Does CFB Championship game end the “they can beat a pro team” stuff finally?

[dave mcbride]

1 hour ago, mannc said:

And he beat the Bengals on the road in that game.

 

#Owned

He didn't beat them; the defense did. Watson was actually terrible in that game. I watched it.

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Foster was the backup. I have a good friend that played for Saban in college and Belichick in the NFL. There is virtually no difference between the 2 according to him (except Saban is much more vulgar). 

Well, his NFL.com draft profile says he was the starter, and he played all the time. Christ, he led the team in pass breakups.  https://www.nfl.com/prospects/levi-wallace?id=32462018-0002-5599-37dc-f8dc32c7ecf3

[Alphadawg7]

55 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, I’m not talking about “insert coach here.” We are talking about Alabama and in turn Saban. They are at a different level. We aren’t talking Miami and Mark Richt (or formerly Mark Richt). The move from Saban to the NFL is minimal (which is why his guys flourish so early). 

 

Its not though.  I understand where you’re coming from, but it’s just not fully accurate as a whole part of the picture.  That’s one small aspect of the transition.  The speed, the violence, the language, the schemes, the complexity of reading defenses in game and identifying offensive plays is far and beyond anything they have done.

 

There is no denying that playing in college for a guy like Saban has its advantages for players transitioning to the NFL, so you are absolutely right about that.  However, it’s not a magic pill that suddenly makes a college kid a seasoned NFL vet. And this is easily proven because you can go and look at week 1 of the rookie year of every Alabama player under Saban and see how they did.  Many didn’t even play, let alone start.  And the ones who did see the field week 1 of their rookie year, most didn’t have a big game.

 

If what you are saying is true, most Alabama rookies would start week 1 and have significant amount of success in that first start.  And that’s just not true for rookies, even rookies from Alabama.  Doesn’t mean none have some success week 1, but we are talking 22 college starters here, very few will both start and have a big game week 1 of their NFL rookie year.  And again, not all 22 staring Alabam players are even going to make the NFL, let alone be starters.

 

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, mannc said:

Stop with your “it’s not debatable” nonsense.  You haven’t refuted a single statement that Kirby made, so stop pretending you have.

 

No one is saying Lawrence or Tua would light up the NFL right now (although Desaun Watson did as a rookie), but it’s ridiculous to argue that they aren’t better right now than some of the stiffs who won games in the NFL this year, like CJ Betheard and the immortal Brock Osweiler.

 

 

Trevor Lawrence now would be the #1 pick in this draft if he was eligible despite being a true freshman. And he would start, week 1. Might the experience gap limit his performance - yes, it definitely might, but as you rightly say Blaine Gabbert and Brock Osweiler won NFL games this year. Lawrence is better than both of them today. Not in 3 years not in 5 years. Now. 

[Bing Bong]

4 hours ago, mannc said:

Stop with your “it’s not debatable” nonsense.  You haven’t refuted a single statement that Kirby made, so stop pretending you have.

 

No one is saying Lawrence or Tua would light up the NFL right now (although Desaun Watson did as a rookie), but it’s ridiculous to argue that they aren’t better right now than some of the stiffs who won games in the NFL this year, like CJ Betheard and the immortal Brock Osweiler.

 

I actually agree with Alpha here. But anybody writing an essay ending every point with condescension like "So you are 1 million percent categorically wrong in this statement, its not even defensible." Makes me want to disagree with him, let alone punch him in the face  

 

Give em your opinion Alpha (they might disagree and have differing opinions!)

 

Facts don't hold much water in a friggin intrasport betting line.

Edited January 17, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[mannc]

3 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this story being accurate as no reason to doubt your authenticity.  

 

However, if you polled 100 players I would bet your friend is the only one who would say that.  I have several friends who played in both college and NFL and none of them would share that opinion.  They talk about how big of a transition it is for rookies and what a shock it is all the time when curbing people’s expectations of rookies first entering the NFL.  Even the pain the 2nd day after a game is a lot worse from the physicality of the NFL game.  The language, playbooks, schemes are all way more immense and complicated.  The biggest thing they always say is how much faster the game is. 

 

And its not even about them, this is a well known part of the game and transition for rookies and why most don’t come flying out of the gate in their first NFL game.

Did your friend play in the SEC recently?  Because that’s what we’re talking about, not UB or Pitt or even Penn State.

[Kirby Jackson]

3 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

He didn't beat them; the defense did. Watson was actually terrible in that game. I watched it.

Well, his NFL.com draft profile says he was the starter, and he played all the time. Christ, he led the team in pass breakups.  https://www.nfl.com/prospects/levi-wallace?id=32462018-0002-5599-37dc-f8dc32c7ecf3

Foster, not Wallace

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Its not though.  I understand where you’re coming from, but it’s just not fully accurate as a whole part of the picture.  That’s one small aspect of the transition.  The speed, the violence, the language, the schemes, the complexity of reading defenses in game and identifying offensive plays is far and beyond anything they have done.

 

There is no denying that playing in college for a guy like Saban has its advantages for players transitioning to the NFL, so you are absolutely right about that.  However, it’s not a magic pill that suddenly makes a college kid a seasoned NFL vet. And this is easily proven because you can go and look at week 1 of the rookie year of every Alabama player under Saban and see how they did.  Many didn’t even play, let alone start.  And the ones who did see the field week 1 of their rookie year, most didn’t have a big game.

 

If what you are saying is true, most Alabama rookies would start week 1 and have significant amount of success in that first start.  And that’s just not true for rookies, even rookies from Alabama.  Doesn’t mean none have some success week 1, but we are talking 22 college starters here, very few will both start and have a big game week 1 of their NFL rookie year.  And again, not all 22 staring Alabam players are even going to make the NFL, let alone be starters.

 

That speaks to my earlier point that the biggest gap is a mental gap not a physical one. The physical gap is minimal. The gap is a mental one (even from a Saban coaches team). The gap is smaller than coming from Richt (for example) but it exists. They just don’t do the same amount of studying. 

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

I actually agree with Alpha here. But anybody writing an essay ending every point with condescension like "So you are 1 million percent categorically wrong in this statement, its not even defensible." Makes me want to disagree with him, let alone punch him in the face  

 

Give em your opinion Alpha (they might disagree and have differing opinions!)

 

Facts don't hold much water in a friggin intrasport betting line.

 

Fair enough, but those points were valid in the way I stated them, and my response was prompted by being dragged back into points I have already made numerous times in this thread before.  

 

I get tired of people calling college Kids NFL players when they are not in the NFL yet.  There is 6 months of intense coaching, practice and training that goes into an NFL rookie before they step on a field.  And its not like rookies step into the NFL week 1 in their very first game and dominate the league.  So I also get tired of people time traveling and calling freshman and sophomores “NFL players” who are a min of 1 to 2 years away from the Pros still.  People act like these kids aren’t learning and improving over those years before they enter the NFL.  

 

A game being played today does not have the benefit of what the kids will at some point in the future become.  

 

So this is why I used such strong words to beat down false claims that are repeatedly being tossed into this argument.  It’s just not true.  

Edited January 18, 2019 by Alphadawg7

[dave mcbride]

37 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Foster, not Wallace

That speaks to my earlier point that the biggest gap is a mental gap not a physical one. The physical gap is minimal. The gap is a mental one (even from a Saban coaches team). The gap is smaller than coming from Richt (for example) but it exists. They just don’t do the same amount of studying. 

Kirby: you said alabama players (plural) were rookie starters for the Bills who were backups at alabama. That’s what I was responding to.

Edited January 18, 2019 by dave mcbride

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Kirby: you said alabama players (plural) were rookie starters for the Bills who were backups at alabama. That’s what I was responding to.

Sorry for the confusion. Foster was a back up. Wallace was a walk-on that really came on as his career went along. I didn’t mean players plural. I meant that the rookies that we had were “worker bees” at Alabama not stars. The talent level is just insane at Alabama, Clemson, UGA, OSU and to a lesser extent Oklahoma.

[SinceThe70s]

Has anyone mentioned that Nathan Peterman beat eventual national champion Clemson when he was at Pitt?

 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

11 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

Has anyone mentioned that Nathan Peterman beat eventual national champion Clemson when he was at Pitt?

 

 

He also beat a bad NFL team. 

[Bing Bong]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Fair enough, but those points were valid in the way I stated them, and my response was prompted by being dragged back into points I have already made numerous times in this thread before.  

 

I get tired of people calling college Kids NFL players when they are not in the NFL yet.  There is 6 months of intense coaching, practice and training that goes into an NFL rookie before they step on a field.  And its not like rookies step into the NFL week 1 in their very first game and dominate the league.  So I also get tired of people time traveling and calling freshman and sophomores “NFL players” who are a min of 1 to 2 years away from the Pros still.  People act like these kids aren’t learning and improving over those years before they enter the NFL.  

 

A game being played today does not have the benefit of what the kids will at some point in the future become.  

 

So this is why I used such strong words to beat down false claims that are repeatedly being tossed into this argument.  It’s just not true.  

Yeah no college team gets close to a 30 point spread against a pro team. First it was Alabama is the all-star team of college talent going to pros. Now Clemson and Alabama are the NFL HOF factories together.. sigh. I guess they're the only 2 (I was told it was just Bama!)

 

I wonder how many other college teams have just as good if not better NFL talent at any given position. Oklahoma, Ohio State.. lol. Bet these guys eventually become All-Pros 4 years later (they won't all be great rookies day 1) as they've grown and been weeded out too! Let me know when every All-Pro in a few years is entirely Clemson and Bama alumns.

Edited January 18, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

Yeah no college team gets close to a 30 point spread against a pro team. First it was Alabama is the all-star team of college talent going to pros. Now Clemson and Alabama are the NFL HOF factories together.. sigh. I guess they're the only 2 (I was told it was just Bama!)

 

I wonder how many other college teams have just as good if not better NFL talent at any given position. Oklahoma, Ohio State.. lol

Again, we started a backup and a walk-on (both undrafted) from Alabama. I don’t know how some can be so blind to the “talent gap” when we are starting their “guys.” We aren’t talking about stars, we are talking about “guys.” We plugged them in as rookies and the team improved drastically. These guys aren’t different players than 6 months earlier. They just wore a different jersey. 

[NoSaint]

7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He also beat a bad NFL team. 

 

That’s kinda the thing, right?

 

even this years bills could knock off a super bowl contender given enough shots. Bama in theory should be able to hang with a bad nfl team occasionally 

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, mannc said:

Did your friend play in the SEC recently?  Because that’s what we’re talking about, not UB or Pitt or even Penn State.

Ok, since you want to continue to over exaggerate the SEC and Alabama as if they magically are fielding 22 starters that will magically all be impact players in their first NFL start...I will indulge you:

1. In 2018, Alabama had 12 players drafted, 4 in the first round.  Not exactly 22 players who were all NFL ready.  
2. 7 of them were round 4 or lower.  
3. Almost NONE of them made a week 1 impact, and only a couple even saw the field.  
   1. Payne 1st round pick.  3 tackles.
   2. Fitzpatrick 1st round pick.  Biggest impact, 6 tackles.
   3. Ridley 1st round pick.  O receptions.
   4. Evans 1st round pick.  1 tackle.
   5. NONE of the 4 first round picks registered a single other stat than is listed here.

Where is the NFL production?  These are 4 Alabama first rounders who went through OTA's, off season practices, training camp, preseason, and had more college experience than a lot of the guys on the current Alabama teams.  Yet in their first game against NFL competition they were all mostly irrelevant with only Minkah even making a noticeable appearance.  

 

Most of the remaining drafted Alabama players had very irrelevant first seasons, some not even registering any real stats and some even being cut.  How is this possible you might ask, I mean "NICK SABAN"..."ALABAMA"..."SEC"...what about all this jazz?  One of the better NFL players this season out of Alabama was our own Foster who didn't register a catch for several games before being cut.  It wasnt until he worked his way back did he make an impact.

 

We are talking about ONE GAME that is WITHOUT any development time in the NFL with these kids as exactly as they sit right now.  And here we are, all this hoopla about how great Alabama rookies are, yet they are NOT producing in their FIRST appearance on an NFL field.  And thats with other NFL talent around them, not other young college kids man of which will either not make the NFL or not last long in the NFL.  

 

How many ways do I need to close this case?  Some of these kids drafted will go on to be great players in the NFL, some had great moments as rookies.  But this hypothetical scenario is about these kids IN COLLEGE right now before any of that future NFL development playing one game.  And this Alabama roster does not currently have 22 starters on it who will all make the NFL.  And many of the guys who will, are going to be 4th round picks or lower and go on to have forgettable careers.  And yet this team is facing a roster of 52 NFL professional football players.  

 

And as if we needed more evidence...this Alabama team got blown out by MORE than 28.5 points by their peers in COLLEGE.  

 

I honestly cant fathom how this is still an ongoing discussion.  Its all good, no ill will to anyone, I have enjoyed the convo even in disagreement.  Apologies if any phrasing I used felt rude, wasnt the intention.  But I honestly dont know what else is left to discuss on the matter.

So agree to disagree is a totally fine outcome and everyone is entitled to differing opinions. GO BILLS!

Edited January 18, 2019 by Alphadawg7

[Kirby Jackson]

5 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

That’s kinda the thing, right?

 

even this years bills could knock off a super bowl contender given enough shots. Bama in theory should be able to hang with a bad nfl team occasionally 

It’s not even “hang” as stay within 4 TDs. People are acting like it’s asinine to think that’s possible. If you look at the personnel though it isn’t that crazy at all.

 

The same goes for Clemson. Some people say, “we’d run all over them.” I look at it and think that they have 2 DTs, and a DE that will be off the board by 20. Am I supposed to believe that Bodine, Miller, Teller, Mills and Dawkins will physically dominate those guys? I certainly don’t believe that. Lawrence, Wilkins and Ferrell are better football players TODAY than any guy on our OL.

Edited January 18, 2019 by Kirby Jackson

[Alphadawg7]

10 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, we started a backup and a walk-on (both undrafted) from Alabama. I don’t know how some can be so blind to the “talent gap” when we are starting their “guys.” We aren’t talking about stars, we are talking about “guys.” We plugged them in as rookies and the team improved drastically. These guys aren’t different players than 6 months earlier. They just wore a different jersey. 

 

Foster registered no catches and got cut BEFORE he became a starter.  You are arguing players after they develop...this is ONE game before ever getting one second of NFL coaching or experience.  So the Foster that would have showed up for this make believe game had it occurred last year is the same Foster who couldn't catch a cold in preseason and got cut after going catchless for several games.

 

You keep using a time machine in all your responses that doesn't exist. Thats the issue.  No one is arguing that Alabama and Clemson have better recruiting and send more players to the draft.  You are just cherry picking players at their future peaks, not their current readiness to face the challenge of the NFL while still attending their college programs.

[SinceThe70s]

28 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He also beat a bad NFL team. 

 

You lost me.

 

Did beating a bad NFL team somehow diminish his win over Clemson with an inferior Pitt team? Are you suggesting that Pitt team was on a par with a bad NFL team? 

 

 

[NoSaint]

37 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Foster registered no catches and got cut BEFORE he became a starter.  You are arguing players after they develop...this is ONE game before ever getting one second of NFL coaching or experience.  So the Foster that would have showed up for this make believe game had it occurred last year is the same Foster who couldn't catch a cold in preseason and got cut after going catchless for several games.

 

You keep using a time machine in all your responses that doesn't exist. Thats the issue.  No one is arguing that Alabama and Clemson have better recruiting and send more players to the draft.  You are just cherry picking players at their future peaks, not their current readiness to face the challenge of the NFL while still attending their college programs.

 

When many examples are 9 months after their last college game is it that crazy?

 

how much better is an nfl rookie team an elite cfb player in the national championship before entering the draft? What’s the differential in ability in that guy?

[ButchCT]

That Clemson QB and o-line might be able to beat the Cardinals.  Only because the QB is that good, IMO.  Let the Trevor Lawrence sweepstakes commence.