Because he did not. If anything Beasley's the most consistent edge rusher available for us. TFL in every game, and a sack in 9/13 games. In those games, he never had more than 2 sacks (3 games) so it wasn't like he piled up sacks on a weak matchup. Those 3 games- FSU, South Carolina, North Carolina. Two of those 3 LTs will be drafted in the first or 2nd day (Corey Robinson, Cam Erving)
http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/player/147/...melog.html
Fowler didnt match his sack or TFL totals- and got 3 of his 8.5 sacks against a single team (ECU). No more than 1 sack in any of his other games. He also recorded a sack in 8/12 games. And TFL in 11/12. So why are people claiming Fowler had a better season?
http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/player/235/...melog.html
Fowler is a better overall pass rusher than Beasley.
Quote:Fowler is a better overall pass rusher than Beasley.
How so?
Fowler was the gators defense
If you want to go off stats Michael Sam should of been a top 10 pick.
Quote:Fowler was the gators defense
Well you say that....but Beasley was to Clemson what Fowler was to Florida
Beasleys % of team Sacks: 27%
Fowlers % of team Sacks: 28%
Beasleys % of team TFL: 17%
Fowlers % of team Sacks: 17%
It actually speaks volumes about Beasley, because he was able to produce at such a high rate on a top-10 sack team and the top team for TFL
Quote:Fowler was the gators defense
That is what I saw as well.
Quote:Well you say that....but Beasley was to Clemson what Fowler was to Florida
Beasleys % of team Sacks: 27%
Fowlers % of team Sacks: 28%
Beasleys % of team TFL: 17%
Fowlers % of team Sacks: 17%
It actually speaks volumes about Beasley, because he was able to produce at such a high rate on a top-10 sack team and the top team for TFL
You are too fixated on the stats. Fowler passes the eye test.
Quote:If you want to go off stats Michael Sam should of been a top 10 pick.
I'm not going off just stats. Its his better stats plus more explosion (in literally every single benchmark). We're talking about the more productive player and the better athlete.
Obviously I think this is more clear cut than most, and no knock to Fowler at all, but I'm just trying to address some of these fallacies about Fowler somehow having a better year or better combine. I really haven't heard one convincing argument aside from his wider array of moves. And that's debatable.
Quote:You are too fixated on the stats. Fowler passes the eye test.
And Beasley doesnt? I'm just unsure what the argument for Fowler really is. Seems like one giant strawman. Just because you watched him more doesn't mean other players don't pass the eye test.
With Beasley, there's empirical evidence of his consistency, explosiveness, and raw ability relative to his peers. The argument for Fowler over him seems to be a lot of homerism and 'feels'
Quote:And Beasley doesnt? I'm just unsure what the argument for Fowler really is. Seems like one giant strawman. Just because you watched him more doesn't mean other players don't pass the eye test.
With Beasley, there's empirical evidence of his consistency, explosiveness, and raw ability relative to his peers. The argument for Fowler over him seems to be a lot of homerism and 'feels'
May I ask if you have watched any tape on Fowler, or is your anti-homerism homerism just because he was a gator? Yes Beasley is a great college pass rusher and has the body to be an elite one in the NFL. If you really watch tape on Fowler he is very versatile and you can see the offense account for where he is at, just because the stats aren't world setting doesn't mean he didn't impact every single play. He keeps cut backs contained, he can go into coverage, he can pass rush, he runs side line to side line, he uses his hands to create leverage well, and he takes good angles. You could line him up anywhere on the DL and be disruptive, hell you can probably drop him into coverage on TE heavy formations.
Plus he would instantly be a fan favorite and motivator on the field. When he starts dancing at the line you know that defense is going to feed off of that energy. I think it would be a great pick for the jags because all he can do. Instant depth and starter.
I agree with OP. It's the same thing I've been seeing which is why I'm confused so many people are ranking Fowler ahead of Beasley after the combine when Beasley's only knock beforehand was his weight and after the combine that was disproven. Beasley had better combine results across the board, was just as if not more productive at Clemson and Fowler was at Florida, and they play the same position. And he also passes the eye test and if anything he has more pass rush moves and more sound technique than Fowler right now. And also has a high ceiling. And all I ever see people say in response is Fowler this and that while ignoring everything about Beasley. It's strange to me.
Quote:May I ask if you have watched any tape on Fowler, or is your anti-homerism homerism just because he was a gator? Yes Beasley is a great college pass rusher and has the body to be an elite one in the NFL. If you really watch tape on Fowler he is very versatile and you can see the offense account for where he is at, just because the stats aren't world setting doesn't mean he didn't impact every single play. He keeps cut backs contained, he can go into coverage, he can pass rush, he runs side line to side line, he uses his hands to create leverage well, and he takes good angles. You could line him up anywhere on the DL and be disruptive, hell you can probably drop him into coverage on TE heavy formations.
Nope. If I had to identify with one college team it would be Virginia Tech, so I'm equally ambivalent between the teams of Florida. But that aside, comeon, we should be trying to get the best talent on the team- so, honestly, the college team really should not matter at all.
I agree with your assessment, Fowler is a fine player. But the role of the LEO is specific and a lot of what you write isnt going to be his responsibility with this team. If we are drafting a LEO this high, the conversation should fixate around who is the best pass rusher and disruptor.
Quote:I agree with OP. It's the same thing I've been seeing which is why I'm confused so many people are ranking Fowler ahead of Beasley after the combine when Beasley's only knock beforehand was his weight and after the combine that was disproven. Beasley had better combine results across the board, was just as if not more productive at Clemson and Fowler was at Florida, and they play the same position. And he also passes the eye test and if anything he has more pass rush moves and more sound technique than Fowler right now. And also has a high ceiling. And all I ever see people say in response is Fowler this and that while ignoring everything about Beasley. It's strange to me.
Well said.
Vernon Hargreaves and the secondary was the Gators defense. Hargreaves may very well be the #1 pick next year.
Quote:And Beasley doesnt? I'm just unsure what the argument for Fowler really is. Seems like one giant strawman. Just because you watched him more doesn't mean other players don't pass the eye test.
With Beasley, there's empirical evidence of his consistency, explosiveness, and raw ability relative to his peers. The argument for Fowler over him seems to be a lot of homerism and 'feels'
Both do. Is that allowed to be said or are we required to paint ourselves into a corner?
Quote:Both do. Is that allowed to be said or are we required to paint ourselves into a corner?
Your argument for selecting Fowler is that he passes the eye test. So does Beasley. Since we can't choose both, who do you choose and why?
Quote:I agree with OP. It's the same thing I've been seeing which is why I'm confused so many people are ranking Fowler ahead of Beasley after the combine when Beasley's only knock beforehand was his weight and after the combine that was disproven. Beasley had better combine results across the board, was just as if not more productive at Clemson and Fowler was at Florida, and they play the same position. And he also passes the eye test and if anything he has more pass rush moves and more sound technique than Fowler right now. And also has a high ceiling. And all I ever see people say in response is Fowler this and that while ignoring everything about Beasley. It's strange to me.
Yeah I said basically this same thing in another thread. Everything people are saying about Fowler is true, but it is just as true (and even moreso) when it comes to Beasley or Gregory too. Then you add that for OTTO Beasley has a fair bit better lateral movement, and received more double teams than any other person in college football, more than cancelling out the "you can see the offense account for where Fowler is at". Then for LEO Gregory has a lot more length and more consistent hand usage. Don't think anyone is knocking Fowler, it just turns out that he's a good solid #2 option behind both of them depending on either way you stack it.
Quote:Yeah I said basically this same thing in another thread. Everything people are saying about Fowler is true, but it is just as true (and even moreso) when it comes to Beasley or Gregory too. Then you add that for OTTO Beasley has a fair bit better lateral movement, and received more double teams than any other person in college football, more than cancelling out the "you can see the offense account for where Fowler is at". Then for LEO Gregory has a lot more length and more consistent hand usage. Don't think anyone is knocking Fowler, it just turns out that he's a good solid #2 option behind both of them depending on either way you stack it.
I don't know that I agree that Fowler is behind Gregory as LEO. If you're doing projection based on Gregory's "potential", then yes. But IMO, Fowler was more stout and did a better job setting the edge against the run than Gregory did.