Started By
Message
re: AU's Dee Ford calls Clowney "Blind dog in a meat market"
Posted on 3/4/14 at 2:28 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
Posted on 3/4/14 at 2:28 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
Dee Ford has proven that he is the superior prospect to Clowney. I expect him to be drafted at 1 or 2 now.
1
Posted on 3/4/14 at 2:30 pm to Yintros
quote:
Dee Ford has proven that he is the superior prospect to Clowney. I expect him to be drafted at 1 or 2 now.
wait til clowney runs a 4.43 at his pro day.
based on averages, Ford would have probably ran a 4.63 at the combine.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 2:38 pm to elposter
Y'all clearly have no clue how statistics work if you took tha combine vs pro day seriously. There is no way you could regress something that correlates 40 times at pro and combine. Your estimator would be incredibly bias due to the sample size. The sample of players who ran at both combine and pro day is a ridiculously biased sample set.
Like Greg Robinson or Tre Mason, those who know how fast they are and believe they ran at, near or below their fastest will not run the 40 at their pro day. Only guys who believe they can improve their 40 time will do it
Therefore there is a bias in the estimator rendering that stat completely useless as written unless adjusted
Like Greg Robinson or Tre Mason, those who know how fast they are and believe they ran at, near or below their fastest will not run the 40 at their pro day. Only guys who believe they can improve their 40 time will do it
Therefore there is a bias in the estimator rendering that stat completely useless as written unless adjusted
This post was edited on 3/4/14 at 2:40 pm
Posted on 3/4/14 at 2:44 pm to GenesChin
quote:
Y'all clearly have no clue how statistics work if you took tha combine vs pro day seriously. There is no way you could regress something that correlates 40 times at pro and combine. Your estimator would be incredibly bias due to the sample size. The sample of players who ran at both combine and pro day is a ridiculously biased sample set.
Like Greg Robinson or Tre Mason, those who know how fast they are and believe they ran at, near or below their fastest will not run the 40 at their pro day. Only guys who believe they can improve their 40 time will do it
Therefore there is a bias in the estimator rendering that stat completely useless as written unless adjusted
Shhh, don't tell them that statistics can be somewhat complex.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 2:50 pm to Yintros
Just basic logic that if only the guys who believe they can run faster and none of the guys who thought they did as good or better than they hoped run at the combine, pro day numbers will be better.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 2:51 pm to GenesChin
Auburn pushes a little hush money to the lasers, anyways.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:01 pm to GenesChin
quote:
Y'all clearly have no clue how statistics work if you took tha combine vs pro day seriously. There is no way you could regress something that correlates 40 times at pro and combine. Your estimator would be incredibly bias due to the sample size. The sample of players who ran at both combine and pro day is a ridiculously biased sample set. Like Greg Robinson or Tre Mason, those who know how fast they are and believe they ran at, near or below their fastest will not run the 40 at their pro day. Only guys who believe they can improve their 40 time will do it Therefore there is a bias in the estimator rendering that stat completely useless as written unless adjusted
I agree with what you are saying, but do you have a better way to compare?
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:06 pm to CockInYourEar
Just think, you have witnessed the best football USCe will ever play. It has gotten SC 0 titles...
Dee Ford will go in the first round, maybe high 2nd. Not bad for someone nobody knows.
Dee Ford will go in the first round, maybe high 2nd. Not bad for someone nobody knows.
This post was edited on 3/4/14 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:08 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
So a player that's 20 lbs lighter than Clowney runs slower than Clowney, leaps lower than Clowney, and broad jumps no further than Clowney, and then says that he's better than Clowney? With fewer career TFL and sacks than Clowney, despite playing 1 more season?
Got it....
Got it....
This post was edited on 3/4/14 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:10 pm to gamecocks22
A better way to compare what? I don't see how lasers can register differently unless you will flat out accuse people of cheating.I'll give you a bias for the pro day in that the day isn't as grueling since at the combine you wake up at around 4-5 I've heard
Difference between pro/combine is very small of laser /same measurements are used at both
Difference between pro/combine is very small of laser /same measurements are used at both
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:12 pm to ConwayGamecock
When did I say Ford was better than Clowney?
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:16 pm to ConwayGamecock
quote:
So a player that's 20 lbs lighter than Clowney
Yet stronger.
quote:
runs slower than Clowney
40's were pretty much the same & Ford beat him on the 3-cone
quote:
, leaps lower than Clowney
meh
quote:
broad jumps no further than Clowney
meh
quote:Do what now?
then says that he's better than Clowney?
quote:How many games did each actually play? I would venture a guess that Clowney has actually appeared in more games than Ford (obviously this is an estimate) Dee has actually played very few games, even though he has been at Auburn a while. His injury history is his biggest concern.
With fewer career TFL and sacks than Clowney, despite playing 1 more season?
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:17 pm to GenesChin
quote:
A better way to compare what? I don't see how lasers can register differently
See my comment about the laser hush fund.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:19 pm to Mizz-SEC
quote:Quit comparing your players to Clowney when claiming Clowney is overrated! It dilutes your original point.
Michael Sam and Kony Ealy played better too.
Clowney was just milktoast.
Also, don't you find it funny that Sam's best year (his senior year) wasn't as good as Clowney's best year (as a sophomore)?
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:19 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
See my comment about the laser hush fund.
Again, I was referring to what I heard while watching the combine, is that the clock is still started by a human. A human starts it, and lasers finish it. I also said I may have heard this wrong, but no one has told me otherwise.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:20 pm to GenesChin
quote:Clowney has been clocked at sub 4.5 multiple times at USC. What are all y'all gonna say when he does it again at Pro-day?
A better way to compare what? I don't see how lasers can register differently unless you will flat out accuse people of cheating.I'll give you a bias for the pro day in that the day isn't as grueling since at the combine you wake up at around 4-5 I've heard
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:21 pm to CockRocket
quote:
Clowney has been clocked at sub 4.5 multiple times at USC. What are all y'all gonna say when he does it again at Pro-day?
He's fast
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:23 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
, leaps lower than Clowney
meh
quote:
broad jumps no further than Clowney
meh
Interesting that you don't really seem to care when Clowney's numbers are better but then try your hardest to justify the others. quote:Upper body strength isn't the best way to judge a DLine's player's game strength. Plus, I bet Clowney has longer arms.
Yet stronger.
quote:meh. (see, I can do it too)
40's were pretty much the same & Ford beat him on the 3-cone
Posted on 3/4/14 at 3:46 pm to CockRocket
Posted on 3/4/14 at 4:11 pm to CockRocket
quote:
Interesting that you don't really seem to care when Clowney's numbers are better but then try your hardest to justify the others.
No. I just don't care on measures that I don't see as all that pertinent to a DE. The broad jump I do see as important, as it is a good measure of explosion, but seeing as they did the same, that gets a meh. The 40 is still pretty irrelevant too, which is why I mentioned the 3 cone drill. Would like to see what each player's 10 yard split is.
quote:
Upper body strength isn't the best way to judge a DLine's player's game strength. Plus, I bet Clowney has longer arms.
Okay? His arm length is a little less than 2 inches more than Ford. Does that justify the 8 reps less? Vertical isn't the best way to measure a DL's game strength either, but you used it.
quote:
40's were pretty much the same & Ford beat him on the 3-cone
meh. (see, I can do it too)
Nah, you just tried to say Clowney was faster, when he wasn't. You can disregard it, but that doesn't help your argument.
This post was edited on 3/4/14 at 4:19 pm
Page 15 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News