Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Did Nawrocki cross the line?


  • Please log in to reply
231 replies to this topic

#121 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed Moncrief 2014

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts
  • LocationDa City

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:03 PM

That's what you came with?

:frown2:

That was worse than Ncmonzta's "Smack" thread :lol:


sorry not a funny guy.

#122 TheRealDeal

TheRealDeal

    Senior Member

  • TROLLOLOL
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,418 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:04 PM

sorry not a funny guy.


I appreciate the honesty and won't hold it against you.

If you want to see real unfunny from someone who is seriously trying...go to smack

#123 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed Moncrief 2014

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts
  • LocationDa City

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:04 PM

maybe Warren Moon was saying that the NFL scouts who think that are racially bias and the corruption is from within the system, not just the guy reporting it!!

...sorry. :P


yeah that's the way you play DA.

#124 TheRealDeal

TheRealDeal

    Senior Member

  • TROLLOLOL
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,418 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:05 PM

maybe Warren Moon was saying that the NFL scouts who think that are racially bias and the corruption is from within the system, not just the guy reporting it!!

...sorry. :P


Possible, not likely

#125 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:10 PM

One thing to keep in mind here. This reminds me of the guy who whispers something in someone else's ear who whispers it in someone else's ear on down the line. After it goes through 10 people it may or may not resemble what was originally said. Certainly everyone puts their own spin on it as it gets passed down the line.

The whole point is not whether it is being discussed among scouts or personnel but how credible it is at this point. I am sure there is some truth to these stories but they might be exaggerated as well. There is n real evidence for example that what was told to Nawrocki is being reported exactly or whether he is taking what he heard and is putting his spin on it that could certainly be less or more negative then what he was told.

And even subtle differences told over and over can change the intensity of the accusations significantly.

#126 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,954 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:12 PM

the three most likely scenarios, to me anyway:
1) untrue rumor spread by a personnel guy to discredit newton in hopes he falls to them
2) newton isn't perfect and is a bit overconfident and sometimes "puts the cart before the horse" as Moon himself says, which seriously turns some guys off...
3) its all true and newton is the worst thing EVAR.

dunno how likely either of the two are excatly bit it's probably one of those.

#127 TheRealDeal

TheRealDeal

    Senior Member

  • TROLLOLOL
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,418 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:12 PM

King gave no indication that Nawrocki exaggerated at all.

You have no reason to believe this is a case of telephone where the story gets changed dramatically. Sure it is possible, but not likely.

King would have mentioned something if Nawrocki was exaggerating or taking them out of context

#128 Urrymonster

Urrymonster

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:16 PM

Not sure if this has really been discussed, but I really don't like Cam's smile - seeing as this is what all the discussion is emanating from.

He is either very humble, with the smile being an embarrassed reaction.
Constantly going "Awwww shucks...." along with that smile.
Or the smile is a facade and he has a confident arrogance behind it.

I can kinda see where he is coming from because from what everyone has heard Cam is not stupid and not a...un-confident... guy. So that kinda suggests this sheepish smile is actually giving out the wrong message.

There I said it, I don't trust his smile. Shoot me.

#129 ncmonzta

ncmonzta

    CBA=Offer U Can't Refuse

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,751 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:17 PM

I appreciate the honesty and won't hold it against you.

If you want to see real unfunny from someone who is seriously trying...go to smack


:lol: It was funny as hell to me... picturing you... ah well. I know you get it.;)I'm not as much of a comedian as you are.

#130 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:18 PM

I haven't dished out any racism towards anyone?

He's gone after my father, my unborn children, my childhood, everything.

He knows he is losing every argument and most people see him for what he is so he turns to other arguments and claims.

The post wasn't even directed at me to which I took offense.

Just like I took offense in the thread when someone made a joke that said Cam tested positive for AIDS.

Ever since the new "Panther fans" that have only showed up after we got the first pick and bombard the board and every thread with Cam propaganda, this board has gone severely downhill. It's really sad to see.

I don't care if people don't agree with me, and I'm known to make a joke or two, but you have to draw the line somewhere to keep the board civil and suggesting other posters are racist on a regular basis does not do that.


So the same person who called me an asshat today without me initiating any personal attacks or namecalling is now offended when he is attacked personally.

Physician heal yourself. You get attacked because you attack others daily and make very negative critical attacks to others constantly.

What hypocrisy.

Edited by panthers55, 31 March 2011 - 07:34 PM.


#131 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,618 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:23 PM

Lance Zierlein actually confirmed a specific element of the report (always knows where the cameras are) and added that this comment came from someone at Auburn. He said that was one of the points he believed probably wasn't true until an NFL team confirmed it to him.

#132 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:28 PM

King gave no indication that Nawrocki exaggerated at all.

You have no reason to believe this is a case of telephone where the story gets changed dramatically. Sure it is possible, but not likely.

King would have mentioned something if Nawrocki was exaggerating or taking them out of context


You missed the point. Nawrocki reported what he heard but also compiled his own spin on it. For example he is told that Newton says one thing privately and one thing publicly. He then reports that sources say Newton is fake and disgenuous. Is what he said wrong or exxagerated. Depends on your definition of what he was told. What if Nawrocki talked to 5 or 6 people and they all told him similar things but of different intensities. It is totally up to him whether he reports that the general consensus is that he is fake and a sham or he reports that people have reported a range of things from his having a fake smile to being disingenuous. There is no equivocation of consideration that these are unsubstantiated reports. He reports them as fact and seems to focus on the negative.

King wouldn't know if they were true or exxagerated unless he knew the whole truth. All he is reporting is that he heard the same thing. Once again it means the rumor mill is rampant but it doesn't prove there is any veracity to the reports unless specific sources are named and they weren't and won't be.

Edited by panthers55, 31 March 2011 - 07:33 PM.


#133 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:31 PM

Lance Zierlein actually confirmed a specific element of the report (always knows where the cameras are) and added that this comment came from someone at Auburn. He said that was one of the points he believed probably wasn't true until an NFL team confirmed it to him.


And if that is all that was reported then it wouldn't have even made a ripple. Honestly who wouldn't get carried away with all the publicity for a guy who a year ago was playing in junior college.

It was the extent of the negative comments far beyond that which drew the controversy.

#134 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,640 posts

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:32 PM

A pretty significant portion of the draft analysis process as done by anyone is subjective. They don't just sit down and rank everybody by who has the best stats.


I realize that allot of it is subjective to one degree or another, but deciding whether or not someone's smile is genuine seems incredibly subjective to me... did they hook up brain monitors?

On top of that, would it be better for him not to smile when it's appropriate or not be aware that there are cameras in the room? Don't you want the "face of your franchise" to be aware of where the cameras are and play to them to a certain extent?

I think there are some very fair criticisms of Cam as a prospect, but some of this stuff is ridiculous...

Edited by CatMan72, 31 March 2011 - 07:38 PM.


#135 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,618 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 31 March 2011 - 07:37 PM

I realize the allot of it is subjective, but deciding whether or not someone's smile is genuine seems incredibly subjective to me... did they hook up brain monitors?

On top of that, would it be better for him not to smile when it's appropriate or not be aware that there are cameras in the room? Don't you want the "face of your franchise" to be aware of where the cameras are and play to them?

I think there are some very fair criticisms of Cam as a prospect, but some of this stuff is ridiculous...

Is virginity important? :eek:

(apparently it is to somebody) :sosp:

Zierlein's article addressed why stuff like that is in there...

Rob Rang, Chad Reuter and the guys over at NFLDraftScout.com do a great job of giving readers a look at player evaluations that are very professionally done and give readers great insight into the strengths and weaknesses of players. Draft Scout doesn't, however, won't go too far into the character issues for players. While they hear the stories about players from scouts and personnel people around the league, they usually won't print much of it.

What Nawrocki did (and does) is write up prospects in the same fashion that many NFL scouts write them up, not like other media outlets write them up. Not only do scouts put the focus on their on-field attributes, but they also include anything and everything that they find out about a player that could have a positive or negative effect on the player's draft stock in his own war room. If the scout doesn't do his due diligence on a player, it could end with him getting fired. It's happened plenty of times.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.