Scouts Inc. Fantasy O-Line rankings

[Bill from NYC]

LOL

 

Funny hearing you guys talk about credibility.

 

We had a line that could at least block much of the time back then. Who do you think were the starting linemen besides Brown who were responsible for that, Nails, Spriggs, Zeigler, Hicks, and Fina! LMFAO

 

Can't wait to hear your credibility laden answers on that.

 

Then again, it could have been the awesome RBs of Antowain Smith, Jonathon Linton, Shawn Bryson, and Sammy Morris that really made the line shine back then.

 

You guys are neverending self-imposed humor.

 

But hey, on Fowler's team we've ranked 30th each year in yards but 9th and 11th with Ostroski at C. I guess that sure settles it. I have no credibility, you have tons. LOL

 

OK, perhaps I was too rough on you. Sorry about that. Actually, your post make me laugh.......not at you, but at myself.

You see for years, I have been here crying about the OL like perhaps no other. I still do it. Not because of the talent level of the starting 5 mind you, but because like before (perhaps even more), this team wastes it's best resources on defensive backs. This is THE primary reason that the team loses football games.

 

These "Ostroski" teams about which you speak.....did they have players on defense who could take the ball away from, and stop opponents? Guys like Bryce Paup and Big Ted Washington, remember? How about Phil Hansen? Oh.....I forgot Buce Smith!

These teams were able to stop opponents, and even they tended to wilt in the 4th quarter. You know why? THERE WAS NO BLOCKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The offense couldn't keep the football.

 

Now, let me go straight to Ostroski. He was able to line up at RT, RG, and OC. At RT, players would run by him at will. RG was his best position, although he was plodding and ineffective. He was very strong, but he was slow with poor balance. At OC, he was a freaking mess. QBs were getting smashed before he got out of his stance. On his very first snap at OC (opener against the Titans), he was pushed back into the qb for a 9 yard loss as I recall. It never got better. Pros capitalize on weaknesses, and he just couldn't move. Btw, Ostroski signed a 5 year contract for 15 mil. This, because of the times, dwarfed what Langston Williams signed for, and he, on the worst day of his life, is better than Jerry O.

To prove that I am being objective, Ostroski had 1 good game that I recall. He did well vs. the dolphins once in the game where they all but quit.

 

In summary, I think that you rely soley on stats. This has to be, because I don't know any credible fan who thinks that Ostroski was "far better than average." In general, I am fond of your posts. I don't think that we should be required to cheer for moves that we disapprove of, and we are not. I disagree with you wrt Trent. I think he will play well, but whatever.

That said, wrt Ostroski, you are off the charts wrong. Signings like Ostroski, making a stiff like Fina the "Franchise Player," and concentrating on defensive backs over all else is what brought this team to the basement. You really need to revisit this history imo.

[Sisyphean Bills]

OK, perhaps I was too rough on you. Sorry about that. Actually, your post make me laugh.......not at you, but at myself. snip

Ostroski's promotion from rotational depth to the starting lineup at RT was the harbinger of the Fall of the Golden Age for the Buffalo Bills. I think he was an average player. While he had limited athleticism, he worked hard and usually played smart. It's hard to say he wasn't willing to go the extra mile for the team; putting him out at RT and then at C where some god awful coaching decisions and bouncing around the line didn't allow him to focus on and improve at a single position. To be fair, the Bills just didn't help themselves out any. Butler claimed that a good OL was "easy to put together; just get a bunch of fat guys." Marv Levy claimed that OL play was going to become a commodity position, where teams had 7 or 8 fat guys and just cycled them in and out at various positions to keep everyone fresh. Tom Bresnahan fell in love with the idea of drafting OL for size on the goofy premise, "it takes longer to run around a bigger guy." The Bills went away from what got them into the Golden Age -- exceptional athletes at the OL that could literally sprint up and down the field in the hurry-up offense and kick the defender's asses play after play. They started going for fat guys like Marcus "Jabba" Spriggs, Jamie "I got winded getting out of bed" Nails, Robert "Huge" Hicks, Victor "He can't play but he's big" Allotey, ...

[VOR]

In summary, I think that you rely soley on stats. This has to be, because I don't know any credible fan who thinks that Ostroski was "far better than average."

It can't be stats. Otherwise he wouldn't be talking about how Hardy couldn't beat the jam or separate in college, when he had 191 catches in 33 games. Or how Marcus Stroud, Kawika Mitchell, and Spencer Johnson weren't even as good additions as Jake Long, Randy Starks, and Reggie Torbor were for the Fins. I think he seizes on the most negative thing about a player and uses a "he can't do this" argument as a reason why he'll fail. Then again, I'm sure it's much more complex than that.

 

Or he "misremembers" or looks at the wrong stats. Perhaps he's thinking of Dusty Ziegler?

[obie_wan]

It can't be stats. Otherwise he wouldn't be talking about how Hardy couldn't beat the jam or separate in college, when he had 191 catches in 33 games. Or how Marcus Stroud, Kawika Mitchell, and Spencer Johnson weren't even as good additions as Jake Long, Randy Starks, and Reggie Torbor were for the Fins. I think he seizes on the most negative thing about a player and uses a "he can't do this" argument as a reason why he'll fail. Then again, I'm sure it's much more complex than that.

 

Or he "misremembers" or looks at the wrong stats. Perhaps he's thinking of Dusty Ziegler?

 

 

Hardy can't beat the jam of a top flight CB.

 

Fortuantely, Indiana only faced NFL caliber CBs against Ohio State.

 

He won't have that luxury in the NFL, especially light of the quick release, timing patterns Turk wants to run this year.

[VOR]

Hardy can't beat the jam of a top flight CB.

Name them. You've obviously seen game film from his college games. Let me know which CB's prevented him from getting off the LOS.

 

Fortuantely, Indiana only faced NFL caliber CBs against Ohio State.

 

He won't have that luxury in the NFL, especially light of the quick release, timing patterns Turk wants to run this year.

Wow, that's pretty amazing that he faced just 1 team his whole college career that had NFL caliber CB's. And NFL teams are so deep with them (just like starting-quality backup LT's).

[BillsVet]

Name them. You've obviously seen game film from his college games. Let me know which CB's prevented him from getting off the LOS.

 

 

Wow, that's pretty amazing that he faced just 1 team his whole college career that had NFL caliber CB's. And NFL teams are so deep with them (just like starting-quality backup LT's).

 

Go check the game stats against Wisconsin and CB Jack Ikegwuonu who completely shut down Hardy.

[VOR]

Go check the game stats against Wisconsin and CB Jack Ikegwuonu who completely shut down Hardy.

And that had nothing to do with the poor play of his QB? And despite his play against Hardy and Manningham, he wasn't considered much better than a 3rd round pick.

 

But it's a good thing for Hardy that he suffered an injury that will probably derail his career before it ever gets started.

[BillsVet]

And that had nothing to do with the poor play of his QB? And despite his play against Hardy and Manningham, he wasn't considered much better than a 3rd round pick. While his injury probably derails his career before it ever gets started.

 

With facts like these, who needs opinions?

 

For the record, Ikegwuonu was a first round talent before his ACL tear, even with his background.

 

Your brilliance is noted.

[Bill from NYC]

Ostroski's promotion from rotational depth to the starting lineup at RT was the harbinger of the Fall of the Golden Age for the Buffalo Bills. I think he was an average player. While he had limited athleticism, he worked hard and usually played smart. It's hard to say he wasn't willing to go the extra mile for the team; putting him out at RT and then at C where some god awful coaching decisions and bouncing around the line didn't allow him to focus on and improve at a single position. To be fair, the Bills just didn't help themselves out any. Butler claimed that a good OL was "easy to put together; just get a bunch of fat guys." Marv Levy claimed that OL play was going to become a commodity position, where teams had 7 or 8 fat guys and just cycled them in and out at various positions to keep everyone fresh. Tom Bresnahan fell in love with the idea of drafting OL for size on the goofy premise, "it takes longer to run around a bigger guy." The Bills went away from what got them into the Golden Age -- exceptional athletes at the OL that could literally sprint up and down the field in the hurry-up offense and kick the defender's asses play after play. They started going for fat guys like Marcus "Jabba" Spriggs, Jamie "I got winded getting out of bed" Nails, Robert "Huge" Hicks, Victor "He can't play but he's big" Allotey, ...

 

I believe you, but I don't remember those quotes by Levy. That goes a long way to explain the fall of this team. It makes you wonder how Ralph could bring him back into the game, when of course nobody else would. Nice guy mind you, but that quote is scary. I'm glad he is gone, and await the day when Dick "Mini=Levy" Jauron is fired, and he is a defensive backs assistant on another team.

 

Btw, those names are enough to make one shudder. Remember Corey Loucheiy? When he would take the field, he looked like Bob Brown, a prototype RT. Because of this, it took me a while to realize that he couldn't block my grandmother. The guy was flat out awful.

As for Spriggs, I once saw RJ get a very late hit in front of him. He wouldn't even help RJ up, let alone retaliate. He stood there, disinterested, as RJ was laying there bleeding profusely. Of the stiffs, my favorite was Corey Hulsey. He was horrible at all phases of the game mind you, but he would go after guys when they would come in late.

[obie_wan]

Ostroski's promotion from rotational depth to the starting lineup at RT was the harbinger of the Fall of the Golden Age for the Buffalo Bills. I think he was an average player. While he had limited athleticism, he worked hard and usually played smart. It's hard to say he wasn't willing to go the extra mile for the team; putting him out at RT and then at C where some god awful coaching decisions and bouncing around the line didn't allow him to focus on and improve at a single position. To be fair, the Bills just didn't help themselves out any. Butler claimed that a good OL was "easy to put together; just get a bunch of fat guys." Marv Levy claimed that OL play was going to become a commodity position, where teams had 7 or 8 fat guys and just cycled them in and out at various positions to keep everyone fresh. Tom Bresnahan fell in love with the idea of drafting OL for size on the goofy premise, "it takes longer to run around a bigger guy." The Bills went away from what got them into the Golden Age -- exceptional athletes at the OL that could literally sprint up and down the field in the hurry-up offense and kick the defender's asses play after play. They started going for fat guys like Marcus "Jabba" Spriggs, Jamie "I got winded getting out of bed" Nails, Robert "Huge" Hicks, Victor "He can't play but he's big" Allotey, ...

 

Don't remember those specfic quotes, but since Polian left, the Bills have had no one in the organization who recognizes and understands what makes a good NFL offensive lineman. Maybe they got confused and took offensive literally because we have had a lot of those.

 

The overriding philosophy of the last 15 years has been a misguided belief that they can save cap dollars on the OL by finding cheap diamonds in the rough.

 

The irony is this policy has consistently backfired and forced them to consistently overspend on marginal players to just field a team.

 

It goes back to severely overspending for players like Fina, Brown on the downside of their careers and Ostrowski because they ignored drafting replacements and now the current $75 million collection of under-producing free agents. The latest abortion driven directly by the team's refusal to draft quality OL over the last 10 years ( 3 picks in top 4 rounds over last 10 years (44 picks) . and zero by the dynamic due of Jauron and Levy.

 

It is clear that the front office has a huge problem in evaluating OL talent - it seems unfortunate that the problem won't be fixed until Modrack Guy and the gang are replaced. Maybe if Modrack spent a few days in Buffalo at his employer he could get up to speed on this issue.

[krazykat]

The cap is entirely irrelevant to the point I made. Good Guards made 4 mil 2 years ago, now they make 7.....and so on.

LOL Yeah, if you use Dockery as the example. Otherwise "good" Gs make much less than that. And the entire known football loving world knows we overpaid for Dockery.

 

Otherwise very good and great Gs get $7M/season in contract, although lots of that never gets paid if you understand how contracts really work.

 

And Dockery is not very good to great.

[krazykat]

OK, perhaps I was too rough on you. Sorry about that. Actually, your post make me laugh.......not at you, but at myself.

You see for years, I have been here crying about the OL like perhaps no other. I still do it. Not because of the talent level of the starting 5 mind you, but because like before (perhaps even more), this team wastes it's best resources on defensive backs. This is THE primary reason that the team loses football games.

 

These "Ostroski" teams about which you speak.....did they have players on defense who could take the ball away from, and stop opponents? Guys like Bryce Paup and Big Ted Washington, remember? How about Phil Hansen? Oh.....I forgot Buce Smith!

These teams were able to stop opponents, and even they tended to wilt in the 4th quarter. You know why? THERE WAS NO BLOCKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The offense couldn't keep the football.

 

Now, let me go straight to Ostroski. He was able to line up at RT, RG, and OC. At RT, players would run by him at will. RG was his best position, although he was plodding and ineffective. He was very strong, but he was slow with poor balance. At OC, he was a freaking mess. QBs were getting smashed before he got out of his stance. On his very first snap at OC (opener against the Titans), he was pushed back into the qb for a 9 yard loss as I recall. It never got better. Pros capitalize on weaknesses, and he just couldn't move. Btw, Ostroski signed a 5 year contract for 15 mil. This, because of the times, dwarfed what Langston Williams signed for, and he, on the worst day of his life, is better than Jerry O.

To prove that I am being objective, Ostroski had 1 good game that I recall. He did well vs. the dolphins once in the game where they all but quit.

 

In summary, I think that you rely soley on stats. This has to be, because I don't know any credible fan who thinks that Ostroski was "far better than average." In general, I am fond of your posts. I don't think that we should be required to cheer for moves that we disapprove of, and we are not. I disagree with you wrt Trent. I think he will play well, but whatever.

That said, wrt Ostroski, you are off the charts wrong. Signings like Ostroski, making a stiff like Fina the "Franchise Player," and concentrating on defensive backs over all else is what brought this team to the basement. You really need to revisit this history imo.

See, the first and major problem with your post, and something that once again you ran from and ignored, was that offensive rankings have absolutely nothing to do with how the defnse plays. They are attained by yards gained on offense. Imagine that. Huh, SHA-zam, eh.

 

So those 9th and 11th rankings, well, let's just say that unless Bruce, Ted Washington, or Paup, or whomever actually lined up in a backfield, and took a snap as the O backfield was flooded with defenders, donned their Green Hornet costume, and in super hero fashion just took to the stripes an posted several long runs for TD skewing the stats, something that I quite honestly do not recall occurring back then while I was at most games, then the offense took it upon themselves to post those stats. Again, which were above average.

 

In '99 our offense ranked 19th passing and 6th rushing. In '00 it was just above average in both.

 

So I see your point, it was our line anchored by Hicks, Spriggs and Nails and their 0 Pro Bowl seasons that really paved the way for their illustrious future hall of fame careers and our above average offensive performance while Ostroski at C had nothing to do with it.

 

Got it! I must bow to your astute and shrewd analyses.

 

Oh but wait, I forgot about Linton, Smith, Bryson, and Sammy Morris lit it up before leaving and producing hall of fame careers.

 

Again, my bad.

 

Apologies.

 

It's no wonder you're hoping for more than this team's going to deliver this year.

[krazykat]

Ostroski's promotion from rotational depth to the starting lineup at RT was the harbinger of the Fall of the Golden Age for the Buffalo Bills. I think he was an average player. While he had limited athleticism, he worked hard and usually played smart. It's hard to say he wasn't willing to go the extra mile for the team; putting him out at RT and then at C where some god awful coaching decisions and bouncing around the line didn't allow him to focus on and improve at a single position. To be fair, the Bills just didn't help themselves out any. Butler claimed that a good OL was "easy to put together; just get a bunch of fat guys." Marv Levy claimed that OL play was going to become a commodity position, where teams had 7 or 8 fat guys and just cycled them in and out at various positions to keep everyone fresh. Tom Bresnahan fell in love with the idea of drafting OL for size on the goofy premise, "it takes longer to run around a bigger guy." The Bills went away from what got them into the Golden Age -- exceptional athletes at the OL that could literally sprint up and down the field in the hurry-up offense and kick the defender's asses play after play. They started going for fat guys like Marcus "Jabba" Spriggs, Jamie "I got winded getting out of bed" Nails, Robert "Huge" Hicks, Victor "He can't play but he's big" Allotey, ...

That's exactly correct SB.

 

Nevertheless, one cannot argue with production which we got back then.

 

I don't think that it's a long shot argument to suggest that Ostroski, even at C, while not great, was in fact average or average plus, and definitely better than Hicks, Spriggs, and Nails, and at least comparable to Fina. The only linemen that we had in '99 or '00 that stood out was Ruben Brown.

 

Still, you don't get that kind of production from a lline with only one decent lineman. Granted, from a scoring perspective it wasn't great, but it was still better than it is now and in the realm of average. We aren't even that now.

 

In yardage however it was leaps and bounds better.

 

Anyway, it's ignorant and naive for anyone to suggest that Ruben Brown paved the way for all that and it's equally absurd for anyone to argue that even at 29 and 30 that Ostroski was equal to or worse than Hicks, Nails, Spriggs, or even Zeigler.

[krazykat]

It can't be stats. Otherwise he wouldn't be talking about how Hardy couldn't beat the jam or separate in college, when he had 191 catches in 33 games. Or how Marcus Stroud, Kawika Mitchell, and Spencer Johnson weren't even as good additions as Jake Long, Randy Starks, and Reggie Torbor were for the Fins. I think he seizes on the most negative thing about a player and uses a "he can't do this" argument as a reason why he'll fail. Then again, I'm sure it's much more complex than that.

 

Or he "misremembers" or looks at the wrong stats. Perhaps he's thinking of Dusty Ziegler?

Yeah, and we all know how NFL performance mirrors collegiate performance perfectly.

 

And since you're like a dog on someone's pant leg that has been dipped in meat juice, I will simply defer to what you would consider "the experts" on the subject;

 

From http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/players/draft/516911;

 

"Not the type that will separate after the catch, but can elude to get extra yardage"

 

"His lanky frame poses problems, as he struggles vs. the more physical cornerbacks to get off the line due to marginal upper-body strength in attempts to get a push off the jam"

 

From http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingr...jameshardy.html

 

"May have trouble separating from pro corners"

 

And OH, the coup de grace, from the NFL.com itself,

 

"Will struggle to defeat the press, but if he gets a clean release, he builds his acceleration steadily...Not the type that will separate after the catch, but can elude to get extra yardage"

 

"His lanky frame poses problems, as he struggles vs. the more physical cornerbacks to get off the line due to marginal upper-body strength in attempts to get a push off the jam"

 

"but he is going to have to dedicate a few hours to the weight room, as his lack of ideal strength could become an issue, especially trying to beat the jam."

 

So you're right VOR, what do I know about Hardy then, eh. After all, we should all bow to your message board opining over the people that rate these guys and do it as a profession all year long.

 

Thanks for helping us to understand that.

 

A$$ salve aisle 6!

[Hazed and Amuzed]

Yeah, and we all know how NFL performance mirrors collegiate performance perfectly.

 

And since you're like a dog on someone's pant leg that has been dipped in meat juice, I will simply defer to what you would consider "the experts" on the subject;

 

From http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/players/draft/516911;

 

"Not the type that will separate after the catch, but can elude to get extra yardage"

 

"His lanky frame poses problems, as he struggles vs. the more physical cornerbacks to get off the line due to marginal upper-body strength in attempts to get a push off the jam"

 

From http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingr...jameshardy.html

 

"May have trouble separating from pro corners"

 

And OH, the coup de grace, from the NFL.com itself,

 

"Will struggle to defeat the press, but if he gets a clean release, he builds his acceleration steadily...Not the type that will separate after the catch, but can elude to get extra yardage"

 

"His lanky frame poses problems, as he struggles vs. the more physical cornerbacks to get off the line due to marginal upper-body strength in attempts to get a push off the jam"

 

"but he is going to have to dedicate a few hours to the weight room, as his lack of ideal strength could become an issue, especially trying to beat the jam."

 

So you're right VOR, what do I know about Hardy then, eh. After all, we should all bow to your message board opining over the people that rate these guys and do it as a profession all year long.

 

Thanks for helping us to understand that.

 

A$$ salve aisle 6!

 

 

Did you realize that the sportsline quotes and the NFL.com quotes are the same two quotes?

[krazykat]

In summary, I think that you rely soley on stats. This has to be, because I don't know any credible fan who thinks that Ostroski was "far better than average." In general, I am fond of your posts. I don't think that we should be required to cheer for moves that we disapprove of, and we are not. I disagree with you wrt Trent. I think he will play well, but whatever.

That said, wrt Ostroski, you are off the charts wrong. Signings like Ostroski, making a stiff like Fina the "Franchise Player," and concentrating on defensive backs over all else is what brought this team to the basement. You really need to revisit this history imo.

I don't rely solely on stats Bill. You just say that I do.

 

I rely on stats as a part of my conclusions. I also rely on what I see.

 

In argument, far too many people here dismiss stats, and I'm not just talking about total yards and points scored either, but stats that are indicative of other aspects of the team such as can we really move the ball etc.

 

I mean how does one rationalize that we were a very average team by record, 7-9, when we were dead last, that's DFL, in the NFL in ball movement and very close to it in terms of stopping other teams from moving the ball?

 

The majority of people here can offer no explanation whatsoever to reconcile those two things.

 

Otherwise any rational person absolutely has to look at that and come to the obvious conclusion that we probably won more games than we should have given that, which is the truth. We certainly weren't going to win anymore playing like that. Hell, if we can't beat the Cowboys on 6 TOs and get our A$$e$ handed to us in all other facets of the game, then WTF. Why are we even discussing whether or not we're good. What, if we had only had one more Interception-TD that game we would have won?

 

Yeah, and two FGs instead of just one pathetic FG would have won it too along with any score by the offense.

 

Everyone sees Edwards as a QB that had poise. But so what? What does that mean in practical terms? Yeah, I agree, he remained composed, remarkably so. But then why were so many of his passes inaccurate? Why did he miss so many open receivers when different passes would have yielded much more?

 

OK, so he was a rookie, but he did the same thing as a senior in college.

 

So far here's what Edwards has done, he lit up San Jose St. with one of the worst defenses in collegiate ball every season in his senior year and did nothing else otherwise with 2 TDs and 5 INTs otherwise and well below 200 yards per game otherwise.

 

In the NFL he lit up Miami, the 1-15 Dolphins, and did nothing else otherwise with 3 TDs and 8 INTs and also well below 200 yards per game otherwise.

 

Meanwhile, TC Ostrander, his replacement, with pretty much the same team or a very comparable one, played much better than Edwards did just one year earlier. So why wasn't Ostrander talked about more in the draft this year?

 

That's not statistical, is it. You can compare the two profiles as draftees all you want, but for every strength or weakness of one you can counter it with another by the other. Either way, Ostrander performed significantly better than Edwards did with very similar talent around him. So why wasn't Ostrander drafted this year? I know what it says, but given the facts, it makes little sense to me. I must conclude that Edwards, and for many other reasons too, was overrated.

 

I wonder how much of Bill Walsh's comments played into Edwards being overrated last year.

 

Either way, a pattern is present here. Edwards has proven that he can light up the worst teams but has not proven that he can play well against good or even average teams.

 

This is the year that he will need to do it. No one's asking him to put 35 points on the board vs. the Pats or Jags, but he will have to at least lead the offense to some points against many of the utterly weak defensive teams we face this season. Last year's production, even twice that, ain't gonna cut it if he wants to finish the season as the starter.

[krazykat]

Did you realize that the sportsline quotes and the NFL.com quotes are the same two quotes?

No, I didn't. Completely missed it in fact.

 

Does that change things?

 

Probably comes from the same group of scout(s) that do this for a living either way.

 

Does that dismiss one or the other?

 

Meanwhile, what are your thoughts on what VOR has said here openly and on record, the real point?

 

VOR insists that his football viewing of the many Indiana games that he watched apparently hoping that we would draft Hardy, that Hardy separates well and avoids the jam.

 

I see here that those that rate these players for a living say the opposite.

 

Whom, of the two parties, do you believe?

 

Do you even believe that VOR actually sat thru Indiana games and watched Hardy as often as he says he did?

 

As to the reprint, you would be surprised how much of NFL scouting data comes from so few sources at the most prominent sites. There are only so many scouts and no scout can rank each of the hundreds of players that are eligible for the draft each year. Each scout has his methods and teams, etc. They watch these guys often for years as they develop.

 

They put out their info almost like media outlets put out news on the wire, some for public consumption, some for team/private consumption at a greater price and with further detail, analysis, and often personalized consultation.

 

Unbeknownst to the average fan, most of what you read on any particular player any year in the draft rankings comes from a very limited number of sources. Some places do their own independent of anything that the NFL or major media that cover the NFL uses, (ESPN, SI, PFW, CBSSL, etc.) but they "borrow" what they don't have people to do.

 

Why do you think that everyone pretty much projects players all going within a half-round or round of everyone else? I mean how come no one ever says about a guy that everyone has going in the top of round 2, "I just don't see it, this guy is overrated and if he goes high on day 2 I will be surprised?" It's because they are all right or go down as a group together. Few want to step out like that and risk looking the fool whereas if all look like fools, then they can all say, well, we all thought that

[Hazed and Amuzed]

No, I didn't. Completely missed it in fact.

 

Does that change things?

 

Probably comes from the same group of scout(s) that do this for a living either way.

 

Does that dismiss one or the other?

 

Meanwhile, what are your thoughts on what VOR has said here openly and on record, the real point?

 

VOR insists that his football viewing of the many Indiana games that he watched apparently hoping that we would draft Hardy, that Hardy separates well and avoids the jam.

 

I see here that those that rate these players for a living say the opposite.

 

Whom, of the two parties, do you believe?

 

Do you even believe that VOR actually sat thru Indiana games and watched Hardy as often as he says he did?

 

As to the reprint, you would be surprised how much of NFL scouting data comes from so few sources at the most prominent sites. There are only so many scouts and no scout can rank each of the hundreds of players that are eligible for the draft each year. Each scout has his methods and teams, etc. They watch these guys often for years as they develop.

 

They put out their info almost like media outlets put out news on the wire, some for public consumption, some for team/private consumption at a greater price and with further detail, analysis, and often personalized consultation.

 

Unbeknownst to the average fan, most of what you read on any particular player any year in the draft rankings comes from a very limited number of sources. Some places do their own independent of anything that the NFL or major media that cover the NFL uses, (ESPN, SI, PFW, CBSSL, etc.) but they "borrow" what they don't have people to do.

 

Why do you think that everyone pretty much projects players all going within a half-round or round of everyone else? I mean how come no one ever says about a guy that everyone has going in the top of round 2, "I just don't see it, this guy is overrated and if he goes high on day 2 I will be surprised?" It's because they are all right or go down as a group together. Few want to step out like that and risk looking the fool whereas if all look like fools, then they can all say, well, we all thought that

 

 

I think that he saw what he said he saw. You see not everything is black and white. There are many shades of grey when drafting a player, those are a players intangibles and those don't show up on the stat sheets all the time. Hardy scored 36 TD's in 33 games, I don't care if he gets great separation all the time or even some of the time, at 6'6 and a vert of 42 in. he should be fine with most db's being around him. That's his greatest value. If there are times that he can get separation and get down the field then great, at least that is something that can be learned. His potential is in those intangibles I mentioned above and sometimes they translate better when watching a player often as opposed to seeing him from time to time.

[obie_wan]

I think that he saw what he said he saw. You see not everything is black and white. There are many shades of grey when drafting a player, those are a players intangibles and those don't show up on the stat sheets all the time. Hardy scored 36 TD's in 33 games, I don't care if he gets great separation all the time or even some of the time, at 6'6 and a vert of 42 in. he should be fine with most db's being around him. That's his greatest value. If there are times that he can get separation and get down the field then great, at least that is something that can be learned. His potential is in those intangibles I mentioned above and sometimes they translate better when watching a player often as opposed to seeing him from time to time.

I saw a stat somewhere that last year there about 38 passes in the red zone to players over 6'-'5".

 

Only 16 were completed.

 

Hardy needs to be more than tall to be productive in the NFL.

 

He has 2 major flaws in his game which is why he dropped out of the 1st round.

 

In addition to making the normal transition to teh NFL which takes 3 years, he has additional work to do.

 

odds are that Hardy won;t contribute consistently in 2008.

[VOR]

With facts like these, who needs opinions?

 

For the record, Ikegwuonu was a first round talent before his ACL tear, even with his background.

 

Your brilliance is noted.

Ikegwuono was nowhere NEAR a 1st round prospect. And keep professing your brilliance by reading the stat sheet.