Jump to content

DK Metcalf, Justin Herbert, the certainty of athleticism and #commonsense


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, jeremy2020 said:

Standing at 6'6", he was an athletic specimen at LSU.  His measurables were 'off the charts' crazy. The finest of athletic specimens. That man? Jamarcus Russell. Highly touted at LSU in 2007, Russell was a big physical specimen with a cannon of an arm who was highly productive. 

Obviously, he's going into the hall of fame. 

Pro Tip: If you think you discovered some secret to picking players who will be superstars in the NFL...take a deep breath, whisper T0mShane into the mirror 3 times, take a dump and then realize you didn't.

It's never that simple...and certainly not 'undefeated' 

Athleticism is still predictive but probably QB is the position (other than PK) where it is least predictive. That doesn't mean it's useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jeremy2020 said:

Standing at 6'6", he was an athletic specimen at LSU.  His measurables were 'off the charts' crazy. The finest of athletic specimens. That man? Jamarcus Russell. Highly touted at LSU in 2007, Russell was a big physical specimen with a cannon of an arm who was highly productive. 

Obviously, he's going into the hall of fame. 

Pro Tip: If you think you discovered some secret to picking players who will be superstars in the NFL...take a deep breath, whisper T0mShane into the mirror 3 times, take a dump and then realize you didn't.

It's never that simple...and certainly not 'undefeated' 

Jamarcus Russel was a fatty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coffee Is Great said:

Also many felt he couldn't run any route but a go-route. I remember early footage of him filmed by a beat writer during his rookie mini camp had social media laughing--it was Metcalf running in/out patterns and he looked bad. 

 

Doesn't that exemplify the cluelessness of today's football community? A 30 second clip of a player's warm-up routine is becoming the basis of evaluation. It goes against conventional wisdom in the worst possible way. 

 

1 hour ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

You don’t think GMs prefer to draft the more stronger/athletic guys and that they haven’t tried?  Do you remember Renaldo Nehemiah?  How about Mike Mamula?  

They used to. I'm referring to the change in attitude over the years.

In 2020, the evaluation process has moved further away from common sense. Earlier, GMs had more common sense, and would look for the most obvious indicators of success: bigger, stronger, faster. 

Today's community, whether 'data driven' or 'film grinder', is ignoring common sense and missing out on dynamite prospects. Something is wrong. 

Do you think today's front offices have a better batting average in the draft? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, jgb said:

Athleticism is still predictive but probably QB is the position (other than PK) where it is least predictive..

 

Is this true for today's NFL? Where Josh allen, lamar jackson, justin herbert are viable starters? Shouldn't their success inspire a change in attitude?

I think the game has changed to accommodate a different (more athletic) style of play. The football community has been slow to react. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, joewilly12 said:

Currently he would be the #1 WR you surround him with other good players and you build a winning culture. 

We cant keep bringing in guys off the scrap heap and expecting better results. 

 

We found Robbie Anderson and wasted him. We found Enunwa but he couldn’t stay healthy. We’ve had our fair share of guys that we’ve wasted...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

 

Is this true for today's NFL? Where Josh allen, lamar jackson, justin herbert are viable starters? Shouldn't their success inspire a change in attitude?

I think the game has changed to accommodate a different (more athletic) style of play. The football community has been slow to react. 

Good point. Guess it depends on what type of QB. The most important part of the job even for a "running QB" is still accuracy, reading defenses, etc. that aren't captured in athletic numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, greenwichjetfan said:

Snark from you? After this Jamarcus Russell of a thread?

Your very first paragraph talks about how the football community ignored or forgot natural athleticism. Peyton was one of the greatest prospects ever, the #1 overall pick, one of the GOATs, all while simultaneously being one of the least athletic players ever. Please advise where he fits in your timeline.

 

Peyton played his college football in the 90s. The game has evolved since then.

Please let me borrow your time-machine, your replies will be more respectable when we're traveling back in time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jeremy2020 said:

Standing at 6'6", he was an athletic specimen at LSU.  His measurables were 'off the charts' crazy. The finest of athletic specimens. That man? Jamarcus Russell. Highly touted at LSU in 2007, Russell was a big physical specimen with a cannon of an arm who was highly productive. 

Obviously, he's going into the hall of fame. 

Pro Tip: If you think you discovered some secret to picking players who will be superstars in the NFL...take a deep breath, whisper T0mShane into the mirror 3 times, take a dump and then realize you didn't.

It's never that simple...and certainly not 'undefeated' 

Wait....did I not take a dump, or revolutionize scouting??

 

So confused right now...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The bod was also a bit too Schwartzenegger, since no one had seen a WR look like that since David Boston ruined himself. Wasn't just that he didn't have enough yards. Remember how he didn't have enough body fat? Lol.

 

So nobody has EVER seen a ripped WR before? Come on... 

Leaving aside the fact that we're in the instagram era, he was flexing for a picture after finishing a workout - of course he's gonna look pumped. Most NFL players (at that weight) would. 

Why is being jacked considered a bad thing? It shouldn't be. This is what needs to change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, docdhc said:

This is why we drafted Bechton, Joe D gets it.

Exactly, people were KNOCKING douglas for drafting Becton instead of Thomas...even though Becton was the most athletically imposing lineman in the draft. 

 

This is an abandonment of common sense. Fundamentals should NEVER be valued over natural athleticism. Barring injury, Becton will have a great career, just because he's bigger than the average lineman. 

We're over-complicating a simple game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Greenbloodblitz said:

Obviously athleticism is very important. The point of scouting these players it's a see who's a criminal, who's going to beat their wife, Who has been juicing, maybe selling drugs? Who can't read, and who is insane.

Somehow many of these guys slip through the cracks and get drafted anyway! LOL! Jail is full of guys who can run really fast.

You're talking about giving millions of dollars to very young men. Just think about your own circle of friends when you were in your early twenties, and how effed up everybody was in some way or another? How many very close friends turned out to be doctors, lawyers and politicians?

Just like you can't coach speed, you can't coach class either. Scouts need to know what kind of background these guys are coming from. It's all relevant.

I brought this up a few weeks ago in another post. The Jets drafted a guy during the Herm Edwards era, and in six months he lost about 50 lb and they thought he was sickly. It turns out he had never been alone and Far From Home, didn't know how to cook, or shop for food and could barely take care of himself.

This is back in the day when they were staying at the dorms at Hofstra during training camp and I don't the life of me remember the guy's name but I'm pretty sure he just left the team and went back home to Arkansas or something?

Point is there's a lot more to it than just athleticism.

 

Wasn't it Bryan Thomas??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Greenbloodblitz said:

 

You're talking about giving millions of dollars to very young men. Just think about your own circle of friends when you were in your early twenties, and how effed up everybody was in some way or another? How many very close friends turned out to be doctors, lawyers and politicians?

Just like you can't coach speed, you can't coach class either. Scouts need to know what kind of background these guys are coming from. It's all relevant.

 

I hung out with people who'd wisely budget their time to get wasted on jaegerbombs around skanky chicks every friday night. This was a manageable lifestyle. 

You can absolutely coach class, time management and route-running. You can't teach studly athleticism, that stuff is innate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

 

Peyton played his college football in the 90s. The game has evolved since then.

Please let me borrow your time-machine, your replies will be more respectable when we're traveling back in time. 

You open this thread stating that football players used to be evaluated based on natural athleticism but that somewhere along the say, the community forgot or ignored natural athleticism (what an awful take), and that if they just evaluated based on natural athleticism, they wouldn't miss prospects (another awful take). When I brought up Peyton Manning, you talk about time and time travel. 

What the **** are you even doing? Are you saying that all naturally athletic prospects should be chosen first? Are you also valuing all draft picks equally? I assure you Tom Brady (also unathletic as ****) being a 6th round pick was a boon for the patriots in his rookie year. It allowed the team to use other picks to build around him. 

In case you're new to football, there is no one way to skin a cat. No one is devaluing natural athleticism. The driving force behind most of the athletic QBs we're seeing dominating is due to scheme and play design. That's evolving to take in more college concepts. Herbert is 7 games into his career and looks great, but it's still early. D.K. is catching passes from a first ballot HoF, and even if he were producing with Blake Bortles, he would be nothing more than a miss. Throughout the years, there have been many prospects - specifically at WR that have been taken high/early due to natural athleticism that still fizzled out. There have also been many players who weren't naturally athletic but still made a difference in the league. 

I'll stop here as I know you're already regretting this thread and you'll probably just respond with something about a DeLorean anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

I hung out with people who'd wisely budget their time to get wasted on jaegerbombs around skanky chicks every friday night. This was a manageable lifestyle. 

You can absolutely coach class, time management and route-running. You can't teach studly athleticism, that stuff is innate. 

2zo1ki.jpg.31112d22aae633670058757a7de3a5b4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

 

What the **** are you even doing? Are you saying that all naturally athletic prospects should be chosen first? 

 

Yes

 

btw, your reply makes more sense if you replace peyton manning with ryan leaf. I still have a valid point though. Athleticism >>> everything else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LockeJET said:

Dewayne Robertson was a bowling ball with butcher knives. 10 times more lethal than the top athletes. 

 

Most guys here will KILL me for saying this: BUT...the logic behind drafting him and Gholston was sound.

I know they didn't pan out, but i'd rather take a shot on the freakishly athletic stud than the skinnier 'fundamentals' guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, predator_05 said:

As the football world juggles a million different fads to accurately identify NFL prospects, many have either ignored, or forgotten, the most obvious, tried-and-tested indicator of success at the professional level: natural athleticism. 

It's not difficult. The guys that are bigger, stronger and faster will probably...be good at football. At any position. Under most circumstances. 

The unheralded success of DK Metcalf and Justin Herbert might well inspire a return to #commonsense, and a scaling back of pointless and mostly extraneous data in modern day scouting. 

These were two highly criticized, unfairly underrated prospects, knocked down for everything other than their athletic prowess. It's almost as if the 'big NFL' tried to outsmart themselves into thinking that exceptional athleticism doesn't matter that much

Both of these prospects were prototypical athletes for their position; so much so...you'd think they'd been built in a lab. Yet, somehow...this simple fact eluded the entire NFL community. A calvin johnson-like wide receiver was the 9th WR drafted in his class. A skillful QB with an exceptional athletic profile was never close to being a consensus number 1 pick, and widely rumored to be a bust. Why? 

How did we even get here? By making athleticism just one of a thousand different 'boxes' on a scout's checklist. 

Somewhere along the line, the football elites, along with us fans, have forgotten that the game doesn't have to be complex. It's a pretty simple game, played by imperfect human beings. Many of whom are on a learning curve from day 1, largely reliant on circumstances beyond their control. 

A simple game necessitates clarity of thought, more than anything else. And there's nothing clearer to the eye than raw, natural, god-given athleticism. You can't teach it. Athleticism, allied with good #commonsense coaching, is often a guaranteed winner.

#intangibles and data have their place, but the predictive value of athleticism in a contact sport, is undefeated. If only more teams, especially the Jets, could realize this...and revert to #commonsense thinking. 

How was Herbert highly criticized and underrated?  He was the second rated QB hehinf Burrow, as he should.  His athleticism was noted by everyone.  Everyone could see the physical skills, it was his lack of a killer instinct, his emotions that people worried about.  Not his skill set

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are certain positions on the field where athleticism matters more than others, and this needs to be taken into account.  At no position is it more important than for pass rushers.  You should never draft an athletic slug like Lorenzo Mauldin.  Meanwhile, the Vernon Gholston pick was a lot more defensible than people think.  

Certainly you can use athleticism as a "gateway" of sorts, where you say "OK, we think this guys physical/athletic traits can help him translate to the pros".  But you still need to do your homework to make sure that guy is going to be a fit in all other ways before drafting him.  Because some guys who are tremendous athletes are used to getting by on athleticism alone, and aren't willing to put in the work to become good football players, too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the single toughest factor in projecting college players for the NFL is in how each reacts to suddenly having access to a lot of money. 

Both the NFL and NBA have seen lots of stud college or, in the case of the NBA high school players, flame out in pro ball after getting PAID. They think they've "made it" and cease to work hard, I guess, or just coasted by on pure talent for so long that they don't care to start to work harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheClashFan said:

I wonder if the single toughest factor in projecting college players for the NFL is in how each reacts to suddenly having access to a lot of money. 

Both the NFL and NBA have seen lots of stud college or, in the case of the NBA high school players, flame out in pro ball after getting PAID. They think they've "made it" and cease to work hard, I guess, or just coasted by on pure talent for so long that they don't care to start to work harder.

But how do you predict this happening, with any player you draft? 

A young player can be "coached" to give all the right answers in pre-draft interviews, and have his life in order before going pro, only to flush it all down the drain a couple years later.

Hell, some players can be good citizens for their entire rookie deals, then turn into slugs as soon as they get paid.  Think Albert Haynesworth and Muhammad Wilkerson.

Meanwhile, other players can have several red flags before they're drafted, then end up HOFers or multi-year Pro Bowlers.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jetsfan80 said:

But how do you predict this happening, with any player you draft? 

A young player can be "coached" to give all the right answers in pre-draft interviews, and have his life in order before going pro, only to flush it all down the drain a couple years later.

Hell, some players can be good citizens for their entire rookie deals, then turn into slugs as soon as they get paid.  Think Albert Haynesworth and Muhammad Wilkerson.

That's just it, I don't think anyone can really predict it. They interview all these kids and check with their college coaches, maybe HS coaches, etc. But who knows?

Hell, throw a 4 year multi million dollar deal at me, and who knows what I might do. Imagine getting that at 21 years old or younger? I'm sure that NFL teams have some criteria that they look for, but obviously that is not going to be close to perfect.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...