Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: 20th pick will be... « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5

PassThePigSkin

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2447
Offline
#30 : January 16, 2011, 11:05:37 AM

Adrian Clayborn!! It will happen people this guy is the best complete end of the whole draft.

why will the best complete end fall behind other DE's all the way to 20?

He's not the physical freak that can play OLB and DE like the other  guys.

PassThePigSkin

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2447
Offline
#31 : January 16, 2011, 11:10:32 AM

We have too many stat sheet scouts making judgements based on his stats for this season. Watch his game. Watch how he uses his hands. Watch how he holds the point. Watch how he overpowers OTs. His game translates very well.

He's the 2nd best DE in this class.

Thank you. That is what i'm talking about the guy can uses his hands and direct traffic.  He had 10 Tackles in that Penn State game he was a monster in that game.

bucs63

*
Starter
****
Posts : 842
Offline
#32 : January 16, 2011, 11:32:22 AM

Chris Colmer, RIP. He was over it too.

Erb Palsy? If that makes him fall to #20, I'm glad he has it. The assault charge doesn't bother me either. So he's a nasty bad ass thug. That's what this D-line needs.

ZzJewbaccazZ

****
Starter

Posts : 500
Offline
#33 : January 16, 2011, 11:36:09 AM

Clayborn's also a cryer.

..

bucs63

*
Starter
****
Posts : 842
Offline
#34 : January 16, 2011, 11:38:03 AM

Clayborn's also a cryer.
So was Brett Favre

ZzJewbaccazZ

****
Starter

Posts : 500
Offline
#35 : January 16, 2011, 11:39:34 AM

Just sayin'

..

jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13589
Offline
#36 : January 16, 2011, 12:07:19 PM

DaRealDeal, I'm willing to accept a DEGREE of your point; we don't watch all of his games and there's only so much you can draw from highlight films. Furthermore, there is an aspect of tackle totals that is deceiving of course; great team defenses have lower individual tackle totals because they get off the field quicker. But four sacks over the course of a season .... tough to see that as a potential double-digit sack guy on the next level.

In Verner We Trust

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
#37 : January 16, 2011, 12:15:15 PM

If he's so good, why does everyone have 5 or 6 DEs going before him?


jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13589
Offline
#38 : January 16, 2011, 12:18:49 PM

So you like him as a run stuffer. That's nice. But if he's getting four or five sacks a season, that's not nearly good enough.

In Verner We Trust

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
#39 : January 16, 2011, 12:21:45 PM

So you like him as a run stuffer. That's nice. But if he's getting four or five sacks a season, that's not nearly good enough.

I guess it depends on your personal opinion. To me, a run stuffing DE that can only get occasional pressure and a 4 sacks a year....definitely is not worth a 1st round pick. 


DaRealdeal

*
Rookie
**
Posts : 41
Offline
#40 : January 16, 2011, 12:23:44 PM

DaRealDeal, I'm willing to accept a DEGREE of your point; we don't watch all of his games and there's only so much you can draw from highlight films. Furthermore, there is an aspect of tackle totals that is deceiving of course; great team defenses have lower individual tackle totals because they get off the field quicker. But four sacks over the course of a season .... tough to see that as a potential double-digit sack guy on the next level.

His play was underwhelming this year, no doubt about it. He wasn't the same consistent force he was last year. Part of that was due to added attention, but the other part is up for interpretation. Was it due to him gaining some weight and losing explosiveness, or was his junior year a flash in the pan? It depends on who you talk to, but I'm inclined to believe the former. I watched his games against Penn State and Wisconsin and I saw a guy that could still do some serious damage as a pass rusher and as a run-defender.

What I want is a little more consistency, though. Most Bucs fans get all warm and fuzzy when a mock draft gives us Robert Quinn, but they hate it when we get Clayborn. Why? In 2009 Clayborn out-produced Quinn across the board in a tougher conference. This year Clayborn's play fell off a bit, but Quinn didn't play AT ALL. It's fair to say that 2010 was a disappointment for both players, right? Then why is Quinn given the benefit of the doubt when Clayborn isn't?

JDouble

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 29156
Offline
#41 : January 16, 2011, 12:26:41 PM

DaRealDeal, I'm willing to accept a DEGREE of your point; we don't watch all of his games and there's only so much you can draw from highlight films. Furthermore, there is an aspect of tackle totals that is deceiving of course; great team defenses have lower individual tackle totals because they get off the field quicker. But four sacks over the course of a season .... tough to see that as a potential double-digit sack guy on the next level.

His play was underwhelming this year, no doubt about it. He wasn't the same consistent force he was last year. Part of that was due to added attention, but the other part is up for interpretation. Was it due to him gaining some weight and losing explosiveness, or was his junior year a flash in the pan? It depends on who you talk to, but I'm inclined to believe the former. I watched his games against Penn State and Wisconsin and I saw a guy that could still do some serious damage as a pass rusher and as a run-defender.

What I want is a little more consistency, though. Most Bucs fans get all warm and fuzzy when a mock draft gives us Robert Quinn, but they hate it when we get Clayborn. Why? In 2009 Clayborn out-produced Quinn across the board in a tougher conference. This year Clayborn's play fell off a bit, but Quinn didn't play AT ALL. It's fair to say that 2010 was a disappointment for both players, right? Then why is Quinn given the benefit of the doubt when Clayborn isn't?


They get excited over Quinn because you can watch his film and easily see he is a freak play maker.....which is what you want in the 1st round.
: January 16, 2011, 12:28:14 PM JDouble


DaRealdeal

*
Rookie
**
Posts : 41
Offline
#42 : January 16, 2011, 12:32:52 PM

DaRealDeal, I'm willing to accept a DEGREE of your point; we don't watch all of his games and there's only so much you can draw from highlight films. Furthermore, there is an aspect of tackle totals that is deceiving of course; great team defenses have lower individual tackle totals because they get off the field quicker. But four sacks over the course of a season .... tough to see that as a potential double-digit sack guy on the next level.

His play was underwhelming this year, no doubt about it. He wasn't the same consistent force he was last year. Part of that was due to added attention, but the other part is up for interpretation. Was it due to him gaining some weight and losing explosiveness, or was his junior year a flash in the pan? It depends on who you talk to, but I'm inclined to believe the former. I watched his games against Penn State and Wisconsin and I saw a guy that could still do some serious damage as a pass rusher and as a run-defender.

What I want is a little more consistency, though. Most Bucs fans get all warm and fuzzy when a mock draft gives us Robert Quinn, but they hate it when we get Clayborn. Why? In 2009 Clayborn out-produced Quinn across the board in a tougher conference. This year Clayborn's play fell off a bit, but Quinn didn't play AT ALL. It's fair to say that 2010 was a disappointment for both players, right? Then why is Quinn given the benefit of the doubt when Clayborn isn't?


They get excited over Quinn because you can watch his film and easily see he is a freak play maker.....which is what you want in the 1st round.

2009 Clayborn:
70 Tackles
20 Tackles-for-Loss
11.5 Sacks
9 QB Hurries
4 Forced Fumbles
1 Blocked Punt

2009 Quinn:
52 Tackles
19 Tackles-for-Loss
11 Sacks
12 QB Hurries
6 Forced Fumbles

So, Clayborn had more Tackles, more Tackles-for-loss and more Sacks, but Quinn is somehow viewed as this freak playmaker while Clayborn is some fat turd? I don't get it.

BucMyLife

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1754
Offline
#43 : January 16, 2011, 12:46:13 PM

Originally Posted by herkyhawkeye http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2479929#post2479929
"Clayborn if he wants to work hard and get back in the right state of mind, He will be a stud for some team. This year he wasnt. He gained weight, Became full of himself, and was out of shape for much of the season. He gave up on plays multiple times a game and is a very poor tackler. Very risky prospect because the guy has it but you dont know if he will revert back to his Junior season form. Bigtime hit or miss NFL prospect."

I saw the same thing and only watched his bowl game. lol

Clayborn was the same player just got a lot more attention after having a breakout year. Let me know what other Talent was on the Dline with him, with Morris as his coach dedication won't be a problem. I'm pretty sure clayborn will be one of the best rookie DE's next year write it down. Before I clicked on the link I thought it was something officially said about him not a fans say.

Why would you not think it wasn't a fan? I thought I made it clear who posted this. lol

The quest for .500 begins...

BucMyLife

*
Pro Bowler
*****
Posts : 1754
Offline
#44 : January 16, 2011, 12:48:43 PM

DaRealDeal, I'm willing to accept a DEGREE of your point; we don't watch all of his games and there's only so much you can draw from highlight films. Furthermore, there is an aspect of tackle totals that is deceiving of course; great team defenses have lower individual tackle totals because they get off the field quicker. But four sacks over the course of a season .... tough to see that as a potential double-digit sack guy on the next level.

His play was underwhelming this year, no doubt about it. He wasn't the same consistent force he was last year. Part of that was due to added attention, but the other part is up for interpretation. Was it due to him gaining some weight and losing explosiveness, or was his junior year a flash in the pan? It depends on who you talk to, but I'm inclined to believe the former. I watched his games against Penn State and Wisconsin and I saw a guy that could still do some serious damage as a pass rusher and as a run-defender.

What I want is a little more consistency, though. Most Bucs fans get all warm and fuzzy when a mock draft gives us Robert Quinn, but they hate it when we get Clayborn. Why? In 2009 Clayborn out-produced Quinn across the board in a tougher conference. This year Clayborn's play fell off a bit, but Quinn didn't play AT ALL. It's fair to say that 2010 was a disappointment for both players, right? Then why is Quinn given the benefit of the doubt when Clayborn isn't?


They get excited over Quinn because you can watch his film and easily see he is a freak play maker.....which is what you want in the 1st round.

2009 Clayborn:
70 Tackles
20 Tackles-for-Loss
11.5 Sacks
9 QB Hurries
4 Forced Fumbles
1 Blocked Punt

2009 Quinn:
52 Tackles
19 Tackles-for-Loss
11 Sacks
12 QB Hurries
6 Forced Fumbles

So, Clayborn had more Tackles, more Tackles-for-loss and more Sacks, but Quinn is somehow viewed as this freak playmaker while Clayborn is some fat turd? I don't get it.

lol :)

The quest for .500 begins...
Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: 20th pick will be... « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools