PDA

View Full Version : No wonder NFL Scouts Inc. are scouting for ESPN and not NFL teams


SoCalBronco
07-14-2005, 07:01 PM
Q is equal to or slightly better than Tatum? Blind Sarge is better than Tatum? I know Tatum's got some holes in his game but come on.

Check it out. I actually dont think their commentary on each player is that bad, but their ratings are crap.

2005 Ratings - Scouts, Inc.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2005 RB ratings - Scout Inc.


Quote:
Tied #58 Overall in the NFL
Name: Mike Anderson
Grade: 68 | Key
Alert: I

Comment:
He is a big back - North/South type runner. Good overall run skills - good vision and run instincts. Average overall hands - struggles at times to adjust and catch outside his frame. Gets up field quickly after the catch. Runs with good balance and body control. Good size and strength to break tackles. He is more of a tackle to tackle runner - lacks the speed to consistently turn the corner. Not a blow up type FB in-line - can fall off and clog up inside run lanes. Struggles to consistently adjust his angle on off-tackle run plays. Overall, he is a player that shows a lot of versatility but is better suited at RB than FB.






Quote:
Tied #58 Overall in the NFL
Name: Quentin Griffin
Grade: 68 | Key
Alert: I

Comment:
There were concerns about how his durability would be as a featured runner, and he proved that he is not best suited for that role when he went down with the knee injury. He is a solid overall athlete for the position. He is small back - not very big or physical. He relies on quickness and elusiveness to make people miss with the ball in his hands. He does not have blazing speed - does not play as fast as he times. He has solid instincts for the position - good feel for finding creases in the defense. He catches the ball well out of the backfield - does a nice job of making the first man miss after the catch.






Quote:
Tied #72 in the NFL
Name: Tatum Bell
Grade: 67 | Key
Alert: None

Comment:
He is an explosive back that can has the speed and burst to score from anywhere on the field. He is a direct runner that shows excellent speed hitting and accelerating through the hole. He shows the ability to consistently turn the corner. He shows excellent foot quickness in the hole. He showed better elusiveness than in college - showed the ability to make the first man miss at the LOS. He has already been nicked a lot early in his career. He is the type of runner that runs on a tract - not real elusive. He needs to be more patient to set up his runs. He does not show consistent vision and holes can close up on him when he has to adjust his runs on the move. He needs to become tougher as a blocker in pass pro.






Quote:
Tied # 145 in the NFL
Name: Ron Dayne
Grade: 59 | Key
Alert: None

Comment:
Dayne has experience returning kickoffs and he plays with a good motor when he's asked to cover kicks. However, Dayne doesn't have ideal quickness, speed or elusiveness. He isn't always aggressive attacking the line of scrimmage, he doesn't have the burst to consistently turn the corner and he doesn't explode through the hole when running between the tackles. Dayne doesn't show a second gear in the open field, he lacks the elusiveness to make multiple defenders miss and he isn't much of a big-play threat. He has had problems holding onto the ball in the past and he doesn't always practice good ball security.

SoCalBronco
07-14-2005, 07:01 PM
Quote:
Tied #145 in the NFL
Name: Kyle Johnson
Grade: 59 | Key
Alert: None

Comment:
He catches the ball cleanly and get his shoulders square to the LOS quickly. He is not quick, nifty or elusive after the catch, but he will drop his pads and run over defenders in the open field. He is a solid lead blocker on ISO runs. He has excellent size and good strength to go hit the MLB in the mouth. He was effective on special teams this season, an area where he has struggled to get it done in the past. He is a better blocker in-line than in space where he can look awkward trying to adjust on the move. He does not show a lot of run skills with the ball in his hands. Overall, he does not play much on offense for them but has been productive and made the most of his limited opportunities.






Quote:
Rookie
Name: Maurice Clarett
Grade: 30 | Key
Alert: R

Comment:
Has good size and power as an inside runner. He lowers his shoulder, creates his own running room and pushes the pile in short-yardage situations. Will snatch on the run and does a nice job of getting upfield right away. Is technically sound, aware and physical as a blocker. Is surprisingly efficient in this area for such an inexperienced player. Shows lateral movement skills to pick up the blitz. Shows good leverage at the point of attack and has good initial pop. Character and maturity are major concerns.

SoCalBronco
07-14-2005, 07:12 PM
here's what they say about Jake. Apparently only RB and QB rankings are out so far (got this all from the team board):

Overall Rank: 20(tie)

Name: Jake Plummer
Grade: 72 | Key
Alert: None

Comment:
Shows solid touch short to intermediate. Very good accuracy rolling both right and left. Solid play action passer He has above average arm strength for the position. He throws a solid deep ball. Can drop the ball over the DC's shoulder. Though he can be good at times, with him you have to take a lot of bad with the good. He is very streaky - a lot of highs and lows throughout the season. Can hold the ball too long in the pocket. Will force the ball into coverage. Can lock on to primary targets and miss open receivers. Not consistent with his arm or foot mechanics - can get sloppy. Will deliver the ball late down the middle of the field. Will throw the ball up for grabs under pressure - try to do too much.

yavoon
07-14-2005, 07:14 PM
who sez Q isnt better? what has tater tot done? he could become as fragile as chris brown and more fumble prone. I, along w/ pretty much everyone on this forum believe in him to gain a kazillion yards. but honestly what has tater done thats so much better than Q? reminds me of euro players in basketball, they're fricking all stars so long as they never see nba action.

DB-Freak
07-14-2005, 07:16 PM
here's what they say about Jake. Apparently only RB and QB rankings are out so far (got this all from the team board):

Overall Rank: 20(tie)

Name: Jake Plummer
Grade: 72 | Key
Alert: None

Comment:
Shows solid touch short to intermediate. Very good accuracy rolling both right and left. Solid play action passer He has above average arm strength for the position. He throws a solid deep ball. Can drop the ball over the DC's shoulder. Though he can be good at times, with him you have to take a lot of bad with the good. He is very streaky - a lot of highs and lows throughout the season. Can hold the ball too long in the pocket. Will force the ball into coverage. Can lock on to primary targets and miss open receivers. Not consistent with his arm or foot mechanics - can get sloppy. Will deliver the ball late down the middle of the field. Will throw the ball up for grabs under pressure - try to do too much.
Wow. I dont know about the grades, but the commentaries are cool.

I like how they credit Plummer's deep ball skills. Screw the Lelie huggers. Despite what you guys say, Plummer does throw a very good deep ball.

watermock
07-14-2005, 07:16 PM
Mike Anderson:

Gets up field quickly after the catch.

Mike Anderson. Can you possibly be more of an idiot? Anderson might catch two to five passes this year, if he even makes the team. Nothing was designed to go to Anderson in this offense at all.

DB-Freak
07-14-2005, 07:26 PM
who sez Q isnt better? what has tater tot done? he could become as fragile as chris brown and more fumble prone. I, along w/ pretty much everyone on this forum believe in him to gain a kazillion yards. but honestly what has tater done thats so much better than Q? reminds me of euro players in basketball, they're fricking all stars so long as they never see nba action.
I don't know, doing better statistically then Q in everyway in terms of rushing?

Maybe rushing for 100+ against a decent defense?

And no one said that much better than Q.

But he did fare better than Q.

Breck Bronc
07-14-2005, 07:34 PM
Quote:
Tied #72 in the NFL
Name: Tatum Bell
Grade: 67 | Key
Alert: None

Comment:
He is an explosive back that can has the speed and burst to score from anywhere on the field. He is a direct runner that shows excellent speed hitting and accelerating through the hole. He shows the ability to consistently turn the corner. He shows excellent foot quickness in the hole. He showed better elusiveness than in college - showed the ability to make the first man miss at the LOS. He has already been nicked a lot early in his career. He is the type of runner that runs on a tract - not real elusive. He needs to be more patient to set up his runs. He does not show consistent vision and holes can close up on him when he has to adjust his runs on the move. He needs to become tougher as a blocker in pass pro.
Nice job on the proofreading, Scouts Inc.

watermock
07-14-2005, 07:57 PM
Idiotic.

[QUOTE]He needs to be more patient to set up his runs. He does not show consistent vision and holes can close up on him when he has to adjust his runs on the move. He needs to become tougher as a blocker in pass pro.[/quote'

This is just another stupid comment. Nothing about the offensive line revolves about "waiting for a hole to open". We use zone blocking, be don't pull anyone. It's zone blicking, you pick the hole, cut and push and finish the run, or break thru into the secondary. It's not at all about "waiting for your blocks to form". It's amusing. It's about the whole OL getting off the snap tight and giving the RB a crack. We haven't pulled a guard since TD. With Clarett, I can see that going back into the book, but that hasn't been our scheme at all.

KillerBronco#76
07-14-2005, 09:28 PM
Has good size and power as an inside runner. He lowers his shoulder, creates his own running room and pushes the pile in short-yardage situations. Will snatch on the run and does a nice job of getting upfield right away. Is technically sound, aware and physical as a blocker. Is surprisingly efficient in this area for such an inexperienced player. Shows lateral movement skills to pick up the blitz. Shows good leverage at the point of attack and has good initial pop. Character and maturity are major concerns.

I know they havnt goten to see him play too much but if character and maturity are the only negatives they can come up with im startin to like this kid more and more.

Pat Bowlen
07-15-2005, 12:31 AM
who sez Q isnt better? what has tater tot done? he could become as fragile as chris brown and more fumble prone. I, along w/ pretty much everyone on this forum believe in him to gain a kazillion yards. but honestly what has tater done thats so much better than Q? reminds me of euro players in basketball, they're fricking all stars so long as they never see nba action.
Once Tatum started getting the ball later on in the season, he led the entire league in YPC. That's all.

Quit hatin' already.

yavoon
07-15-2005, 01:08 AM
Once Tatum started getting the ball later on in the season, he led the entire league in YPC. That's all.

Quit hatin' already.

hey maybe I'm just still giving Q some props. its not like I dont think tatum will be awesome.

crazyhorse
07-15-2005, 01:18 AM
Of course Q is better than the potato. You guys said it yourself. Q is the next Barry Sanders.

Nnyah! Hilarious!