GunnerBill Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 6 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said: And you know what's going to happen right? Some perennial winner like Pittsburgh, New England, Green Bay etc are going to bottom out in 2 years and wind up with Lawrence. Yep. New England. New ***** England. And you will hear me cry all the way from old England.
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Logic said: While I do doubt the notion that a college team could beat an NFL team in the modern era, I DO want to point this out: Every year for 42 years, an exhibition game was played between a college all-stars team made up of the best seniors in college, and an NFL team. The College All-Stars won 9 of those 42 games. So a little more often than once every 5 years, a team made up of college players DID beat an NFL team. Granted, the NFL teams may not have played all their starters or tried that hard given that these were exhibition games, but nevertheless. I thought this was really interesting.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_College_All-Star_Game Couple of things: One, they collected the best players in all of college football...thats a MASSIVE difference than just a random college football team that has a lot of its players that will never play a down of professional football. Two, the game is substantially different today. The NFL players are so much bigger and faster than college kids. Players now a days have so much technology, training, etc that goes into them that they are still substantially getting bigger and stronger once in the pros. Three, the modern games today are vastly different. The NFL is so far ahead of the college game in complexity, schemes, and speed compared to the old days, especially in the passing game. 3 hours ago, Nanker said: You are wrong on that - historically speaking. You probaly don’t remember the Chicago College All Star Games. The NFL Champions played a roster of College All Stars, and the kids won 9 of the 42 games and tied the Pros twice. Just posted this and saw Logic had done pretty much the same thing right above my post. He wasnt wrong...a college "team" is no where close to the same thing as a college "all star" team. Not even comparable, not to mention the different eras and how different todays games are. Edited January 8, 2019 by Alphadawg7
row_33 Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 2 hours ago, GunnerBill said: Go back and find my first posts on the subject. The only revision I would like is I included Oklahoma in with these two. I was wrong on that. This pair is way ahead. We crunched the numbers last year. Every starter on the 2016 Alabama defense is now in the NFL. By the end of this next draft every starter on the 2017 defense will be too. Offense it is more like 60/40 (60 in league 40 not) I grant you.... but Alabama and Clemson don't have 5 or 6 stars and then a bunch of guys who will never play on Sundays. The talent isnt nearly as spread out in college football as it used to be. If you start for one of those teams the chances are you will play (and likely start) in the NFL. The D and O-lines will move over fine QB not a hope skill players, look elsewhere for pros and since the QB and skill players are about 80% of recognition for a school..... your 60/40 should be submerged a ton...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, GunnerBill said: Go back and find my first posts on the subject. The only revision I would like is I included Oklahoma in with these two. I was wrong on that. This pair is way ahead. We crunched the numbers last year. Every starter on the 2016 Alabama defense is now in the NFL. By the end of this next draft every starter on the 2017 defense will be too. Offense it is more like 60/40 (60 in league 40 not) I grant you.... but Alabama and Clemson don't have 5 or 6 stars and then a bunch of guys who will never play on Sundays. The talent isnt nearly as spread out in college football as it used to be. If you start for one of those teams the chances are you will play (and likely start) in the NFL. Ok, let's pretend what you just said is true above, which feels aggressively optimistic, but lets say you are right anyway. When this was originally being discussed, you told me that Bama might win, but if they didn't, Buffalo would NOT cover the spread against Bama because the Bama defense has so many future NFL players on it, in fact, you said all of them. You said this Bama team was different, it was essentially a PRO team on the field with very few people who won't make the NFL. YET: They just got blown out by a COLLEGE team. A College team which does not, under any circumstance, have the same number of pro players on it that an NFL franchise has on it which is 100% all professional players. A 19 year old QB just lit them up. If you take that same QB and put him against an NFL defense tomorrow, he is going to have a terrible game. You put that kid against the Bills defense and he won't throw for 100 yards and probably has 5 picks. He isnt ready to play against an NFL defense...yet he just lit up this legendary Bama D I heard about all year and he did it with a mix of players who will make the NFL and guys who will never go pro. The entire Clemson offense is not going to all be NFL players, and the ones that do make the NFL are not all going to be good long term starters. Clemson defense, which was NOT as touted by anyone here as highly as the Bama defense, just shut down Bama's offense. An NFL defense will crush them even more than Clemson did, especially the Bills. Not one of these kids has taken one snap in an NFL practice let alone played a game. NFL rookies week 1 are playing their first game...but yet they have spent 7 months learning the pro game, going through practice, camp, preseason etc. And yet, most rookies still are not impactful week 1 of their professional careers. I would say its safe to say that 95%+ of all rookies do not make a week 1 impact that is even notable. Now you are expecting a team of college kids who dont even have those 7 months of NFL work to come in on day 1 and compete strongly against a professional football team...thats quite the reach. Not to mention, many of the kids on that team who probably eventually make the NFL aren't ready to go to the NFL today and will go back to school at least another year. College teams look dominant because they are facing other college teams made up of mostly players that will never make the pros. Yes certain programs play tougher schedules, but those "tough" teams still have more kids on their roster that won't play in the pros than kids that will. Everyone, especially the media, was obviously wrong about Bama's dominance, its not even disputable. Just like they were wrong earlier this year when they said Duke could beat the Cavs who then went out and lost to a college team like a week later. Bama got destroyed by one of their peers. Wasnt even a game. They will not beat an NFL team, nor cover the spread. Edited January 8, 2019 by Alphadawg7
GoBills808 Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Ok, let's pretend what you just said is true above, which feels aggressively optimistic, but lets say you are right anyway. When this was originally being discussed, you told me that Bama could win and if they didn't, Buffalo would NOT cover the spread against Bama because the Bama defense has so many future NFL players on it, in fact, you said all of them. You said this Bama team was different, it was essentially a PRO team on the field with very few people who won't make the NFL. YET: They just got blown out by a COLLEGE team. A College team which does not, under any circumstance, have the same number of pro players on it that an NFL franchise has on it which is 100% all professional players. A 19 year old QB just lit them up. If you take that same QB and put him against an NFL defense tomorrow, he is going to have a terrible game. You put that kid against the Bills defense and he won't throw for 100 yards and probably has 5 picks. He isnt ready to play against an NFL defense...yet he just lit up this legendary Bama D I heard about all year and he did it with a mix of players who will make the NFL and guys who will never go pro. The entire Clemson offense is not going to all be NFL players, and the ones that do make the NFL are not all going to be good long term starters. Clemson defense, which was NOT as touted by anyone here as highly as the Bama defense, just shut down Bama's offense. An NFL defense will crush them even more than Clemson did, especially the Bills. Not one of these kids has taken one snap in an NFL practice let alone played a game. NFL rookies week 1 are playing their first game...but yet they have spent 7 months learning the pro game, going through practice, camp, preseason etc. And yet, most rookies still are not impactful week 1 of their professional careers. I would say its safe to say that 95%+ of all rookies do not make a week 1 impact that is even notable. Now you are expecting a team of college kids who dont even have those 7 months of NFL work to come in on day 1 and compete strongly against a professional football team...thats quite the reach. Not to mention, many of the kids on that team who probably eventually make the NFL aren't ready to go to the NFL today and will go back to school at least another year. College teams look dominant because they are facing other college teams made up of mostly players that will never make the pros. Yes certain programs play tougher schedules, but those "tough" teams still have more kids on their roster that won't play in the pros than kids that will. Everyone, especially the media, was obviously wrong about Bama's dominance, its not even disputable. Just like they were wrong earlier this year when they said Duke could beat the Cavs who then went out and lost to a college team like a week later. Bama got destroyed by one of their peers. Wasnt even a game. They will not beat an NFL team, nor cover the spread. I still say they might not even be able to finish the game due to injuries. 1
GunnerBill Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said: Ok, let's pretend what you just said is true above, which feels aggressively optimistic, but lets say you are right anyway. When this was originally being discussed, you told me that Bama might win, but if they didn't, Buffalo would NOT cover the spread against Bama because the Bama defense has so many future NFL players on it, in fact, you said all of them. You said this Bama team was different, it was essentially a PRO team on the field with very few people who won't make the NFL. YET: They just got blown out by a COLLEGE team. A College team which does not, under any circumstance, have the same number of pro players on it that an NFL franchise has on it which is 100% all professional players. A 19 year old QB just lit them up. If you take that same QB and put him against an NFL defense tomorrow, he is going to have a terrible game. You put that kid against the Bills defense and he won't throw for 100 yards and probably has 5 picks. He isnt ready to play against an NFL defense...yet he just lit up this legendary Bama D I heard about all year and he did it with a mix of players who will make the NFL and guys who will never go pro. The entire Clemson offense is not going to all be NFL players, and the ones that do make the NFL are not all going to be good long term starters. Clemson defense, which was NOT as touted by anyone here as highly as the Bama defense, just shut down Bama's offense. An NFL defense will crush them even more than Clemson did, especially the Bills. Not one of these kids has taken one snap in an NFL practice let alone played a game. NFL rookies week 1 are playing their first game...but yet they have spent 7 months learning the pro game, going through practice, camp, preseason etc. And yet, most rookies still are not impactful week 1 of their professional careers. I would say its safe to say that 95%+ of all rookies do not make a week 1 impact that is even notable. Now you are expecting a team of college kids who dont even have those 7 months of NFL work to come in on day 1 and compete strongly against a professional football team...thats quite the reach. Not to mention, many of the kids on that team who probably eventually make the NFL aren't ready to go to the NFL today and will go back to school at least another year. College teams look dominant because they are facing other college teams made up of mostly players that will never make the pros. Yes certain programs play tougher schedules, but those "tough" teams still have more kids on their roster that won't play in the pros than kids that will. Everyone, especially the media, was obviously wrong about Bama's dominance, its not even disputable. Just like they were wrong earlier this year when they said Duke could beat the Cavs who then went out and lost to a college team like a week later. Bama got destroyed by one of their peers. Wasnt even a game. They will not beat an NFL team, nor cover the spread. Let me correct you on one point because it does matter in the context of what you are saying I argued. While the thread was about whether the Bills would cover the spread I repeatedly said that it wasn't about the Bills from my perspective. Nor was it really about whether the NFL team covered the spread although I, like Kirby, felt that the point spreads for the bottom feeder teams in the NFL were interesting. I also conceded on point 4 when we discussed. The reason I entered that thread was to dispute the argument that Alabama is undertalented to compare to a bottom end NFL team because that argument was being made "there are guys on that team who won't be pros". I don't think they are (at least at the starter level) and still believe that. They ARE different in that regard. Their whole starting 2016 defense is playing in the NFL 7 starters, 3 backups and 1 special teamer. After this year's draft their whole 2017 starting defense will be as well. These are indisputable facts. There are no grocery baggers starting on those defenses. Their might be one or two on the offense but not on the defense. Last night they got lit up by a true freshman Quarterback who was phenomenal. The 2016 defense got lit up by Deshaun Watson too. Sometimes great defensive teams get beaten by great Quarterbacks. That happenes in the pros the same as in college. As for how would Trevor Lawrence fare in the NFL.... we will have to wait a couple more years to see - but if he was able to and declared for the 2019 NFL Draft he would be a top 10 pick and the first Quarterback off the board. So do I downgrade my view on the Alabama defense after last night? No, not really. I think they are still super talented and like their 2016 and 2017 predecessors they will all play in the NFL. Their offensive line and running backs probably will too and the QB will also get drafted. Wide receiver and tight end they are thinner and I never argued otherwise. What I do think is that people can no longer sleep on the job Dabo has done with Clemson. That programme is now ready to challenge Alabma as the dominant force in college football. The central point I made 2 months ago stands - This Alabama team and even this Clemson team are different. There are very few grocery baggers. These programmes are absolutely stacked with NFL talent. I put the over/under on the number of the 44 starters from last night playing in the NFL (and I mean making teams and playing snaps not getting drafted in the 7th and being on practice squads) at 35. Where do you put it?
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 25 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Let me correct you on one point because it does matter in the context of what you are saying I argued. While the thread was about whether the Bills would cover the spread I repeatedly said that it wasn't about the Bills from my perspective. Nor was it really about whether the NFL team covered the spread although I, like Kirby, felt that the point spreads for the bottom feeder teams in the NFL were interesting. I also conceded on point 4 when we discussed. The reason I entered that thread was to dispute the argument that Alabama is undertalented to compare to a bottom end NFL team because that argument was being made "there are guys on that team who won't be pros". I don't think they are (at least at the starter level) and still believe that. They ARE different in that regard. Their whole starting 2016 defense is playing in the NFL 7 starters, 3 backups and 1 special teamer. After this year's draft their whole 2017 starting defense will be as well. These are indisputable facts. There are no grocery baggers starting on those defenses. Their might be one or two on the offense but not on the defense. Last night they got lit up by a true freshman Quarterback who was phenomenal. The 2016 defense got lit up by Deshaun Watson too. Sometimes great defensive teams get beaten by great Quarterbacks. That happenes in the pros the same as in college. As for how would Trevor Lawrence fare in the NFL.... we will have to wait a couple more years to see - but if he was able to and declared for the 2019 NFL Draft he would be a top 10 pick and the first Quarterback off the board. So do I downgrade my view on the Alabama defense after last night? No, not really. I think they are still super talented and like their 2016 and 2017 predecessors they will all play in the NFL. Their offensive line and running backs probably will too and the QB will also get drafted. Wide receiver and tight end they are thinner and I never argued otherwise. What I do think is that people can no longer sleep on the job Dabo has done with Clemson. That programme is now ready to challenge Alabma as the dominant force in college football. The central point I made 2 months ago stands - This Alabama team and even this Clemson team are different. There are very few grocery baggers. These programmes are absolutely stacked with NFL talent. I put the over/under on the number of the 44 starters from last night playing in the NFL (and I mean making teams and playing snaps not getting drafted in the 7th and being on practice squads) at 35. Where do you put it? I bolded the part above for one reason...that this isnt about how Lawrence will EVENTUALLY fare in the NFL. This is about Lawrenece right now at this exact moment. If he was in the draft this year, I agree, he would likely be a first round pick and this kid certainly seems promising. But if he stepped onto a a field today at this exact moment against an NFL defense he would get eaten alive. And that same kid who would get swallowed whole but an NFL defense today just lit up that famed Bama defense and blew them out. That was really where my point was with him, is that Lawrence is not NFL ready to start a game and yet he just dismantled this heralded Bama defense. Now imagine what an NFL QB would do playing along side 10 other NFL starting players with also a bench full of NFL professional players. Agree on Clemson...but I think they were already there and have been there for a few years. But again, this notion that a college program, even one as good as Alabama would beat an NFL team is silly. And even the notion that an NFL team wouldn't cover a 28 point spread against them is also pretty silly. Last time someone suggested they could beat a pro team they mentioned the Raiders. I mean Carr would throw for 500+ yards and 6 TDs if they faced the Raiders, and would probably leave the game early in the 4th Quarter the blow out would be so big. To answer your last question...honestly don't know the answer to that question as I haven't broken every player down in that way. In my best guess opinion, I do feel its quite aggressively optimistic to suggest that 35 of the 44 starters will go on to be relevant NFL players. As you stated, you are suggesting that 35 of the 44 players will be relevant draft picks who play relevant snaps in the NFL, not 7th rounder or UDFAs who end up on PS.. Not even so much on the number that make it, but that you think 35 of the 44 players will be relevant in the NFL is astonishing considering the bust rate of the first round alone of the best players in football is greater than 50%. To suggest that 35 out of 44 players from 2 schools would be relevant contributors seems like a stretch to say the least.
mannc Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 12 hours ago, BuffaloButt said: I read that Alabama said they could beat the Cardinals. They said the Cardinals were trash and they would beat them. It would never happen, the NFL team would always win. There is a big difference between the NFL and the best college team. This can be put to rest. Why is it that a lot of Alabama guys in the NFL swear the Tide could beat an NFL team? Don’t you think they are better qualified than anyone to make that judgment? Obviously a poor showing for Alabama, but I think what we really saw is Tua getting exposed. He played poorly vs Georgia, too, and it appears he just might not be very good. Biggest difference in the game last night was the two QBs.
GunnerBill Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: To answer your last question...honestly don't know the answer to that question as I haven't broken every player down in that way. In my best guess opinion, I do feel its quite aggressively optimistic to suggest that 35 of the 44 starters will go on to be relevant NFL players. As you stated, you are suggesting that 35 of the 44 players will be relevant draft picks who play relevant snaps in the NFL, not 7th rounder or UDFAs who end up on PS.. Not even so much on the number that make it, but that you think 35 of the 44 players will be relevant in the NFL is astonishing considering the bust rate of the first round alone of the best players in football is greater than 50%. To suggest that 35 out of 44 players from 2 schools would be relevant contributors seems like a stretch to say the least. And this is the crux of what we were disagreeing about two months ago and still disagree on. Much more than spreads or anything else. The 50% doesn't apply to these two teams. They are not normal college teams. The whole of the last two Bama defenses are going to be proper NFL players bar possibly the one linebacker who is already in and is a special teamer only so far. The bust rate on these guys is nowhere near 50/50. I am happy to come back to the starters in that game last night and track them. My estimation is that 35 of the 44 will play meaningful snaps in the NFL and a majority of those will be starters. College football has changed. 10 years ago the talent was more evenly spread. It isn't anymore. Recruiting has changed. Kirby talks about in much more detail than me but the powerhouses are recruiting nationwide on a much greater scale than before. You think it is incredible to believe that these two teams have such a wealth of the talent between them. I don't. I think they are demonstrating almost unprecedented dominance. I am not a CFB history buff and I know the playoff has changed the dynamic a little but have two schools ever played 3 National Title games in 4 years between them before? Edited January 8, 2019 by GunnerBill
mannc Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: I bolded the part above for one reason...that this isnt about how Lawrence will EVENTUALLY fare in the NFL. This is about Lawrenece right now at this exact moment. If he was in the draft this year, I agree, he would likely be a first round pick and this kid certainly seems promising. But if he stepped onto a a field today at this exact moment against an NFL defense he would get eaten alive. You have zero evidence for this statement. DeShaun Watson, who similarly excelled vs. Alabama in the national championship game, did exactly the same thing in the NFL 8 months later. There really isn't much doubt that Lawrence would be the first player picked this year if he was draft-eligible. It's not arguable that every player from Alabama's 2016 defense (and, soon, its 2017 defense) is in the NFL. Both Alabama and Clemson have far more future number 1 picks in their lineups than any NFL team--probably as many as 10 each. Each NFL team only gets one number one pick per year. There is practically no limit to the number of such players Sweeney and Saban can sign. Last night proved two things: (1) Right now, Clemson is at least as loaded with talent as Alabama is and (2) Clemson has a much better QB.
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, mannc said: You have zero evidence for this statement. DeShaun Watson, who similarly excelled vs. Alabama in the national championship game, did exactly the same thing in the NFL 8 months later. There really isn't much doubt that Lawrence would be the first player picked this year if he was draft-eligible. It's not arguable that every player from Alabama's 2016 defense (and, soon, its 2017 defense) is in the NFL. Both Alabama and Clemson have far more future number 1 picks in their lineups than any NFL team--probably as many as 10 each. Each NFL team only gets one number one pick per year. There is practically no limit to the number of such players Sweeney and Saban can sign. Last night proved two things: (1) Right now, Clemson is at least as loaded with talent as Alabama is and (2) Clemson has a much better QB. Except what you just said is wrong and you are also completely wrong in how you are thinking about this. You are taking what Watson eventually became and using that. But these kids would be playing them now, never spending a single second in the NFL, so you dont get to use your predicted arc of what they will develop into maybe one day, its who they are right now before ever entering the NFL. Case in point: Watson in his first start threw for 125 yards, 0 TDs and 0 INTs. You are incorrectly using what he EVENTUALY did after getting some NFL experience a few games later. These kids get ONE game, not a season to round into form. In addition, Watson had 2 more season of College football experience, an entire NFL offseason of OTA's and Camp, Preseason, and a little time in the regular season BEFORE he had to start his FIRST game in the NFL. So sorry, what you just said is just incorrect analogy. So not one thing you just said about Watson is applicable to this situation. Watson did NOT do the same thing in the NFL 8 months later, he didn't even win the starting job. Unless you think passing for 125 yards is somehow repeating his National Championship game performance. Remember this is ONE game being played TODAY. Not where they guys will EVENTUALLY develop into. And Lawrence is an exciting prospect, but he is not today at the same level of development he will be after 3 full season of College Football and an entire NFL offseason, camp, preseason. But this wasnt even about Lawerence, kid looks great...it was about Bama defense...a defense so legendary they just got lit up and blown out by a 19 year old freshman QB...yet I am supposed to believe that Bama was going to slow down an NFL offense when they cant slow down a kid????? Come on, thats absurd. And again, making the NFL means nothing...Bama will be facing 11 STARTING NFL players or better on each side of the ball. Not one kid on the Bama team has played an NFL snap. Not all of them are even ready for the NFL even if they will eventually get there. Not all of them are going to be starters. And in a football game, your BENCH matters too and again, NFL team is made up 100% of NFL professionals while a college program as good as Alabama still has guys who will never play a down of pro football. Cant believe people still defending this after Clemson just annihilated the very team every said would beat an NFL team. I mean that seals this convo on its own, and Clemson, as good as they are, is not better than an NFL team. Edited January 8, 2019 by Alphadawg7
mannc Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 18 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Case in point: Watson in his first start threw for 125 yards, 0 TDs and 0 INTs. Oh, you mean the game where he beat the Bengals on the road?? Or do you want to talk about his second NFL start, when he put up 33 points and over 300 yards against Belichick at Foxborough? 21 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: I mean that seals this convo on its own, and Clemson, as good as they are, is not better than an NFL team. Again, this is not something you can prove simply by stating it over and over. Clemson, like Alabama, is packed with future NFL players, including probably 10-12 future first round draft picks, more than any NFL team has on its roster. There is every reason to believe they could compete against a team like Oakland or the Cardinals on a neutral field.
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 1 hour ago, GunnerBill said: And this is the crux of what we were disagreeing about two months ago and still disagree on. Much more than spreads or anything else. The 50% doesn't apply to these two teams. They are not normal college teams. The whole of the last two Bama defenses are going to be proper NFL players bar possibly the one linebacker who is already in and is a special teamer only so far. The bust rate on these guys is nowhere near 50/50. I am happy to come back to the starters in that game last night and track them. My estimation is that 35 of the 44 will play meaningful snaps in the NFL and a majority of those will be starters. College football has changed. 10 years ago the talent was more evenly spread. It isn't anymore. Recruiting has changed. Kirby talks about in much more detail than me but the powerhouses are recruiting nationwide on a much greater scale than before. You think it is incredible to believe that these two teams have such a wealth of the talent between them. I don't. I think they are demonstrating almost unprecedented dominance. I am not a CFB history buff and I know the playoff has changed the dynamic a little but have two schools ever played 3 National Title games in 4 years between them before? Your argument about Bama vs another school would hold water, but the first round is made up of the cream of the crop of over 100 other schools. To suggest Bama has 11 guys on their defense right now that have a higher probability of NFL success than the best players across the entire college football landscape taken in the first round is quite a stretch. They dont even have 11 players that will all be first round draft picks, so unless all 11 guys get drafted in the first round this point is already refuted. And again, we are talking about these 11 players today. Not after another year or two of college football, not after OTA's and NFL training camp, not after an NFL preseason, not after eventually getting some game experience in the NFL. Bama today, right now at this moment. And their bench is not made up of NFL players, and more than 11 guys play during a game on each side of the ball. I mean why are we even talking about Bama, they aren't even the best team in college football after getting waxed last night (again). So I get your love for Bama and Clemson, they are truly great College Football Teams. You are absolutely right that they have an edge over all other schools in recruiting right now too and are different. Nothing wrong with any of your points on that. But thats not what is being discussed, what was being discussed is can this team today go out and beat an NFL team or even cover the spread. And given how badly Bama got beat by a college team, I think the answer is pretty indisputable at this point. There is no chance they could beat an NFL team nor would they cover the 28 point spread previously suggested when this conversation first started in the media.
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 (edited) 23 minutes ago, mannc said: Oh, you mean the game where he beat the Bengals on the road?? Or do you want to talk about his second NFL start, when he put up 33 points and over 300 yards against Belichick at Foxborough? Again, this is not something you can prove simply by stating it over and over. Clemson, like Alabama, is packed with future NFL players, including probably 10-12 future first round draft picks, more than any NFL team has on its roster. There is every reason to believe they could compete against a team like Oakland or the Cardinals on a neutral field. Guess what Lawerence doesn't get: A 2nd NFL start. Its one game bud, one game. Like I said, the ONLY game that matters is Watsons first game just like it will be Lawerences FIRST game. You dont get to go down the list and pick one that first your narrative lmao Guess what else he doesn't have that Watson had...2 more years of development in college, an entire NFL off season learning the NFL GAME, training camp, preseason games, practice snaps, and NFL game experience. To even suggest Lawrence would step onto an NFL field with his Clemson teammates tomorrow, some of which are also freshman, and have a good game against an NFL defense is so comical that I cant even believe we are discussing it. Doesn't mean Lawerence won't be a good NFL QB when he gets to the NFL, but we are not talking about that Lawerence, we are talking about the kid today at this second. LMAO at "packed" with NFL players...who cares. Guess what an NFL team has? 100% NFL Players, even pro bowlers and further HOF players. Guess what Clemson and Alabama have? Some guys who will never play a competitive down in college football, let alone NFL football. Guess what else they have? Future NFL players who are NOT ready to play TODAY in the NFL. Many of their best players on offense are FRESHMAN. Guess what else they both have? Guys who will make the NFL and not last long or never be consistent starters. And you saying they are "packed" with NFL players is false and misleading. They are packed with college kids who have a shot of making the NFL, many of which will not go on to be GREAT players or even starters. Meanwhile they will be facing off against an NFL team entirely made up 100% of seasoned NFL professionals. This thread has been a lot more entertaining and interesting than I anticipated. Edited January 8, 2019 by Alphadawg7
mannc Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 8 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Guess what Lawerence doesn't get: A 2nd NFL start. Its one game bud, one game. Like I said, the ONLY game that matters is Watsons first game just like it will be Lawerences FIRST game. You dont get to go down the list and pick one that first your narrative lmao Guess what else he doesn't have that Watson had...2 more years of development in college, an entire NFL off season learning the NFL GAME, training camp, preseason games, practice snaps, and NFL game experience. To even suggest Lawrence would step onto an NFL field with his Clemson teammates tomorrow, some of which are also freshman, and have a good game against an NFL defense is so comical that I cant even believe we are discussing it. Doesn't mean Lawerence won't be a good NFL QB when he gets to the NFL, but we are not talking about that Lawerence, we are talking about the kid today at this second. LMAO at "packed" with NFL players...who cares. Guess what an NFL team has? 100% NFL Players, even pro bowlers and further HOF players. Guess what Clemson and Alabama have? Some guys who will never play a competitive down in college football, let alone NFL football. Guess what else they have? Future NFL players who are NOT ready to play TODAY in the NFL. Many of their best players on offense are FRESHMAN. Guess what else they both have? Guys who will make the NFL and not last long or never be consistent starters. And you saying they are "packed" with NFL players is false and misleading. They are packed with college kids who have a shot of making the NFL, many of which will not go on to be GREAT players or even starters. Meanwhile they will be facing off against an NFL team entirely made up 100% of seasoned NFL professionals. This thread has been a lot more entertaining and interesting than I anticipated. You mean seasoned NFL professionals like Robert Foster, the Bills’ WR1, who was a backup for Alabama last year?
GunnerBill Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 16 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Your argument about Bama vs another school would hold water, but the first round is made up of the cream of the crop of over 100 other schools. To suggest Bama has 11 guys on their defense right now that have a higher probability of NFL success than the best players across the entire college football landscape taken in the first round is quite a stretch. They dont even have 11 players that will all be first round draft picks, so unless all 11 guys get drafted in the first round this point is already refuted. And again, we are talking about these 11 players today. Not after another year or two of college football, not after OTA's and NFL training camp, not after an NFL preseason, not after eventually getting some game experience in the NFL. Bama today, right now at this moment. And their bench is not made up of NFL players, and more than 11 guys play during a game on each side of the ball. I mean why are we even talking about Bama, they aren't even the best team in college football after getting waxed last night (again). So I get your love for Bama and Clemson, they are truly great College Football Teams. You are absolutely right that they have an edge over all other schools in recruiting right now too and are different. Nothing wrong with any of your points on that. But thats not what is being discussed, what was being discussed is can this team today go out and beat an NFL team or even cover the spread. And given how badly Bama got beat by a college team, I think the answer is pretty indisputable at this point. There is no chance they could beat an NFL team nor would they cover the 28 point spread previously suggested when this conversation first started in the media. But that wasn't the point you and I disagreed on. I only got engaged in that conversation on the specific point about the talent on the Alabama team and the same is true of the Clemson team. And my argument is not and never has been that all the best players play for Alabama or indeed Clemson. But the talent is concentrated at those schools in a much higher percentage than anywhere else and that is why I objected then and still do to one of the reasons put forward for why a college team would always lose to an NFL team being "college teams have players who will never play in the pros". Because when you talk about 'Bama (and Clemson actually) that is the exception not the rule. And I don't love either of them. I actively dislike Alabama and am ambivalent to Clemson. That is just what an analytical look at where those two programmes are at tells us - they produce bona fide NFL players by the bucket load. They don't produce grocery baggers.
Alphadawg7 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, mannc said: You mean seasoned NFL professionals like Robert Foster, the Bills’ WR1, who was a backup for Alabama last year? yeah, the same Robert Foster who got CUT in season and had zero catches before getting enough development to compete on the NFL field. Thanks for once again continuing to make my point over and over again. 6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: But that wasn't the point you and I disagreed on. I only got engaged in that conversation on the specific point about the talent on the Alabama team and the same is true of the Clemson team. And my argument is not and never has been that all the best players play for Alabama or indeed Clemson. But the talent is concentrated at those schools in a much higher percentage than anywhere else and that is why I objected then and still do to one of the reasons put forward for why a college team would always lose to an NFL team being "college teams have players who will never play in the pros". Because when you talk about 'Bama (and Clemson actually) that is the exception not the rule. And I don't love either of them. I actively dislike Alabama and am ambivalent to Clemson. That is just what an analytical look at where those two programmes are at tells us - they produce bona fide NFL players by the bucket load. They don't produce grocery baggers. I dont disagree with your stance on those schools. But again, rosters are made up more than 22 players. My argument has always been 100% about how they cant beat an NFL team today nor will they cover the spread. I haven't then, nor am I now, disagreeing that they clearly are the cream of the crop of schools right now in terms of recruiting. Edited January 9, 2019 by Alphadawg7
GunnerBill Posted January 9, 2019 Posted January 9, 2019 19 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: And you saying they are "packed" with NFL players is false and misleading. I don't think it is. I think certainly with Bama that is what an assessment of the last couple of years tells you. I don't think Clemson have quite been there yet... that ability to roll classes right off one after the other... but I think they are close now. Their last Natty came with a lot of seniors or declaring juniors in key positions. This team will need reinforcements up front on the DLine but other than that is a young group that goes into 2019 as the favourite.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 9, 2019 Posted January 9, 2019 Topic titles must reflect the content of the topic (and it must contain more than just a name). This helps to reduce the number of duplicate topics and makes the community much more user friendly. Please edit the title so that it properly reflects the discussion that you started. Thank you.
dave mcbride Posted January 9, 2019 Posted January 9, 2019 19 hours ago, mannc said: Why is it that a lot of Alabama guys in the NFL swear the Tide could beat an NFL team? Don’t you think they are better qualified than anyone to make that judgment? Obviously a poor showing for Alabama, but I think what we really saw is Tua getting exposed. He played poorly vs Georgia, too, and it appears he just might not be very good. Biggest difference in the game last night was the two QBs. Tua is really, really good. He just had a few bad moments and made a few bad decisions. He's very young. It happens. The talent is obvious, however.
Recommended Posts