Michael Johnson must stop showing people how to . . .

[fredtoast]

(04-09-2017, 06:11 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: First and foremost, this is a terrible year for Tackles. More than one of the supposed 2016 collegiate top T's are projected to be Guards at the NFL level. Barnett's D gave up 31,45,49,&24 points in games played in October. Tennessee lost three of those four games.

So who were all of the other DEs around the country playing against?

Who cares how many points the team gave up?

Who cares if tennessee won?  Does the Bengals only winning 6 games last year mean genmo Atkins sucked?

If competitionall across the country was down then why didn't all of the other DEs have a lot more sacks than Barnett?

[fredtoast]

(04-09-2017, 06:11 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: Your Tennessee bias is shining brightly! And these numbers are misleading. Kudos to the kid for putting up such good numbers, but it may as well been you or I trying to block him in many of his games.

Then who do you like that faced so much better competition?

Show me a list of the great OTs that your favorite player thrived against.

And how low are you dropping Garrett in the draft because hje played against such weak SEC competition?

[Socal Bengals fan]

Barnette is a stud. Looks like a scrappy player not the most physically gifted but gets the job done . I'm worried the Panthers will draft him anyways.

[coachmcneil71]

(04-10-2017, 08:46 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So who were all of the other DEs around the country playing against?

Who cares how many points the team gave up?

Who cares if tennessee won?  Does the Bengals only winning 6 games last year mean genmo Atkins sucked?

If competitionall across the country was down then why didn't all of the other DEs have a lot more sacks than Barnett?

I already showed you who he faced from the last week of Sept through the end of October. That was the best two tackles that he faced all year in the SEC. Never said that the kid couldn't be good. What I said is that at the next level he will be facing professional grown men & that he needs to bulk up.

He carries risk at #9 & may not be an immediate impact player. Same can be said for the other available pass rushers but they won't be getting picked in the top ten.

(04-10-2017, 08:49 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Then who do you like that faced so much better competition?

Show me a list of the great OTs that your favorite player thrived against.

And how low are you dropping Garrett in the draft because hje played against such weak SEC competition?

That's the difference between the way that you & I view the draft. I don't have "a favorite". I look at the teams weaknesses or needs. Then I evaluate the best means by which to address those concerns.

If we can address a weakness at #9 & then address another in the next Rd or later, I'm all for it. I already listed several players that I would be content with at the #9 spot. I'm not knocking your boy, Fred. I'm just shedding light on the things he will need to improve upon at the NFL level.

I don't fall in love with any one prospect at any position. I tend to step back and look at the big picture. 

As for Garrett, he has inflated stats as well. Especially considering the watered down competition that he faced. That said, he is 6'5" has a tremendous first step & is 20 pounds heavier. He should contribute immediately. You don't need me to explain the difference's between the two, Fred. You already know which one is more NFL ready, and it's not the Tennessee player.

[fredtoast]

(04-10-2017, 03:30 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: I already showed you who he faced from the last week of Sept through the end of October. That was the best two tackles that he faced all year in the SEC. Never said that the kid couldn't be good. What I said is that at the next level he will be facing professional grown men & that he needs to bulk up.

He carries risk at #9 & may not be an immediate impact player. Same can be said for the other available pass rushers but they won't be getting picked in the top ten.

That's the difference between the way that you & I view the draft. I don't have "a favorite". I look at the teams weaknesses or needs. Then I evaluate the best means by which to address those concerns.

If we can address a weakness at #9 & then address another in the next Rd or later, I'm all for it. I already listed several players that I would be content with at the #9 spot. I'm not knocking your boy, Fred. I'm just shedding light on the things he will need to improve upon at the NFL level.

I don't fall in love with any one prospect at any position. I tend to step back and look at the big picture. 

As for Garrett, he has inflated stats as well. Especially considering the watered down competition that he faced. That said, he is 6'5" has a tremendous first step & is 20 pounds heavier. He should contribute immediately. You don't need me to explain the difference's between the two, Fred. You already know which one is more NFL ready, and it's not the Tennessee player.

You can't call the SEC competition "watered down" unless you can say who faced the top competition.

Otherwise you are sayinbg that we need to discount every single DE in the draft.  How does having a weak class of OTs suddenly make all the DEs worse?

And why don't you look at any other seasons except '16? Are you saying there have not been any good college offensive tackles in the last three years?

[coachmcneil71]

Here's the list of OTs that were taken from the SEC through the first 5 RDS of the 2016 draft.

Infedi 1st....He's a G at the NFL level.

L. Tunsil 1st.. He's a G.

S. Coleman 3rd ....Well, he is still a Tackle albeit a back up that has never started a game.

J. Hawkins 4th... He's still listed as a Tackle. Spent the year on IR.

John Theus 5th...Still a Tackle!! Active for 4 games...Started 1.

B. Shell 5th....Tackle. Started 3 games.

I purposely left out Cooper. Didn't figure the need to continually trounce you anymore.

This was the bumper crop of SEC Tackles that were drafted n 2016. Scary bunch of O-lineman there!!!!

Just stop! Take your ball and go home. Did I say, "Watered down?" Why yes, yes I did. School's out and I'm going on Summer vacation. Done with you on this.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-10-2017, 01:43 AM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: I think most of us agree that Barnett has a great nose for the ball. He may very well be a stud. TS, at #9 he carries serious concern.

Fournette carries risk, but the upside is just too overwhelming to pass up. They should race to the podium if he's still there.

If he's gone (Panthers & Jets) then the next three players that are close to sure things imo are Adams,Foster, & Howard.
Robinson could be there, but at #9 I'm not so sure he's worthy of that pick.

As was mentioned by a friend earlier, Howard is really intriguing with the continued TE situation. Lack of toughness being a severe problem with that group in particular. 

I like Barnett, but he worries me at #9 for reasons I previously mentioned. I like the depth of this draft at pass rusher/ DE, so I think we can still get a very good one in the 2nd or wait & double up on a couple good one's in the 3rd/4th.

Another nice post Coach, i agree with everything you say here even about Fournette who i would be for even if i
like Dalvin Cook and Joe Mixon better for us. Fournette does not have those red flags off the field and is so damn
fast for a big RB with power it is hard to even compare him to anybody, maybe Earl Campbell.

High praise, i know. But he has that kind of speed and can catch the ball out of the backfield so he wouldn't make
us predictable like Hill does now. We should take a gamechanger at 9, whether it is Howard, Fournette, Ross etc.

Then get the DE in the 2nd, lots of talented Ends will be there.