https://x.com/the33rdteamfb/status/1774180297564737979?s=46&t=1vcQIN8GqF5J2oLdxEVEJQ
So a good thing that if we take one in R1 it will likely be WR 2 or 3?! =))
Honestly let's pay more to intangibles. If there's an entourage or posse, be careful. Gun incident? Be careful. Rumored assault? Be careful.
Dont just pretend this smoke means there is no fire.
AJ Brown and DK Metcalf were clearly the best wrs their year and got to the 2nd rd.
Quote from: Jclayton92 on March 30, 2024, 09:00:23 PMAJ Brown and DK Metcalf were clearly the best wrs their year and got to the 2nd rd.
100% which is why this rush to the top 3 makes little sense. It is rare that the so-called top player is actually the top player.
I will say that with Rashee Rice the latest player with college issues off field to potentially find trouble again I do think in this WR class we should be more wary of Nabers blemishes than many here seem to be. Reports of him having an 'entourage' on visits/meetings etc. does suggest he is the latest LSU "big personality" WR. In contrast everybody raves about Odunze as a character, person and leader. Harrison has his ultra-professional upbringing and lineage and a profile so low off the field he is nearly invisible.
We are in transition with issues around our HC's demeanour and two established locker room leaders departed. We are not the ideal environment to try to keep someone with any fragilities on the straight and narrow. Our track record with red flag guys like Baker and Toney is also not encouraging. I do not have a red flag on Nabers but he is definitely an amber. It matters IMO.
Quote from: londonblue on March 31, 2024, 10:10:39 AMI will say that with Rashee Rice the latest player with college issues off field to potentially find trouble again I do think in this WR class we should be more wary of Nabers blemishes than many here seem to be. Reports of him having an 'entourage' on visits/meetings etc. does suggest he is the latest LSU "big personality" WR. In contrast everybody raves about Odunze as a character, person and leader. Harrison has his ultra-professional upbringing and lineage and a profile so low off the field he is nearly invisible.
We are in transition with issues around our HC's demeanour and two established locker room leaders departed. We are not the ideal environment to try to keep someone with any fragilities on the straight and narrow. Our track record with red flag guys like Baker and Toney is also not encouraging. I do not have a red flag on Nabers but he is definitely an amber. It matters IMO.
This!!!
Before their "bad noise and drama" entered the picture how many years of great production did we actually get from Plax and OBJ?
Marvin Harrison, Larry Fitzgerald, etc gave their teams a decade plus. Focus on character.
If we get 2 years of Nabers being great then some kind of implosion, it was a bad pick.
What does that prove other than WR1 guesses, although no more accurate/reliable than those for QB1, are less burdened by our expectations and thus "success" is not so rigidly anchored to Draft position?
Cheers!
Shouldn't be too surprised at this, as the position itself is heavily drafted throughout every round. Throw more darts, land more bullseyes. Also first pick WRs are naturally going to worse team environments.
Being so hell-bent on "intangibles" that you steer clear of anyone who had "smoke" around him is a methodology that would have eliminated a lot of players from one's draft board who ended up being good if not great NFL players:
Micah Parsons
Brandon Flowers
Navorro Bowman
Laremy Tunsiil
Frank Clark
Alvin Kamara
Tyrann Matthieu
Joe Mixon
Those are just a handful of examples.
I'm not saying it's a bad approach to steer clear of anyone with even a minor incident or minor rumors on his resume. But anyone who wants to take that approach needs to own the fact that they're going to miss out on a lot of good to great NFL players with that approach.
For me, it's case-by-case. Young people make mistakes sometimes. That doesn't mean all of them are long term bad apples.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on March 31, 2024, 11:31:04 AMBeing so hell-bent on "intangibles" that you steer clear of anyone who had "smoke" around him is a methodology that would have eliminated a lot of players from one's draft board who ended up being good if not great NFL players:
Micah Parsons
Brandon Flowers
Navorro Bowman
Laremy Tunsiil
Frank Clark
Alvin Kamara
Tyrann Matthieu
Joe Mixon
Those are just a handful of examples.
I'm not saying it's a bad approach to steer clear of anyone with even a minor incident or minor rumors on his resume. But anyone who wants to take that approach needs to own the fact that they're going to miss out on a lot of good to great NFL players with that approach.
For me, it's case-by-case. Young people make mistakes sometimes. That doesn't mean all of them are long term bad apples.
There's a difference between Tunsil smoking pot and Joe Mixon punching a woman in the face.
Don't conflate minor issues with assaulting a woman.
I believe it is error to conclude from the original post that immediate success = better draft pick.
It depends to which team the player goes.
A great WR might go to a team with a veteran number-one WR, or to a team with a young (or lousy) QB.
There are many other reasons along the same line of thinking.
My point is that if Harrison (for example) doesn't shine next year, it will not mean he was a lousy draft pick.
Bob
Quote from: Hadron on March 31, 2024, 11:26:01 PMThere's a difference between Tunsil smoking pot and Joe Mixon punching a woman in the face.
Don't conflate minor issues with assaulting a woman.
Before you hand out lectures to people, I recommend re-reading their posts and making certain you understand what they have written.
I gave a list of players whose stock dropped due to "character concerns" or off the field problems. Nowhere in my post did I say or even remotely imply that the various reasons for each player being on the list were equal or even close in severity. There was nothing in my post that suggested I think this.
That you couldn't understand this, and that you would then claim I think smoking weed is equal to beating up a woman would normally be something I would take exception to, but it is so absurdly preposterous that I can't simply take you or your post seriously.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 01, 2024, 05:13:37 PMBefore you hand out lectures to people, I recommend re-reading their posts and making certain you understand what they have written.
I gave a list of players whose stock dropped due to "character concerns" or off the field problems. Nowhere in my post did I say or even remotely imply that the various reasons for each player being on the list were equal or even close in severity. There was nothing in my post that suggested I think this.
That you couldn't understand this, and that you would then claim I think smoking weed is equal to beating up a woman would normally be something I would take exception to, but it is so absurdly preposterous that I can't simply take you or your post seriously.
I was speaking in general terms. Of course I believe it's a case by case base, much like you stated in your post.
Calm down.
Quote from: Hadron on April 01, 2024, 07:06:59 PMI was speaking in general terms. Of course I believe it's a case by case base, much like you stated in your post.
Calm down.
How was what you just said to me "speaking in general terms"? You were very specifically referring to what I wrote in my post and lecturing me on something that I wasn't even doing.
If you want to say you misunderstood or misspoke, then that's fine, but if not, at least own your own words.
Quote from: DaveBrown74 on April 01, 2024, 07:14:40 PMHow was what you just said to me "speaking in general terms"? You were very specifically referring to what I wrote in my post and lecturing me on something that I wasn't even doing.
If you want to say you misunderstood or misspoke, then that's fine, but if not, at least own your own words.
I was commenting on the severity of the warts that these players possessed, not saying that you were advocating for them.
I can give you an example of targeting/lecturing you if it makes you feel better or you can move on. Pettiness doesn't provide value to the board.
Quote from: Hadron on April 01, 2024, 09:35:18 PMI was commenting on the severity of the warts that these players possessed, not saying that you were advocating for them.
I can give you an example of targeting/lecturing you if it makes you feel better or you can move on. Pettiness doesn't provide value to the board.
You literally instructed me not to "conflate minor issues with assaulting a woman", when I was doing absolutely nothing of the sort, and it was obvious I was not. What kind of a reaction do you expect when you accuse someone of something like that? And then you call me "petty" for defending myself and pointing out that your comment was completely off base, which it was.
I provide plenty of value to this board. I think you are the one who should move on, sir.