables or even talent alone, don't necessarily equate success. In fact, in my opinion, players who show they have the talent, but don't show it on the field also have high bust factors. It really takes a lot of support and coaching to get a player to live up to their potential. Parcells was an ace at doing that which allowed him to have a lot of success with late round picks. But even an ace like Parcells cannot avoid having players end up as busts (even when picked high). Simply because measurables and talent alone aren't enough in the NFL where players are skilled at using their strengths and hiding their weaknesses.

I don't know what the stats are, but I would imagine that college stars have a greater amount of success in the NFL than the workout warrior types. As they say, "Look like Tarazan, Play like Jane".

Here's my opinion:
Good College Play + Good Measurables = High Ceiling/Low Bust Factor
> Good College Play + Questionable Measurables = Medium Ceiling/Low Bust Factor
> Questionable College Play + Good Measurables = High Ceiling/Medium Bust Factor
> Questionable College Play + Questionable Measurables = Medium Ceiling/Medium Bust Factor
> Bad Measurables + Good College Play = Low Ceiling/Medium Bust Factor
> Good Measurables + Bad College Play = High Ceiling/High Bust Factor
> Bad College Play + Bad Measurables = Low Ceiling/High Bust Factor


That said, here is what I value:
1. Football Intelligence
2. College Play
3. Measureables

* Character is overrated.

D-Unit
03-29-2007, 02:39 PM
I don't think Ramonce Taylor offers significant value over Tyson Thompson if any. I think we should use the pick where we can get more value out of it.

Ward
03-29-2007, 02:44 PM
Whatever. I am done with this site. No one listens to me, so forget it.

Please don't get our hopes up if you don't plan on following through. Seriously though, you will look back on this in a 4-5 years when you turn 17-18 and realize you needed to chill out, read more, and post less. Feel free to come back then, we'll welcome you with open arms.

thule
03-29-2007, 03:08 PM
I don't think Ramonce Taylor offers significant value over Tyson Thompson if any. I think we should use the pick where we can get more value out of it.

I'd like to see Thompson in a spread out role...that would do alot to answer if Taylor would really be an upgrade. We have 3 7th round draft picks and 2 6th round picks....plenty of picks to use one on a guy with this potential.

D-Unit
03-29-2007, 03:12 PM
I'd like to see Thompson in a spread out role...that would do alot to answer if Taylor would really be an upgrade. We have 3 7th round draft picks and 2 6th round picks....plenty of picks to use one on a guy with this potential.
Wow, we have a lot of picks!

thule
03-29-2007, 03:18 PM
Wow, we have a lot of picks!

Yah, and we didn't even get any comp picks. Hopefully we ship some of them to get in better position for players we like. Like I said earlier in a different post. With the positions we are looking to address as it looks from the reports...moving up 5-10 spots in the 3rd and 2nd round could almost land us a player one tier higher.

CB depth takes a decline after the first round
Some very good WR's will be available mid 2nd...but not when we pick in the 2nd.
OT depth seems to be sitting early 2nd round too.
Only position that looks to hold value is OG at pick 53...so depending how we value bringing in top OG talent I see us doing quite a bit of moving on draft day.

thule
03-29-2007, 03:32 PM
Wow, we have a lot of picks!

First - 22nd overall
Second - 53rd overall
Third - 87th overall
Fourth - 122nd overall
Fifth - 159th overall
Sixth - 195th overall
Sixth - 200th overall (from the Jets for Hunter)
Seventh - 212th overall (from the Jets for TE Sean Ryan)
Seventh - 234th overall
Seventh - 237th overall (from the Saints for LB Scott Shanle)

bigmac076
03-29-2007, 03:50 PM
Dont we owe KC a 6th though? For Fujita?

thule
03-29-2007, 05:10 PM
Dont we owe KC a 6th though? For Fujita?

That was last year....

However I'm almost positive we gave up a future 6th round pick to move up for Watkins last year with the Eagles...can't find any information on that tho.

KILLERSANTA
03-29-2007, 10:12 PM
I didn't read every post(because I'm lazy). But, didn't Hall run a 4.39?? And Jarrett burned him in the rose bowl..Twice, if i remember right!

Don't know if anyone has said that...So I'm just throwin it out there!

Im_a_Romosexual
03-29-2007, 11:33 PM
Dont we owe KC a 6th though? For Fujita?

yup we dont have any 6th rounders this year

mtmock
03-31-2007, 05:34 PM
yup we dont have any 6th rounders this year

we have 2 actually, and 3 7th's

Achilles33
03-31-2007, 07:10 PM
We should trade a few to trade up in the 4th round to get one of those classic good players who somehow fell out of the first day. Jerry wanted to do it last year, but he only got a late 4th and took Skyler Green. We all know how that turned out.

Oh and D-Unit, I disagree that Thompson is just as good as Ramonce Taylor. Ramonce is a proven playmaker at a top flight school, while Thompson has done nothing but return a kick to mid-field and get a 7 yard gain in the 4th quarter when the game was already wrapped up. In the 6th I think he can be a great addition to our team and be a poor mans reggie bush. I know he ran a 4.5, but on the field he is easily a 4.3.

Ward
03-31-2007, 07:26 PM
Oh and D-Unit, I disagree that Thompson is just as good as Ramonce Taylor. Ramonce is a proven playmaker at a top flight school, while Thompson has done nothing but return a kick to mid-field and get a 7 yard gain in the 4th quarter when the game was already wrapped up. In the 6th I think he can be a great addition to our team and be a poor mans reggie bush. I know he ran a 4.5, but on the field he is easily a 4.3.

What has Taylor done in the NFL? We know what we have in Thompson. We have no way of knowing what we'd have in Taylor. Reports I've heard from his Pro Day are not good. I loved the guy just as much as everyone else at UT. But he blew it, let's move on.

mtmock
03-31-2007, 08:16 PM
We should trade a few to trade up in the 4th round to get one of those classic good players who somehow fell out of the first day. Jerry wanted to do it last year, but he only got a late 4th and took Skyler Green. We all know how that turned out.

Oh and D-Unit, I disagree that Thompson is just as good as Ramonce Taylor. Ramonce is a proven playmaker at a top flight school, while Thompson has done nothing but return a kick to mid-field and get a 7 yard gain in the 4th quarter when the game was already wrapped up. In the 6th I think he can be a great addition to our team and be a poor mans reggie bush. I know he ran a 4.5, but on the field he is easily a 4.3.

you way overrate ramonce taylor...the only way he makes our team is through UFA. he had a bad combine and played at a bad school...i wouldnt waste a 6th on him. sure he has some potential, but so does every other rb in the draft.

Achilles33
03-31-2007, 08:48 PM
Oh I don't think he is that good, I just think he is explosive and is a better playmaker than Tyson Thompson, that is all. I don't think he is a future pro-bowler, lol. And Ward makes a great point, what has Taylor done in the NFL? I just think he is a dynamic situatuional player, that is all.

DMWSackMachine
04-02-2007, 12:57 PM
Larry Fitzgerald ran a 4.63 but I would take him on my team any day of the week.


huh?

Fitzgerald helped his cause tremendously by running faster than expected with clockings of 4.48 and 4.51 seconds in the 40-yard dash in a Pro Day workout last month.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/7269500

I don't know where you got that number from, but Fitz is well known for being a borderline 4.4 guy, but more realistically in the 4.5 range. You may be thinking of Mike Williams, who basically ran the same that Jarrett did, while still getting picked 10th overall.

bigmac076
04-02-2007, 01:20 PM
I didn't read every post(because I'm lazy). But, didn't Hall run a 4.39?? And Jarrett burned him in the rose bowl..Twice, if i remember right!

Don't know if anyone has said that...So I'm just throwin it out there!
No, you do not remember right apparently. Someone probably told you that and you believe it. Leon Hall was not burned my Jarrett twice. He got beat once by Jarrett when Hall was going for the football. Morgan Trent is the "man"(I use that term loosely) that let Jarrett have a field day.

Achilles33
04-02-2007, 01:52 PM
Oh well, Hall still will only be an average #1 NFL CB. There just isn't anything special about him. There are really know CBs in this draft that will be future pro-bowl #1's. Maybe some late round guy will come out of nowhere, but none of the top tier guys are going to be that special. Well, Chris Houston and Marcus McCauley have the potential to be better than ever one else, but potential is potential.

BigMac, what makes Hall so good?

I don't like how people are having him in the top 10, yet they still say he will never be a pro-bowl CB, just a solid one. Even Scotts scouting report says he will never be a star, pro-bowl CB, but he is in the top 10. You don't take soild players in the top ten. You don't even take good players in the top 10. You take elite players in the top 10. Hall is just average, on a good day above average in my eyes.

thule
04-02-2007, 03:07 PM
Hall's instincts and intellegence are what makes him a good CB. They are unmatched by everyone in this class. Now some people like you may say its unjustifiable to have in him the top 10..but truth is he is the top corner in the draft...and depending on the players available he might have the most value for a position of need. I really think he goes to Houston if AD is off the board...but Mia also looks like another strong possibility.

I will go on record to say after the reports I read on Taylor at his pro-day I no longer want this scrub on our team. If you can't get yourself ready to make millions of dollars...how are you gonna get yourself ready for sunday. Thugs...wat a waste of life.

Achilles33
04-02-2007, 04:16 PM
I know Hall is the best CB in this draft, I am not disputing that, but other people have the potential to be a lot better. Lets just say that Hall will be drafted a lot higher than he should because of need. This is a horrible CB class, not one should be drafted inside 18 or so, and none will be one of the best CBs in the league in a few years, but because of need they will go a lot higher than they should.

LSUALUM99
04-02-2007, 04:39 PM
The bottom line is that CB is a premium position. Arguably the most premium position (highest average salary of any position in the NFL including QB).

QB is the most important position, but CB is the most premium position due to scarcity. If you have a guy that has the tools to be a Solid player at the most scarce position, it vaults him to the top 10. It makes perfect sense to me.

Achilles33
04-02-2007, 05:20 PM
Not really. My way of thinking is that a pass rush makes a CB unless they are really good. Thank god we have one of those, because our pass rush was horrid. If you are consistantly getting pressure on the QB, horrible CBs look like pro-bowlers. And don't give me sack numbers or any of that stuff, I mean really RUSHING the QB. Like making him make bad desicions, crappy throws, rattling him, throwing him to the ground, scrambling and making him off balance, things like that. Not having 4 sacks a game. On average an offense has 55-60 plays a game, I would much rather be hitting and messing up the timing of the QB on about half of those plays than getting 4 sacks and nothing else. You think people like Ike Taylor and Deshea Townsend are good CBs? Please, they are lucking to be in the league, yet because of Pittsburghs pass rush they look like solid players. Even players like Asante Samuel. No offense, but he isn't that good, but bwcause of the Pats front seven and Bill Belicheck's genius, he looks like one of the best CBs in recent memory. Makes perfect sense to me. :)

That is why I can't wait for Wade to use our players wisely, unlike Parcells who sucked. DOMINANCE BABY!

Ward
04-02-2007, 06:04 PM
The bottom line is that CB is a premium position. Arguably the most premium position (highest average salary of any position in the NFL including QB).

Ouch is that before or after the Nate Clements deal?

Im_a_Romosexual
04-02-2007, 06:07 PM
clements deal probably skewed the number

KILLERSANTA
04-02-2007, 08:47 PM
No, you do not remember right apparently. Someone probably told you that and you believe it. Leon Hall was not burned my Jarrett twice. He got beat once by Jarrett when Hall was going for the football. Morgan Trent is the "man"(I use that term loosely) that let Jarrett have a field day.
No one told me anything...I knew hall got beat atleast once by Jarrett


Edit..........Going for the ball, My butt!!!!!!!

I love game film, never lies:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QzqJlQN4rxE

About at 2:50

LSUALUM99
04-03-2007, 08:48 AM
Ward, that was even before Clements' deal.

Part of the reason the average salary is so high is because CB's get 'franchised' alot. QB's almost never get franchised because they get locked up to long term deals well before that time.

But, regardless of any explanations our theories, the fact is that CB is the most premium position on the team.

Ward
04-03-2007, 10:45 AM
Ward, that was even before Clements' deal.

Part of the reason the average salary is so high is because CB's get 'franchised' alot. QB's almost never get franchised because they get locked up to long term deals well before that time.

But, regardless of any explanations our theories, the fact is that CB is the most premium position on the team.

I definitely agree. The skillset required to be a good corner is so much more complex than other positions. There are no "easy" positions, but cornerback blows most of them out of the water. Only receivers are as isolated and as far from the ball, and they have the advantage of knowing the route already. Corners have to be the fastest guys on the field, as smart as anyone on defense, have good footwork, have good recovery speed, have fluid hips and agility, good recognition, enough strength in their 6 foot 200 pound bodies not to get beaten up by 6'4 230 receivers, the leaping ability as well as the timing that goes with that, soft hands, extreme stamina, and on top of all of that instincts.

Finding anyone even average at some of those is a blessing these days.

LSUALUM99
04-03-2007, 11:56 AM
Not to mention that if a CB blows an assignment it can cost you 6 points. If anyone on offense blows one it will probably just cost you a down.

With the proliferation of 3 WR sets in the NFL (and some TE's that can't be covered by S or LB positions) you need 3 starting quality CB's as opposed to 1 QB.

I personally think you can never have too many good corners on a team.

bigbluedefense
04-03-2007, 11:59 AM
Not to mention that if a CB blows an assignment it can cost you 6 points. If anyone on offense blows one it will probably just cost you a down.

With the proliferation of 3 WR sets in the NFL (and some TE's that can't be covered by S or LB positions) you need 3 starting quality CB's as opposed to 1 QB.

I personally think you can never have too many good corners on a team.

What would you rather have, 2 PB CBs and 2 Jags at safety, or 1 PB CB + 1 PB Safety and 1 jag s + 1 jag CB?

Im curious to know.

LSUALUM99
04-03-2007, 01:15 PM
What would you rather have, 2 PB CBs and 2 Jags at safety, or 1 PB CB + 1 PB Safety and 1 jag s + 1 jag CB?

Im curious to know.


I'd much rather have 2 PB CB 's and 2 JAGs at S from a pure football perspective (meaning that from a salary cap standpoint it may change depending on where they are in their contracts, age, etc).

Having two excellent CB's gives you alot of flexability in your defenses.

Conversely, I'd rather have 4 good players (none that are probowlers) rather than 2 HOF's and 2 Terrible players.

I think having a JAG at S versus a JAG at CB is better b/c a CB is easier to exploit in most situations.

Achilles33
04-03-2007, 01:37 PM
When Henry is healthy, we do have 2 pro-bowl CBs, but he hasn't been healthy for a long period of time, atleast not since he has been here.

I am really a fan of Jonathan Wade. I would love him in the 3rd round. I think he is very underrated, and has the ability of a 1st rounder.

bigbluedefense
04-12-2007, 03:38 PM
I'd much rather have 2 PB CB 's and 2 JAGs at S from a pure football perspective (meaning that from a salary cap standpoint it may change depending on where they are in their contracts, age, etc).

Having two excellent CB's gives you alot of flexability in your defenses.

Conversely, I'd rather have 4 good players (none that are probowlers) rather than 2 HOF's and 2 Terrible players.

I think having a JAG at S versus a JAG at CB is better b/c a CB is easier to exploit in most situations.

See, in the old days, Id agree with this line of reasoning, but I think in today's NFL, you have to go 1 CB + 1 Safety. Safeties are your best defense against the deepball, and as long as you can stop the run and the deepball, youre fine.

Plus, with more spread offenses, you need a versatile safety who can cover the TE and come up for run support in the nickel fronts. I think safety has become a very important position on defense, arguably almost as important as CB. Recent drafts indicate this trend as well, with guys like Sean Taylor, Michael Huff and Whitner and in this draft, Landry (in all likelihood) all being taken so early.

With 1 good CB + 1 good safety, you have schemeatically a better defensive strategy against high powered offenses.

Take Indy's offense for example. They spread you out and force you in the nickel. Now your safety's ability to come up for run support is important, because you have only 6 in the box and need a guy like Polumalu who can tackle in the open field well. But remember, he also has to be good in coverage.

So now you put your 1 CB on Harrison man up, double Wayne, and put your SS man up with Clark. Send the farm at Peyton to disrupt his timing, press everyone at the line in man coverage, and hope it holds up. On paper, thats an effective strategy against them.

Contrarily, if you have 2 good CBs and poor safeties, your run support against the spread set will be less effective. Plus, you would have to double up Clark, which would be less effective.

Because remember, pass catching TEs tend to have a bigger advantage against double teams opposed to WRs. A pass catching TE usually blows past the LB like its nothing anyway, so you need a SS who can recover and pick up the slack. If you lack a SS who can do that, then regardless of the double team, youre dead in the water. A CB + FS double on a 2ndary WR is usually more successful than a SAM + SS double on a pass catching TE.

Just ask NE how it turned out when they doubled Clark with Vrabel and their SS.

Thats why I think in today's NFL, youre better off 1 CB + 1 Safety. Safety has become a very important position in football nowadays.

Of course thats a VERY general description of strategies. But you get the point.

LSUALUM99
04-13-2007, 01:06 PM
I certainly understand your thoughts. And in many ways I agree. But, the question was two JAG (which I equate to AVERAGE players not poor players). I think an average S is just fine.

You mention supporting the run, clearly we have the S to do that. Roy is excellent in run support (practically all he's good at). I think that Hamlin, for instance, is Average or maybe, slightly above average when healthy. I'm perfectly content with that duo.

I think that there are more examples of teams with 1 good CB and 1 good S because it's virtually impossible from a cap standpoint to have 2 good CB (Philly is the only one that comes to mind, but I don't think they are as good as their reputations, Dawkins OTOH is better than most anyone).

Ultimately I'd rather have all my DB's be average than have 2 good ones and 2 poor ones. I think that's the NE strategy, and I wholeheartedly agree.

Texico From Mexico
04-15-2007, 09:41 AM
d's favorite wideout is dwayne jarrett who just ran a 4.67 40. i cant remember a w.r thats been drafted in the first round running over a 4.6

d's favorite c.b. is daymeion hughs who just ran a 4.65 40. ive seen mocks with him in the 3rd round lately.

d's favorite r.b. is marshawn lynch who ran in the mid 4.5s compared to petersons 4.36. is also on record as saying lynch will be the better pro which is crazy imo.

so why the love for all the slow guys d?

So we can add more slow players to an already SLOW team? This team is slow...especially on defense.

robert_in_bigd
04-15-2007, 11:20 AM
So we can add more slow players to an already SLOW team? This team is slow...especially on defense.


D is not slow per se, it is slow at two key positions for a 3-4 Zone Scheme. ILB and SS.