Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is experience a bad thing?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is experience a bad thing?

    Well, Ive been on this forum a while now, and i have noticed arguments all the time like "he had a great coach in college, which was why he was sucessful". But isnt that good? Why would that be a knock on something? People that have played one year are getting drafted based on "potential" other than based on whether they perfrom at over a high level period of time.

    Ex.-

    Lawrence Timmons vs. Paul Poszluzny (sp?)-
    Poz put up really good numbers at penn state consistently. In 2004- he had 104 tackles, in and injhury riddled 2005, he had 116 tackles. in 2006, he put up 116 tackles. All of these numbers are impressive. He led a pretty solid defense for the Nittany Lions.

    Timmons put up these numbers in the same time- 12 in 2004, 35 in 20005, and 79 in 2006. but he has more "potential". I dont get how a proven performer can get drafted 17 spots lower than someone that didnt produce consistently at the same position. Paul has better measurables, at 6'2 238, than Timmons at 6'0, 234. Paul also had a better combine. He ran his 40 at 4.58. Timmon's best forty was 4.63. Paul had a better 60 shuttle, Vertical, 20 shuttle, and bench press than timmons. Yet timmons has better "Potential", just because he didnt start as long as Poz.



    I think staying for you senior year is a bad idea for a junior thats projected to be in the first round, at least for your draft stock and rookie contract. If Brohm had came out this year, he prolly would have been the first pick of the draft. But now, there are people hating on him left and right. If Leinart had came out after he won the Heismanm, he would most likely be a 49 right noe. BUt he stayed in school and fell to number ten. It is comical to me that things like this happen. If you look back at the number, the players with the most starting experience tend to have the besty NFL careers.

    EX.

    Peyton Manning- He started about 3 and a half years at tennesee, and he has had a pretty sucesful NFL career, dont you think?


    Ryanh Leaf, on the other hand, started 24 games. look where he s at now.

    AKili Smith- 11 starts. he couldnt cut it either.
    Donavon Mcnabb- Started 45 games. hes doing pretty welll.
    Joey Harring suck- 28 starts
    Drunkenmiller-started 2 seasons
    Culpepper- played al 4 seasons
    McNair- Played all 4 years


    i know there are more example, but i belive that is enough. that is why to me, experience is over potential when selecting a player. DO any of you agree?
    Last edited by Bengals1690; 05-14-2007, 04:37 PM.


    Originally posted by mythbusta
    i love my pedestal. thats why im the mythbusta.
    who dey?

  • #2
    yeah, it is really getting out of hand how people can look at a guy and say he will be so much better than someone who played the same potition and produced more. People underestimate football inteligence and skill in favor of measureables

    Comment


    • #3
      bumped for discussion...


      Originally posted by mythbusta
      i love my pedestal. thats why im the mythbusta.
      who dey?

      Comment


      • #4
        Same reason Aaron Kampmann is an "overachiever."
        I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
        Hunter S. Thompson

        Comment


        • #5
          If race is mentioned in this thread again it's gonna get locked.

          Timmons was drafted ahead of Poz because his style of play. Timmons is a disruptor and a guy that can play in both the 3-4 and 4-3. Poz flows to the ball and is a tackler. That had nothing to do with experience really.

          That is correct comahan
          I ******* LOVE YOU DG
          <3 dg

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by draftguru151 View Post
            If race is mentioned in this thread again it's gonna get locked.

            Timmons was drafted ahead of Poz because his style of play. Timmons is a disruptor and a guy that can play in both the 3-4 and 4-3. Poz flows to the ball and is a tackler. That had nothing to do with experience really.
            Hey, you're the one who mentioned the giant elephant in the corner, I just alluded to it.
            I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
            Hunter S. Thompson

            Comment


            • #7
              It is all about the P word. Potential.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 24cadillac24 View Post
                It is all about the P word. Potential.
                Did you even read the original post?
                I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
                Hunter S. Thompson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by someone447 View Post
                  Did you even read the original post?
                  Do I have to agree with you?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by 24cadillac24 View Post
                    Do I have to agree with you?
                    His question was why is potential more important than experience... You didn't answer that question. Saying "It's all about potential" in no way answers his question, or leaves anything open to debate. You sir, fail.
                    I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
                    Hunter S. Thompson

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's about ceiling. I understand what you're saying, and I agree with you, but people look at a guy like Timmons, for example, and say his level of play last season was around Posluzney's level of play, but with less experience, so if he had the experience, he could have surpassed Puz's level of performance. I don't really agree with it either, but that's how people tend to see it.

                      As for the 'great coach' thing, its the same way. If the levels of play are roughly equivalent but one is polished and one is rough, people will appreciate what the rough diamond could look like when cut, and value it higher.
                      Last edited by Race for the Heisman; 05-14-2007, 09:27 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Bengals1690 View Post
                        that is why to me, experience is over potential when selecting a player. DO any of you agree?
                        Originally posted by someone447 View Post
                        His question was why is potential more important than experience... You didn't answer that question. Saying "It's all about potential" in no way answers his question, or leaves anything open to debate. You sir, fail.
                        By saying that it is all about potential pretty much means I do not agree with him. I am pretty sure that answers his question buddy.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I guess I need to read a little closer, I was just answering his other questions.
                          I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
                          Hunter S. Thompson

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            When evaluating 1st round prospects one has to consider the experience factor and it's effect on NFL success. One of the draft magazines did a detailed write-up on lack of experience and how it leads to underachieving and busting in 1st rounders. They listed recent players who started 2 years or less in college and well over half of them were extreme disappointments. There a few exceptions but the overwhelming majority struggle to find their place in camp and have to overcome major obstacles. There is no substitute for starting experience and a lot of scouts and analsysts get too creative with their "potential" talk and forget the essentials of football: hitting, technique and effort.

                            Potential is a wonderful aspect of scouting and the draft process but unproven inexperienced prospects are not 1st round material. The risk and cost is far too expensive.

                            Tim Couch is another great example to add to your list.

                            sig by BoneKrusher

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              just think of the bust ratio if the Maurice Clarett ruling stood and players could leave after their freshman year in college. Imagine Percy Harvin in the 2007 NFL draft....


                              -sig by jkpigskin

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information