Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

T.I.R.T. 5.0 - O/U how many wins the Vikings have?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 93, 94, 95 ... 97, 98, 99  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47878
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kalil also batted a flu last year, if I recall correctly.

As far as the comment that the line is only as good as the weakest link, that is hogwash. We are talking about a Left Guard here, probably the easiest position on the line to scheme around. The LG gets so much help from the Center in most blocking schemes. While Johnson may be poor, Sullivan is frequently aiding him with double team blocks.

Sullivan and Loadolt both have an argument as being top 5 at their respective positions (C and RT). Fusco is quickly emerging as a very good player, PFF certainly thinks very highly of him.

Kalil was excellent as a rookie, but took a step back as a sophomore due to injuries and an illness. I think its safe to assume that Kalil will return to form, I would take that bet. He has the upside to be as good as any LT in the league in terms of pass protection. He may always be a limited run blocker, but its not like Peterson needs much help here anyway.

The line looked much better once Cassel took over as starter. Probably because Ponder was extremely hesitant to not make a mistake.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GreenGold12


Joined: 28 Feb 2009
Posts: 2272
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Probably because Ponder was extremely hesitant to not make a mistake.


Perfect. Laughing
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
incognito_man


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 31129
Location: Madison
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Kalil also batted a flu last year, if I recall correctly. .


if he battled the flu last year, you have bigger concerns...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HokieHigh


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 1861
Location: Blacksburg
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

incognito_man wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Kalil also batted a flu last year, if I recall correctly. .


if he battled the flu last year, you have bigger concerns...


I hear the year-long flu is bad this time of year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 2416
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guys relax. He basically misspoke and meant illness which was reported around here I remember. I young that was last year anyway.

I'm a big anti homerism guy and I gotta admit IN MY OPINION you're overly harsh on their line quality and looking at ours as best case scenario for ours which never happens.
_________________
blueswedeshoes wrote:

I don't like Jeff Janis

He's another one of those shingles-prone athletes. TT no longer does his due diligence on susceptibility to viral infections.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CWood21


Moderator
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 35288
Location: 'Merica
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think Cadmus's grades were more accurate, but some of them are too high. If you're throwing A grades on them, I expect them to be one of the best at their position and neither Loadholt nor Sullivan are in that top tier IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CalhounLambeau


Joined: 05 May 2011
Posts: 1787
Location: WI
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Kalil also batted a flu last year, if I recall correctly.

As far as the comment that the line is only as good as the weakest link, that is hogwash. We are talking about a Left Guard here, probably the easiest position on the line to scheme around. The LG gets so much help from the Center in most blocking schemes. While Johnson may be poor, Sullivan is frequently aiding him with double team blocks.

Sullivan and Loadolt both have an argument as being top 5 at their respective positions (C and RT). Fusco is quickly emerging as a very good player, PFF certainly thinks very highly of him.

Kalil was excellent as a rookie, but took a step back as a sophomore due to injuries and an illness. I think its safe to assume that Kalil will return to form, I would take that bet. He has the upside to be as good as any LT in the league in terms of pass protection. He may always be a limited run blocker, but its not like Peterson needs much help here anyway.

The line looked much better once Cassel took over as starter. Probably because Ponder was extremely hesitant to not make a mistake.


Completely agree with everything you stated here. I think Kalil takes a big step this year in pass protection and starts the trend upward.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 2416
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So I was really disappointed when I saw the 26 GMs/scouts/coaches were polled to rank the 32 projected starters and I went in the Gen and people are just viscous on the Luck ranking.


Ya'd think when 26 guys in the league put him in the first tier, people wouldn't still blame "the hype." But I guess not.

Stat Googling>paying attention to what Luck is asked to do and the level he's trying to play at while so wet behind the years.
_________________
blueswedeshoes wrote:

I don't like Jeff Janis

He's another one of those shingles-prone athletes. TT no longer does his due diligence on susceptibility to viral infections.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
DavidatMIZZOU


Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 9395
Location: The ZOU
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NormSizedMidget wrote:
So I was really disappointed when I saw the 26 GMs/scouts/coaches were polled to rank the 32 projected starters and I went in the Gen and people are just viscous on the Luck ranking.


Ya'd think when 26 guys in the league put him in the first tier, people wouldn't still blame "the hype." But I guess not.

Stat Googling>paying attention to what Luck is asked to do and the level he's trying to play at while so wet behind the years.



I am more disappointed in nfl.com's poll question asking if Russell Wilson is a top 5 QB Laughing
_________________
GO PACK GO!

mistakebytehlak wrote:

My god it must be so terrible to have three teams that consistently make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ketchup


Joined: 13 May 2009
Posts: 13897
Location: Milwaukee, WI
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NormSizedMidget wrote:
So I was really disappointed when I saw the 26 GMs/scouts/coaches were polled to rank the 32 projected starters and I went in the Gen and people are just viscous on the Luck ranking.


Ya'd think when 26 guys in the league put him in the first tier, people wouldn't still blame "the hype." But I guess not.

Stat Googling>paying attention to what Luck is asked to do and the level he's trying to play at while so wet behind the years.
So because some GM's and scouts rated Luck as the 5th best QB, that means he absolutely is? Were the GM's and scouts named? Do we know their ability? Their bias? Their personal preference? You're putting way to much stock into 26 opinions that you have no clue who those 26 opinions came from.

Simply put, Luck is NOT a top 5 QB in the NFL. I'd argue he's not even top 10. Just because some random GM's and scouts ranked him so doesn't make it true.
_________________

Kempes on the custom sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 2416
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ketchup wrote:
NormSizedMidget wrote:
So I was really disappointed when I saw the 26 GMs/scouts/coaches were polled to rank the 32 projected starters and I went in the Gen and people are just viscous on the Luck ranking.


Ya'd think when 26 guys in the league put him in the first tier, people wouldn't still blame "the hype." But I guess not.

Stat Googling>paying attention to what Luck is asked to do and the level he's trying to play at while so wet behind the years.
So because some GM's and scouts rated Luck as the 5th best QB, that means he absolutely is? Were the GM's and scouts named? Do we know their ability? Their bias? Their personal preference? You're putting way to much stock into 26 opinions that you have no clue who those 26 opinions came from.

Simply put, Luck is NOT a top 5 QB in the NFL. I'd argue he's not even top 10. Just because some random GM's and scouts ranked him so doesn't make it true.



26 NFL professionals who you believe to have bias/preference/and a supposedly low ability>The mass opinion of people who use message boards.

Sorry.


Does it mean he IS, no. Does it mean that I have to respect the opinion of everyone crying they know better than them. Pass

What's hilarious is that you think you ABSOLUTELY know he's not and these guys are just all hacks who what? Got their jobs and ascended into their positions for being completely flawed evaluators?

Because YOU don't agree with the list I have to automatically assume they all have issues with flawed their evaluation? Rolling Eyes

Just funny. You as some random guy on the internet are SURE he's not top 5 but I'm a fool if I believe the PROFESSIONALS saying he is.

Give me a break guys. I know we all want to live in our world that we could do what they do and we know more or as much and they draft a bust and I would never do that. But it's naivety at it's finest.


This is easily the best board I've ever been on. SO many intelligent football minds but I'm sorry when I read person after person rip into these 26 guys and make so many excuses about why they're wrong and oh they could have drafted or signed a bad player, all I hear is "I'm trying to convince myself they're not more knowledgeable than me."

Guess what, they are.
_________________
blueswedeshoes wrote:

I don't like Jeff Janis

He's another one of those shingles-prone athletes. TT no longer does his due diligence on susceptibility to viral infections.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Ketchup


Joined: 13 May 2009
Posts: 13897
Location: Milwaukee, WI
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NormSizedMidget wrote:
Ketchup wrote:
NormSizedMidget wrote:
So I was really disappointed when I saw the 26 GMs/scouts/coaches were polled to rank the 32 projected starters and I went in the Gen and people are just viscous on the Luck ranking.


Ya'd think when 26 guys in the league put him in the first tier, people wouldn't still blame "the hype." But I guess not.

Stat Googling>paying attention to what Luck is asked to do and the level he's trying to play at while so wet behind the years.
So because some GM's and scouts rated Luck as the 5th best QB, that means he absolutely is? Were the GM's and scouts named? Do we know their ability? Their bias? Their personal preference? You're putting way to much stock into 26 opinions that you have no clue who those 26 opinions came from.

Simply put, Luck is NOT a top 5 QB in the NFL. I'd argue he's not even top 10. Just because some random GM's and scouts ranked him so doesn't make it true.



26 NFL professionals who you believe to have bias/preference/and a supposedly low ability>The mass opinion of people who use message boards.

Sorry.


Does it mean he IS, no. Does it mean that I have to respect the opinion of everyone crying they know better than them. Pass

What's hilarious is that you think you ABSOLUTELY know he's not and these guys are just all hacks who what? Got their jobs and ascended into their positions for being completely flawed evaluators?

Because YOU don't agree with the list I have to automatically assume they all have issues with flawed their evaluation? Rolling Eyes

Just funny. You as some random guy on the internet are SURE he's not top 5 but I'm a fool if I believe the PROFESSIONALS saying he is.

Give me a break guys. I know we all want to live in our world that we could do what they do and we know more or as much and they draft a bust and I would never do that. But it's naivety at it's finest.


This is easily the best board I've ever been on. SO many intelligent football minds but I'm sorry when I read person after person rip into these 26 guys and make so many excuses about why they're wrong and oh they could have drafted or signed a bad player, all I hear is "I'm trying to convince myself they're not more knowledgeable than me."

Guess what, they are.
So your point is because we are not professionals in the field, we don't know as much as these random GM's and scout we know nothing about? That's fine. You believe what you want.

I'll ask again, do we know the 26 people? Do we even know for sure that they actually polled 26 GM's or scouts? I've seen Luck play a lot and IMO, he's not a top 5 QB. Just because some random "professionals" say he is, doesn't mean a damn thing to me because I don't know the 26 people and if they even exist.

You're just blindly following a ranking because ESPN, a garbage network, told us they polled 26 people and this is what they came up with.

And to clear it up, I've never said I know more then these people. My complaint is we don't know the people and since I don't agree with the list they came up with, I'm going to question it. I know what I think and it's that the list is garbage so excuse the crap out of me for using my brain and questioning the conclusion they came up with.
_________________

Kempes on the custom sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DavidatMIZZOU


Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 9395
Location: The ZOU
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Luck has a better claim to top 5 than Russell Wilson though.


I will also say that I am more qualified than NFL players based on their top 100 list.
_________________
GO PACK GO!

mistakebytehlak wrote:

My god it must be so terrible to have three teams that consistently make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 2416
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ketchup wrote:

I'll ask again, do we know the 26 people? Do we even know for sure that they actually polled 26 GM's or scouts? I've seen Luck play a lot and IMO, he's not a top 5 QB. Just because some random "professionals" say he is, doesn't mean a damn thing to me because I don't know the 26 people and if they even exist.

You're just blindly following a ranking because ESPN, a garbage network, told us they polled 26 people and this is what they came up with.

And to clear it up, I've never said I know more then these people. My complaint is we don't know the people and since I don't agree with the list they came up with, I'm going to question it. I know what I think and it's that the list is garbage so excuse the crap out of me for using my brain and questioning the conclusion they came up with.


We know they work in the NFL. We know what jobs they held. Unless you think Sando is making this up. The only reason these lists are always in doubt is flat out because people are PASSIONATE about their football and spend so much time "scouting" and they want to believe they know and understand as much. People know a DAMN lot here and I don't have an issue if someone said Luck should be 2nd tier not first. But some people are saying he's not top 15 and not top 10 IMO is even funny.

They've seen Luck play a lot too. Probably more than you. And I guarantee they can all evaluate tape better than you. As much as you'll dispute both things.


And no, I'm not blindly following it. Since I said the same thing before this came out. (I said he would be 5th after the season ended, not ATM FWIW).


What were your other issues with the list? I saw few glaring weaknesses. Though it's obvious (I can admit things) there was a bias for pocket passers and against the new age mobile guys.



Truth be told, I think most people only saw the playoff games and assumed that's how he always plays. Guy's INTs went way down last year with not much help from the run game or the D.

http://i.gyazo.com/fa1536fa4515f0677d58d62b9d09d1ec.png

But people go SEVEN INTS!


This is my thing.

Andrew is asked to take the responsibilities of long time vets. Good ones. He has all the tools as a QB, ya know the guy preps like hell. He's got everything you need to be great. SMART, mobile, dude just has that IT feel, resilient as all hell. He doesn't take an INT as a slap in the face. He learns. And his memory is as short as they come. NFL GMs are looking beyond the stats and seeing that. As fans I think everything has to be SO tangible for it to matter. We know by now GMs look past that and Luck has all the tangibles and the intangibles. He wasn't one of the biggest prospects on accident. It wasn't a flipping ESPN invention.

He needs more reps and things will continue to slow down. The level of play he's attempted (and for the most part succeeded at) as a young QB is only speeding his learning curve. He's going to be light years ahead of these other guys who are playing on low difficulty with their better teams and less put on their shoulders. Whether that's having to score, throwing more, having to make more post and pre reads and reading more of the field.

He's already really good and he's GOING to be great. There isn't a QB coming into his third year that I can recall going back a while that was going to walk on the field ready to play the level Andrew is about to.


Hate it if you want, it's fine. But a lot of people in 10 years are going to have "forgotten" all the "it's just the hype" comments and basically disputing the entire fact GMs regarded him this highly....but, then again, we don't know their names so they're all incompetent and anyone with internet access and a message board account knows better.


Again, I was a little disappointed with so many damn smart people here that EVERYONE was against that ranking. Because it can't be just me and 26 idiot NFL employees that see it.
_________________
blueswedeshoes wrote:

I don't like Jeff Janis

He's another one of those shingles-prone athletes. TT no longer does his due diligence on susceptibility to viral infections.


Last edited by NormSizedMidget on Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 2416
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DavidatMIZZOU wrote:
Luck has a better claim to top 5 than Russell Wilson though.


I will also say that I am more qualified than NFL players based on their top 100 list.


We all are. And I would never and have never disputed that. That thing is putrid.

Knowing a couple NFL players through the days, none currently but lately, some of them don't even know some of the star players in the league while they're playing. Dead true.
_________________
blueswedeshoes wrote:

I don't like Jeff Janis

He's another one of those shingles-prone athletes. TT no longer does his due diligence on susceptibility to viral infections.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 93, 94, 95 ... 97, 98, 99  Next
Page 94 of 99

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group