Jonathan Paul Manziel
-
The biggest reason DHB was drafted at 7 was due to Al Davis so not the best example. However drafting a prospect is as much about his potential as his college production. DHB possessed the raw athletic ability to have a much higher potential than Shipley ever did. While DHB was a reach a 7, he would've been taken higher than Shipley regardless. You can't teach speed or height.
As for Welker, he is short for an NFL WR. He also doesn't have prototypical top line speed you look for in a first round draft pick either. Where he does excel is his quickness, agility, knowledge of the game and his ability to find soft spots in coverage. It's tough to spot some of that ability when all of your game tape is in Mike Leech's air raid offense.
(FYI Welker is a bit of a folk hero down here in Oklahoma due to him growing up in OKC, being a classic underdog and all.)
Nice try attempting to dismiss my knowledge of him though. Would you like to continue to make an ass of yourself or would you prefer to just chalk this one up as a loss?
Are you serious.....? are you really starting a pissing contest on a message board?! Go play with power rangers and lego's little buddy.
The biggest reason DHB was drafted at 7 was due to Al Davis so not the best example. However drafting a prospect is as much about his potential as his college production. DHB possessed the raw athletic ability to have a much higher potential than Shipley ever did. While DHB was a reach a 7, he would've been taken higher than Shipley regardless. You can't teach speed or height.
As for Welker, he is short for an NFL WR. He also doesn't have prototypical top line speed you look for in a first round draft pick either. Where he does excel is his quickness, agility, knowledge of the game and his ability to find soft spots in coverage. It's tough to spot some of that ability when all of your game tape is in Mike Leech's air raid offense.
(FYI Welker is a bit of a folk hero down here in Oklahoma due to him growing up in OKC, being a classic underdog and all.)
Nice try attempting to dismiss my knowledge of him though. Would you like to continue to make an ass of yourself or would you prefer to just chalk this one up as a loss?
Are you serious.....? are you really starting a pissing contest on a message board?! Go play with power rangers and lego's little buddy.
You started it my man, I'm just finishing it. I'll take your lack of a response as you waving the white flag. It's been fun.
-
The biggest reason DHB was drafted at 7 was due to Al Davis so not the best example. However drafting a prospect is as much about his potential as his college production. DHB possessed the raw athletic ability to have a much higher potential than Shipley ever did. While DHB was a reach a 7, he would've been taken higher than Shipley regardless. You can't teach speed or height.
As for Welker, he is short for an NFL WR. He also doesn't have prototypical top line speed you look for in a first round draft pick either. Where he does excel is his quickness, agility, knowledge of the game and his ability to find soft spots in coverage. It's tough to spot some of that ability when all of your game tape is in Mike Leech's air raid offense.
(FYI Welker is a bit of a folk hero down here in Oklahoma due to him growing up in OKC, being a classic underdog and all.)
Nice try attempting to dismiss my knowledge of him though. Would you like to continue to make an ass of yourself or would you prefer to just chalk this one up as a loss?
Are you serious.....? are you really starting a pissing contest on a message board?! Go play with power rangers and lego's little buddy.
You started it my man, I'm just finishing it. I'll take your lack of a response as you waving the white flag. It's been fun.
You started it my man, I'm just finishing it. I'll take your lack of a response as you waving the white flag. It's been fun.
If I took the time (which I dont have) to look at all the comparable WR's who have been drafted in the first round with the same #'s, id find a TON!
He's 6', 195lb's, ran a 4.5, with a 36" vertical. You couple that with the numbers he put up. 3191 yards and 33 touchdown in his career. Capping off his career with a Nat'l championship game performance of 10 receptions 122 yards 2 touchdowns (not mention ALL with a Freshman QB that couldn't find his @$$ with both hands and a map). He's got the stats, he's got measurable.
I dont see how you can intellectually honestly argue ALL that. But again, I can even give you that he's a bad example if it means that much to you. I could make a list over the years of players I've seen it happen to. All under the guise of "Athleticism". Its discrimination that isnt even subtle.
-
The biggest reason DHB was drafted at 7 was due to Al Davis so not the best example. However drafting a prospect is as much about his potential as his college production. DHB possessed the raw athletic ability to have a much higher potential than Shipley ever did. While DHB was a reach a 7, he would've been taken higher than Shipley regardless. You can't teach speed or height.
As for Welker, he is short for an NFL WR. He also doesn't have prototypical top line speed you look for in a first round draft pick either. Where he does excel is his quickness, agility, knowledge of the game and his ability to find soft spots in coverage. It's tough to spot some of that ability when all of your game tape is in Mike Leech's air raid offense.
(FYI Welker is a bit of a folk hero down here in Oklahoma due to him growing up in OKC, being a classic underdog and all.)
Nice try attempting to dismiss my knowledge of him though. Would you like to continue to make an ass of yourself or would you prefer to just chalk this one up as a loss?
Are you serious.....? are you really starting a pissing contest on a message board?! Go play with power rangers and lego's little buddy.
You started it my man, I'm just finishing it. I'll take your lack of a response as you waving the white flag. It's been fun.
You started it my man, I'm just finishing it. I'll take your lack of a response as you waving the white flag. It's been fun.
And while were on this subject. I got another guy for ya. I'm really pumped to hear your explanation for him!
Peter Warrick. #4 Overall Pick for the Cincy Bengals in 2000.
5-11 190. Similar statistics, but ran a high end 4.6 almost a 4.7 in the 40.
-
@mike-h said:
I blog with Shawn at Dawg Pound Nation, and have met his source... he has been right about everything this offseason:
ha! you are funny. shawn at dawg pound nation. GTFO of here. shawn? we all know him as.............well shawn from dawg pound nation which means absolutely nothing. i'm sure shawn is sitting in with jimmy, ray and mike in the war room discussing their big board.
-
You started it my man, I'm just finishing it. I'll take your lack of a response as you waving the white flag. It's been fun.
If I took the time (which I dont have) to look at all the comparable WR's who have been drafted in the first round with the same #'s, id find a TON!
He's 6', 195lb's, ran a 4.5, with a 36" vertical. You couple that with the numbers he put up. 3191 yards and 33 touchdown in his career. Capping off his career with a Nat'l championship game performance of 10 receptions 122 yards 2 touchdowns (not mention ALL with a Freshman QB that couldn't find his @$$ with both hands and a map). He's got the stats, he's got measurable.
I dont see how you can intellectually honestly argue ALL that. But again, I can even give you that he's a bad example if it means that much to you. I could make a list over the years of players I've seen it happen to. All under the guise of "Athleticism". Its discrimination that isnt even subtle.
If I took the time (which I dont have) to look at all the comparable WR's who have been drafted in the first round with the same #'s, id find a TON!
He's 6', 195lb's, ran a 4.5, with a 36" vertical. You couple that with the numbers he put up. 3191 yards and 33 touchdown in his career. Capping off his career with a Nat'l championship game performance of 10 receptions 122 yards 2 touchdowns (not mention ALL with a Freshman QB that couldn't find his @$$ with both hands and a map). He's got the stats, he's got measurable.
I dont see how you can intellectually honestly argue ALL that. But again, I can even give you that he's a bad example if it means that much to you. I could make a list over the years of players I've seen it happen to. All under the guise of "Athleticism". Its discrimination that isnt even subtle.
I can't speak on Warrick as he was before my time but I can speak on Shipley.
He was product of a spread offense that at the time (and still a bit presently) is difficult for scouts to decipher in terms of production and how it will translate to the NFL. He also played on a loaded Texas team that relied on screens, bubble screens, and simple short passes. Shipley's job was to catch short passes in space and advance it as far as he could. He didn't break massive amounts of tackles or rack up large amounts of yards after contact (such as Watkins this year) that would warrant a high draft pick. I guarantee if Watkins didn't break all those tackles and rack up all of that YAC, he wouldn't be in consideration for a top 5 draft pick.
You can also look at Texas' spotty record of WR making it in the NFL (Roy Williams would be their best product) or the Big 12's (a predominantly spread offensive conference) spotty record of producing NFL caliber WR's at the time and there is enough evidence to suggest a spread WR couldn't cut it in the NFL. Granted that's changed now with the success of Welker (which took a few years), Dez, Maclin, and to a lesser extent Crabtree (his production hasn't justified his draft spot although that could be more due to Seattle's offensive mementality) and Blackmon (if he could ever get his life in order.)
Bottom line race had nothing to do with Shipley or Welker or potentially Borland dropping in the draft. Each have/had enough question marks and limitations to cause their draft stock to fall.
Personally I think Borland will be a steal in this draft but ILB production in college is generally considered a better indicator of NFL ability than WR production in college.
-
Good
-
Good
I dig the avatar. They'd have my vote.
-
If I took the time (which I dont have) to look at all the comparable WR's who have been drafted in the first round with the same #'s, id find a TON!
He's 6', 195lb's, ran a 4.5, with a 36" vertical. You couple that with the numbers he put up. 3191 yards and 33 touchdown in his career. Capping off his career with a Nat'l championship game performance of 10 receptions 122 yards 2 touchdowns (not mention ALL with a Freshman QB that couldn't find his @$$ with both hands and a map). He's got the stats, he's got measurable.
I dont see how you can intellectually honestly argue ALL that. But again, I can even give you that he's a bad example if it means that much to you. I could make a list over the years of players I've seen it happen to. All under the guise of "Athleticism". Its discrimination that isnt even subtle.
I can't speak on Warrick as he was before my time but I can speak on Shipley.
He was product of a spread offense that at the time (and still a bit presently) is difficult for scouts to decipher in terms of production and how it will translate to the NFL. He also played on a loaded Texas team that relied on screens, bubble screens, and simple short passes. Shipley's job was to catch short passes in space and advance it as far as he could. He didn't break massive amounts of tackles or rack up large amounts of yards after contact (such as Watkins this year) that would warrant a high draft pick. I guarantee if Watkins didn't break all those tackles and rack up all of that YAC, he wouldn't be in consideration for a top 5 draft pick.
You can also look at Texas' spotty record of WR making it in the NFL (Roy Williams would be their best product) or the Big 12's (a predominantly spread offensive conference) spotty record of producing NFL caliber WR's at the time and there is enough evidence to suggest a spread WR couldn't cut it in the NFL. Granted that's changed now with the success of Welker (which took a few years), Dez, Maclin, and to a lesser extent Crabtree (his production hasn't justified his draft spot although that could be more due to Seattle's offensive mementality) and Blackmon (if he could ever get his life in order.)
Bottom line race had nothing to do with Shipley or Welker or potentially Borland dropping in the draft. Each have/had enough question marks and limitations to cause their draft stock to fall.
Personally I think Borland will be a steal in this draft but ILB production in college is generally considered a better indicator of NFL ability than WR production in college.
I can't speak on Warrick as he was before my time but I can speak on Shipley.
He was product of a spread offense that at the time (and still a bit presently) is difficult for scouts to decipher in terms of production and how it will translate to the NFL. He also played on a loaded Texas team that relied on screens, bubble screens, and simple short passes. Shipley's job was to catch short passes in space and advance it as far as he could. He didn't break massive amounts of tackles or rack up large amounts of yards after contact (such as Watkins this year) that would warrant a high draft pick. I guarantee if Watkins didn't break all those tackles and rack up all of that YAC, he wouldn't be in consideration for a top 5 draft pick.
You can also look at Texas' spotty record of WR making it in the NFL (Roy Williams would be their best product) or the Big 12's (a predominantly spread offensive conference) spotty record of producing NFL caliber WR's at the time and there is enough evidence to suggest a spread WR couldn't cut it in the NFL. Granted that's changed now with the success of Welker (which took a few years), Dez, Maclin, and to a lesser extent Crabtree (his production hasn't justified his draft spot although that could be more due to Seattle's offensive mementality) and Blackmon (if he could ever get his life in order.)
Bottom line race had nothing to do with Shipley or Welker or potentially Borland dropping in the draft. Each have/had enough question marks and limitations to cause their draft stock to fall.
Personally I think Borland will be a steal in this draft but ILB production in college is generally considered a better indicator of NFL ability than WR production in college.
You can speak to Warrick. I just told you. Same height, weight, stats, but he was slower. Past 10 yrs or so I haven't paid as much attention to football as I had previously in my life. I don't feel like Manziel has dropped cause of race. But plenty do, at certain positions. we won't go into running backs.
-
I'm sticking by an earlier statement that if we take Johnny Manziel at #4, it is because Haslam pulls the owner card and does what he has promised all he wouldn't do and that is pull rank over the guys he hired to run the team. I'm sure Farmer does like Manziel, but I don't think he likes him at #4 and I don't even think he is Farmers highest rated QB.
I'm sticking by an earlier statement that if we take Johnny Manziel at #4, it is because Haslam pulls the owner card and does what he has promised all he wouldn't do and that is pull rank over the guys he hired to run the team. I'm sure Farmer does like Manziel, but I don't think he likes him at #4 and I don't even think he is Farmers highest rated QB.
Rest easy son- at least if you want to believe Pettine.
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
If Manziel was 2 inches taller hed be the unanimous first pick. If Manziel was black he'd be the unanimous first pick. Let that sink in for a second.
But he's not 2" taller, white or black has nothing to do with it either. If he was 100 pounds heavier, he'd make a heck of a nose tackle. And if he was William Wallace (Braveheart), he'd be able to shoot balls of fire out of his ass. I think some of the Johnny lovers already think he's capable of that.
He ran over many duke defenders much larger than him.. thanks
And how many of those Duke defenders are going to be playing on Sunday? None? Got any video of him running over C J Mosley or Dee Ford? Out running Clinton Dix?
-
@mike-h said:
As long as they take Bortles (1b), Bridgewater (2) or Manziel (1a), I'll be happy.
ABM- anyone but Manziel.
@mike-h said:
I think so, but anything can happen on Thursday.
If they take JF, I'm going to be in as big a funk as when Byner fumbled in the AFC Championship game. I'm not kidding.
Oh, if we do draft him, I'll support the little twerp- but I'll go on record right now- I have a bad, bad, BAD feeling feeling about him on the Browns. Now if he fell to #26, that's a different story. Means we took a top impact player @ #4.
BTW, here's your "face of the Franchise" straight from his Twitter page.
-
I want Johnny Football.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
This thread is a joke.
-
A good majority of that crap was fan boi blind love.
Just as one example, the ability to push back linebackers? Lmao....the shrimp is gonna out muscle a man that has 50 lbs on him......please.
Fan boi honks only see what they wanna see.
On a positive note, the does throw a nice left handed pass....
He ran over many duke defenders much larger than him.. thanks
exhibit #1 of the failure of a fan trying to scout.He ran over many duke defenders much larger than him.. thanks
Making such declarative statements about a prospect based on one game....against.....let's say guys that will not make it in the league. How'd he look against mizz and LSU? Hey, he beat rice though....lol
You're welcome.
-
I'm sticking by an earlier statement that if we take Johnny Manziel at #4, it is because Haslam pulls the owner card and does what he has promised all he wouldn't do and that is pull rank over the guys he hired to run the team. I'm sure Farmer does like Manziel, but I don't think he likes him at #4 and I don't even think he is Farmers highest rated QB.
Rest easy son- at least if you want to believe Pettine.
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
If Manziel was 2 inches taller hed be the unanimous first pick. If Manziel was black he'd be the unanimous first pick. Let that sink in for a second.
But he's not 2" taller, white or black has nothing to do with it either. If he was 100 pounds heavier, he'd make a heck of a nose tackle. And if he was William Wallace (Braveheart), he'd be able to shoot balls of fire out of his ass. I think some of the Johnny lovers already think he's capable of that.
He ran over many duke defenders much larger than him.. thanks
And how many of those Duke defenders are going to be playing on Sunday? None? Got any video of him running over C J Mosley or Dee Ford? Out running Clinton Dix?
Rest easy son- at least if you want to believe Pettine.
But he's not 2" taller, white or black has nothing to do with it either. If he was 100 pounds heavier, he'd make a heck of a nose tackle. And if he was William Wallace (Braveheart), he'd be able to shoot balls of fire out of his ass. I think some of the Johnny lovers already think he's capable of that.
And how many of those Duke defenders are going to be playing on Sunday? None? Got any video of him running over C J Mosley or Dee Ford? Out running Clinton Dix?
That wasnt the point.. the point was that he can take and deliver hits from players that are NFL size
exhibit #1 of the failure of a fan trying to scout.
Making such declarative statements about a prospect based on one game....against.....let's say guys that will not make it in the league. How'd he look against mizz and LSU? Hey, he beat rice though....lol
You're welcome.
How did he look against Alabama? Oh thats right.. great.. I think thats the answer right? great?
Oh and Hoorta.. if you watch both Bama games you can see JFF beating Mosley to the edge almost on a regular occasion, he never had to go head to head with him because he just out manuevered him.
Fan trying to be a scout?
No, not at all. Just a guy with an opinion who likes to back it up with video. Theres tons of it online, you can see full games of JFF in amost each one of his college starts
BTW.. watching the LSU game which I believe was Johnnys worst..
The stat line was way worse than his actual play on the field. See for yourself
-
"According to the Houston Chronicle, "word's spreading among media" in New York that the Jaguars will take Texas A&M QB Johnny Manziel at No. 3."
Is there a bigger college player coming out that has MORE SMOKESCREEN than Johnny Football?
If he's this good, then Houston would take him at 1...but the issue is. HE IS NOT.
Every team using his popularity to trade down and rob someone.
Texans,
Rams, -- remember this one? Rumor of Johnny visiting them a few days ago? Pure BS as player visits ended a week ago.
Jacksonville
Raiders
Browns
"We're taking johnny!!! who wants to pony up??!?!"
-
Um....they lost against Alabama....I guess you missed that part.
But he's a winner.....except he went 4-4 in the SEC.
-
Calm down. It's all smoke and mirrors right now.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login