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!
My intent isn't to single him out in that game, or any game. Well maybe it kind of is. I am trying to evaluate him after all. None the less, I'm not intending to site him as a reason for Buffalo struggles. Far from it. Like you said one guy can't do it all and he was carrying a heavy load on that team. I appreciate you rip thoughts on the matter. I'm simply trying to provide some talking points. It's amazing to me that thru basically 3 months of fodder, over analysis and hyper speculation basically nobody brings up anything negative about Mack. Not here, not on ESPN, not on draft websites, not on NFL.com. It's like everyone is trying to sell us on the idea that Clowney isn't the best player and the Mack is a safe argument is the only one with legs. There are concerns with Mack, though. He disappeared in games he shouldn't have. He can be exposed in space and has some stiffness in his hips, drop. He isn't this ultra clean prospect everyone is making him out to be. We just aren't seeing the masses pick him apart like Clowney, the QBs and others. Perhaps that's because LB isn't a glamorous position and people by and large don't care as much. He's still a top 3 guy in the draft.
I hate groupthink and appreciate it when people can point out reasonable flaws in a player's game.
IMO, pass coverage is easily his biggest weakness. He can get to the QB, he can get sideline-to-sideline to stop the run, and he can get penetration to blow up running plays. I have my questions about whether he can keep up with elite TEs and slot WRs.
Never indicated that all I care about is height/weight comparison. But you're saying Clowney's "style of play" is similar to Dumervil's based on? Clowney is going to "washed out" on run plays based on? So I think the height weight comparison is fair to point out when many cited Dumervil's lack of ideal size as a concern in his ability to play the run when he was a prospect. I don't see the same concerns with Clowney, who so happens to be a significantly bigger human being.
I agree. Like I've said, Mack is best when attacking down hill and pressing the LOS. You're right that he does run parallel pretty well but I'd say he does it much better when the target is clear, hence the attacking part. Sometimes I feel he gets caught in limbo when in space. For example I think both Mosely and Shazier are better in this regard. Probably because it's not a natural fit for him given his use at Buffalo. He's an unreal talent and one you should be proud of as a former Buffalo alum. The fact that he's in the top 3 is a real credit to his skill, especially as a LB. LB isn't exactly the most in demand position in the NFL.Steve Tasker said:
http://www.silverandblackpride.com/2014/10/22/7040967/khalil-mack-highest-rated-first-round-pick-rookie-oakland-raiders
it's not a small victory... it's pretty huge.
At last someone to build around over there. Hitting on a franchise player is a big deal.
Clowney has played what, 4.5 games thus far and still never at 100% and you want to declare a winner?Still only about 10-15% thru their careers...
But do we already have a winner?
By the criteria set out in my OP... I say it is a resounding YES.
I may ruin NFL players careers once they're here... but at least I scout well in college
Clowney missing most of his games isn't a stat/fact I would use to argue otherwise.Clowney has played what, 4.5 games thus far and still never at 100% and you want to declare a winner?Still only about 10-15% thru their careers...
But do we already have a winner?
By the criteria set out in my OP... I say it is a resounding YES.
I may ruin NFL players careers once they're here... but at least I scout well in college
No, but it points to the fact that it's a vastly incomplete data set not remotely worthy of declaring anything.Clowney missing most of his games isn't a stat/fact I would use to argue otherwise.Clowney has played what, 4.5 games thus far and still never at 100% and you want to declare a winner?Still only about 10-15% thru their careers...
But do we already have a winner?
By the criteria set out in my OP... I say it is a resounding YES.
I may ruin NFL players careers once they're here... but at least I scout well in college
Nobody is arguing anything other than the data we have.. which is emphatically in favor of the other player.No, but it points to the fact that it's a vastly incomplete data set not remotely worthy of declaring anything.Clowney missing most of his games isn't a stat/fact I would use to argue otherwise.Clowney has played what, 4.5 games thus far and still never at 100% and you want to declare a winner?Still only about 10-15% thru their careers...
But do we already have a winner?
By the criteria set out in my OP... I say it is a resounding YES.
I may ruin NFL players careers once they're here... but at least I scout well in college
Doesn't help that HOU is almost already out of the playoffs, players seem to have checked out, and the coach is an idiot.Nobody is arguing anything other than the data we have.. which is emphatically in favor of the other player.No, but it points to the fact that it's a vastly incomplete data set not remotely worthy of declaring anything.Clowney missing most of his games isn't a stat/fact I would use to argue otherwise.Clowney has played what, 4.5 games thus far and still never at 100% and you want to declare a winner?Still only about 10-15% thru their careers...
But do we already have a winner?
By the criteria set out in my OP... I say it is a resounding YES.
I may ruin NFL players careers once they're here... but at least I scout well in college
That has nothing to do with what I said.Nobody is arguing anything other than the data we have.. which is emphatically in favor of the other player.No, but it points to the fact that it's a vastly incomplete data set not remotely worthy of declaring anything.Clowney missing most of his games isn't a stat/fact I would use to argue otherwise.Clowney has played what, 4.5 games thus far and still never at 100% and you want to declare a winner?Still only about 10-15% thru their careers...
But do we already have a winner?
By the criteria set out in my OP... I say it is a resounding YES.
I may ruin NFL players careers once they're here... but at least I scout well in college
Playing opposite Watt is a good thing, but learning a new position is not. There are Pros and Cons to him landing in Hou.Doesn't help that HOU is almost already out of the playoffs, players seem to have checked out, and the coach is an idiot.Nobody is arguing anything other than the data we have.. which is emphatically in favor of the other player.No, but it points to the fact that it's a vastly incomplete data set not remotely worthy of declaring anything.Clowney missing most of his games isn't a stat/fact I would use to argue otherwise.Clowney has played what, 4.5 games thus far and still never at 100% and you want to declare a winner?Still only about 10-15% thru their careers...
But do we already have a winner?
By the criteria set out in my OP... I say it is a resounding YES.
I may ruin NFL players careers once they're here... but at least I scout well in college
Clowney ending up in HOU was supposed to be a good thing w Watt in charge... Instead, well... Doesn't look that way at all.
Oddly enough, Im on the cusp of calling Watt part of the problem...
Again, it's totally incomplete. We have no idea exactly what Clowney is right now. That sucks, but it's true. He's played so little and never been healthy that I don't think you can blam it on Watt or coaches or anything. Maybe the doc who screwed up his knee? Maybe Clowney never amounts to much and is a bust. Maybe he's just never healthy. Nonetheless, I think you have to give it some more time before making a claim.
