Does it matter if I ask do we need a thread every time a guy has a bowl game?

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

Does it matter if I ask do we need a thread every time a guy has a bowl game?

Nope. Doesn't matter one little bit.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

OK then, stop getting yalls panties in a bunch.

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

Does it matter if I ask do we need a thread every time a guy has a bowl game?

 

I know I'm kinda getting into semantics here, but how often does a guy-Barnett in this instance-have a good bowl game?

 

Barring participation in the Senior Bowl, a player can only have one thread a year if he has a good bowl game.

 

Is one thread a year on a player excessive?

 

(Just busting your chops.  Don't mind me)

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I hope Caldwell doesn't mess things up by passing on guys like Garrett or Barnett because "we have Dante Fowler"

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

OK then, stop getting yalls panties in a bunch.

 

No one made you open the thread.

---

I know I'm kinda getting into semantics here, but how often does a guy-Barnett in this instance-have a good bowl game?
 
Barring participation in the Senior Bowl, a player can only have one thread a year if he has a good bowl game.
 
Is one thread a year on a player excessive?
 
(Just busting your chops.  Don't mind me)

I should really say everytime a guy has a good game in general because that's what happens. What's annoying about is it's like guys see them one time and then are like "oh wow they're good" without seeing anything else from them.
 
 

No one made you open the thread.

But you made me look at it when I opened the section.

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

I should really say everytime a guy has a good game in general because that's what happens. What's annoying about is it's like guys see them one time and then are like "oh wow they're good" without seeing anything else from them.



But you made me look at it when I opened the section.

You okay man?

---

Are you? Accept someone has a different opinion and move on.

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

I just don't see what's so appealing about him. Admittedly, I've only seen a couple videos from that DraftBreakdown website, but he seems slow to get off the line and takes bad angles. Nothing really jumps out at me that says he's worth an early 1st round pick. 

---

Are you? Accept someone has a different opinion and move on.

You seem upset. Relax Vino.

---

I should really say everytime a guy has a good game in general because that's what happens. What's annoying about is it's like guys see them one time and then are like "oh wow they're good" without seeing anything else from them.

 

 

So perhaps stickies on the top prospects would solve the issue?

 

What you are describing should not be surprising.

 

  In many instances, people will follow a particular college team until bowl season, then watch other teams.  Others prefer to emphasize watching the bowl games because there is some expectation of a similar level of competition.  A prospect can look dominant against a directional school, but how will he look against a big time program in a big game?

 

Is it a "crime" for one fan to "discover" a player later than another?  Should the later discoverer of a player be penalized by not commenting on that player in any thread of his own making if it isn't the established thread for that player?

 

What is the reasonable search a poster must make to find a preexisting thread on a player before posting a new one?  One page?  Two?  Are threads that name one player in a title that branch off into a discussion about another player counted among those to be considered a preexisting thread?  What about team vs. team game day threads?

 

In my opinion, if there is a reasonably recent thread that is obvious from the title it is about a particular player, perhaps an effort should be made to post in that thread or perhaps have a mod merge the threads.  By the same token, I think threads that facilitate the substantive discussion about the merits of a player should be encouraged, even if somewhat redundant.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I just don't see what's so appealing about him. Admittedly, I've only seen a couple videos from that DraftBreakdown website, but he seems slow to get off the line and takes bad angles. Nothing really jumps out at me that says he's worth an early 1st round pick. 

 

I'm not sure what you're watching. He looks very fast off the line to me and has the best bending skills in this class. The only thing I see missing from him is maybe power, since I don't see him bullrush guys hardly ever, but he definitely seems worth a first round pick as a pass rusher. I'll have to see his results from the combine, but just going off tape, I would say he has double digit sack potential in the league with the way he moves. He also plays the run a lot better than say a Tim Williams.

 

You seem upset. Relax Vino.

I'm not.

 

So perhaps stickies on the top prospects would solve the issue?

 

What you are describing should not be surprising.

 

  In many instances, people will follow a particular college team until bowl season, then watch other teams.  Others prefer to emphasize watching the bowl games because there is some expectation of a similar level of competition.  A prospect can look dominant against a directional school, but how will he look against a big time program in a big game?

 

Is it a "crime" for one fan to "discover" a player later than another?  Should the later discoverer of a player be penalized by not commenting on that player in any thread of his own making if it isn't the established thread for that player?

 

What is the reasonable search a poster must make to find a preexisting thread on a player before posting a new one?  One page?  Two?  Are threads that name one player in a title that branch off into a discussion about another player counted among those to be considered a preexisting thread?  What about team vs. team game day threads?

 

In my opinion, if there is a reasonably recent thread that is obvious from the title it is about a particular player, perhaps an effort should be made to post in that thread or perhaps have a mod merge the threads.  By the same token, I think threads that facilitate the substantive discussion about the merits of a player should be encouraged, even if somewhat redundant.

I think a general thread discussion on players would solve the issue. I just don't see the need for a new thread to pop up every single time one random guy has a flashy game. imo it just reduces the quality of the section.

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

Jags D will be the #1 ranked D in 2017

---

I want to watch more of him.  Right now, I'd say he reminds me of a bigger Noah Spence, which is a good thing that he's able to play that way being bigger.  Not in that "can't miss" tier, but should easily go top 10.

---

Eh, as a guy who stanned pretty hard for Noah before the draft, I don't really see any similarities between the two.

---

Eh, as a guy who stanned pretty hard for Noah before the draft, I don't really see any similarities between the two.

I see both guys get off the line quick, both have similar bend, both have similar strength, both have a couple of pass rush moves.

 

Who do you think is the better prospect (off the field issues aside from Spence)?

---

Barnett doesn't really get off the line quick, he just tries to anticipate the snap count and it shows by how many offsides penalties he's racked up at Tennessee. Noah had far more bend, though I'd say Barnett was stronger. Haven't really seen Derek use much(or any) pass-rush moves. If his initial rush gets stoned, he doesn't seem to have a counter move developed.

 

Depends on what you're looking for, IMO. Pure edge-rusher, I'd majorly favor Spence because he has tools that I haven't seen out of Barnett. Derek's better at setting the edge and should probably the stronger of the two, so you could possibly get him to develop a pretty good bull-rush. If you want more of an all-rounder that you don't need to take off the field for fear that he'll get run over, then I'd lean Barnett.

---

Good analysis.

 

I'll have to watch more of Barnett.  I thought he did get off the line pretty good, especially considering his size.

---

Pass. We have more pressing needs to fill.

---