Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, predator_05 said:

 

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. 

That was the sentiment. Plus yes there have been WRs in crazy shape, but no one jacked to this degree. That's the reason behind all the pictures of his torso all over the internet and my bedroom ceiling.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, shawn306 said:

Johnny Mitchell

Man, thanks for reminding me of that car wreck of a player.  With his size and speed (unique for that era) we all thought he would be all world.  Yet, outside of a few games where Mitchell performed well, he was a complete head case and total disappointment as a player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

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

 

You answered your own question there...but in addition to the points you mentioned, he had zero experience playing under center, calling plays at the line of scrimmage, not even a cadence. 

There were MANY...who believed 'experience in pro-style offense' FAR out-weighs sheer natural athleticism. And they were happily predicting his downfall. Loud and proud.

 

 

He took a gallon of gasoline to all those self-proclaimed experts and lit their pseudo-intellectual bulls*t on fire.

Now, those same guys are embarrassingly shrugging their shoulders and saying, "aaaw shucks, i guess i gawt it wrawng dis tyme..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Please. These aren't the wepponz you're looking for.

These+aren't+the+droids.png

It'd be more how we cheaped out and didn't give poor Sammy real wepponz.

We can't evaluate our QB with these weaponz! We can't evaluate our skill players with this QB!

Coin Flip GIF - HarveyDent CoinFlip TwoFace - Discover & Share GIFs

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, munchmemory said:

Folks kept referring to him as a "workout warrior".   Yeah, fantastic in the gym, I guess.  One an NFL field?  Not so much.  Goes down as a top Jets bust.

 

Even if he failed, the logic behind drafting him was sound. Stud athlete = more likely to be good in the NFL.

If i'm drafting, I'd take a gamble on those types any day.  Looking at his draft picks, I think Joe douglas also believes in this way of thinking. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, predator_05 said:

 

But that's what i'm saying...there is no secret. It's simple, the better athletes are more likely to be successful in the NFL.

It's not always the case, but this approach has a better track record than others. We're underrating athleticism in favor of other wishy-washy criteria. 

This is true, all else being equal and limited to positions where the primary skills are athletic.

But all else is never equal (desire, work ethic, processing speed, etc) and QB in particular is a position where raw athleticism means way less than what happens in the QB's head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

and QB in particular is a position where raw athleticism means way less than what happens in the QB's head.

 

Don't you think the success of the younger generation of QBs is changing this? Josh Allen, Lamar, justin herbert, even 'ugly' prospects like daniel jones..these guys were never supposed to have a shot in the NFL according to 'new-age' thinking. 

 

I could be wrong, and this might well be a fad. But i don't see these guys as 'once in a generation talents', they are decent players, and the beneficiaries of a newly revamped code of football that minimizes collisions and defensive play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I'll take a smart, hard working, good character guy with slightly less athleticism/scores over a dumb, lazy, poor character guy with elite athleticism.

But to each their own.

Sure...but character isn't natural (or for the religious, "god given"). Human beings can change their behavior, their habits, their work ethic and time management. 

You can't change athleticism though, you're born with it. You're either a good athlete, or you aren't. 

 

Belichick is also big on this 'athleticism over everything' mindset. It's why he'd take headcases or 'cast-offs' from other teams. If they were stud athletes to begin with, he could 'reason' with them and rehabilitate them. Doesn't always work, but the logic is sound. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

or we might still have people lamenting how Anderson is just #3 WR at best and how Metcalf is a juiced-up bust

Yeah I guess it could have gone either way... in which case more excuses are being made for Darnold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, August said:

Not my point. But who’s to say they wouldn’t look like DK under different circumstances? 

Because the consequence of that view is nihilism. I'd rather believe that good players are good to have and affect the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, predator_05 said:

 

Don't you think the success of the younger generation of QBs is changing this? Josh Allen, Lamar, justin herbert, even 'ugly' prospects like daniel jones..these guys were never supposed to have a shot in the NFL according to 'new-age' thinking. 

 

I could be wrong, and this might well be a fad. But i don't see these guys as 'once in a generation talents', they are decent players, and the beneficiaries of a newly revamped code of football that minimizes collisions and defensive play. 

No. They succeed and fail on what's in their heads. Their athleticism helps determine the magnitude of that success or failure.

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...