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

Should the Bears trade McClellin to a 3-4 team?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
LaxBroBearsFan


Joined: 11 Oct 2011
Posts: 145
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:

Please explain how I'm showing my ignorance? Do you disagree with my assessment of his sacks?

And how did he dominate in the run game? Lacy and Starks both averaged 7 yards per carry.
It's ignorant when you say things that are completely false and act like they're true. It's ignorance or you don't understand football. No I dont agree. Disengaging from blocks and showing elite closing speed is a great skill. Rodgers is a very mobile QB and McClellin was able to get him down. The sack on the scramble was Peppers fault for losing contain but McClellin and Pep showed great speed to close against a very mobile QB. McClellin showed great speed to get around your RT and get off the block to get his 3rd sack. That spin move on his 4th sack was a fantastic move. McClellin was great against the run. Your big runs were because our LBs werent gap disciplined. Not his fault.

If you continue to think he cant play OLB in a 3-4. If he a horrible pass rusher. He's less athletic and worse in coverage then Coples then yes you are ignorant but you're saying something that every reasonable person knows to be false.


Disengaging from a block when a blocker is between yourself and the ball carrier is impressive. Disengaging from a block when you are between the ball carrier and the blocker is not impressive at all. It is literally as easy as turning around.

What year do you think it is? Wallace isn't an extremely mobile QB. He's 33 years old. Closing on Seneca Wallace in 2005 would have been impressive, closing on Seneca Wallace in 2013 is really not, especially as he's looking downfield rather than looking to run. The fact that he didn't throw the ball away is lulz worthy.

The third and fourth sacks weren't even impressive (against the back up too, for the record). That spin move had him way upfield. If Seneca Wallace had the pocket presence god blessed a 6th grader with, he would have stepped up into the pocket rather than scrambling backwards like a moron. Nobody in the NFL does that. It is one of the most basic aspects of playing football and Wallace just seemed to completely forget it.

There were several big runs to the outside that happened because Wallace got washed out. Blaming the entire disastrous run defense against the linebackers is a cop out. The entire front seven got pushed around on running plays.

I stand by that he's a horrible pass rusher.

I never once said that he is worse in coverage than Quinton Coples.

Why do you say that he is more athletic than Coples? I would think at best you call it a draw.
I watched every single play and rewinded most plays multiple times. Which plays did McClellin not do his job against the run?

No it's not a draw. Not even close and I'm basing that on watching both of them play football and also there workout numbers. McClellin has also played a lot of coverage in college and excelled at it. Coples never has.

This is what you said:

Perry is a better pass rusher, better against the run, more experienced in coverage at the NFL level and significantly more athletic. He's also a much better fit for what we're looking for out of our LOLB spot.

Much the same with Coples.

Those comments are also untrue. Not only would I say that Perry is not significantly more athletic. I would say McClellin is a much more fluid athlete. That's probably the reason so many Packers fan wanted McClellin in the draft to play the exact position Perry is playing. Why do you think that was?


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive. I'll always take the more explosive guy when the change of direction guy isn't particularly good at being a change of direction guy.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.

I'm still waiting for you to point out where I said anybody is better in coverage than anybody.


IIRC Hot Rod Marinelli worked out Nick Perry on his pro day while Lovie smith had connections with USC and they with Emery passed on Perry... only time will tell who is the better FOOTBALL player, forget athlete
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LaxBroBearsFan wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:

Please explain how I'm showing my ignorance? Do you disagree with my assessment of his sacks?

And how did he dominate in the run game? Lacy and Starks both averaged 7 yards per carry.
It's ignorant when you say things that are completely false and act like they're true. It's ignorance or you don't understand football. No I dont agree. Disengaging from blocks and showing elite closing speed is a great skill. Rodgers is a very mobile QB and McClellin was able to get him down. The sack on the scramble was Peppers fault for losing contain but McClellin and Pep showed great speed to close against a very mobile QB. McClellin showed great speed to get around your RT and get off the block to get his 3rd sack. That spin move on his 4th sack was a fantastic move. McClellin was great against the run. Your big runs were because our LBs werent gap disciplined. Not his fault.

If you continue to think he cant play OLB in a 3-4. If he a horrible pass rusher. He's less athletic and worse in coverage then Coples then yes you are ignorant but you're saying something that every reasonable person knows to be false.


Disengaging from a block when a blocker is between yourself and the ball carrier is impressive. Disengaging from a block when you are between the ball carrier and the blocker is not impressive at all. It is literally as easy as turning around.

What year do you think it is? Wallace isn't an extremely mobile QB. He's 33 years old. Closing on Seneca Wallace in 2005 would have been impressive, closing on Seneca Wallace in 2013 is really not, especially as he's looking downfield rather than looking to run. The fact that he didn't throw the ball away is lulz worthy.

The third and fourth sacks weren't even impressive (against the back up too, for the record). That spin move had him way upfield. If Seneca Wallace had the pocket presence god blessed a 6th grader with, he would have stepped up into the pocket rather than scrambling backwards like a moron. Nobody in the NFL does that. It is one of the most basic aspects of playing football and Wallace just seemed to completely forget it.

There were several big runs to the outside that happened because Wallace got washed out. Blaming the entire disastrous run defense against the linebackers is a cop out. The entire front seven got pushed around on running plays.

I stand by that he's a horrible pass rusher.

I never once said that he is worse in coverage than Quinton Coples.

Why do you say that he is more athletic than Coples? I would think at best you call it a draw.
I watched every single play and rewinded most plays multiple times. Which plays did McClellin not do his job against the run?

No it's not a draw. Not even close and I'm basing that on watching both of them play football and also there workout numbers. McClellin has also played a lot of coverage in college and excelled at it. Coples never has.

This is what you said:

Perry is a better pass rusher, better against the run, more experienced in coverage at the NFL level and significantly more athletic. He's also a much better fit for what we're looking for out of our LOLB spot.

Much the same with Coples.

Those comments are also untrue. Not only would I say that Perry is not significantly more athletic. I would say McClellin is a much more fluid athlete. That's probably the reason so many Packers fan wanted McClellin in the draft to play the exact position Perry is playing. Why do you think that was?


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive. I'll always take the more explosive guy when the change of direction guy isn't particularly good at being a change of direction guy.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.

I'm still waiting for you to point out where I said anybody is better in coverage than anybody.


IIRC Hot Rod Marinelli worked out Nick Perry on his pro day while Lovie smith had connections with USC and they with Emery passed on Perry... only time will tell who is the better FOOTBALL player, forget athlete


I think a lot of that comes down to what a team is looking for. Perry turns like a battleship, but that doesn't mean he's not a good pass rusher. God forbid he ever puts together a counter move to go with that bull rush. He's productive as a one trick pony, get him another trick and you're looking at a helluva player when you take into account his run defense. Obviously there's no guarantee that he ever finds that other trick, and he's had issues staying healthy, but I think Packer fans are rightfully optimistic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DaMike


Joined: 21 Nov 2010
Posts: 5623
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Size isnt relevant. We're not talking about who's the better athlete for there size. It's who's the better athlete. You desire to never answer a question is very odd. You're always changing the subject. We're talking about who's better in coverage and who's a better athlete and you saying who is taller and who weighs more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Size isnt relevant. We're not talking about who's the better athlete for there size. It's who's the better athlete. You desire to never answer a question is very odd. You're always changing the subject. We're talking about who's better in coverage and who's a better athlete and you saying who is taller and who weighs more.


You're not taking the size of the players into account when discussing athleticism? Shocked Shocked

I'm thinking I should start to back away slowly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DaMike


Joined: 21 Nov 2010
Posts: 5623
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Size isnt relevant. We're not talking about who's the better athlete for there size. It's who's the better athlete. You desire to never answer a question is very odd. You're always changing the subject. We're talking about who's better in coverage and who's a better athlete and you saying who is taller and who weighs more.


You're not taking the size of the players into account when discussing athleticism? Shocked Shocked

I'm thinking I should start to back away slowly
Correct I'm not. You can try and be sarcastic to try and prove the really no point you're trying to make but it just makes you look even worse. Athleticism is athleticism. You factor is height/weight/etc when determining how athletic a player is for his size. Scouting 101 or common sense 101.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LaxBroBearsFan


Joined: 11 Oct 2011
Posts: 145
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
LaxBroBearsFan wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:

Please explain how I'm showing my ignorance? Do you disagree with my assessment of his sacks?

And how did he dominate in the run game? Lacy and Starks both averaged 7 yards per carry.
It's ignorant when you say things that are completely false and act like they're true. It's ignorance or you don't understand football. No I dont agree. Disengaging from blocks and showing elite closing speed is a great skill. Rodgers is a very mobile QB and McClellin was able to get him down. The sack on the scramble was Peppers fault for losing contain but McClellin and Pep showed great speed to close against a very mobile QB. McClellin showed great speed to get around your RT and get off the block to get his 3rd sack. That spin move on his 4th sack was a fantastic move. McClellin was great against the run. Your big runs were because our LBs werent gap disciplined. Not his fault.

If you continue to think he cant play OLB in a 3-4. If he a horrible pass rusher. He's less athletic and worse in coverage then Coples then yes you are ignorant but you're saying something that every reasonable person knows to be false.


Disengaging from a block when a blocker is between yourself and the ball carrier is impressive. Disengaging from a block when you are between the ball carrier and the blocker is not impressive at all. It is literally as easy as turning around.

What year do you think it is? Wallace isn't an extremely mobile QB. He's 33 years old. Closing on Seneca Wallace in 2005 would have been impressive, closing on Seneca Wallace in 2013 is really not, especially as he's looking downfield rather than looking to run. The fact that he didn't throw the ball away is lulz worthy.

The third and fourth sacks weren't even impressive (against the back up too, for the record). That spin move had him way upfield. If Seneca Wallace had the pocket presence god blessed a 6th grader with, he would have stepped up into the pocket rather than scrambling backwards like a moron. Nobody in the NFL does that. It is one of the most basic aspects of playing football and Wallace just seemed to completely forget it.

There were several big runs to the outside that happened because Wallace got washed out. Blaming the entire disastrous run defense against the linebackers is a cop out. The entire front seven got pushed around on running plays.

I stand by that he's a horrible pass rusher.

I never once said that he is worse in coverage than Quinton Coples.

Why do you say that he is more athletic than Coples? I would think at best you call it a draw.
I watched every single play and rewinded most plays multiple times. Which plays did McClellin not do his job against the run?

No it's not a draw. Not even close and I'm basing that on watching both of them play football and also there workout numbers. McClellin has also played a lot of coverage in college and excelled at it. Coples never has.

This is what you said:

Perry is a better pass rusher, better against the run, more experienced in coverage at the NFL level and significantly more athletic. He's also a much better fit for what we're looking for out of our LOLB spot.

Much the same with Coples.

Those comments are also untrue. Not only would I say that Perry is not significantly more athletic. I would say McClellin is a much more fluid athlete. That's probably the reason so many Packers fan wanted McClellin in the draft to play the exact position Perry is playing. Why do you think that was?


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive. I'll always take the more explosive guy when the change of direction guy isn't particularly good at being a change of direction guy.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.

I'm still waiting for you to point out where I said anybody is better in coverage than anybody.


IIRC Hot Rod Marinelli worked out Nick Perry on his pro day while Lovie smith had connections with USC and they with Emery passed on Perry... only time will tell who is the better FOOTBALL player, forget athlete


I think a lot of that comes down to what a team is looking for. Perry turns like a battleship, but that doesn't mean he's not a good pass rusher. God forbid he ever puts together a counter move to go with that bull rush. He's productive as a one trick pony, get him another trick and you're looking at a helluva player when you take into account his run defense. Obviously there's no guarantee that he ever finds that other trick, and he's had issues staying healthy, but I think Packer fans are rightfully optimistic.


Look no further than the topic....or the millions of bears fan posts about switching to a 3-4 D so "save McClellins career"...scheme wise it certainly seems as tho Perry would have been a better fit in Chicago and Shea in GB (and in all honestly i really liked him in the draft after chandler jones (how do you not draft Bones Jones and Arthur Jones kid brother is BEYOND me but completely irrelevant right now))... trying to tie this all together....i certainly cant admit i see what they were looking for in McClellin but between Lovie and especially Rod, i have a ton of faith McClellin will be a baller.

They both seem to be one trick ponies at the moment...with great athleticism..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LaxBroBearsFan wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:

I think a lot of that comes down to what a team is looking for. Perry turns like a battleship, but that doesn't mean he's not a good pass rusher. God forbid he ever puts together a counter move to go with that bull rush. He's productive as a one trick pony, get him another trick and you're looking at a helluva player when you take into account his run defense. Obviously there's no guarantee that he ever finds that other trick, and he's had issues staying healthy, but I think Packer fans are rightfully optimistic.


Look no further than the topic....or the millions of bears fan posts about switching to a 3-4 D so "save McClellins career"...scheme wise it certainly seems as tho Perry would have been a better fit in Chicago and Shea in GB (and in all honestly i really liked him in the draft after chandler jones (how do you not draft Bones Jones and Arthur Jones kid brother is BEYOND me but completely irrelevant right now))... trying to tie this all together....i certainly cant admit i see what they were looking for in McClellin but between Lovie and especially Rod, i have a ton of faith McClellin will be a baller.

They both seem to be one trick ponies at the moment...with great athleticism..


Forgive me for my ignorance, what do you consider to be McClellin's one trick. I'll admit that I completely hated McClellin as a player in college and it was pretty much my greatest fear that the Packers would draft him. Little he's done in the pros has changed my mind, so I was curious about what you guys who watch him weekly view his strengths to be?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Size isnt relevant. We're not talking about who's the better athlete for there size. It's who's the better athlete. You desire to never answer a question is very odd. You're always changing the subject. We're talking about who's better in coverage and who's a better athlete and you saying who is taller and who weighs more.


You're not taking the size of the players into account when discussing athleticism? Shocked Shocked

I'm thinking I should start to back away slowly
Correct I'm not. You can try and be sarcastic to try and prove the really no point you're trying to make but it just makes you look even worse. Athleticism is athleticism. You factor is height/weight/etc when determining how athletic a player is for his size. Scouting 101 or common sense 101.


Who's a better athlete, Haloti Ngata or Chris Conte?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DaMike


Joined: 21 Nov 2010
Posts: 5623
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Size isnt relevant. We're not talking about who's the better athlete for there size. It's who's the better athlete. You desire to never answer a question is very odd. You're always changing the subject. We're talking about who's better in coverage and who's a better athlete and you saying who is taller and who weighs more.


You're not taking the size of the players into account when discussing athleticism? Shocked Shocked

I'm thinking I should start to back away slowly
Correct I'm not. You can try and be sarcastic to try and prove the really no point you're trying to make but it just makes you look even worse. Athleticism is athleticism. You factor is height/weight/etc when determining how athletic a player is for his size. Scouting 101 or common sense 101.


Who's a better athlete, Haloti Ngata or Chris Conte?
Rolling Eyes

You really dont consider posts like this trolling? Just saying nonsense for the sake of nonsense?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Size isnt relevant. We're not talking about who's the better athlete for there size. It's who's the better athlete. You desire to never answer a question is very odd. You're always changing the subject. We're talking about who's better in coverage and who's a better athlete and you saying who is taller and who weighs more.


You're not taking the size of the players into account when discussing athleticism? Shocked Shocked

I'm thinking I should start to back away slowly
Correct I'm not. You can try and be sarcastic to try and prove the really no point you're trying to make but it just makes you look even worse. Athleticism is athleticism. You factor is height/weight/etc when determining how athletic a player is for his size. Scouting 101 or common sense 101.


Who's a better athlete, Haloti Ngata or Chris Conte?
Rolling Eyes


What? I thought size doesn't matter in determining athleticism?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DaMike


Joined: 21 Nov 2010
Posts: 5623
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
DaMike wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:


Forgive me for not believing you on only your assurances that you went back and watched every play multiple times. Assuming you knew what the hell you were doing, that would almost assuredly take longer than the game has been over for, much less since this debate has been taking place. The Packers ran the ball 29 times tonight.

What's the difference in Coples' and McClellin's athleticism?

McClellin was .07 seconds faster in the 40.
Coples put up 6 more reps on the bench with longer arms.
They had identical vertical leaps
McClellin was 9 inches better on his broad jump
McClellin was .45 seconds better on his 20 shuttle
McClellin was .5 seconds better on his 3 cone.
Coples is 25 pounds heavier and 3 inches taller.

Looks pretty close to me. McClellin is quicker and changes direction better, Coples is stronger and more explosive.

As for Perry, jesus do you even want to do this? Perry is a FREAK athletically. He's the Lamborghini of explosive athletes.

As for why people wanted McClellin over Perry, most everybody on the Packer forum didn't. People thought it made sense because they were told by morons like Keiper and McShay that it made sense. Obviously the teams disagreed.
That's my point. You think those numbers are close and they're actually very very different. .45 and .5 are big differences. Bench press numbers have nothing to do with athletic ability. You weren't given a chance to disagree.

And yes for almost 3 quarters I rewinded every play on D. Halftime makes up for all of that. Looking for McClellin and our LBs. Again it's nothing but ignorance to say I didn't when you have no idea.


Those numbers would be big deals if you don't take into account the size of the players. Coples is a giant. McClellin isn't. Of course you're going to give up a bit of manueverability when you buy the bigger model.
Size isnt relevant. We're not talking about who's the better athlete for there size. It's who's the better athlete. You desire to never answer a question is very odd. You're always changing the subject. We're talking about who's better in coverage and who's a better athlete and you saying who is taller and who weighs more.


You're not taking the size of the players into account when discussing athleticism? Shocked Shocked

I'm thinking I should start to back away slowly
Correct I'm not. You can try and be sarcastic to try and prove the really no point you're trying to make but it just makes you look even worse. Athleticism is athleticism. You factor is height/weight/etc when determining how athletic a player is for his size. Scouting 101 or common sense 101.


Who's a better athlete, Haloti Ngata or Chris Conte?
Rolling Eyes


What? I thought size doesn't matter in determining athleticism?
Posting your age in the other thread answered all my questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LaxBroBearsFan


Joined: 11 Oct 2011
Posts: 145
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
LaxBroBearsFan wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:

I think a lot of that comes down to what a team is looking for. Perry turns like a battleship, but that doesn't mean he's not a good pass rusher. God forbid he ever puts together a counter move to go with that bull rush. He's productive as a one trick pony, get him another trick and you're looking at a helluva player when you take into account his run defense. Obviously there's no guarantee that he ever finds that other trick, and he's had issues staying healthy, but I think Packer fans are rightfully optimistic.


Look no further than the topic....or the millions of bears fan posts about switching to a 3-4 D so "save McClellins career"...scheme wise it certainly seems as tho Perry would have been a better fit in Chicago and Shea in GB (and in all honestly i really liked him in the draft after chandler jones (how do you not draft Bones Jones and Arthur Jones kid brother is BEYOND me but completely irrelevant right now))... trying to tie this all together....i certainly cant admit i see what they were looking for in McClellin but between Lovie and especially Rod, i have a ton of faith McClellin will be a baller.

They both seem to be one trick ponies at the moment...with great athleticism..


Forgive me for my ignorance, what do you consider to be McClellin's one trick. I'll admit that I completely hated McClellin as a player in college and it was pretty much my greatest fear that the Packers would draft him. Little he's done in the pros has changed my mind, so I was curious about what you guys who watch him weekly view his strengths to be?


From what ive seen and gathered....Shea really only has his speed. We saw one spin move tonight...but generally speaking he relies on his speed. and if that fails him he gets mauled by OTs...just my opinion tho
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DaMike wrote:
Posting your age in the other thread answered all my questions.


Yikes, and you accused me of ducking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6474
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LaxBroBearsFan wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
LaxBroBearsFan wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:

I think a lot of that comes down to what a team is looking for. Perry turns like a battleship, but that doesn't mean he's not a good pass rusher. God forbid he ever puts together a counter move to go with that bull rush. He's productive as a one trick pony, get him another trick and you're looking at a helluva player when you take into account his run defense. Obviously there's no guarantee that he ever finds that other trick, and he's had issues staying healthy, but I think Packer fans are rightfully optimistic.


Look no further than the topic....or the millions of bears fan posts about switching to a 3-4 D so "save McClellins career"...scheme wise it certainly seems as tho Perry would have been a better fit in Chicago and Shea in GB (and in all honestly i really liked him in the draft after chandler jones (how do you not draft Bones Jones and Arthur Jones kid brother is BEYOND me but completely irrelevant right now))... trying to tie this all together....i certainly cant admit i see what they were looking for in McClellin but between Lovie and especially Rod, i have a ton of faith McClellin will be a baller.

They both seem to be one trick ponies at the moment...with great athleticism..


Forgive me for my ignorance, what do you consider to be McClellin's one trick. I'll admit that I completely hated McClellin as a player in college and it was pretty much my greatest fear that the Packers would draft him. Little he's done in the pros has changed my mind, so I was curious about what you guys who watch him weekly view his strengths to be?


From what ive seen and gathered....Shea really only has his speed. We saw one spin move tonight...but generally speaking he relies on his speed. and if that fails him he gets mauled by OTs...just my opinion tho


From what I've seen, and quite a bit of boxscore scouting, it doesn't really look like the speed is working for him (with the exception of tonight which I stand by was a whole lot of luck). Is it a situation where he's racking up pressures and not getting sacks or is it a situation where you're hoping it's one trick because you spent a first on the guy and your really hoping he's productive?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 8 of 9

 
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