Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

*UPDATE* Malik McDowell Was Misunderstood


Saca312

Recommended Posts

Malik was originally a guy I was rooting for and hoping to see succeed in the NFL. He seemed like a monster and someone who just wasn't in the right situation at first glance.

Well, after his comments I'm questioning his IQ and sanity.

Well, hey he fills a need at safety amirite?

...

*UPDATE* So looks like this twitter guy took what McDowell said out of context.

Watch the interview video

1:15 onward

McDowell is saying that he has an unconventional style of using his hands to shed blocks and get to the back field and once his coaches saw that his techniques worked, they stopped trying to "fix" him. 

These kids are not paid to be articulate. Sometimes they say perfectly normal things in an awkward manner which could end up conveying the wrong message. 

So don't worry about McDowell. He'd be great at the 40th honestly, and he will probably fall that far.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never have been high on him.  Only thought he May creep into the bottom of the 1st

Theres a reason he's one of the top athletes here and upside but the majority of Mocks have him going 20 at the highest and some have him going as low as mid to low 2nd

 

i had him mocked to the Seahawks because there won't be a OT worth picking there and he has upside.  They deal with guys off field stuff all the time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like Greg Hardy. Hardy's production and physical traits sounded like a round 1 guy as a junior, but a subpar senior year and likely that personality dropped him in the draft. These "uncoachable traits" could drop him on some mentally weak teams. Teams that have a strong leadership on the field, and coaches that can direct his personality will get a steal then.

 

Reading up on Malik, one controversial quote was how he likes to embarrass OL in practice. Some would take that as a guy who would be a locker room problem. Not me. Personally, the OL should step up or step out in practice when he starts that. If they can't take him in practice, either improve or next guy up. Should be more a motivator than a demoralizer. If it spills off the practice field, yes that is when it is a problem, but that is not what has been said about him. 

 

If Malik brings same desire to embarrass the opposition on Sunday, good. Need a few more guys like that. 

 

Are we now a choirboys only team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...