sschumer - Packer Fan HoF'r posted:

New OLB coach Mike Smith just shared how excited he is about Rashan Gary, and more importantly why.  I thought he presented a very clear, compelling case for Gary.  Worth listening to a replay of once posted.

Not impressed. The guy still hasn’t had a single NFL sack. Pathetic.

sschumer - Packer Fan HoF'r posted:
sschumer - Packer Fan HoF'r posted:

New OLB coach Mike Smith just shared how excited he is about Rashan Gary, and more importantly why.  I thought he presented a very clear, compelling case for Gary.  Worth listening to a replay of once posted.

"Smith has never seen size and speed with athleticism like Rashan Gary":  https://www.packers.com/video/...ism-like-rashan-gary   

I got goose bumps listening to coach Smith.

BrainDed posted:

Circle Jerk.  What do you think his position coach is going to say?  "I wanted the LT so the guys we got could get some reps against someone other than Spriggs."

This.

I challenge anyone to find a clip of a coach/GM/scout/etc. who, at the time of a pick or just after, had negative things to say about the pick.  Similar to what BD says above.  No player, coach, GM or anyone directly associated with a pro team is gonna say they don't like a pick or he wasn't the guy they wanted, or they're not thrilled to get so and so.  Probably same for former college teammates and coaches.  It just doesn't happen.

And all you bitchin' about posters not liking the pick, and how those posters don't know anything compared to the professional scouts/coaches/etc., get over yourselves.  This is a message board.  Opinions are shared.  Those same experts who poured hours of their time to research and make the Rashan Gary pick are the same experts who can make sh!tty picks in every draft.

Were there different experts or was less time put in from the people who wanted the Packers to draft Kenny Clark and also Jason Spriggs??

What about HaHa and Davante?  Different amount of time invested in researching those two's talents, right?

The lists can go on an on.  

 

All indications are the organization sincerely believes he was one of the best players in the draft and time will ultimately tell if their judgement was correct.  Do think it's fair to say that given his physical skills it wouldn't have taken much more production at UM to push him into the top five.

PackLandVA posted:
BrainDed posted:

Circle Jerk.  What do you think his position coach is going to say?  "I wanted the LT so the guys we got could get some reps against someone other than Spriggs."

This.

I challenge anyone to find a clip of a coach/GM/scout/etc. who, at the time of a pick or just after, had negative things to say about the pick.  Similar to what BD says above.  No player, coach, GM or anyone directly associated with a pro team is gonna say they don't like a pick or he wasn't the guy they wanted, or they're not thrilled to get so and so.  Probably same for former college teammates and coaches.  It just doesn't happen.

And all you bitchin' about posters not liking the pick, and how those posters don't know anything compared to the professional scouts/coaches/etc., get over yourselves.  This is a message board.  Opinions are shared.  Those same experts who poured hours of their time to research and make the Rashan Gary pick are the same experts who can make sh!tty picks in every draft.

Where there different experts or was less time put in from the people who wanted the Packers to draft Kenny Clark and also Jason Spriggs??

What about HaHa and Davante?  Different amount of time invested in researching those two's talents, right?

The lists can go on an on.  

 

Group A:  guys paid an obscene amount of money to watch football games with the sole purpose of identifying strengths & weaknesses of players.  Provided infinitely  more information about hundreds (thousands?) of players.  Gathers  weekly to daily to discuss said players & try to form a group consensus/ranking.  Personally meets with a subset of players team is interested in knowing more about.  Sh!t-canned from job for making too many mistakes.

Group B:  Internet jockeys that enjoy surfing draft sites & reading Mel Kiper's current draft book.  Often drunk when doing so.  Watches a few football games on a Saturday & a random Thursday/Friday.  Often drunk when doing so.  Happy to provide anonymous opinions on team's draft picks.  Often drunk when doing so.  Gets mad when other Internet jockeys question opinion (or is it drunk opinion?).

Please tell me which group I should put more stock into when I'm forming my own opinion of a draft pick.  Thank you for your advice.

Group C:  The ones who do such things as pick players by the color of their uniforms or other applied irrelevant criteria.  They exist - I met a few and they are very entertaining to listen to. 

Somehow Group A would seem to be a better bet.  However, I reserve the right to be wrong. 

i happen to think that if a coach was not big on a player, it's not that they would go out of their way to gush about that player, they would use the mantra "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all" - plus, for these coaches, they are also being evaluated and possibly looking for future jobs, so if the guy's opinion is 'all these guys are great' then that doesn't bode well for future gigs, as he would have missed on many of the prospects...i think he's pretty genuine in his belief in the kid.

Just because coaches don't say negative things about draft picks doesn't mean Smith's opinion is bullshit. Smith has a good reputation for developing talented edge players, much more so than his predecessor. If Moss were still the OLB coach I would have low expectations for Gary, but Smith is not Winston Moss and I don't think his optimism is a pipe dream. 

Does anyone think the Pack doesn't like Gary?  They used a first round pick on him, of ****ing course they are excited about him.  

Does anyone think guys who spend a lot of time examining all things NFL draft are in a more informed position?  Abso****inglutely.  Do those guys get things wrong?  No shit Sherlock.  Do some guys have a better track record than others?  Obviously (that might mean it isn't a crapshoot).  

Is this a message board where people express opinions, some less informed than others?  Am I running out of rhetorical questions?  No gawdamn way.  

Image result for captain obvious gif

FinnLander posted:
PackLandVA posted:
BrainDed posted:

Circle Jerk.  What do you think his position coach is going to say?  "I wanted the LT so the guys we got could get some reps against someone other than Spriggs."

This.

I challenge anyone to find a clip of a coach/GM/scout/etc. who, at the time of a pick or just after, had negative things to say about the pick.  Similar to what BD says above.  No player, coach, GM or anyone directly associated with a pro team is gonna say they don't like a pick or he wasn't the guy they wanted, or they're not thrilled to get so and so.  Probably same for former college teammates and coaches.  It just doesn't happen.

And all you bitchin' about posters not liking the pick, and how those posters don't know anything compared to the professional scouts/coaches/etc., get over yourselves.  This is a message board.  Opinions are shared.  Those same experts who poured hours of their time to research and make the Rashan Gary pick are the same experts who can make sh!tty picks in every draft.

Where there different experts or was less time put in from the people who wanted the Packers to draft Kenny Clark and also Jason Spriggs??

What about HaHa and Davante?  Different amount of time invested in researching those two's talents, right?

The lists can go on an on.  

 

Group A:  guys paid an obscene amount of money to watch football games with the sole purpose of identifying strengths & weaknesses of players.  Provided infinitely  more information about hundreds (thousands?) of players.  Gathers  weekly to daily to discuss said players & try to form a group consensus/ranking.  Personally meets with a subset of players team is interested in knowing more about.  Sh!t-canned from job for making too many mistakes.

Group B:  Internet jockeys that enjoy surfing draft sites & reading Mel Kiper's current draft book.  Often drunk when doing so.  Watches a few football games on a Saturday & a random Thursday/Friday.  Often drunk when doing so.  Happy to provide anonymous opinions on team's draft picks.  Often drunk when doing so.  Gets mad when other Internet jockeys question opinion (or is it drunk opinion?).

Please tell me which group I should put more stock into when I'm forming my own opinion of a draft pick.  Thank you for your advice.

Quote a post, any post, where a poster is stating more stock should be put in that poster's opinion than a scout or other NFL professional.  IT"S STILL A FREAKIN' MESSAGE BOARD WITH OPINIONS.  Isn't that what a message board is supposed to be about.  A handful of posters state they aren't thrilled with or don't like the pick at all, a suddenly that's supposed to mean the the poster thinks he/she know more than the professionals.  

As I said, get over yourselves.  Cripes, how is not liking this pick any different than criticizing a pick ANY team makes, not just the Packers.  

Maybe we can all sit in a circle and tell each other how wonderful every move the Packers make really is.....until it isn't wonderful at all.  

antooo posted:

I personally maintain to a 'two drink minimum' when posting on x4.

I realize that this isn't a firm house rule, but I hold myself to a higher standard.

Out of respect.

I don't have any minimums.  I don't have any maximums either.  So you might say I have no standards.  In fact I drink all day. 

You know ........ because I both need and like too. 

Still love the clip from Don Brown, Michigan's Defensive Coordinator that I posted on Page 3. He talks about Gary being asked to do the dirty work and about his incredible flexibility ("Swiss army knife"). Can play inside or outside. 

Being asked regularly to play the 6 Technique is not going to yield many sacks, but in Gary's case he disrupted the play and created lanes to make Bush and Winovich look like heroes in having free runs to the football.  

Ok to hope the kid is going to be the next Cam Jordan or Richard Seymour. He's got the goods, and the right coach, up to him to make the most of his opportunity. 

Ghost of Lambeau posted:

Group C:  The ones who do such things as pick players by the color of their uniforms or other applied irrelevant criteria.  They exist - I met a few and they are very entertaining to listen to.

Speak for yourself. I get nervous and stammery when they pick two players from the same school in the same draft.

PackLandVA posted:

And all you bitchin' about posters not liking the pick, and how those posters don't know anything compared to the professional scouts/coaches/etc., get over yourselves.  

 

I will not.  No one can get over me.  

#hopetosmokeabong

Packdog posted:

Still love the clip from Don Brown, Michigan's Defensive Coordinator that I posted on Page 3. He talks about Gary being asked to do the dirty work and about his incredible flexibility ("Swiss army knife"). Can play inside or outside. 

Being asked regularly to play the 6 Technique is not going to yield many sacks, but in Gary's case he disrupted the play and created lanes to make Bush and Winovich look like heroes in having free runs to the football.  

Ok to hope the kid is going to be the next Cam Jordan or Richard Seymour. He's got the goods, and the right coach, up to him to make the most of his opportunity. 

So, the idiotic coaches at Michigan had an all time playmaker on the field and they decided to set up other players to make the plays instead? Confusing.

Goalline posted:
Packdog posted:

Still love the clip from Don Brown, Michigan's Defensive Coordinator that I posted on Page 3. He talks about Gary being asked to do the dirty work and about his incredible flexibility ("Swiss army knife"). Can play inside or outside. 

Being asked regularly to play the 6 Technique is not going to yield many sacks, but in Gary's case he disrupted the play and created lanes to make Bush and Winovich look like heroes in having free runs to the football.  

Ok to hope the kid is going to be the next Cam Jordan or Richard Seymour. He's got the goods, and the right coach, up to him to make the most of his opportunity. 

So, the idiotic coaches at Michigan had an all time playmaker on the field and they decided to set up other players to make the plays instead? Confusing.

Bad coaching?

We've had some of that in Green Bay. Particularly with rug=wearing DCs.

Goalline posted:
Packdog posted:

Still love the clip from Don Brown, Michigan's Defensive Coordinator that I posted on Page 3. He talks about Gary being asked to do the dirty work and about his incredible flexibility ("Swiss army knife"). Can play inside or outside. 

Being asked regularly to play the 6 Technique is not going to yield many sacks, but in Gary's case he disrupted the play and created lanes to make Bush and Winovich look like heroes in having free runs to the football.  

Ok to hope the kid is going to be the next Cam Jordan or Richard Seymour. He's got the goods, and the right coach, up to him to make the most of his opportunity. 

So, the idiotic coaches at Michigan had an all time playmaker on the field and they decided to set up other players to make the plays instead? Confusing.

I know. Stupid that they used a team approach to having one of the top rated defenses in the nation. Should have been smarter and created more selfishness. 

Their coach could be smerter than the Rug Doctor and been playing to player strengths. If Bush and Winovich's strengths were running to the ballcarrier and making good tackles vs say, shedding blockers to make tackles, then why not ask a guy to eat blockers and allow those guys to do what they do best? Gary was doubled a lot, and that automatically opened up stuff for Bush and Winovich. It's the difference between having one great player trying to do it all vs two guys being freed up to do what they do best. And if that one guy is unselfish enough to do it, so much the better.

I still have a hard time with him only having 9.5 sacks in three years especially when I keep reading he has one pash rush move and no counter moves if he gets blocked. Again I really hope he turns into a great player but my expectations are low. 

Pakrz posted:

Did you also have low expectations of Clay Matthews after posting 5.5 sacks, 13.5 tackles for loss and 97 total tackles in four years at USC where he played in 47 total games?

#ihopeimrong

Comparing apples to oranges really. Pack traded up to get Clay.....with the 26th pick. Not the 12th. 

Did you bitch about anyone who didn’t like the Ha Ha pick because the professionals who spent 100s of hours pouring over tape thought he was the right pick? How about Spriggs?  How about guys like Justin Harrell or Jamal Reynolds? The list can go on and on.

#youreusuallyabetterposterthanthis

#itsamessageboardwherepeopleexpresstheiropinions

#iguessitswrongthento dislikeanypickofanyteamsinceprofessionalsmadethepick

#goodgrief

.

I know. Stupid that they used a team approach to having one of the top rated defenses in the nation. Should have been smarter and created more selfishness. 

Exactly. Maybe they would have beaten Ohio State at least one time this millennium with that approach. Loser Michigan coaches.

13X posted:

I still have a hard time with him only having 9.5 sacks in three years especially when I keep reading he has one pash rush move and no counter moves if he gets blocked. Again I really hope he turns into a great player but my expectations are low. 

But he was doubled. Can't expect a guy with that many double teams to crack double digits in sacks, can you? Pretty sure it has never been done EVER in NFL history.

Fortunately, double teaming is illegal in the NFL, isn't it?

Add Reply

Likes (1)
YATittle
Post
×
×
×
×