(01-10-2017, 11:05 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It came across as McMillan doesn't miss tackles instead of you don't know how many tackles he missed. If you don't know, just say you don't know instead of making up a number which isn't true. 

ur right should have said don't know but it's gotta be low or something along the lines of that.

(01-10-2017, 07:45 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: People didn't think Kuechly was Kueckly; too slow to be a 3 down LB. 

Huh? He ran a 4.58 and no one ever questioned his ability to be a 3 down backer. He was a sure fire top 10 pick his entire senior year.

(01-10-2017, 10:42 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I'm hesitant to take Alabama defenders. Their defense is so stacked that it's really hard to know which ones make an impact. Their defensive line is so good that he basically gets to run free. How will he do when blockers get to him?

Yeah it's gotta be a hard job scouting. That's why they get 6 figures to do it. You gotta look at these amazing players and decide who is smart enough to make similar plays in your system. I'll always say Shawn Williams was a product of lazy drafting. Anybody with a brain who checked his tape out would've known he wasn't gonna be the same player here. While he's not bad he's not good either. Put him on a team like Seattle and I bet he makes the pro bowl.

But back to your point it's gotta be a hefty task to gauge guys' mental aptitude to learn how to play with the big boys. Because physically EVERY prospect in the first couple rounds are gonna be athletic and impressive.

But what if there's a situation where you have a freak athlete linebacker on an undefeated team who makes a lot of plays against the run? But the reason he makes those plays is because he plays with a generational talent at DE who for whatever reason is really good at guessing which way runs will go and calls audibles from the line back to his linebackers? So now as a scouting dept you have to decide how good that freak athlete REALLY is without his star teammate. But the problem is you have NO TAPE of that kid because all his snaps are with the defensive lineman.

If you draft him and he sucks you look stupid but if you don't draft him and he shows promise you still look stupid


That's always been one job I'd never want in sports

(01-10-2017, 11:11 PM)Au165 Wrote: Huh? He ran a 4.58 and no one ever questioned his ability to be a 3 down backer. He was a sure fire top 10 pick his entire senior year.

People questioned his speed before the combine and even afterwards his critics claimed he didn't play to his 40 time on tape. 

I'll see if I can find some critiques. 

https://www.google.com/amp/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/1031882-luke-kuechly-2012-nfl-draft-scouting-report.amp.html?client=safari

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2012lkuechly.php

http://www.mynfldraft.com/NFL-Draft-Profiles/2012/Luke-Kuechly

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2012lkuechly.php

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/613

https://www.imgacademy.com/media/headline/luke-kuechly-ready-showcase-new-speed

http://sportsbreakcsn.blogspot.com/2012/03/luke-kuechly-draft-profile.html

http://gcobb.com/2012/02/16/luke-kuechly-has-it-all-but-his-speed-could-be-a-problem/

I couldn't find draft profiles from some of the more well known sites.  CBS has scrubbed their profile completely.  The last article noted Mayock was worried he might run a 4.8 at the combine.

Biggest knocks on Kuechly; too small, too slow, not enough splash plays, numbers inflated by tackles downfield beyond the line of scrimmage.  

(01-10-2017, 11:04 PM)Jpoore Wrote: oh I know that u didn't say he couldn't cover I was saying that as that is a key difference between him and malaluga. I wish people threw around him more never really got to see him in pass coverage. 

If you didn't see McMillan in pass coverage how do you know he can do what you just now admitted you never really got to see him do?

(01-11-2017, 01:06 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If you didn't see McMillan in pass coverage how do you know he can do what you just now admitted you never really got to see him do?

 I wanna see a bunch of plays. Most times they didn't throw his way bc he was covering the running back or tight end tightly. 

(01-11-2017, 01:09 AM)Jpoore Wrote:  I wanna see a bunch of plays. Most times they didn't throw his way bc he was covering the running back or tight end tightly. 

So he was in pass coverage covering the RB or TE tightly, but you "never really got to see him in pass coverage"?  Not only was he covering them tightly, he was a shut down pass coverage LB because he covered the RB or TE so damn tightly the QB didn't dare throw at him.  But, you never really got to see him in pass coverage?

How many times do you have to see the QB not throw his way because his pass coverage is too damn tight to be a "bunch of plays"?

Sounds a lot like that stat you made up earlier.  This is just ridiculous.

(Hint: if the QB doesn't throw his way because he is covering the RB or TE that is pass coverage.)

Please stop.

(01-11-2017, 01:21 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: So he was in pass coverage covering the RB or TE tightly, but you "never really got to see him in pass coverage"?  Not only was he covering them tightly, he was a shut down pass coverage LB because he covered the RB or TE so damn tightly the QB didn't dare throw at him.  But, you never really got to see him in pass coverage?

How many times do you have to see the QB not throw his way because his pass coverage is too damn tight to be a "bunch of plays"?

Sounds a lot like that stat you made up earlier.  This is just ridiculous.

(Hint: if the QB doesn't throw his way because he is covering the RB or TE that is pass coverage.)

Please stop.

I know that is part of pass coverage. My point is when the ball is thrown his way I want to see what his skills are like. 

(01-10-2017, 11:04 PM)Jpoore Wrote:  never really got to see him in pass coverage

(01-11-2017, 01:09 AM)Jpoore Wrote:  they didn't throw his way bc he was covering

(01-11-2017, 01:49 AM)Jpoore Wrote: I know that is part of pass coverage

Cool story.

If the QBs won't throw at a LB because of his tight pass coverage I think that tells you what you need to know about a LBs pass coverage ability.  I think you could sum it up as follows:

Pass Coverage:  Tight coverage on RBs and TEs, couldn't evaluate ball skills because QBs are afraid to throw at him.  Jpoore out.

(01-10-2017, 08:53 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It's rare a 4-3 LB is going to get that, whereas 3-4 teams are looking for those types of OLBs.

I couldn't even tell you the last 4-3 LB who got that many sacks.

 Boulware with the Ravens?  They ran a 4-3 during their first Super Bowl season.  

(01-11-2017, 03:11 AM)t3r3e3 Wrote:  Boulware with the Ravens?  They ran a 4-3 during their first Super Bowl season.  

One time 16 years ago?  Wow, that's even more rare than I thought.

(01-11-2017, 02:17 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Cool story.

If the QBs won't throw at a LB because of his tight pass coverage I think that tells you what you need to know about a LBs pass coverage ability.  I think you could sum it up as follows:

Pass Coverage:  Tight coverage on RBs and TEs, couldn't evaluate ball skills because QBs are afraid to throw at him.  Jpoore out.

What I mean is in the Wisconsin game they threw a floater on a wheel route I think? He looked lost. Just want to know if that's how he looks other times they throw aT him. 

(01-11-2017, 04:13 AM)Jpoore Wrote: What I mean is in the Wisconsin game they threw a floater on a wheel route I think? He looked lost. Just want to know if that's how he looks other times they throw aT him. 

So one QB threw at him one time?  And you didn't see him in coverage much because QBs rarely tested his pass coverage skills (except once during the Wisconsin game) because he covered the RBs and TEs so tightly that it prevented the QBs from throwing his way.  So you think you need to see more QBs throw his direction to evaluate his pass coverage skills because you weren't able to evaluate his pass coverage skills while the ball was in the air because QBs were too scared to even put the ball in the air to test his pass coverage skills which prevented you from seeing McMillan in pass coverage?

If they rarely throw his direction due to his pass coverage, what difference will it make what he looks like with the ball in the air if they rarely put the ball in the air because his pass coverage prevents the QB from even putting the ball in the air in his direction in the first place?  You're not evaluating a DB.  Do you know what we would call a cornerback QBs wouldn't throw at because of their pass coverage back in the day?  Darrelle Revis.  QBs wouldn't throw at Darrelle Revis because of his pass coverage . . . wait for it . . . before the ball was in the air.  

This conversation is like peeling an onion one layer of made up bullshit after another layer of made up bullshit.  Like your made up stats.  Redonkulous.

(01-10-2017, 11:58 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: People questioned his speed before the combine and even afterwards his critics claimed he didn't play to his 40 time on tape. 

I'll see if I can find some critiques. 

https://www.google.com/amp/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/1031882-luke-kuechly-2012-nfl-draft-scouting-report.amp.html?client=safari

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2012lkuechly.php

http://www.mynfldraft.com/NFL-Draft-Profiles/2012/Luke-Kuechly

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2012lkuechly.php

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/613

https://www.imgacademy.com/media/headline/luke-kuechly-ready-showcase-new-speed

http://sportsbreakcsn.blogspot.com/2012/03/luke-kuechly-draft-profile.html

http://gcobb.com/2012/02/16/luke-kuechly-has-it-all-but-his-speed-could-be-a-problem/

I couldn't find draft profiles from some of the more well known sites.  CBS has scrubbed their profile completely.  The last article noted Mayock was worried he might run a 4.8 at the combine.

Biggest knocks on Kuechly; too small, too slow, not enough splash plays, numbers inflated by tackles downfield beyond the line of scrimmage.  

Most the big places had him as the top LB the entire year.

Mayock's take: "I call him Clark Kent, and he can turn into Superman on Saturdays and Sundays. He's one of the cleanest players in this draft. His instincts and his pass-coverage ability might be the best of any linebacker I've seen come out of the draft."

Mel Kiper had him Mocked as the best 4-3 LB in the draft heading into his last year. 

No one is a perfectly clean prospect everyone could be bigger, faster, stronger and so they normally throw out something to have an "out" when they fail ,but Kuechly was about as clean a LB prospect as we have seen in the last 15 years.

(01-11-2017, 09:36 AM)Au165 Wrote: Most the big places had him as the top LB the entire year.

Mayock's take: "I call him Clark Kent, and he can turn into Superman on Saturdays and Sundays. He's one of the cleanest players in this draft. His instincts and his pass-coverage ability might be the best of any linebacker I've seen come out of the draft."

Mel Kiper had him Mocked  as the best 4-3 LB in the draft heading into his last year. 

No one is a perfectly clean prospect everyone could be bigger, faster, stronger and so they normally throw out something to have an "out" when they fail ,but Kuechly was about as clean a LB prospect as we have seen in the last 15 years.

I know they had him rated high, but many questioned his speed, size, athleticism. Some of the critiques are embarrassing to read. Man, I wish we could still read OSUfan's comments. F'n comedy gold. 

(01-10-2017, 11:58 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: People questioned his speed before the combine and even afterwards his critics claimed he didn't play to his 40 time on tape. 

I'll see if I can find some critiques. 

https://www.google.com/amp/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/1031882-luke-kuechly-2012-nfl-draft-scouting-report.amp.html?client=safari

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2012lkuechly.php

http://www.mynfldraft.com/NFL-Draft-Profiles/2012/Luke-Kuechly

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2012lkuechly.php

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/613

https://www.imgacademy.com/media/headline/luke-kuechly-ready-showcase-new-speed

http://sportsbreakcsn.blogspot.com/2012/03/luke-kuechly-draft-profile.html

http://gcobb.com/2012/02/16/luke-kuechly-has-it-all-but-his-speed-could-be-a-problem/

I couldn't find draft profiles from some of the more well known sites.  CBS has scrubbed their profile completely.  The last article noted Mayock was worried he might run a 4.8 at the combine.

Biggest knocks on Kuechly; too small, too slow, not enough splash plays, numbers inflated by tackles downfield beyond the line of scrimmage.  

Here's the NFL.com draft profile for Kuechly.
http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/luke-kuechly?id=2533056

Quote:Overview
Kuechly had one of the most productive careers, in terms of tackles, in recent memory for a collegiate linebacker. Kuechly blew away the competition as the top tackler in the nation with a jaw-dropping 191 total. Many knock that most of his plays were downfield tackles and not "influential" enough, but 12 tackles for loss is a testament to his overall ability and instincts to get in the backfield and disrupt plays. He is more of an athlete than given credit for and has simply been a machine throughout his college career. Kuechly has all the tools to be an immediate starter in the NFL and shore up the middle of an entire defense.

Analysis

Strengths
Kuechly is one of the most instinctual and technically sound linebackers to enter the draft in years, and he had the tackle production throughout his career to back it up. He is able to avoid trash at his knees and is elite when it comes to shedding blockers and keeping himself free to the ball. He is excellent working over the top of tight ends to maul and delay their release, and is capable of running with them in-phase down the field. He has the sudden burst and long speed to cover a very wide range against the run and is an extremely sure-handed tackler who can bring ball carriers down a number of different ways.
Weaknesses
The major knock on Kuechly is that he had a lot of "inflated" tackle production throughout his career, the idea being that he is indeed a superb tackler but most of those tackles came 5 to 8 yards downfield in pursuit. He didn't get up into the line of scrimmage to make powerful, impactful plays much, and won't be relied upon as a pass rusher at the next level and is strictly a tackling, sideline-to-sideline backer.

One thing that stands out is that Kuechly was criticized for not having enough "impactful/influential" plays, but still had 12 TFL his senior year. TFL is kind of like a sack.
Reuben Foster had 13.0 TFL in 2016. In 2015, he had 8.0 TFL.
McMillan, on the other hand, had just 8.0 TFL in 2016 and just 4.0 TFL in 2015.
McMillan simply does not make as many "impactful/influential" plays as Foster has.
There's a reason McMillan is rated as a 2-3 round player and Foster is rated as the top ILB.
McMillan will likely be a very solid, but unspectacular player in the NFL, whereas Foster has a good chance of being a difference maker.

(01-11-2017, 10:41 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Here's the NFL.com draft profile for Kuechly.
http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/luke-kuechly?id=2533056


One thing that stands out is that Kuechly was criticized for not having enough "impactful/influential" plays, but still had 12 TFL his senior year. TFL is kind of like a sack.
Reuben Foster had 13.0 TFL in 2016. In 2015, he had 8.0 TFL.
McMillan, on the other hand, had just 8.0 TFL in 2016 and just 4.0 TFL in 2015.
McMillan simply does not make as many "impactful/influential" plays as Foster has.
There's a reason McMillan is rated as a 2-3 round player and Foster is rated as the top ILB.
McMillan will likely be a very solid, but unspectacular player in the NFL, whereas Foster has a good chance of being a difference maker.

To follow this up, I found this from NFL.com back in September where a NFL scout was quoted saying Reuben Foster compares to Luke Kuechly. Essentially, at least one NFL scout feels that Foster has the makings to be a star.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000706663/article/sources-tell-us-scout-compares-reuben-foster-to-luke-kuechly

(01-10-2017, 10:04 AM)corpjet Wrote: this is exactly what we need on defense, he can be our Kuechly, Ray "the muderer" Lewis and Junior Seau of our defense......please for the love of God fall to us in the draft!

Not that I don't love Foster, but what exactly does he bring to the table that Burfict doesn't.

(01-10-2017, 10:04 AM)corpjet Wrote: this is exactly what we need on defense, he can be our Kuechly, Ray "the muderer" Lewis and Junior Seau of our defense......please for the love of God fall to us in the draft!

He can be our little murderer like ray huh

(01-11-2017, 05:54 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: Not that I don't love Foster, but what exactly does he bring to the table that Burfict doesn't.

Thats what i was gonna say and u said it for me