Those scores are all based on weight adjusted combine numbers. None of them had solid days.

I forgot. It has nothing to do with what they do on field for you. Its all about the 3 cone and jumps lol

---

Those scores are all based on weight adjusted combine numbers. None of them had solid days. 

 

You said they "underperformed."

 

 Yet you are conveniently ignoring a major portion of their "performance" to prop up your faith in a third party's cobbled together copy of a shoe manufacturer's metric on athleticism. 

---

You said they "underperformed."

 

 Yet you are conveniently ignoring a major portion of their "performance" to prop up your faith in a third party's cobbled together copy of a shoe manufacturer's metric on athleticism. 

Bash it all you want. The best teams in the NFL use it (heck they all use it, just to varying degrees) and so do a ton of the evaluators. 

 

If you don't want to that's fine but you can't say they had good performances, you can say they had bad performances and you don't care. 

---

It makes me wonder why these teams have scouting departments.  All they have to do is look online for players.

---

It makes me wonder why these teams have scouting departments.  All they have to do is look online for players.

Yeah man, why bother doing puzzles with more than one piece in the box. 

---

Bash it all you want. The best teams in the NFL use it (heck they all use it, just to varying degrees) and so do a ton of the evaluators.


If you don't want to that's fine but you can't say they had good performances, you can say they had bad performances and you don't care.

You saying the best teams use it. Now is that an opinion or can you actually prove it?

---

Bash it all you want. The best teams in the NFL use it (heck they all use it, just to varying degrees) and so do a ton of the evaluators. 

 

If you don't want to that's fine but you can't say they had good performances, you can say they had bad performances and you don't care. 

LOL

 

Relax.  I was being intentionally snarky with you because you like to shove sparq and spider charts down the throats of so many posters that don't value them nearly as much as you do. 

 

You have zero clue as to what degree NFL teams are weighing that particular metric in their evaluations of players BTW. So let's not pretend that scouting directors and GMs are treating this metric as gospel. 

 

I'm very curious.  Since you think Tre White "underperformed" and "didn't have a solid day" where you would see him falling in the draft and if he should indeed be the 18th CB off the board?  

---

Yeah man, why bother doing puzzles with more than one piece in the box. 

 

...even the little tiny pieces that some people want to make into huge ones.

---

You saying the best teams use it. Now is that an opinion or can you actually prove it?

Pretty much. As I explained many pages ago guys like Whitman for the Seahawks and Mosqueda for the Packers make lists of guys that passed through the athletic filters they have observed the teams taking...and sure enough darn near every player drafted for years has passed those filters. 

---

...even the little tiny pieces that some people want to make into huge ones.

For some teams they are tiny pieces, for some teams they are huge pieces. Coincidentally, for the best teams (at least the Seahawks, Packers, Steelers, Patriots) they have proven to be huge pieces. 

---

I'm very curious.  Since you think Tre White "underperformed" and "didn't have a solid day" where you would see him falling in the draft and if he should indeed be the 18th CB off the board?  

I don't know, he was my CB4 or 5 I'd probably make him like my CB7 or 8 now? He probably moved behind Moreau and Kevin King but I'm not sure if anyone else was that much better to jump him. 

 

It just made an already confusing CB class even more confusing overall. All I really know is Lattimore and Conley were already top 2 and cemented themselves there for me, and Moreau was on the back of the 2nd tier and now he moves to the front. After those 3 it's really tricky.

---

 

 

It just made an already confusing CB class even more confusing overall

 

Watching their actual game tape makes it a lot less confusing I find. 

---

Watching their actual game tape makes it a lot less confusing I find. 

None of us are watching their actual game tape, and I watch their cutups just like everyone else. While they are useful they are also woefully insufficient for defensive backs more than any other position. 

---

None of us are watching their actual game tape, and I watch their cutups just like everyone else. While they are useful they are also woefully insufficient for defensive backs more than any other position.

So if a CB shows in cutups that he bites a lot on double moves, has sloppy footwork and stiff hips. But kills it as a sparq athlete would you draft him before a guy with a high football IQ and fluid, clean footwork and has sidney jones type of sparq stats?

---

So if a CB shows in cutups that he bites a lot on double moves, has sloppy footwork and stiff hips. But kills it as a sparq athlete would you draft him before a guy with a high football IQ and fluid, clean footwork and has sidney jones type of sparq stats?

Lol no

---

While they are useful they are also woefully insufficient for defensive backs more than any other position. 

That's definitely an opinion that you have.  

 

I don't share it. 

---

So if a CB shows in cutups that he bites a lot on double moves, has sloppy footwork and stiff hips. But kills it as a sparq athlete would you draft him before a guy with a high football IQ and fluid, clean footwork and has sidney jones type of sparq stats?

You're basically talking Kevin King vs Sidney Jones. It's tough. 

---

For some teams they are tiny pieces, for some teams they are huge pieces. Coincidentally, for the best teams (at least the Seahawks, Packers, Steelers, Patriots) they have proven to be huge pieces.

I'd love to see where you got that information if you provide it.

---

You're basically talking Kevin King vs Sidney Jones. It's tough. 

 

I changed the position from S to CB. But the players were Taylor Mays and Earl Thomas. 

---

I changed the position from S to CB. But the players were Taylor Mays and Earl Thomas.

Perfect example why spider charts and sparq metrics mean very very little.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."