Clowney: We Love Kicking People Off The Mountain

[CGI_Ram]

Everywhere you turn, it seems like "everyone" is having a good time knocking Clowney down from the top rated spot in this draft.

It's almost as if... In this day and age, the media loves to build people up and enjoys pulling them down.

http://espn.go.com/blog/jacksonvill...237/clowneys-40-impressive-but-matters-little

What none of those things will show, however, is Clowney's work ethic and attitude, and there are plenty of questions about those. Mike Mayock and Warren Sapp, both of the NFL Network, shredded Clowney in those areas. Mayock said there were red flags about Clowney -- but Sapp was even harsher, saying Clowney should be ashamed of the way he played at times and questioned whether Clowney really wants to play football.

I understand the critique of this player. And... Honestly, he makes me a tad nervous. But how much of this "worry" is driven by the media's feast on Clowney?

 

[sdakotaram]

I tend to think its a little of both player analysis and media driven (helps ratings). I watched the 1st game of the year against North Carolina (at the time did not see much special about him). I rewatched a few months ago and the last series of the 1st half and 3rd quarter he appeared to be mailing it in. Also a little concern with his talk for the combine and his battle with Spurrier was not good. At half of the North Carolina game....reporter asked Spurrier what was going on with Clowney, his response was I guess he said he has a stomach virus/problems which was news to him. Not good IMO. Here is the full game.

 

[jsimcox]

He is right tbf. The same thing is happening with Bridgewater. As far as i'm concerned he is easily the best QB in the class but people try to knock him down too...

 

[tonyl711]

Clowney scares me, too much of a risk in an area that is good enough where they don't need to take a risk. when your HC questions your desire in the media that sends red flags waving all over the place, even his supporters wont argue the fact that he takes plays off. I mean think about it has there ever been a DE drafted in the top 5 who only had 3 sacks his last year in college? I hope some other team gives us a boatload for the right to draft him.

 

[Sum1]

Theres reason for caution...but not enough for me to think someone early shouldnt take him.

No more reason to be cautious drafting clowney than anyone else at the top.


THere is more than a good chance a player or two drafted in the top 10 will bust.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

The tape don't lie

 

[jrry32]

I tend to think its a little of both player analysis and media driven (helps ratings). I watched the 1st game of the year against North Carolina (at the time did not see much special about him). I rewatched a few months ago and the last series of the 1st half and 3rd quarter he appeared to be mailing it in. Also a little concern with his talk for the combine and his battle with Spurrier was not good. At half of the North Carolina game....reporter asked Spurrier what was going on with Clowney, his response was I guess he said he has a stomach virus/problems which was news to him. Not good IMO. Here is the full game.

This is the interesting thing to me. How many other players would be criticized for a game in which they did all of this:

Go to:
30 seconds
1 minute
2 minutes 30 seconds
3 minutes 10 seconds
5 minutes
6 minutes 52 seconds
6 minutes 55 seconds
7 minutes 10 seconds
EDIT: So much for being able to add the links without it converting it.

Second EDIT: Links below...copy and paste.

It just seems unfair to me that the expectations for Clowney are that he has to be some Reggie White type force. People focus on the select few negative plays while ignoring all the positive ones that don't go on the stat sheet. And even more importantly, they ignore how much teams schemed for him. North Carolina neutered their offense by running mainly screens and quick passes because they were so worried about Clowney. They often doubled or chipped him. Renner was erratic all day with his accuracy. And ultimately, their offense did nothing against SC.

But the narrative for the game was the few plays that Clowney took off...likely because North Carolina runs the Oregon hurry up offense meant to wear out defensive linemen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=00m30s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=01m00s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=02m30s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=03m10s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=05m00s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=06m52s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=06m55s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnnTNVWK0lg#t=07m10s

 

[Sum1]

This is the interesting thing to me. How many other players would be criticized for a game in which they did all of this:






It just seems unfair to me that the expectations for Clowney are that he has to be some Reggie White type force. People focus on the select few negative plays while ignoring all the positive ones that don't go on the stat sheet. And even more importantly, they ignore how much teams schemed for him. North Carolina neutered their offense by running mainly screens and quick passes because they were so worried about Clowney. They often doubled or chipped him. Renner was erratic all day with his accuracy. And ultimately, their offense did nothing against SC.

But the narrative for the game was the few plays that Clowney took off...likely because North Carolina runs the Oregon hurry up offense meant to wear out defensive linemen.

No offense, Jrry...but if you are going to claim that if you pass on Clowney at no.2 overall and deem the draft a failure because so...well he BETTER be Reggie White, if not more!

 

[jrry32]

No offense, Jrry...but if you are going to claim that if you pass on Clowney at no.2 overall and deem the draft a failure because so...well he BETTER be Reggie White, if not more!

Let it go. I said that I believe the pick is a failure(only in the sense that you didn't trust your board) if you don't get one of the top two players on your board with the #2 pick. I didn't call the entire draft a failure. I didn't call Clowney a HOFer. I think he's the 2nd best player in this draft and as such, I'd take him and only him at #2. I have no earthly idea if he'll be Reggie White but I think he's of the same talent level of Julius Peppers and Mario Williams.

 

[Sum1]

Let it go. I said that I believe the pick is a failure(only in the sense that you didn't trust your board) if you don't get one of the top two players on your board with the #2 pick. I didn't call the entire draft a failure. I didn't call Clowney a HOFer. I think he's the 2nd best player in this draft and as such, I'd take him and only him at #2. I have no earthly idea if he'll be Reggie White but I think he's of the same talent level of Julius Peppers and Mario Williams.

Just discussing...sorry if I offended you.

 

[jrry32]

Just discussing...sorry if I offended you.

Nah. I'm fine. Just was frustrated by the issue with the links when I posted that. Regardless, you know my stance. I know yours. I think this discussion really isn't going to go anywhere. I doubt either of us plan on budging. I've seen every college game Clowney has played so my opinion of him just isn't going to change. And I have a very strict philosophy when it comes to the draft which also will not change...right now. I am always reevaluating and if I recognize that my philosophy isn't working in the future...I'll alter it.

 

[Sum1]

Fair enough...I find value in questioning each other. Although I can (and will be) strong and at times abrasive with my opinions and responses, just know that I am trying to see things from all angles even when I disagree with them.

I like to learn, and that is one of the ways I do it best.

 

[Ramrasta]

I'm not denying Clowney's talent but DL is the only spot on this team that nobody can question. Would we really draft him so he can alternate plays with Langford and Long (very competent players) while our subpar secondary, offensive line, and receiving core are starting what should be bench players? Let's not put all our eggs in one basket here. Especially since this guy has mental question marks. Why not use his value to stimulate a trade down?

 

[jrry32]

I'm not denying Clowney's talent but DL is the only spot on this team that nobody can question. Would we really draft him so he can alternate plays with Langford and Long (very competent players) while our subpar secondary, offensive line, and receiving core are starting what should be bench players? Let's not put all our eggs in one basket here. Especially since this guy has mental question marks. Why not use his value to stimulate a trade down?

If there's a good trade down offer, by all means, I hope they take it. But if we're picking at #2. I want Clowney. The draft is for the foreseeable future. It's not just for 2014. Most rookies aren't ready to be impact starters.

For example, since 1980, only 11 WRs have posted 1000+ yards as a rookie. Of those 11 WRs, only 3 were top 10 picks. Of those 3, only one was a top 5 pick...AJ Green.

So while Sammy Watkins is definitely a talented kid, there's no certainty that he can step into a #1 WR role as a rookie. It might take him 2 or 3 years to reach that level.

Which is why I don't believe that you should only consider 2014 when talking needs. Chris Long is nearing 30 and he's getting paid a nice chunk of change over the next few years. It might not be a bad idea to let him walk and use that money to re-sign Quinn after 2014. If we had a guy like Clowney, doing that would be much easier.

And that's the thing, I don't expect Clowney to be a 10+ sack guy as a rookie either. If he is...great. But odds are he'll need time to adjust too. It helps when you can ease a guy in and develop him instead of just throwing him into the fire.

In fact, the only guy that I'd say I'm confident in his ability to be an immediate impact starter is Jake Matthews and that's because he's so technically sound and mentally advanced for a college player.

But it has to be kept in mind that the guy(s) we draft might not be ready to be anything more than role players as rookies...and that's okay because it's true of most rookies. You typically see guys start to reach their potential somewhere between years 2 and 4. Some take longer than that. Some come right in and play really well. But for the majority, years 2 to 4 are the norm.

 

[Ram Quixote]

Clowney scares me, too much of a risk in an area that is good enough where they don't need to take a risk. when your HC questions your desire in the media that sends red flags waving all over the place, even his supporters wont argue the fact that he takes plays off. I mean think about it has there ever been a DE drafted in the top 5 who only had 3 sacks his last year in college? I hope some other team gives us a boatload for the right to draft him.

Spurrier? He's so busy empowering his star players toward entitlement it's almost a joke. IMO, that's been the problem all along. So long as he doesn't wind up with Snyder's Redskins, Clowney won't be "getting by" on whatever NFL team drafts him.

 

[jrry32]

Clowney scares me, too much of a risk in an area that is good enough where they don't need to take a risk. when your HC questions your desire in the media that sends red flags waving all over the place, even his supporters wont argue the fact that he takes plays off. I mean think about it has there ever been a DE drafted in the top 5 who only had 3 sacks his last year in college? I hope some other team gives us a boatload for the right to draft him.

There was a DE drafted at #11 that had 11.5 sacks in his COLLEGE CAREER. That DE's name? J.J. Watt.

There was a DE drafted at #6 that had 5.5 sacks in his final year in college? His name? Aldon Smith.

Ziggy Ansah...the DE picked #5 last year...4.5 sacks in his college CAREER.

 

[blackbart]

Jrry Earlier this year you posted your formula for value of draft prospects. If I remember right your eval had Matthews rated higher than Clowney with Bridgewater as the highest rated. I think the tipping factor was team need. Has that changed to now put Clowney at #2? Or am I mistaken???

I really don't know who I would rate at #1 right now as I feel like team needs always have to be factored in, not for just the draft year but in building the team for now and the future. If the Rams had the first pick no way do I see them taking a QB, Clowney still isn't enough ahead based on what I have seen to put him #1, is it Matthews at #1, Watkins no way, Robinson too raw to risk it??

I never have given the draft as much thought and admittedly a weak attempt at evaluation. How do you separate such good players at different positions and differing team needs??

Thanks for your insight

 

[jrry32]

Jrry Earlier this year you posted your formula for value of draft prospects. If I remember right your eval had Matthews rated higher than Clowney with Bridgewater as the highest rated. I think the tipping factor was team need. Has that changed to now put Clowney at #2? Or am I mistaken???

I really don't know who I would rate at #1 right now as I feel like team needs always have to be factored in, not for just the draft year but in building the team for now and the future. If the Rams had the first pick no way do I see them taking a QB, Clowney still isn't enough ahead based on what I have seen to put him #1, is it Matthews at #1, Watkins no way, Robinson too raw to risk it??

I never have given the draft as much thought and admittedly a weak attempt at evaluation. How do you separate such good players at different positions and differing team needs??

Thanks for your insight

I remember, you're correct. Matthews did come out ahead but I still have kept Clowney at #2 mainly because he's really an exception for me. The talent level is so high that it kind of breaks the scale persay. For example, if we had Roddy White and Julio Jones, I'd still draft Calvin Johnson if he was there. If we had Arian Foster, I'd still take Adrian Peterson. If we had Matt Ryan, I'd still take Peyton Manning.(Johnson, Peterson and Manning as prospects)

Those are the true exceptions. Rare talents. And you kind of just have to trust your gut on that one. But you're right, on my scale, I should have Matthews rated just slightly higher.

 

[Rams and Gators]

I think it's far too easy to get carried away with media hype either way. I think Clowney has the most potential of any player in this draft, the question is whether there's a person alive who can get him to reach that potential. I don't want him but if Fisher decides that he's that man I'll welcome Clowney as much as I'd welcome any player.

 

[tonyl711]

There was a DE drafted at #11 that had 11.5 sacks in his COLLEGE CAREER. That DE's name? J.J. Watt.

There was a DE drafted at #6 that had 5.5 sacks in his final year in college? His name? Aldon Smith.

Ziggy Ansah...the DE picked #5 last year...4.5 sacks in his college CAREER.

none of them had a reputation for taking plays off, none had the HC calling them out in the media. don't get me wrong, if we take him ill root for him as long as he is a Ram, I just think there is too much risk involved.