Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
In defense of Lou's 21 and 22
#36
(12-04-2024, 06:41 PM)Synric Wrote: It's not about how pff graded Bates it's what having Bates allowed the team to do on defense in underneath coverage. It's not a coincidence that those are Bell, Wilson, and Pratts best pff coverage years.

Bates and Reader never really got hype or glazing nationally.  They didn't play stat heavy positions.  Even so, how many guys in the league can hold down single high like Bates did?  Not many at all.  It's tough to replace that with a prospect or even a veteran.  The inventory just isn't there.  

Same for Reader.  He's never going to make Aaron Donald money, but finding a guy that can do what he does at his level is extremely hard.  NT might be the literal hardest position to judge when it comes to college prospects.  You just don't know until you see them on the field vs grown man professionals.  Shelvin was a monster size wise and played well vs SEC competition.  He played one of the toughest schedules imaginable in the Burrow title year.  He was also terrible in the NFL.  
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - 125250 - 12-04-2024, 06:34 PM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - J24 - 12-04-2024, 06:59 PM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - Synric - 12-04-2024, 06:41 PM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - samhain - 12-07-2024, 01:37 PM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - Destro - 12-04-2024, 06:45 PM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - Destro - 12-04-2024, 08:59 PM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - jason - 12-04-2024, 08:27 PM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - Housh - 12-05-2024, 10:47 AM
RE: In defense of Lou's 21 and 22 - Dr.Z - 12-07-2024, 12:57 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 12 Guest(s)