Clayton and Duper redux.. That's how you excite a fanbase while keeping your intergrity on the game..we have room for both..I would need Eifert to compliment. Shock the world Rafs, we can do it if we want..theres all kind of scenarios to jolt this fanbase with offensive skillset combinations. We're not even talking free agency addition. Indy did it..full metal jacket.
I honestly don't know what you're going for here. I can't qualify my stance anymore than I have. I've admitted I'm a football idiot. I've admitted I could be wrong. I've admitted if we draft him that means Philbin thinks he's awesome and I'll instantly change my mind....because as I've said a few times now...I could be wrong and I'm a football idiot. I have the opinion I do, because of a few reasons: 1. Posters whose opinions I respect in general or on WRs like rafael and KB21 and DPate, in the beginning all believed him to not be a great fit. 2. Generally, not always, but the human joystick guys, don't tend to be solid route runners. Mostly they are one trick ponies, who've been forced to play to their strength their whole HS and college career. 3. The level of overly intense praise from you and DJ. I do respect both your opinions, but I also believe you often develop a stronger conviction for something the more someone argues with you.
Isn't it likely we didn't play that way because we didn't have the WR talent to do so? We had at most 2 WRs that were viable targets on any given play. And those two are nothing more than competent.
I apologize if I've come across like that, believe me when i say, when they express their opinions i most def take it into account, those three dudes know more about the game than I do, but also know that evaluating talent is a different skill, so I'm confident to debate anyone in that category.. I also think you have certain talents for this game, and I think that's the beauty of this board, understanding what each other does very well and implement it all before we take a stand.. I think Boomer was actually the first to suggest Austin should be in play at 12. Where I think this debate stems from is identifying who is the best most impactful offensive skillset player in this draft, it also coincides with a year where we are the most desperate team in the league for that skillset, we must get it right, the conviction I guess comes from battling the stature argument..once again I will bring up Russell Wilson, by the end of that evaluation period this last year,I wanted him and Kuechly, and thought that the height would not factor in with his game at the next level, i thought i could steal him, and had to debate a lot folks telling me his size would be a problem, and that I was crazy.
On a side note, how in the hell do these guys on the NFL network sit across from all the naughty women in short naughty skirts..I mean there getting mental photographs in the middle of conversation.. That chick on NFL am her body is just ridiculous, and so many others, I would have to spank it before going on that show.
Gil Brandt said something on the radio a couple of days ago that got me thinking about this draft. His comment was that there isn't much difference in the top 10 guys this year, and there isn't much difference in 11-45. I think this is true. This is one of those drafts where I'm not sure you can say for any certainty who the best available player is. Therefore, I think teams are going to have a bunch of players rated closely, and they will draft according to need. IMO, this is why a guy like Tavon Austin could range in projections anywhere from 12 to 42, and this is also why a guy like Keenan Allen may have a similar range. Greg Cosell mentioned something about Tavon Austin that I felt was interesting. He said that he really needs to go to a team that has a creative offensive coordinator that can design ways to get him in space. Well, Mike Sherman is Miami's offensive coordinator, and some may think that he is not creative. I'd argue that even though he is one of the older coaches in the league, his recent college experience has made him more creative than you think. Some may look at last year and think that they weren't that creative. Honestly, it is hard to get creative when you have gone through 6 or 7 guys at WR behind your top two guys and found no consistency in any of them. Mike Sherman is also a guy that ran the West Coast Offense that Mike Holmgren ran, and that version is probably the closest version to that of Bill Walsh's. What Mike Sherman effectively did at the college level was take that West Coast Offense and change it to an up tempo, spread oriented offense that had west coast offense principles in it. In researching this, here are some tidbits that I found interesting. Back in 2009, there was a coaching clinic held at College Station, TX. Gus Malzahn was supposed to be the guest speaker at the clinic, but he had to cancel at the last minute. There was a high school coach in Lake Charles, TX, that had studied Malzahn's offense over the previous 5 years, so they got him to come and speak at the clinic. There were over 800 high school coaches at this clinic. Also in attendance was Mike Sherman. The speaker they had to fill in for Gus Malzahn was Chad Morris. Chad Morris is now the offensive coordinator for Clemson. Well, after the clinic, Mike Sherman called Chad Morris to come to Texas A&M and teach his offense to his coaches. Mike's TAMU team had just come off a season where they got very poor offensive production with him running his traditional WCO, and Mike wanted to add some spread elements and also some up tempo elements to his offense. Morris apparently met with Sherman's coaches for 6 hours, and then met with Mike for another 2 hours. After that meeting, Mike and his coaches went to work on installing some of the elements of the spread offense, zone read, and up tempo no huddle stuff while maintaining a lot of the established philosophy from the WCO. They rolled out with this offense in 2010, and over those last two seasons, TAMU was among the NCAA leaders in plays per game at over 80 per game. To make a long story short, I think Mike Sherman proved at the college level that he was more than willing to try new ideas to make his offense go.
exactly what ive been debating, the skillset dictates what the coach should do, not ignore the skillset just because that's what he knows, but to always continue to evolve and scheme, the speed, incredible stop start ability, the laterally quickness, the field vision this dude has, its just hard for me to conceptualize how it's not an offensive coordinators dream.. From an offensive foundation, I would think that a fundamental requirement would be to find that player that draws extra attention because of a certain skillset, that way life is easier for everyone else, it's why a good player with great speed can help a run game..simple spacing concepts...this guy could potentially bring fear and hesitation to a defense vertically and horizontally
I think you have to be careful when looking at skill sets and make sure that you don't make things so simplistic that it actually hurts you in the long run. For example, if you tried to implement Gus Malzahn's or Chad Morris's offense in the NFL, they would probably have some early success. Defenses in the NFL will eventually catch up with what you do if you can't disguise it well though. If you are looking at skill sets only in this setting, you are running the risk of simplifying things to the point that it limits you. This is why I say that you have to be convinced that Tavon Austin can do more than just space oriented things if you take him with the 12th pick. IMO, you have to believe that this is a guy who you can keep on the field if you decide to bring things in tight and go three tight with one receiver split out wide for example while at the same time being a guy who can make plays with the space you have created when you empty the backfield and go 5 wide. Both of which are things that Mike Sherman loved to do at Texas A&M.
To add, I think the biggest thing that Mike took from Chad Morris was defining a way to simplify how they get the calls in from the sideline to increase the pace. Instead of saying "Brown Right F Short 2 Jet Flanker", the play call may be condensed down to a couple of words or a number call. Another thing he may have taken away from Morris was how to package plays and give the quarterback an option play where he decides who gets the ball based on the presnap read. When I say a packaged play, I mean a play where based on the defense, you can either run the inside zone or fake the inside zone and throw the quick screen to the receiver in the flats. The play calls may also contain a one word call that gives the receivers the pass concept they are going to run, and based on the concept, the receivers know exactly what route to run, at what depth, and likely who will get the ball based on the pre snap coverage given.
Don't you think we can outthink ourselves here in terms of scheme fit, when football will always be about winning matchups and superior talent in the end.?
You don't need to apologize. I'm not upset or think your stance is bad thing or negative. Its just one of many things that led to my view. But I also don't care about size so much. I stopped caring about player size in #54's rookie year.
Appreciate the post, Raf. As for the first paragraph, do you feel these handful of receptions vs Baylor apply? I've been waiting for someone to finally release his Baylor game (starts at 5:47) b/c it offers a great look at him from an assessment POV. Route-running diversity, run after catch, catch in traffic or with defenders bearing down on him, and watching the actual game itself it highlighted his blocking ability, not that it's great but it at least shows he's quite willing and can do enough to get the job done. 5:54 6:16 6:29 6:45 7:19 [video=youtube;bG20wQoaies]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bG20wQoaies[/video]
and how do you fell about being able to utilize more pre-snap motion and misdirection with having Austin on the field?
I know you weren't being negative or upset, and I can see where your coming from..I def get excited when I have a conviction on a player, or a player that I feel is underrated or overrated.. there are some folks that make me rethink the process, you mentioned a few, including yourself on many subjects.
misdirection..never talked about, but incredibly important... When the jets got rid of shottenheimer they lost their ability to understand what that did for their team and their Qb..he was very good at that, sparano notsomuch..
and Tajh Boyd is masterful at this. You give the QB numerous options to assess the weak spot of a defense on any particular play and exploit it, but you need playmaking receivers, a smart QB (which we do have), and a quality ZBS running back to make it work and to help create & take advantage of mismatches. There's a lot of quick passes involved in these read option plays so you HAVE TO HAVE receivers who can either make that first defender miss or get up field in a hurry so that we're at least picking up a an easy, positive 5+ yards. The execution is a lot easier if you have a guy like Tavon on the field to freeze the defense, especially if he's in motion, and with his endurance ability that wouldn't be an issue at an uptempo level. Here's a perfect example (first play of the clip): Triple read option. Boyd has 3 options here: a) handoff to Ellington reading the left end Werner (Boyd pulls it back) --After Boyd is on the move he has the option between keeping it or throwing a quick pass to Sammy Watkins. He chooses Watkins. Sammy has one defender to beat 3 yards downfield; turns the quick pass into a 20 yard gain. [video=youtube;XUGVf2ZAyGk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUGVf2ZAyGk[/video]
I made a similar comment to Brandt's a couple of months ago. I discussed the scattered value in the draft. As for Sherman, I don't agree. You can say what you want about his weapons but he's always been lacking as an OC, even in Green Bay and at Texas A&M. He struggled to make adjustments.
I've never been against Austin. But I have been hesitant to ignore his limitations. Reality is that there are some. It appears to me that some are ignoring those limitations and acting like he's a no-brainer pick b/c he's a "playmaker". Personally my position hasn't changed. I'm a big fan, but would be hesitant to take him at #12 if I don't believe he can be at least passable on the perimeter. Almost all of those highlight plays show him against LBs or Ss in off coverage. They're impressive but not representative of what he'll face at the next level. I was a big Harvin fan when he was in the draft. Austin reminds me of a shiftier, but less powerful Harvin. That lesser strength is an issue that can't automatically be cancelled by him being shiftier. That's a real limitation. I believe that limitation can be overcome to some extent if he's a very good, precise route runner. I'm thinking along the lines of a Marvin Harrison. To do that he has to have the right personality and motivation. I wouldn't take him if he didn't convince of that. I wouldn't take a guy who is just going to be a slot guy at the next level particularly in this offense. IMO the offense as a whole would suffer and I'm not going to sacrifice that for some dynamic plays b/c they will be far less likely at the next level.
The one at 6:29 showed him creating separation through good route running. That's what I think he'll have to do at the next level. Otherwise I expect that he'll end up doing more of what you saw at 5:54. He couldn't break away and had a very minimal game. He really didn't do a great job of shielding the defender. Better S play or a less accurate pass would have been dangerous there. The other plays are all space plays. 6:16 shows good concentration, but not how he'll deal with contact. The other plays are space plays made against off coverage.
I disagree. I'm not ignoring his limitations, and I don't MrClean or DJ doing it either. I know his size offers some concerns, but I also know we won't be drafting him as solely an outside receiver, so I choose to not blow the size thing out of proportion. Like you said, he can be worth the pick if it's believed he can be at least passable on the perimeter, and for me, I don't see anything to make me think he can't at least achieve that level. IMO the intelligence & underlying ability is there for him to become a precise route runner to where he can perform at least on par with Bess on the outside, but I personally feel Tavon's ceiling there is higher than Bess's. Someone will draft him in the first round, and that team will believe his size can be overcome enough to justify the selection or else they wouldn't use a 1st on him to begin with, so I don't think it's fair to label my belief or any other's as if we're being obtuse or ignorant about his size concern, Raf. Had I come out and said Tavon is a surefire bet to become the next Steve Smith on the perimeter then I'd feel your point would be valid, but no one has made such a bold statement.
I would say that your exuberance for Austin is such that it doesn't appear that you're giving his limitations any consideration. It sounds like nothing else matters b/c he's a "playmaker".
That's not how I meant it at all. To me it seemed the debate against Austin became excessively caught up in his ability as a perimeter receiver when that's not what we'd be drafting him as. He's an elite slot receiver/X-factor prospect first and foremost, and IMO that's how we should've been discussing him rather than getting lost in talks of playing on the outside. Like I said, I never mentioned a belief that Austin would become some elite perimeter receiver; I only took the stance that I didn't see anything in his game to suggest he couldn't line up on the outside, during a time when others were questioning this kid's ability as if he's lucky to break the 3rd round. I never called him a can't miss prospect or anything, but he is a talented first round prospect, and that's what I've been treating him as.
And no where will you find where I said I would take Tavon at 12.. That's assumption, I've said repeatedly that if certain defensive players are off the board then it comes down to singling out the best weapon in this draft, not just the best fit, im not interested in that, but the most impactful dynamic offensive player in the draft, and Imo Tavon Austin is most def in the top 3..so that's why we're fu&$ing talking about him so much, he could very well be, boundary limitations and all, the most talented offensive skillset player in this draft, ya know he does do other things that those bigger receivers cannot do..that's what's getting to me a bit.. Last time I checked,there's a very real possibility that our first rounder is going to be a skillset player, and if your not taking this dude seriously, then I'm a bit perplexed..
My issues are that it's about more than just being a playmaker and the fit matters. If he doesn't fit then the rest of the offense will bog down and he won't make as many plays individually. And IMO just being an elite slot receiver in college isn't enough to warrant a first round pick. There have been a ton of those that weren't nearly as successful in the pros. There's more space in college and you have a greater breadth of talent disparity. In the NFL, you need to be able to play both in space and with somebody on you. Arguably you'll have somebody tight on you the majority of the time. So the issue of how well he plays with a CB on him is paramount to determining his first round worth. It's not an after-thought. Now I first talked positively about Austin almost 2 months ago so I really like him, but I've also been around long enough to know that joystick players who can't play while covered rarely thrive in the NFL. Harvin faced similar questions coming out. He was more powerful than people gave him credit for though and I believe that's why he succeeded. I don't think Austin is as powerful, but he may be strong enough and if he runs consistent enough routes he can compensate. That's why I said earlier in this thread what I would want to see from him in a private workout.
Brandon Marshall was/is a playmaker. Brandon Marshall didn't really work here. Our offense wasn't effective, we didn't win games, we were predictable and we were stoppable. In his case its not that he wasn't a fit for the system...its that we had no system. You have to have a system and playmakers that fit that system. If not, you'll just spin your wheels like we did with Marshall...or we did with just Hartline. The Patriots change their system seemingly every other year. That works for them, because they have Brady who is a proven vet and in the discussion for one of the all time greats. That's the Pats' luxury. We don't have that. So we can't emulate them and change our system around great players, like they did with Gronk. Ground and pound Shula, changed his system for the once in a lifetime talent that is Marino. If Philbin believes Austin fits, then do it and don't look back. But if he doesn't think he's a fit for the current system, the system shouldn't be changed for him because he is not a once in a lifetime talent, though he is immensely talented.
I'll start by saying that I havent watch much more than youtube videos for any of the prospects yet... so I'm not being critical but instead am looking for more information (so I'm turning to the most knowledgable resource I have... ThePhins). So... what are the major arguements for taking Austin over CPatterson? Both seem to be blazing fast with fantastic agility and open field ability. One is 6'2 215lbs, and one is 5'8 175lbs. I'd be quite inclined to take Patterson over Austin for that reason alone. For those that would prefer Austin instead... what are your major reasons for prefering him over Patterson?
Tavon Austin is electric, and a KILLER. I personally witnessed him kill my Cyclones, and watched the Oklahoma game live. He is as lethal as they come. His sizes makes me wonder, but if I were in charge I still take a shot on him.
1. Ireland just dished out $90 million to his starting perimeter receivers and has a somewhat talented Rishard Matthews behind them.... as well as Binns. 2. Austin would almost immediately become our starting slot receiver and would see more snaps and touches there than Patterson would in rotation on the perimeter, so Tavon's net impact should be greater, and having Austin in the slot would serve the better compliment to Wallace <and Keller, if he's signed>.
I think it is pretty close between the two, and if I had to err, I would err on the side of going with the bigger player. With that said, I think the two players are very similar after the catch, which obviously gives the advantage to Patterson due to his size. I think Austin is better before the catch though, and this is the area that will keep Patterson from realizing his potential long term if he doesn't figure things out. I've seen some signs in him that suggest to me that the natural ability is definitely there though. The other question I have about Patterson is what is between his ears. Can he come in and digest a complex, multiple offense, or are things going to have to be simplified for him?
What happened to Philbin's, anyone who can count to three can play in this offense? Not being a smart ***, but I'm not so sure Philbin agrees with your analysis. If he's Chad Johnson dumb (failing to understand three different teams offenses), then that might be worth considering. I don't think there's anything to suggest that, though. At least, as far as I know. If I had to choose between CP and TA, I'm going with CP. Has the physical playmaking attributes to be a star WR. Obviously, there are mental traits in question which include, intelligence, focus, etc... And he certainly is raw and doesn't have a lot of experience against top notch prospects. Similar to Cam Newton. However, the upside to this kid could be ridiculous. Maybe the next Dez Bryant, Julio Jones, Deymaryius Thomas, etc... That type of guy, combined with Wallace and Hartline, could create a ridiculous WR core. But one thing about Austin, I don't think he's likely to bust. Even if he never lives up to his 1st round hype (assuming that's where he's drafted), I think he'll still be able to fill a Darren Sproles type role. Be a highly productive player in multiple facets of the game. With CP, I'm not sure how much in between there is. However, there is a caveat... If the rumors/speculation is true that Miami is going to run read option, Tavon Austin becomes more interesting due to his versatility. One of the reasons I speculated Seattle would be the team most likely to draft Austin in round 1. They went ahead and traded for Percy Harvin, a player with glaring similarities. You could plug Tavon into the offenses in a number of ways and positions, without overwhelming him as a rookie and get production right away. Wallace, Hartline, and Bess could be the primary three, with a healthy dose of Austin at WR/RB and Matthews (situational). If Miami adds a seem threat TE in FA/draft, that could be a potent combination. When Bess's contract is over next year, let Austin take his spot full time. Who knows. like I said, Don't hate TA. Wouldn't be upset with drafting him. Just have some concerns about whether or not his physical stature could limit his ability (scheme, health, etc...). Truth be told, I'd be OK with drafting either at 12 if the team feels that's best. If Philbin signs off on either, that's good enough for me. Personally, I'm interested in trading down a bit assuming no big name prospect falls to 12 (like a Jarvis Jones). Maybe get back into the twenties and get another 2 or 3. Wait to see if an Austin/Eifert/whoever... is there. Then maybe take 2a and trade up back into round 1 with the pick we acquired in the trade down and grab another top 32 player.
I am also not 100% sold on Austin. However I couldn't imagine him having poor route running and catching over 100 passes two years in a row.
I've been puzzled for some time as to the equating of Patterson to Austin in terms of explosion, agility and open field ability. Patterson is impressvie in these regards, while Austin is phenomenal. They are not the same in those regards- Austin is nearly unique from what I've seen- smaller than Percy Harvin, but more explosive- and that's saying a lot, Harvin is a phenomenal talent. Patterson is more of a Roddy White type imo- that's high praise, but he is no Harvin or Austin imo in terms of straight up agility and open field ability. Austin is also more muscular than I thought, and his strength at the combine and his RB play at WVU show that he's both plenty strong and tough for a WR at his size- as to the size issue, he's roughly the size of Desean Jackson but thicker and more muscular, and Jackson certainly has been able to get it done. Jackson's combine measurements: 5'9 3/4, 169 lbs. We just signed our wide out, Mike Wallace. The real improvement to be made now, imo, is in the slot position. Davonne Bess is a crowd favorite and he's a good, productive receiver, but what he is not is explosive or a true threat. Take Wallace out wide and Tavone Austin in the slot and you really give defenses something to think about. Patterson is a boom/bust guy imo, and quite frankly he scares me as a prospect, he just doesn't look like all that natural a receiver to me, more of a great athlete than a great receiver. Given the choice of the two, I'll take Austin. As a later round pick/consolation prize I'd still look at Marquise Goodwin for explosion in the slot, and otherwise I'd still look hard at a lot of the other receivers, especially Quinton Patton Stedman Bailey, Da' Rick Rogers and Marquess Wilson. Bess really is a tough subject, because he is a gamer and producer, but his ceiling is so damn low. Hard to be a great asset when you're short and slow- he has quickness, but he is no Wes Welker, who is a one-off. I saw John Elway on NFLN this morining speaking of Welker, he called him uncoverable over the middle. That is the magic of Welker, and Bess possesses no such magic. If nothing else, even if we don't draft a single WR (which I doubt), I think that Bess is in danger of getting phased out by Rishard Matthews. Anyway, imo Patterosn is a huge risk and Austin is a massive talent and could be a game changer if we put him in the slot and played him with Wallace, an explosive Lamar Miller out of the backfield and hopefully a TE combo of Charles Clay, a solid rookie TE and hopefully an improved Egnew, who can certainly stretch the middle with that size and speed if he can put together the rest of his game. Get Austin on this team and he can help make the offense electric. He would also help to generate some much needed excitement as per the Dolphins, and Stephen Ross would love that.
Wouldn't we just move Hartline into the slot in 3WR packages? I think Hartline could be very effective in the slot. Also, beyond the short term... Hartline's deal gives us an out after 2 years... so we could move Patterson to the #2 full time perimeter WR after he's had a a couple years to develop into that role... with Hartline serving as a stop gap in the meantime?
He's a perimeter receiver first and foremost, and I don't think we should assume 3 WR packages won't be the preferred package of choice. Would you rather have Charles Clay on the field than Tavon Austin? I wouldn't. Would you want Hartline playing in a Cobb/Harvin type role? He's not the Xfactor type IMO. And if it's between sitting Patterson behind Hartline for a couple years or plugging Austin immediately into the slot where he'll see a ton of touches, I don't see us opting for Patterson. To me it wouldn't jive with Ireland to spend $90 million on starting perimeter receivers only to draft one in the 1st round, and I don't think he'd spend a 1st round pick on a player with the intention of semi shelving him for a couple years. What if Philbin & Sherman want to go to the spread with an Xfactor type receiver in the slot as the base offense? What becomes the biggest hole and who best fills that hole?
