Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Keenan Allen Pro Day Tommorow.


  • Please log in to reply
327 replies to this topic

#286 carolina-chuck

carolina-chuck

    HORNETS 2014

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,678 posts
  • LocationKurby

Posted 11 April 2013 - 02:22 PM

Saying he looks like a 4.5 guy to me assumes you know what one looks like and can tell the difference between a 4.5 guy and a 4.7 guy. That assumes you have some kind of expertise to tell the difference which wouldn't be obvious to the casual fan. I called BS and you have been the one on the attack calling me a hypocrite.

Casual fans don't make statements like that and I am smart enough to know that and don't do it. And no, I don't think you are an expert, I think you are a pseudo expert. You seem to be the only one who misses the distinction.

But I won't keep going back and forth because I have seen you do this for pages like other posters we know. Think what you want and get in the last word.



I can sure distinguished it bc Keenan didn't look like a Tyler Eifert running in the highlights.

You too funny bro.

#287 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,460 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 11 April 2013 - 02:57 PM

I can sure distinguished it bc Keenan didn't look like a Tyler Eifert running in the highlights.

You too funny bro.


I think that anyone who thinks they can discerne the differences in what aa 4.5 guy and a 4.7 guy look like on tape are totally full of poo. We are talking about 2/10th of a second over 40 yards......that is the blink of an eye.

#288 carolina-chuck

carolina-chuck

    HORNETS 2014

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,678 posts
  • LocationKurby

Posted 11 April 2013 - 03:00 PM

I think that anyone who thinks they can discerne the differences in what aa 4.5 guy and a 4.7 guy look like on tape are totally full of poo. We are talking about 2/10th of a second over 40 yards......that is the blink of an eye.


I never said I can tell the differences in time. My point is he doesn't look like a Tyler Eifert 4.6-4.7 guy on those highlights. Tell me if you disagree.

#289 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,709 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 07:33 PM

I think that anyone who thinks they can discerne the differences in what aa 4.5 guy and a 4.7 guy look like on tape are totally full of poo. We are talking about 2/10th of a second over 40 yards......that is the blink of an eye.


So, given that, why should anyone make a big deal out of his 4.7 on a less than 100% leg?

#290 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,048 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 11 April 2013 - 09:50 PM

So, given that, why should anyone make a big deal out of his 4.7 on a less than 100% leg?


The issue isn't about running a 4.5 or 4.7, it is about posters that say they can tell the difference on game film especially when they aren't using a split screen or other mechanism to be able to compare them side by side. Like when they compare people running a 40 at the combine. Because everything is the same you can line up film side by side and compare them. Watching two guys running a route on a football field and saying you can tell the difference between a 4..5 and 4.7 is just ridiculous.
There is a difference for sure but it isn't discernible to a casual fan or even most self-proclaimed experts, IMO.

It is analogous to saying you can tell the difference between a car going 55 miles an hour and a different one going 60 miles an hour on different days and different tracks. Is there a difference?? Yep. It is easily discernible?? Not to most anyone. Doesn't mean they are the same though or that it doesn't matter.

#291 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,709 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 10:59 PM

The issue isn't about running a 4.5 or 4.7, it is about posters that say they can tell the difference on game film especially when they aren't using a split screen or other mechanism to be able to compare them side by side. Like when they compare people running a 40 at the combine. Because everything is the same you can line up film side by side and compare them. Watching two guys running a route on a football field and saying you can tell the difference between a 4..5 and 4.7 is just ridiculous.
There is a difference for sure but it isn't discernible to a casual fan or even most self-proclaimed experts, IMO.

It is analogous to saying you can tell the difference between a car going 55 miles an hour and a different one going 60 miles an hour on different days and different tracks. Is there a difference?? Yep. It is easily discernible?? Not to most anyone. Doesn't mean they are the same though or that it doesn't matter.


If (and granted it's a fairly big if) Allen has no continuing injury concerns going forward, the fact he ran a 4.7 given his size and style of play shouldn't disqualify him as a potential pick in the 1st. He's not going to be a burner like a young Steve Smith or Percy Harvin, but he knows how to use his body to create separation and should become an excellent red zone receiver, something we've lacked for too long.

I would feel more comfortable projecting success for a guy like Keenan than a speedy guy that checks in at 5'8". Unfortunately, we're not going to find many Calvin Johnson quality receivers at 14, but that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't upgrade our WR corps, and I believe Allen would have a nice impact from day 1.

#292 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,048 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 11 April 2013 - 11:16 PM

If (and granted it's a fairly big if) Allen has no continuing injury concerns going forward, the fact he ran a 4.7 given his size and style of play shouldn't disqualify him as a potential pick in the 1st. He's not going to be a burner like a young Steve Smith or Percy Harvin, but he knows how to use his body to create separation and should become an excellent red zone receiver, something we've lacked for too long.

I would feel more comfortable projecting success for a guy like Keenan than a speedy guy that checks in at 5'8". Unfortunately, we're not going to find many Calvin Johnson quality receivers at 14, but that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't upgrade our WR corps, and I believe Allen would have a nice impact from day 1.


The injury concerns are a big deal especially given our history. And when have we ever had a receiver make a big impact year 1?? Smith?? Nope...... Moose? Nope. Anyone? Nope

But an injured guy who may be months away from even practicing is going to be the first???

Color me skeptical.

#293 panther4life

panther4life

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,654 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 07:02 AM

The injury concerns are a big deal especially given our history. And when have we ever had a receiver make a big impact year 1?? Smith?? Nope...... Moose? Nope. Anyone? Nope

But an injured guy who may be months away from even practicing is going to be the first???

Color me skeptical.


So are you suggesting there is a jinx or curse in panther land saying its impossible to draft a successful rookie receiver?

Your basing our history off of 3 2nd round receivers and 1 1st rounder 27th overall)since 95.

That's silly logic IMO. If we went by that logic then we should zoom in on a LB or RB as we have had better rookie impact from those positions than any other.

If we find a noise or smitty in the first wouldn't that be a success anyway? We need to start grooming someone to replace Smith instead of being stuck overpaying a FA receiver or expecting a rookie to come in and immediately be the new # 1.

Just sounds like you don't like him as a prospect and that's fine. The problem is you are using reasons totally unrelated to him to justify your stance.

Funny thing is, if Allen was completely healthy and ran a 4.4 then I don't think anyone would believe he'd be there at 14 anyway.

Every prospect has causes for concern and lower the pick the more amplified the concerns are.





#294 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    The holy ghost of Mr. Miyagi

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,374 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 12 April 2013 - 07:27 AM

Seriously..to prove Keenan Allen is fast enough we have a game against the NFL stacked Washington huskies?

When these highlights are questionable maybe he wont be as good as Dewayne Jarrett.

#295 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,048 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 12 April 2013 - 07:39 AM

So are you suggesting there is a jinx or curse in panther land saying its impossible to draft a successful rookie receiver?

Your basing our history off of 3 2nd round receivers and 1 1st rounder 27th overall)since 95.

That's silly logic IMO. If we went by that logic then we should zoom in on a LB or RB as we have had better rookie impact from those positions than any other.

If we find a noise or smitty in the first wouldn't that be a success anyway? We need to start grooming someone to replace Smith instead of being stuck overpaying a FA receiver or expecting a rookie to come in and immediately be the new # 1.

Just sounds like you don't like him as a prospect and that's fine. The problem is you are using reasons totally unrelated to him to justify your stance.

Funny thing is, if Allen was completely healthy and ran a 4.4 then I don't think anyone would believe he'd be there at 14 anyway.

Every prospect has causes for concern and lower the pick the more amplified the concerns are.


Of course I am not suggesting there is a jinx in us picking receivers in the draft, where did you get that stupid idea. Your whole premise and post is built off faulty reading comprehension and a leap in convoluted logic I never said. It would be stupid logic to say that, and you are the one who said it not me. You Allen nut huggers need to take a few deep breaths and actually see what people are saying before going off on a ridiculous tangent to champion your injured warrior.

But lets review what I did say to make it easy for you.

So I said that we need to avoid injured players or guys with injury histories because our experience has been lately that they struggle to play right away and some of them like Otah or Hogan played very little for us. Stupid?? No.

And if we have 5 players in the draft, your coach is on the hotseat and we need to draft an impact player in the first we should not take a receiver who often needs a few years to learn the position in order to perform at a high level. We should avoid taking a flier on a rookie receiver who is injured and isn't even the highest rated receiver in the draft on many boards particularly if he isn't Julio Jones or an AJ Greene and is a can't miss pick who is 100% healthy. Stupid??? No.....

And to the point that if he ran a 4.4 everyone would be fine with it. Of course they would. If he ran a 4.4 then it would be faster than he ever been recorded running and it would show he was 100% recovered and not injured going into the draft. He would be one of the best receiver prospects in the draft and as I said earlier would be a good option at 14.

But he didn't, and he is still rehabbing and this is a non surgery injury which appears to taking quite a bit of time to heal. So some of us are reticent to pull the trigger on him.

Stupid??? No.......


Now take a few breaths, read what I actually said, and then respond to avoid looking like a confused Alllen Groupie this time.

#296 C47

C47

    89...Panther for Life...

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,311 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 07:48 AM

........ double post

#297 C47

C47

    89...Panther for Life...

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,311 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 07:48 AM



I'm sorry you guys didn't bother to watch Allen until after the season ended. The kid is a playmaker, all he did his sophomore year is make plays. Is he the fastest guy running in a straight line? Absolutely not, but in my opinion his straight line speed also isn't going to hold him back because he does other things so well.







His debut game at Cal in 2010...don't give me the "it's against UC Davis" BS, if [insert SEC WR here] did this against Western Middle North Tennessee State some of you would be raving about him....



#298 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed KB 2014

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,663 posts
  • LocationDa City

Posted 12 April 2013 - 08:39 AM

you can judge off tape,or project how fast a prospect may run. it is a projection, that is why a lot of time people say he should run well or he is a 4.5 guy before a individual runs a 40. how many times have a prospect came out, and ran a faster 40 then people expected. but then when you watch him in the game, he doesnt play now where near that speed. or vice versa, people thought Kendall Wright was a burner but he ran a 4.61 what the combine. look at him on tape, he plays at 4.4 speed.

#299 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,048 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 12 April 2013 - 08:49 AM

Anyone want to look at the past 10 years and see how many first round rookie receivers outside of the top 10 made significant contributions for their team in their rookie year Why not use 1000 yards since that assumes they start and average roughly 60 yards a game. I won't even quantify it with how many first round rookie receivers who were injured at draft time outside of the top 10 made significant contributions.

I am going out on a limb and say none.

And before you say that we need to look for the long term, tell that to Rivera who is on the hot seat and Gettleman who needs to follow up the last 2 years where we had guys who won the rookie of the year award on their side of the ball. Like I said Allen would be a good pick if healthy of if we had multiple 1st round picks like Minnesota. But he isn't and we don't. We need someone at 14 who will start this year not in a few years.

#300 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,199 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:01 AM

not sure why people hold certain positions to a higher standard than others. if he isn't a julio jones or aj green then you shouldn't draft him at 14. unless he's a sure thing WR prospect then you stay away...but at 14 there are no sure thing WRs. someone their caliber wouldn't last that long so pretty much no WR should ever be drafted around that spot. it's ridiculous. it's like saying that no DT should be drafted at 14 unless they are suh-like. you could go on and on.

the truth is, if you don't like the idea of a certain pick at a position or you just have another one or direction in mind, you're going to put all kinds of unrealistic expectations on the position that you wouldn't for the one(s) you want that year. people did the same thing with QB when we were talking about cam, talking about how far back you could set the team if you picked the wrong one and how you should only go with the low risk sure thing, esp. with the #1 pick and that they should be the most established and pro-ready blah blah blah...

point is, we all have inconsistencies and we are all guilty of the double standard when advocating for or against certain players or positions. people arguing for WR will use the same arguments for it that others will for DTs or whatever and the justifications and urgency for the pick will be very similar.


just an observation.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com