Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
Please, not Bryant Gumbel.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
***Official Senior Bowl 2007 Game Thread*** (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Jeff Pasquino
- Start date
Gottabesweet
Footballguy
Won't be able to watch
NFL network grrrrrrrr
NFL network grrrrrrrr
beto
Footballguy
Cecil Lammey
Footballguy
Some very interesting names to watch. On my personal fav list:
Ben Patrick, TE, Delaware
Thomas Clayton, RB, Kansas State
and of course - LORENZO BOOKER, RB, Florida State
Ben Patrick, TE, Delaware
Thomas Clayton, RB, Kansas State
and of course - LORENZO BOOKER, RB, Florida State
peter griffin
Footballguy
I'm going to try and hit a sports bar to watch this today. Will attempt to take a good long look at these players for my dynasty team
Drew Stanton
Kevin Kolb
Troy Smith
Tony Hunt
Lorenzo Booker
Dwayne Bowe
Jason Hill
Drew Stanton
Kevin Kolb
Troy Smith
Tony Hunt
Lorenzo Booker
Dwayne Bowe
Jason Hill
and of course - LORENZO BOOKER, RB, Florida State
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
Clayton was very well spoken - that impressed me.I believe if he has a good game, he'll get a LOT of interest at the Combine.Some very interesting names to watch. On my personal fav list:Ben Patrick, TE, DelawareThomas Clayton, RB, Kansas Stateand of course - LORENZO BOOKER, RB, Florida State
Don Quixote
Footballguy
Interesting that you say was well-spoken. My impression of him was more of a Maurice Clarett clone (in terms of arrogance, immaturity, and work ethic). If this past season helped him mature a bit, I could see him generating a bit more interest. There is no questioning his talent. Off-the-field issues (a couple suspensions), as well as not being consistent on the field, were what got him in the dog house with Prince.Clayton was very well spoken - that impressed me.I believe if he has a good game, he'll get a LOT of interest at the Combine.Some very interesting names to watch. On my personal fav list:Ben Patrick, TE, DelawareThomas Clayton, RB, Kansas Stateand of course - LORENZO BOOKER, RB, Florida State
lord_helmet
Footballguy
Any Patrick Willis sightings ?
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
Yeah, he got blown up by Beekman and taken out by Leonard.
lord_helmet
Footballguy
Ouch, thats not gonna help his stock. It really sucks that I'm stuck in Europe and unable to watch the gameYeah, he got blown up by Beekman and taken out by Leonard.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
The game has almost nothing to do with their stock. This week is all about the practices. Cutler was a nightmare in this game last year. Horrid. A solid week of practice lifted his stock. Same with Troy Smith this week. What happens today is just for entertainment purposes. NFL teams are too smart to place much on one game under these circumstances.Ouch, thats not gonna help his stock. It really sucks that I'm stuck in Europe and unable to watch the gameYeah, he got blown up by Beekman and taken out by Leonard.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
Over 90% of the scouts who attended practices have already gone home to write up their report cards. Most don't bother to watch this game, fwiw.
lord_helmet
Footballguy
I understand what you're saying, but from what I've read he didn't really help himself during the week. Lousy footwork etc.The game has almost nothing to do with their stock. This week is all about the practices. Cutler was a nightmare in this game last year. Horrid. A solid week of practice lifted his stock. Same with Troy Smith this week. What happens today is just for entertainment purposes. NFL teams are too smart to place much on one game under these circumstances.Ouch, thats not gonna help his stock. It really sucks that I'm stuck in Europe and unable to watch the gameYeah, he got blown up by Beekman and taken out by Leonard.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
Right, sort of. Even the practices weren't great, but Fisher was very clear that he had separated from the others. There was considerable debate about Whitehurst, Croyle, and Cutler. A week of comparison in Mobile did set Jay apart. And he still wasn't spectacular. The truth is their resumes and final grades are primarily on game film from the last two years. All this stuff is just an interview process to help make tough decisions easier.I understand what you're saying, but from what I've read he didn't really help himself during the week. Lousy footwork etc.The game has almost nothing to do with their stock. This week is all about the practices. Cutler was a nightmare in this game last year. Horrid. A solid week of practice lifted his stock. Same with Troy Smith this week. What happens today is just for entertainment purposes. NFL teams are too smart to place much on one game under these circumstances.Ouch, thats not gonna help his stock. It really sucks that I'm stuck in Europe and unable to watch the gameYeah, he got blown up by Beekman and taken out by Leonard.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
I really like Jonathan Wade at corner.
Willis is making a lot of plays. He is going to measure very nicely at the Combine too. He is much more of a freak than most think.
Willis is making a lot of plays. He is going to measure very nicely at the Combine too. He is much more of a freak than most think.
peter griffin
Footballguy
When Drew Stanton gets in, could someone please give me an overview of how he's doing? I think he has tons of potential and and sitting fingers crossed he gets to me a 3.01 in my dynasty league. All comments are appreciated.
coolnerd
Footballguy
I get the sense that he will like Ryans last year and won't run some crazy forty time, but his composite as an athlete bench press, braod jump, etc will show outstanding athleticism. Still not quite as high as most people on him, but I think he will be an above average peo and a good IDP option for many years.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
I think his acceleration is impressive and will translate into straight line speed around 4.50, honestly, and at 240 that is going to turn heads. I also expect not only a 37-38 inch vertical but his arms are so long that the actual range of his hops is going have people shaking their heads and laughing. Last year I saw a clip of him dunking a basketball. He really throws it down. Singletary commented this week that Willis jumped out at him much more than Ryans did. He wasn't saying he would be better just that the initial impression of athleticism was very noticeable.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
Kolby Smith has really been growing on me. Thoughts from observers of these runs and catches?
Troy Smith seemed tight. he was overthrowing a lot of balls. When he was relaxed in practice, he was throwing mostly darts. His best passes were deep balls, and we didn't get to see one of those.
massraider
Footballguy
Man, if you watched any of the NFL Network's Senior Bowl coverage, you want your team to draft Carriker.
They keep talking about him as a 3-4 end, I think he'd be wasted there. Put him at base end. Strong, and showed a nice array of moves in the clips I saw.
They keep talking about him as a 3-4 end, I think he'd be wasted there. Put him at base end. Strong, and showed a nice array of moves in the clips I saw.
Michael Coe! John Murphy singled him out at the Shrine Game, and now he's making the most of this opportunity. Could an Alabama State guy make good for the 2nd year in a row?
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
Hit hard from play one.I've only seen the first half so far, but he packs a wallop.Brian Leonard did his best Bo Jackson impression and ran him over on 4th and 1.
massraider
Footballguy
Yeah, Willis got a bum rap on that on. He was already being blocked when Leonard plowed him over. Leonard did look good though.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
I can't find stats either but this recap has some info...
I recorded it to watch it with the pause button later but my first impression is basically the OLs in this draft are pretty bad. Levi Brown goes completely brain dead every 5 or 6 downs and he looked far and away like the best OT out there. Beekman and Grubbs outplayed Sears and Blalock (who was particularly ineffective). Also notable is McBean had a better time with the South's lineman this week than Carriker did in the game. But McBean wasn't anything special in the game either. The weather took away from this one as much as the blowout.
Rovers
Footballguy
Of the QB's, only Stanton looks to have any promise at the next level to me. Smith is very uncomfortable in the pocket, doesn't seem to have much awareness of pressure, and basically isn't happy unless he's on the run. Anyone rememeber Gary Beban? Yeah, I thought so.
Leonard and Hunt did what I expected. I didn't expect a lot. Irons leaves me very unimpressed. I am in general, left unimpressed with this senior class. Some good tweeners, a couple good DT's, a handful of LB's, but deep in DE's.
One guy I watched was Ramirez, RG Tx Tech. For such a big guy, he pulled OK. But, he can run block and pass protect. He had an outstanding game, and a pretty good week of practice too. I think he'll be a steal in the third round. He's my sleeper as a future pro bowl O lineman. I did say SLEEPER! Brown looks like the genuine article too. I don't think Kalil is quite another Mangold, but he's up there. The North had several good looking O line prospects.
Leonard and Hunt did what I expected. I didn't expect a lot. Irons leaves me very unimpressed. I am in general, left unimpressed with this senior class. Some good tweeners, a couple good DT's, a handful of LB's, but deep in DE's.
One guy I watched was Ramirez, RG Tx Tech. For such a big guy, he pulled OK. But, he can run block and pass protect. He had an outstanding game, and a pretty good week of practice too. I think he'll be a steal in the third round. He's my sleeper as a future pro bowl O lineman. I did say SLEEPER! Brown looks like the genuine article too. I don't think Kalil is quite another Mangold, but he's up there. The North had several good looking O line prospects.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
With a well established disagreement, I agree with your assessment of this senior class. Thank God for the juniors.
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
They would have been better if the juniors didn't leave last year....
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
Talked with Bloom about this - the game isn't a fair metric of how good or bad they are. If they stand out, great. However, most everyone bails on staying for / going to the game. They formulate / add to opinions during the practices.
Rovers
Footballguy
I know "they" do. I don't. Not to say that I don't weight the practice week, which I do, but I also think that the game provides a look at how these kids respond to pressure in a game situation. While Carriker was a practice killer, he wasn't a force in the game. If he had an A grade for practice, I move him to a A- or a B+ for the week. The drills are fine, but it's a very controlled experiment. The DE knows he's doesn't have to make a read, he knows he's on an all out pass rush. That's fine for measuring what he can do, as an almost measurable, but it is an artificial football situation. Scouts are looking for pure ability, and game performance takes a back seat this week, and that's fine.... players can be coached up. SOME players can be coached up IMO..... some are just football players with inate insticts, and I think those qualities are undervalued given the lack of attention the game itself gets. The naural football players will stand out in a game situation. The ones that don't may well be very good NFL'ers some day, but they aren't the "naturals" that I place a slightly higher value on. I know this isn't mainstream player evaluation think tank stuff, but it's my own!
Guapote
Footballguy
Is an exhibition game with players and coaches that these kids have been around for one week really a good look at how they respond to pressure? I would think that rivalry games, conference championships, and maybe meaningful bowl games are a better indication. Not trying to argue with you, it just seems to me there are probably better measures of how they respond to pressure.I know "they" do. I don't. Not to say that I don't weight the practice week, which I do, but I also think that the game provides a look at how these kids respond to pressure in a game situation. While Carriker was a practice killer, he wasn't a force in the game. If he had an A grade for practice, I move him to a A- or a B+ for the week. The drills are fine, but it's a very controlled experiment. The DE knows he's doesn't have to make a read, he knows he's on an all out pass rush. That's fine for measuring what he can do, as an almost measurable, but it is an artificial football situation.
Scouts are looking for pure ability, and game performance takes a back seat this week, and that's fine.... players can be coached up. SOME players can be coached up IMO..... some are just football players with inate insticts, and I think those qualities are undervalued given the lack of attention the game itself gets. The naural football players will stand out in a game situation. The ones that don't may well be very good NFL'ers some day, but they aren't the "naturals" that I place a slightly higher value on.
I know this isn't mainstream player evaluation think tank stuff, but it's my own!
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
The game would be important if and only if a player excelled, IMO.
If a player doesn't do great or really stand out, then going to his prior games against good competition would be the appropriate scouting action.
The issue is if a player goes to a smaller school (see Jacoby Jones, LANE), then judging him against better competition is a good metric, as he probably had one game (if that) against a solid opponent.
This reminds me of the NFL Combine, where you can train / study up for the tests you'll be taking. My favorite example was Mike Mamula, who blew it out of the water at the combine but never lived up to his early first round pick in the NFL.
If a player doesn't do great or really stand out, then going to his prior games against good competition would be the appropriate scouting action.
The issue is if a player goes to a smaller school (see Jacoby Jones, LANE), then judging him against better competition is a good metric, as he probably had one game (if that) against a solid opponent.
This reminds me of the NFL Combine, where you can train / study up for the tests you'll be taking. My favorite example was Mike Mamula, who blew it out of the water at the combine but never lived up to his early first round pick in the NFL.
Tenacious D
Footballguy
First, here's the BOX SCORE, if anyone is still looking.
I'm real interested to see how Tony Hunt's quickness and speed test out. They looked unspectacular as usual, but, again, he was very productive. Two things that made him standout for me were on display in the game, (1) he waits for his blocks to be set up and (2) he has decent hands for a big man.
I'm real interested to see how Tony Hunt's quickness and speed test out. They looked unspectacular as usual, but, again, he was very productive. Two things that made him standout for me were on display in the game, (1) he waits for his blocks to be set up and (2) he has decent hands for a big man.
He looked solid, as usual. Kolby Smith was the reliable guy, whereas Stripling and Anderson had more big play ability. When Brohm came back, conservative won out. Smith can do everything a RB needs to do well, but I don't see exceptional natural running skills or special vision. His blocking and receiving should find him work as a top back-up for a long time.Okoye growing on you at all yet? I think it was his first sack, he just dominated I think Ben Grubbs. If he tests well, whether or not he deserves it, some team will absolutely reach for his potential and big play ability at DT. Tommie Harris --> copy cat league. Carriker looked great again, too. I don't see growing disbelief in Levi Brown. Of course, other than NFL Network, I didn't see all of him in practice, but he looked good in the game again. I'm impressed how he uses his arms to keep space from speed rushers. Looked fundamentally very solid for a guy who is supposed to be getting by on size and nastiness at this level.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rovers
Footballguy
I would agree with your assessment. I was just making the point that what happens in the Senior Bowl game is underplayed and under valued. Apparently, there are those that think it's vitually meaningless, and that is where I have a differing opinion. I don't put a lot of wieght on it, but I do put some. I think regular seaon and rivalry and bowl games are more important.... for instance, I mentioned Ramirez. There is no drill to see how well a guard pulls. Given the Tx Tech offense, I doubt he pulled much there either. The LB's weren't allowed to blitz, so they had to stay at nome. Once the guard pulls, they are allowed to go. So, how well they can read and react doesn't show up in drills either. Jus sayin.... I don't think the game is as meaningless as many , even the scouts appear to think it is.Guapote said:Is an exhibition game with players and coaches that these kids have been around for one week really a good look at how they respond to pressure? I would think that rivalry games, conference championships, and maybe meaningful bowl games are a better indication. Not trying to argue with you, it just seems to me there are probably better measures of how they respond to pressure.Rovers said:I know "they" do. I don't. Not to say that I don't weight the practice week, which I do, but I also think that the game provides a look at how these kids respond to pressure in a game situation. While Carriker was a practice killer, he wasn't a force in the game. If he had an A grade for practice, I move him to a A- or a B+ for the week. The drills are fine, but it's a very controlled experiment. The DE knows he's doesn't have to make a read, he knows he's on an all out pass rush. That's fine for measuring what he can do, as an almost measurable, but it is an artificial football situation.
Scouts are looking for pure ability, and game performance takes a back seat this week, and that's fine.... players can be coached up. SOME players can be coached up IMO..... some are just football players with inate insticts, and I think those qualities are undervalued given the lack of attention the game itself gets. The naural football players will stand out in a game situation. The ones that don't may well be very good NFL'ers some day, but they aren't the "naturals" that I place a slightly higher value on.
I know this isn't mainstream player evaluation think tank stuff, but it's my own!
-OZ-
Footballguy
Do you have a weighting system for this game, practices, the combine, real games, bowls, etc? Does it depend on the player? Most of us can see a player in the games we watch and see talent, but how do you compare all of these events? I would hope the high stakes games would be on top, then the other games, and this week would rank somewhere near the bottom, but am I severely underweighting this thing?I would agree with your assessment. I was just making the point that what happens in the Senior Bowl game is underplayed and under valued. Apparently, there are those that think it's vitually meaningless, and that is where I have a differing opinion. I don't put a lot of wieght on it, but I do put some. I think regular seaon and rivalry and bowl games are more important.... for instance, I mentioned Ramirez. There is no drill to see how well a guard pulls. Given the Tx Tech offense, I doubt he pulled much there either. The LB's weren't allowed to blitz, so they had to stay at nome. Once the guard pulls, they are allowed to go. So, how well they can read and react doesn't show up in drills either. Jus sayin.... I don't think the game is as meaningless as many , even the scouts appear to think it is.Guapote said:Is an exhibition game with players and coaches that these kids have been around for one week really a good look at how they respond to pressure? I would think that rivalry games, conference championships, and maybe meaningful bowl games are a better indication. Not trying to argue with you, it just seems to me there are probably better measures of how they respond to pressure.Rovers said:I know "they" do. I don't. Not to say that I don't weight the practice week, which I do, but I also think that the game provides a look at how these kids respond to pressure in a game situation. While Carriker was a practice killer, he wasn't a force in the game. If he had an A grade for practice, I move him to a A- or a B+ for the week. The drills are fine, but it's a very controlled experiment. The DE knows he's doesn't have to make a read, he knows he's on an all out pass rush. That's fine for measuring what he can do, as an almost measurable, but it is an artificial football situation.
Scouts are looking for pure ability, and game performance takes a back seat this week, and that's fine.... players can be coached up. SOME players can be coached up IMO..... some are just football players with inate insticts, and I think those qualities are undervalued given the lack of attention the game itself gets. The naural football players will stand out in a game situation. The ones that don't may well be very good NFL'ers some day, but they aren't the "naturals" that I place a slightly higher value on.
I know this isn't mainstream player evaluation think tank stuff, but it's my own!
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
I know this ? was directed at me, but it's a good one.If a player goes to a big school (let's pick Michigan), then I'd look at the Bowl Games and the OSU rivalry game, along with ND. The combine would be next, only because of the interaction between the team and the player, interviews, etc. The practices / drills between that player and others of similar caliber are a good metric.Last would be the postseason bowl game (Shrine, Senior).I'd put it at say 65-25-10, percentage of value wise, for games / combine / all-star game. If I was torn between two players, I'd bump up the importance of the combine because I'm judging character and making decisions on that, all else being equal.For a middle-sized school or program (let's pick Rutgers), I would look less at the Bowl Game because they didn't play a bigger bowl / more solid opponent, and even if K-State was considered a good team the opposing unit or defense or whatever opposing force they put up may not be a good judge. For example, if I was looking at Carriker vs. an inferior O-line, that's not a good way to judge.I'd put more weight on Rutgers' tougher games (WV, Louisville, Cincy) and use that film more.Combine would get more weight as well, as again I don't have much to judge some players against high caliber talent. Brian Leonard isn't a good example, as he is a RB and you can judge that a lot easier than a lineman, DB or LB. Line play and defense are harder to gauge IMO.So, for a generic player from a mid-size program, I'd go 55% to games, 35% combine and 10% all-star game.Lastly, smaller schools. You get the trend. More weight against tougher foes, and also against similar caliber players side by side. I'd go 45-45-10, since I bet there is less film on him.My
coolnerd
Footballguy
When I have heard general managers talk about the evaluation process, the claim has been that the in season games rank anywhere from 60% to 80% of the evaluation depending on the organization. Think of of it like college, the majority of your grade will come from tests and essays (games), and the quizzes, class participation, etc (combine, all-star game, work outs) matter especially if a player does extreme well or poorly. To figure out the weight, you will go look at each teams syallabus.Do you have a weighting system for this game, practices, the combine, real games, bowls, etc? Does it depend on the player? Most of us can see a player in the games we watch and see talent, but how do you compare all of these events? I would hope the high stakes games would be on top, then the other games, and this week would rank somewhere near the bottom, but am I severely underweighting this thing?I would agree with your assessment. I was just making the point that what happens in the Senior Bowl game is underplayed and under valued. Apparently, there are those that think it's vitually meaningless, and that is where I have a differing opinion. I don't put a lot of wieght on it, but I do put some. I think regular seaon and rivalry and bowl games are more important.... for instance, I mentioned Ramirez. There is no drill to see how well a guard pulls. Given the Tx Tech offense, I doubt he pulled much there either. The LB's weren't allowed to blitz, so they had to stay at nome. Once the guard pulls, they are allowed to go. So, how well they can read and react doesn't show up in drills either. Jus sayin.... I don't think the game is as meaningless as many , even the scouts appear to think it is.Guapote said:Is an exhibition game with players and coaches that these kids have been around for one week really a good look at how they respond to pressure? I would think that rivalry games, conference championships, and maybe meaningful bowl games are a better indication. Not trying to argue with you, it just seems to me there are probably better measures of how they respond to pressure.Rovers said:I know "they" do. I don't. Not to say that I don't weight the practice week, which I do, but I also think that the game provides a look at how these kids respond to pressure in a game situation. While Carriker was a practice killer, he wasn't a force in the game. If he had an A grade for practice, I move him to a A- or a B+ for the week. The drills are fine, but it's a very controlled experiment. The DE knows he's doesn't have to make a read, he knows he's on an all out pass rush. That's fine for measuring what he can do, as an almost measurable, but it is an artificial football situation.
Scouts are looking for pure ability, and game performance takes a back seat this week, and that's fine.... players can be coached up. SOME players can be coached up IMO..... some are just football players with inate insticts, and I think those qualities are undervalued given the lack of attention the game itself gets. The naural football players will stand out in a game situation. The ones that don't may well be very good NFL'ers some day, but they aren't the "naturals" that I place a slightly higher value on.
I know this isn't mainstream player evaluation think tank stuff, but it's my own!
It all depends on the player... One guy might be proven on the field, but the worry is that a specific measureable is so low that he's not redeemable. The combine would be huge for him. Another guy might have been a terrific freelancing athlete, but never had to learn anything to excel. The practices are important for him. The game is becoming more important, don't get me wrong. Marques Colston showed something in the Shrine Game last year that he did not have an opportunity to show in the practices. Rovers is right is putting some weight in what happens in the game. In fact, for some players it can be everything, making that play that leaves an indelible impression, like David Ball's flying squirrel catch in the Shrine Game.Do you have a weighting system for this game, practices, the combine, real games, bowls, etc? Does it depend on the player? Most of us can see a player in the games we watch and see talent, but how do you compare all of these events? I would hope the high stakes games would be on top, then the other games, and this week would rank somewhere near the bottom, but am I severely underweighting this thing?I would agree with your assessment. I was just making the point that what happens in the Senior Bowl game is underplayed and under valued. Apparently, there are those that think it's vitually meaningless, and that is where I have a differing opinion. I don't put a lot of wieght on it, but I do put some. I think regular seaon and rivalry and bowl games are more important.... for instance, I mentioned Ramirez. There is no drill to see how well a guard pulls. Given the Tx Tech offense, I doubt he pulled much there either. The LB's weren't allowed to blitz, so they had to stay at nome. Once the guard pulls, they are allowed to go. So, how well they can read and react doesn't show up in drills either. Jus sayin.... I don't think the game is as meaningless as many , even the scouts appear to think it is.Guapote said:Is an exhibition game with players and coaches that these kids have been around for one week really a good look at how they respond to pressure? I would think that rivalry games, conference championships, and maybe meaningful bowl games are a better indication. Not trying to argue with you, it just seems to me there are probably better measures of how they respond to pressure.Rovers said:I know "they" do. I don't. Not to say that I don't weight the practice week, which I do, but I also think that the game provides a look at how these kids respond to pressure in a game situation. While Carriker was a practice killer, he wasn't a force in the game. If he had an A grade for practice, I move him to a A- or a B+ for the week. The drills are fine, but it's a very controlled experiment. The DE knows he's doesn't have to make a read, he knows he's on an all out pass rush. That's fine for measuring what he can do, as an almost measurable, but it is an artificial football situation.
Scouts are looking for pure ability, and game performance takes a back seat this week, and that's fine.... players can be coached up. SOME players can be coached up IMO..... some are just football players with inate insticts, and I think those qualities are undervalued given the lack of attention the game itself gets. The naural football players will stand out in a game situation. The ones that don't may well be very good NFL'ers some day, but they aren't the "naturals" that I place a slightly higher value on.
I know this isn't mainstream player evaluation think tank stuff, but it's my own!
Everything means something in this process - I don't mean to put down the game itself at all. It's just that the practices are when the coaches and scouts really get a feel for the player, and where he can be compared directly with his peers.
I'll ask John Murphy some more questions about this in the audible - he talked about this in the Shrine Game interview we did with him:
QBs Zac Taylor (Nebraska), Matt Gutierrez (Idaho St), and John Murphy (Shrine Game Selection)
Rovers
Footballguy
Naw, I'm much more seat of the pants than scientific. I'll watch the practice week, and look for some players that stand out to me. I'll use Ramirez as my example again. Having not watched a Tx Tech game this year, he was something of an unknown to me, but I liked what I saw in drills. So, I Tivo'd the game, and focused on him. At 329, he's big. I wanted to know if he was TOO big. Was he too lumbering to pull? Was he agile enough to turn it upfield after he pulled? Knowing that blitzing wasn't allowed, how fast did the LB's make the read and penetrate once the guard pulled? How fast were they to react?Do you have a weighting system for this game, practices, the combine, real games, bowls, etc? Does it depend on the player? Most of us can see a player in the games we watch and see talent, but how do you compare all of these events? I would hope the high stakes games would be on top, then the other games, and this week would rank somewhere near the bottom, but am I severely underweighting this thing?I would agree with your assessment. I was just making the point that what happens in the Senior Bowl game is underplayed and under valued. Apparently, there are those that think it's vitually meaningless, and that is where I have a differing opinion. I don't put a lot of wieght on it, but I do put some. I think regular seaon and rivalry and bowl games are more important.... for instance, I mentioned Ramirez. There is no drill to see how well a guard pulls. Given the Tx Tech offense, I doubt he pulled much there either. The LB's weren't allowed to blitz, so they had to stay at nome. Once the guard pulls, they are allowed to go. So, how well they can read and react doesn't show up in drills either. Jus sayin.... I don't think the game is as meaningless as many , even the scouts appear to think it is.Guapote said:Is an exhibition game with players and coaches that these kids have been around for one week really a good look at how they respond to pressure? I would think that rivalry games, conference championships, and maybe meaningful bowl games are a better indication. Not trying to argue with you, it just seems to me there are probably better measures of how they respond to pressure.Rovers said:I know "they" do. I don't. Not to say that I don't weight the practice week, which I do, but I also think that the game provides a look at how these kids respond to pressure in a game situation. While Carriker was a practice killer, he wasn't a force in the game. If he had an A grade for practice, I move him to a A- or a B+ for the week. The drills are fine, but it's a very controlled experiment. The DE knows he's doesn't have to make a read, he knows he's on an all out pass rush. That's fine for measuring what he can do, as an almost measurable, but it is an artificial football situation.
Scouts are looking for pure ability, and game performance takes a back seat this week, and that's fine.... players can be coached up. SOME players can be coached up IMO..... some are just football players with inate insticts, and I think those qualities are undervalued given the lack of attention the game itself gets. The naural football players will stand out in a game situation. The ones that don't may well be very good NFL'ers some day, but they aren't the "naturals" that I place a slightly higher value on.
I know this isn't mainstream player evaluation think tank stuff, but it's my own!
I don't get the chance to watch tons of collge football, so it's the first time I get to see a lot of these players in a game. So, it's more important to me than it would be to a scout, obviously, but lets say Ramirez did very little pulling in that TX Tech offense.... this is a chance for the scouts to see that as well.
Yes, it's a new offense, but how does a LT not block Moore, the DE not once but twice, while KNOWING they can't blitz? There's a kid with little football insticnt. So, yeah, I think there are things that can be gleaned about players in the game itself.
Teams and scouts have soooo much more info, game films, etc that I would not expect the game to be heavilly wieghted, but as Bloom said, sometimes a player can do something to stand out that didn't show up on a practice field. I've heard commentors say things like "His measurables aren't great, but he's a football player." Some players are just better in games than they are in practices. They somehow kick it up a notch. Those are some of the things I look for, understanding that NFL teams aren't looking for most of the same things I am.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
All the NFLN practice coverage and the game, all commercial free. Great link.Okoye. Yes! Now that I get it.Tenacious D said:
As I've explained, all year long I'm reading about this 317 pound manchild nose tackle two gapping run stuffing beast. Then I tune into Louisville and this 285 pound skinny legged quick kid is struggling to play nose and being graded into the road. On the day four practice coverage (in that link) look at Mayock's game film and you will see exactly what was bugging me. He shows Okoye being driven 10 yards down the field on a run right up the middle. This happens with regularity (but not as drastic as the one example) and Grady (just 20 himself) was the more powerful player. At three tech UT, Amobi looks spectacular, very disruptive, but he won't be a great run stuffer. He could go in the top 10 now and I'll shut my yap.
Jene Bramel
Footballguy
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
Carriker didn't do much against very vanilla blocking and his team recorded 8 sacks. I thought he looked a little slow on the outside and better on the inside. 3-4 DE is probably perfect. Levi Brown was, imo, clearly the best OT on the field. Staley and Ugoh had awful games. I think Brown will be the second lineman off the board, but I have no idea how soon that will be. I agree his fundamentals in pass protection were sweet on several plays. He was on an island having no issues. He did make a few mistakes that looked like he ran the wrong play, but he's welcome in Dallas.Tenacious D said:
Capella
Footballguy
mcintyre1
Footballguy
Just because Carriker didn't get sacks doesn't mean he wasn't getting pressure. Also, I thought Jay Moore had a very good showing.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
He got credited with one QH and he really had two. The other was on a roll out. In the second case he was unblocked and a quicker DE probably nails Kolb on that one. In the first one he gets a full head of steam with no one blocking him and smashes into Irons forcing Kolb into the trash. Those were his most effective plays. When blocked... he was blocked, and he sure wasn't beating anyone like he did in practice. Moore is another one. Two of his sacks are funny. He is completely 100% unblocked. I cannot give him much credit for those, but I will agree with anyone who thinks the North OTs were sorry. Those plays are so strange I wonder if the coaching is to blame.
