Which Players are Leaving?

[cole256 17,043]

4 hours ago, AUght2win said:

Because he was behind Tre Mason - Heisman finalist, and Artis-Payne - multi-year NFL vet who set the single season Auburn rushing record. 

Technically, Slayton wasn't the top receiver at Auburn either. Ryan Davis was. But both Slayton and Grant were used aplenty in college.

Jeff is stating that top-level athleticism doesn't mean much to scouts or teams at a position like receiver. At defensive end or offensive line? Yes. But at skill positions, you better be good at your craft.

Top level athleticism doesn't mean much at wr???? Jeff said that?

[AUght2win 6,833]

48 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Top level athleticism doesn't mean much at wr???? Jeff said that?

We both said it. It means much more in college than it does in the pros. In the NFL, you better be a craftsman.

[cole256 17,043]

2 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

We both said it. It means much more in college than it does in the pros. In the NFL, you better be a craftsman.

I think what you two should be saying is you need both as opposed to either or. To say it doesn't mean much is crazy though

[AUght2win 6,833]

3 hours ago, metafour said:

That is a flaw in the offense, not in the athletic ability of Slayton to actually run those routes.  Corey Grant has MECHANICAL deficiencies in what he can and can't do which limit his upside as a RB to that of a situational player, which is what he was all throughout college and is in the NFL as well.  Are you trying to suggest that Slayton lacks the athletic ability to run certain routes LOL?

Sammie Coates had the athletic ability to be the best wideout in pro football, and certainly to run any route on the tree. But he isn't and he didn't. I will post Slay's highlights from the TAMU game this year if you'd like an example. He has trouble on jump balls and makes chest catches. I'd qualify those as 'mechanical deficiencies' as you put it. 

[AUght2win 6,833]

Just now, cole256 said:

I think what you two should be saying is you need both as opposed to either or. To say it doesn't mean much is crazy though

I'm saying athletes are a dime a dozen because they really are. You do need both, but you really do need to be more of a technician at the NFL level. There are a lot of guys in college who can run fast and jump high.

Jerry Rice ran a freaking 4.71 man. Fitzgerald runs a 4.6. 

[cole256 17,043]

5 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

I'm saying athletes are a dime a dozen because they really are. You do need both, but you really do need to be more of a technician at the NFL level. There are a lot of guys in college who can run fast and jump high.

Jerry Rice ran a freaking 4.71 man. Fitzgerald runs a 4.6. 

Not my argument but you are going to be hard pressed naming wr's that are slow and are great. Then saying someone is a technician and someone isn't is subjective. 

[AUght2win 6,833]

2 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Not my argument but you are going to be hard pressed naming wr's that are slow and are great. Then saying someone is a technician and someone isn't is subjective. 

Well yeah. That subjective difference is why guys that run 4.6s get drafted and a 4.4 athletic freak like Robert Foster goes undrafted. 

When I say technician I mean route running, body control, hands, fluidity, and balance.

[DAG 33,977]

 

 reading some of these posts got me like this  but I am doing my best to be neutral and stay a team player.

[bigbird 60,498]

9 hours ago, DAG said:

 

 reading some of these posts got me like this  but I am doing my best to be neutral and stay a team player.

[aujeff11 6,243]

10 hours ago, cole256 said:

Not my argument but you are going to be hard pressed naming wr's that are slow and are great. 

I’d take Duke over Coates, Slayton, or Louis or any of the other athletes we put at X receiver any day of the week. 

Change my mind. 

 

[cole256 17,043]

1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

I’d take Duke over Coates, Slayton, or Louis or any of the other athletes we put at X receiver any day of the week. 

Change my mind. 

 

We're talking NFL and you're talking auburn wr's.....which in this offense you can't even evaluate thoroughly....I'm not even going to argue the non sense ofathleticism doesn't matter in the NFL. And Duke played more slot than anything. 

And no I'm not basing any debate with changing your mind

[aujeff11 6,243]

7 minutes ago, cole256 said:

I'm not even going to argue the non sense ofathleticism doesn't matter in the NFL.

He’s not saying athleticism doesn’t matter in the NFL. The fact remains that players have to be good at their craft before they are good NFL receivers. Some players like Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Duke don’t have to be ultra athletic and still be effective receivers because they can just ball. 

 

11 minutes ago, cole256 said:

We're talking NFL and you're talking auburn wr's

Which one is a pure receiver and which are freaks that were told to run down the field.

[cole256 17,043]

28 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

He’s not saying athleticism doesn’t matter in the NFL. The fact remains that players have to be good at their craft before they are good NFL receivers. Some players like Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Duke don’t have to be ultra athletic and still be effective receivers because they can just ball. 

 

Which one is a pure receiver and which are freaks that were told to run down the field.

We don't know because there haven't been any pure receivers to come out of Gus offense.....

 

And he literally said athleticism has little to do.....now on the other hand I didn't say players don't have to be good at their crafts. And it's news to me that Fitzgerald wasn't athletic. And Duke doesn't count in the class your putting him in with. I imagine you could think of a couple....there's always an outlier or anomaly but you're not going to be able to name too many wr's that are great and aren't athletic. It's just not going to happen. It matters.

[aujeff11 6,243]

6 minutes ago, cole256 said:

We don't know because there haven't been any pure receivers to come out of Gus offense.....

Duke is a pure receiver.

7 minutes ago, cole256 said:

And it's news to me that Fitzgerald wasn't athletic.

Well that’s fine. He ran a 4.63 out of college which was years and years ago. If he is athletic, so is Duke. 

8 minutes ago, cole256 said:

And he literally said athleticism has little to do.

It’s because the receivers that get drafted out of college are always athletic. It’s a prerequisite of sorts. Elite athleticism doesn’t always prevail. Being crafty, being able to elude professional defenders (be honest with me: do you know Slayton can do this,) and being able to catch the ball are also requisites to being good NFL receivers.

 

[cole256 17,043]

7 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Duke is a pure receiver.

Well that’s fine. He ran a 4.63 out of college which was years and years ago. If he is athletic, so is Duke. 

It’s because the receivers that get drafted out of college are always athletic. It’s a prerequisite of sorts. Elite athleticism doesn’t always prevail. Being crafty, being able to elude professional defenders (be honest with me: do you know Slayton can do this,) and being able to catch the ball are also requisites to being good NFL receivers.

 

Being able to elude defenders is part of being athletic. Speed isn't the only thing to base athleticism off of. Like I'm pretty sure Fitzgerald had an incredible vertical. 

You saying Duke is a pure receivers doesn't just make him one. Slayton didn't get to play with Marshall. But no I don't know what Slayton can do because Gus offense is trash. I don't know if Davis is a complete receiver, I don't know if any wr for Gus is.....you REALLY don't see this problem or are you just glancing over it because you on of the Gus furious five? Out of all the wr's we've had all these years none of them are good enough to be complete receivers? None? I mean you say Duke but you have no evidence. Well no more than any of the other wr's. 

[aujeff11 6,243]

56 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Being able to elude defenders is part of being athletic

Cole, I just don’t think WRs automatically have this when they are athletic. Slayton has top end speed, but more crafty receivers with less speed can get open easier if they are more savvy. We didn’t even recruit Slayton as WR until the end. Others didn’t at all. What makes you think he has the total package?

 

1 hour ago, cole256 said:

You saying Duke is a pure receivers doesn't just make him one. Slayton didn't get to play with Marshall. But no I don't know what Slayton can do because Gus offense is trash.

Both Duke and Slayton played under the same HC. If Duke kept himself in shape and out of trouble, he’d probably already be in the league. 

1 hour ago, cole256 said:

I don't know if any wr for Gus is.....you REALLY don't see this problem or are you just glancing over it because you on of the Gus furious five? 

Hopefully RD is a complete WR. Would surprise me and a whole lot of draft experts. Furious five? That’s hilarious but I’ll allow it. 

 

1 hour ago, cole256 said:

Out of all the wr's we've had all these years none of them are good enough to be complete receivers? None? I mean you say Duke but you have no evidence. Well no more than any of the other wr's. 

Duke is a pure receiver, not necessarily a complete receiver as he has limitations that render him a better possession receiver. He didn’t have the speed for the deep ball although he could actually box defenders out like in basketball during the jump ball. There are only a few complete receivers that can come to mind and my favorite was Amari Cooper. As for Duke’s evidence, he’s ripped the CFL a new one in ways that even Darvin Adams couldn’t. 

[cole256 17,043]

29 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Cole, I just don’t think WRs automatically have this when they are athletic. Slayton has top end speed, but more crafty receivers with less speed can get open easier if they are more savvy. We didn’t even recruit Slayton as WR until the end. Others didn’t at all. What makes you think he has the total package?

 

Both Duke and Slayton played under the same HC. If Duke kept himself in shape and out of trouble, he’d probably already be in the league. 

Hopefully RD is a complete WR. Would surprise me and a whole lot of draft experts. Furious five? That’s hilarious but I’ll allow it. 

 

Duke is a pure receiver, not necessarily a complete receiver as he has limitations that render him a better possession receiver. He didn’t have the speed for the deep ball although he could actually box defenders out like in basketball during the jump ball. There are only a few complete receivers that can come to mind and my favorite was Amari Cooper. As for Duke’s evidence, he’s ripped the CFL a new one in ways that even Darvin Adams couldn’t. 

You're sort of all over the place here. Seems like you either think I've said something about Slayton that I haven't or you have two different topics going in one. My take on Slayton is I don't know what he may or may not be able to do as he and many other QB's are hand cuffed in this offense. I feel like he did a good job as far as what he had to work with. But I haven't been saying anything as far as him, so the total package comment I don't know where that came from. You brought him up in an earlier post as well. 

 

Only thing I was saying is it's not true saying athleticism isn't too important in the NFL at wr. I even went as far as to say you need more than just that, but no you can't erase it out

[aujeff11 6,243]

5 minutes ago, cole256 said:

You're sort of all over the place here. Seems like you either think I've said something about Slayton that I haven't or you have two different topics going in one.

I don’t think I’m all over tbe place. We are bogged down somewhere. It’s coming off as if you’re bashing my man Duke though. I thought we were the bash brothers.

6 minutes ago, cole256 said:

But I haven't been saying anything as far as him, so the total package comment I don't know where that came from

You said Gus hasn’t developed a complete receiver. I didn’t say Duke was one,  but he’s a quality receiver. 

8 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Only thing I was saying is it's not true saying athleticism isn't too important in the NFL at wr

Maybe he misworded it? I don’t think he believes that himself. I think WR skill is just as important and that’s maybe where he is getting at. 

[cole256 17,043]

1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

I don’t think I’m all over tbe place. We are bogged down somewhere. It’s coming off as if you’re bashing my man Duke though. I thought we were the bash brothers.

You said Gus hasn’t developed a complete receiver. I didn’t say Duke was one,  but he’s a quality receiver. 

Maybe he misworded it? I don’t think he believes that himself. I think WR skill is just as important and that’s maybe where he is getting at. 

No I'm not coming down on Duke at all. Im just saying he had a better situation than Slayton did. 

And I tried to get a little clarity and tell him to think about what he was saying but he doubled down on it, but I don't know maybe he did. But I'm not trying to challenge you in all the other stuff. I just feel like our wr's haven't been given the best opportunities but when I originally posted I was just pointing out the importance of athleticism. We're still on the same page. No beef.

[aujeff11 6,243]

19 minutes ago, cole256 said:

I just feel like our wr's haven't been given the best opportunities

Awesome. It’s because they’re role driven receivers. It’s our offense. I guess this pill is easier to accept when we are winning 10+ and we are stuck with the offense until Gus is gone. Not when D Craig is gone and not when Burns is gone. 

[AUght2win 6,833]

7 minutes ago, cole256 said:

No I'm not coming down on Duke at all. Im just saying he had a better situation than Slayton did. 

And I tried to get a little clarity and tell him to think about what he was saying but he doubled down on it, but I don't know maybe he did. But I'm not trying to challenge you in all the other stuff. I just feel like our wr's haven't been given the best opportunities but when I originally posted I was just pointing out the importance of athleticism. We're still on the same page. No beef.

I never said athleticism wasn't important in the NFL. LMAO. Every potential NFL receiver is an athlete. They ALL run relatively fast. They ALL jump relatively high. It's a prerequisite. This need not be stated. Especially at a position like receiver.

My point was that metafour is convinced that NFL scouts are drooling over Slayton because of his speed. That they couldn't really care less about his ball skills or route running because he's just so athletic! That is incorrect. An NFL scout will take the 4.54 guy with great ball skills over the 4.41 guy with mediocre balls skills any day. The bottomline on Slay is he doesn't possess great hands or body control, and that the NFL, unlike Gus Malzahn, is looking for great receivers not super athlete-projects.

[McLoofus 35,182]

Why are folks still talking like it's an either-or proposition?

Yes, the elite, athletic, accomplished players will get drafted early.

Yes, the elite athletes who give reason to believe that they can be coached into productive NFL players will get drafted next, along with the less athletic guys who produce.

Duke Williams just signed with the Bills and Slayton will sign with somebody in April. 

[cole256 17,043]

1 minute ago, McLoofus said:

Why are folks still talking like it's an either-or proposition?

Yes, the elite, athletic, accomplished players will get drafted early.

Yes, the elite athletes who give reason to believe that they can be coached into productive NFL players will get drafted next, along with the less athletic guys who produce.

Duke Williams just signed with the Bills and Slayton will sign with somebody in April. 

I literally said I think the best phrase may be it takes both

[cole256 17,043]

13 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

I never said athleticism wasn't important in the NFL. LMAO. Every potential NFL receiver is an athlete. They ALL run relatively fast. They ALL jump relatively high. It's a prerequisite. This need not be stated. Especially at a position like receiver.

My point was that metafour is convinced that NFL scouts are drooling over Slayton because of his speed. That they couldn't really care less about his ball skills or route running because he's just so athletic! That is incorrect. An NFL scout will take the 4.54 guy with great ball skills over the 4.41 guy with mediocre balls skills any day. The bottomline on Slay is he doesn't possess great hands or body control, and that the NFL, unlike Gus Malzahn, is looking for great receivers not super athlete-projects.

You said it doesn't mean much. To me when I say isn't important IMO we're saying the same thing. But I shouldn't speak for you and maybe you see a difference I don't.

I shouldn't even had entered the debate to be honest

[bigbird 60,498]

4 minutes ago, cole256 said:

I shouldn't even had entered the debate to be honest