IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The NFL Draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 02-24-2009, 09:19 PM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

A bit of levity - Rich Eisen running the 40, stay tuned for the shadow cam thingy at the end:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80eea0dc
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 02-24-2009, 09:38 PM
painekiller painekiller is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the Galleria
Posts: 2,852
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
A bit of levity - Rich Eisen running the 40, stay tuned for the shadow cam thingy at the end:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80eea0dc
The Shadow cam with Raji is funny as hell.
__________________
There is no failure, only feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 02-25-2009, 06:58 AM
nunusguy nunusguy is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by painekiller View Post
The Shadow cam with Raji is funny as hell.
Raji beats Eisen by what, 6 yards in the 40 ? Very entertaining. The NFLNetwork crew is fun and informative all at once.
Here's my question: Can Eisen do play-by-play ? Why can't we come up with a twosome of Eisen & Mayoc (or threesome with Mayocs buddy Charles) to staff ESPNs MNF ? Anything to get rid of Kornheiser !
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 02-25-2009, 08:56 AM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

I wish they did this with some of the players. I heard some one say the other day they were dissapointed that this guy ran a 4.64, but he was hoping he would run a mid to high 4.5. So if the guy runs a 4.57 he's OK but not if he's .07 seconds slower? So a better lean at the tape means he can play in the NFL?
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 02-25-2009, 10:28 AM
painekiller painekiller is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the Galleria
Posts: 2,852
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nunusguy View Post
Raji beats Eisen by what, 6 yards in the 40 ? Very entertaining. The NFLNetwork crew is fun and informative all at once.
Here's my question: Can Eisen do play-by-play ? Why can't we come up with a twosome of Eisen & Mayoc (or threesome with Mayocs buddy Charles) to staff ESPNs MNF ? Anything to get rid of Kornheiser !
Mainly because ESPN is not going to use NFL Network guys.
__________________
There is no failure, only feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 02-25-2009, 12:03 PM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
I wish they did this with some of the players. I heard some one say the other day they were dissapointed that this guy ran a 4.64, but he was hoping he would run a mid to high 4.5. So if the guy runs a 4.57 he's OK but not if he's .07 seconds slower? So a better lean at the tape means he can play in the NFL?
At some point you have to draw a line. For somebody it might be 4.8. Then somebody comes behind them and says, well this guy ran a 4.81 are you going to dismiss them for .01 seconds?

There is no real black/white thing going on here. When players start getting so deep in the gray, you just have to cut bait.

For example, if I'm looking for a MLB my target 40 time would be around 4.63. Any time better is gravy and any time worse I start having to come up with reasons to keep him on the board. If a guy runs 4.67, he better be a thumper that can tackle very well. If he goes 4.77, then he has to be able to defeat OL blocks and be able to stack and shed. At 4.8, he better have the instincts of a pyschic and know the playbook better than the other teams' Offensive Coordinator. If he runs a 4.81 - then I can't draft him to play MLB because there isn't enough other things that he will be able to do to overcome the lack of speed that my defense would require. So, it wasn't the .01 second difference really - it was .17 seconds slower than the 4.63 that I desire. I think you can see the difference in .17 seconds on the Simulcam.
__________________
Originally Posted by chuck
I'm just sitting here thinking (pacing, actually) that whatever my issues with Kubiak he is apparently a goddam genius at tutoring quarterbacks.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 02-25-2009, 12:45 PM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy P View Post
At some point you have to draw a line. For somebody it might be 4.8. Then somebody comes behind them and says, well this guy ran a 4.81 are you going to dismiss them for .01 seconds?

I understand that, but I don't think the average person really understands how little difference there is between some of the times and get way to fixated on what amounts to a half step. That can be the difference in being open in the NFL, but at the combine it's probably more indicative of who spent the most time working with a track coach. That is one thing about the combine though. The players know what drills will be there, and it's good to find out who were the ones willing to put in the work to get better at the things they will be tested on. If a guy got confused on how to run the three cone that would probably set off as many alarm bells for me as a 40 that was slightly below par.

I just wish they had some kind of graphic representation to compare two players. I would be more willing to discount a player for a slow ten or twenty yard split then I would for a 40. I'm a guy who loves having speed, but if a LB or RB is a tenth slower then a target time for the forty, but has a great 3 cone and looks good on film, and has a good initial burst...so what on the 40.


I'm not saying I want a CB who runs 4.8, and I don't think the 40 is worthless. It is definitely a tool that can be useful. I just think some people are way to fixated on it. I'm not talking about you Roy, or anyone else her for that matter. You are at least as accurate as the network guys with less information and resources.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 02-25-2009, 06:49 PM
mussop mussop is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: livingston
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
I understand that, but I don't think the average person really understands how little difference there is between some of the times and get way to fixated on what amounts to a half step. That can be the difference in being open in the NFL, but at the combine it's probably more indicative of who spent the most time working with a track coach. That is one thing about the combine though. The players know what drills will be there, and it's good to find out who were the ones willing to put in the work to get better at the things they will be tested on. If a guy got confused on how to run the three cone that would probably set off as many alarm bells for me as a 40 that was slightly below par.

I just wish they had some kind of graphic representation to compare two players. I would be more willing to discount a player for a slow ten or twenty yard split then I would for a 40. I'm a guy who loves having speed, but if a LB or RB is a tenth slower then a target time for the forty, but has a great 3 cone and looks good on film, and has a good initial burst...so what on the 40.


I'm not saying I want a CB who runs 4.8, and I don't think the 40 is worthless. It is definitely a tool that can be useful. I just think some people are way to fixated on it. I'm not talking about you Roy, or anyone else her for that matter. You are at least as accurate as the network guys with less information and resources.
This is why I dont pay much attention to the combine.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 02-25-2009, 07:31 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
I understand that, but I don't think the average person really understands how little difference there is between some of the times and get way to fixated on what amounts to a half step. That can be the difference in being open in the NFL, but at the combine it's probably more indicative of who spent the most time working with a track coach. That is one thing about the combine though. The players know what drills will be there, and it's good to find out who were the ones willing to put in the work to get better at the things they will be tested on. If a guy got confused on how to run the three cone that would probably set off as many alarm bells for me as a 40 that was slightly below par.

I just wish they had some kind of graphic representation to compare two players. I would be more willing to discount a player for a slow ten or twenty yard split then I would for a 40. I'm a guy who loves having speed, but if a LB or RB is a tenth slower then a target time for the forty, but has a great 3 cone and looks good on film, and has a good initial burst...so what on the 40.


I'm not saying I want a CB who runs 4.8, and I don't think the 40 is worthless. It is definitely a tool that can be useful. I just think some people are way to fixated on it. I'm not talking about you Roy, or anyone else her for that matter. You are at least as accurate as the network guys with less information and resources.
This is why I do pay attention to the combine.

If a guy cannot prepare for the combine and run and test at his best with his future on the line, then he lacks the profesionalism and work ethic to be a very good NFL football player.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 02-25-2009, 11:15 PM
James James is offline
Undrafted Rookie
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 43
Default

Probably not the appropriate spot for this post, however; I was perusing the old draft pick value chart, considering some mock draft possibilities, when I realized that either Stafford, Sanchez, or (now a bit more likely) both, will be there at 15. After the 15th pick though, the Jets, Bucs, Bears, and Lions are in some need of a QB. Whether its both or just Sanchez, it would (wouldn't it?) suit the Lions to take the best tackle (J Smith) #1 and trade us their 3rd to move up . . .wouldn't it? Perhaps just dreaming . . .
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 02-26-2009, 12:05 AM
painekiller painekiller is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the Galleria
Posts: 2,852
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
Probably not the appropriate spot for this post, however; I was perusing the old draft pick value chart, considering some mock draft possibilities, when I realized that either Stafford, Sanchez, or (now a bit more likely) both, will be there at 15. After the 15th pick though, the Jets, Bucs, Bears, and Lions are in some need of a QB. Whether its both or just Sanchez, it would (wouldn't it?) suit the Lions to take the best tackle (J Smith) #1 and trade us their 3rd to move up . . .wouldn't it? Perhaps just dreaming . . .
No I find that a very plausible thing to happen.
__________________
There is no failure, only feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 02-26-2009, 01:03 AM
jppaul jppaul is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 343
Default

I am personally on the draft Malcolm Jenkins at 15 to be a safety train now.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 02-26-2009, 03:04 AM
mussop mussop is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: livingston
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
Probably not the appropriate spot for this post, however; I was perusing the old draft pick value chart, considering some mock draft possibilities, when I realized that either Stafford, Sanchez, or (now a bit more likely) both, will be there at 15. After the 15th pick though, the Jets, Bucs, Bears, and Lions are in some need of a QB. Whether its both or just Sanchez, it would (wouldn't it?) suit the Lions to take the best tackle (J Smith) #1 and trade us their 3rd to move up . . .wouldn't it? Perhaps just dreaming . . .
Check this thread out its already been talked about. I still think this is one of our best shots at trading down. No way Detroit drafts a QB first. I just dont believe it. The pick will be Curry or (more likely) Monroe. If one of the top QB's fall they will have to jump in front of a few other teams to assure they get one. Surrendering a 3rd to make sure they get their QB of the future isnt out of the question.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 02-26-2009, 03:05 AM
mussop mussop is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: livingston
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jppaul View Post
I am personally on the draft Malcolm Jenkins at 15 to be a safety train now.
I would be extremely happy with that!
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 02-26-2009, 05:23 AM
NickO NickO is offline
Drafted Rookie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 57
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
Probably not the appropriate spot for this post, however; I was perusing the old draft pick value chart, considering some mock draft possibilities, when I realized that either Stafford, Sanchez, or (now a bit more likely) both, will be there at 15. After the 15th pick though, the Jets, Bucs, Bears, and Lions are in some need of a QB. Whether its both or just Sanchez, it would (wouldn't it?) suit the Lions to take the best tackle (J Smith) #1 and trade us their 3rd to move up . . .wouldn't it? Perhaps just dreaming . . .
Shades of Cleveland in 2007. In bad need of a QB, selected Joe Thomas 3rd overall then traded back up to grab Brady Quinn.

Browns Got:
2007 1st Rd Pick (22nd Overall)

Dallas Got:
2007 2nd Rd Pick (36th Overall)
2008 1st Rd Pick (which turned out to be 22nd Overall thanks to Derek Anderson)


So the question is, would the Texans trade back from 15th overall for the Lions 2nd rounder (33rd overall) and their 1st next year? That's a long way to trade back, but remember a couple things:

1) Consensus is there's a lack of top-end talent in the 2009 draft, but good depth
2) The Lions just went 0-16 and are freaking terrible, that could be a top five pick. Hell, Cleveland was freaking terrible and they were willing to gamble (Phil Savage got fired, but whatever)
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 02-26-2009, 07:02 AM
nunusguy nunusguy is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
Whether its both or just Sanchez
Excuse the digression, but can you just imagine the commercial potential of a Texas football franchise that has a Latino QB ?
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 02-26-2009, 07:41 AM
James James is offline
Undrafted Rookie
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 43
Default

VY would have brought commercial appeal, or even ReBu, the Texans don't care for appeal clearly, which is a good thing in my opinion. In regards to a third not being enough to drop 5 spots, the trusty value chart says we are +100 points in this deal, and; in my opinion are clearly getting the better of the deal considering the talent that will still be available there at 20 . . .just my 2 cents though.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 02-26-2009, 08:33 AM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post

If a guy cannot prepare for the combine and run and test at his best with his future on the line, then he lacks the profesionalism and work ethic to be a very good NFL football player.
Absolutely. That to me is one of the biggest aspects of the combine.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 02-26-2009, 08:38 AM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jppaul View Post
I am personally on the draft Malcolm Jenkins at 15 to be a safety train now.
I'm intrigued by this idea. A guy who was considered a top corner at Safety sounds great on paper. The problem is playing safety is a whole other skill set than playing man coverage type corner. I don't know enough about Jenkins to know if he would make a good safety or not, but there's more to being a safety than just being a slow corner.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 02-26-2009, 08:44 AM
nunusguy nunusguy is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jppaul View Post
I am personally on the draft Malcolm Jenkins at 15 to be a safety train now.
We just signed our starting FS to a 3-year contract.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.