David Arkin, anyone?

[jjktkk]

The unwritten rule of giving 3 years for a player to develop is true for Arkin. No excuses, its make or break time for Arkin.

[AbeBeta]

Originally Posted by jjktkk

The unwritten rule of giving 3 years for a player to develop is true for Arkin. No excuses, its make or break time for Arkin.

it is a reasonable rule given that the guy is from such a small school and that we may have grossly underestimated his physical condition.

Me, I think we get a little ahead of ourselves scouting small college guys. It always seems like Jerrry is trying to look super smart by landing the next Larry Allen or something.

Small school guys are long shots. That's a great UDFA pickup but not so great as a 4th round pick

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by jjktkk

The unwritten rule of giving 3 years for a player to develop is true for Arkin. No excuses, its make or break time for Arkin.

Originally Posted by AbeBeta

it is a reasonable rule given that the guy is from such a small school and that we may have grossly underestimated his physical condition.

Me, I think we get a little ahead of ourselves scouting small college guys. It always seems like Jerrry is trying to look super smart by landing the next Larry Allen or something.

Small school guys are long shots. That's a great UDFA pickup but not so great as a 4th round pick

Players that get drafted in the 4th round and later, almost always have some issue(s); otherwise, they would have been drafted earlier.

The team must decide which issues they are going to accept before drafting that player.

John Phillips is an example of a player that was a reasonably safe bet to contribute to a team; however, his upside was limited and the possibility of him ever becoming a starter was minimal.

On the opposite end of the spectrum from Phillips, was AOA. He was a big risk in terms of ever contributing to the team; however, if he did "get it", then his upside was very high.

Basically the primary categories of issues are:
1. Limited Physical upside.
2. High upside, but underdeveloped player due to small school, etc..
3. Character issues.
4. Medical issues.

I think that you want a mix of category #1 and #2 in the 4th round and later.

It's nice that John Phillips contributed; however, you only need a limited number of those types of players. You need to leave room on the roster for high upside hit/miss players like Miles Austin.

Rounds 4 and later are also a tempting time to consider players in categories #3 and #4.

.

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by IrishAnto

While he may have had two years, he's only had one full off-season.

I really don't see the problem with keeping him around until training camp and see how it goes.

It's not as if we have a boatload of young talent waiting to step up.

I don't have that much hope he'll make the grade but again I don't see why we couldn't let him sink or swim at camp.

BS on the one full offseason. That playing season he was inactive and thus able to work out and get stronger the whole year. Then he had all last year and still could not get on the field during the season.

You do realize that the lockout only lasted 3 months? AND during that time there was nothing stopping him from working out? Here it is almost 3 years later and you still want to use that excuse?

[Primetime42]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

BS on the one full offseason. That playing season he was inactive and thus able to work out and get stronger the whole year. Then he had all last year and still could not get on the field during the season.

You do realize that the lockout only lasted 3 months? AND during that time there was nothing stopping him from working out? Here it is almost 3 years later and you still want to use that excuse?

I don't think you understand how weight training in the NFL works.

[reddyuta]

Arkin is a lost cause.he had 2 seasons to get stronger but not only did he fail to do so but he must have been so bad in practice that he wasnt even worth a spot in the game day roster.

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by reddyuta

Arkin is a lost cause.he had 2 seasons to get stronger but not only did he fail to do so but he must have been so bad in practice that he wasnt even worth a spot in the game day roster.

You also have to consider Garrett's mindset which was heavily influenced by Hudson Houck. He likes to have veteran OLinemen when possible. It was reported that Callahan had to plead with him to get Parnell into a rotation with Free.

They didn't consider Arkin a Center and they had Dockery as the top reserve OG. They didn't really get to evaluate Arkin at OG in training camp due him being forced into action at Center. Once they started the season with Dockery on the roster, Arkin had near Zero chance of contributing unless multiple injuries occurred at OG.

I don't have faith that Arkin is going to make the cut in training camp; however, I don't think you can judge him based on not being active in 2012.

It's the same mentality that somehow caused Ogletree to get more snaps than Harris.

[AbeBeta]

Originally Posted by ConstantReboot

Why is it that every 4th rounder that we have each year we select a project from a small school? Yet it keeps failing year after year after year. Just shows how much of a joke we are in drafting.

Not hitting on small college prospects doesn't make you a joke. I think we actually do a pretty solid job in scouting the small colleges as is evidenced by our numerous successes with small college players.

I think the where we are falling short is that we overvalue these guys. No one would really care about Arkin if he stuck around as a 6th rounder. But people freak about about 1st-4th round picks

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by Primetime42

I don't think you understand how weight training in the NFL works.

clearly you don't

When not activated you do have more time to W/T and he had the whole season to work on it. No injuries from games and less practice work as well-especially under the new CBA rules . So he has had enough time frankly to show something which he has not.

Sure bring him to camp. Just do not expect anything from him

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by AbeBeta

Not hitting on small college prospects doesn't make you a joke. I think we actually do a pretty solid job in scouting the small colleges as is evidenced by our numerous successes with small college players.

I think the where we are falling short is that we overvalue these guys. No one would really care about Arkin if he stuck around as a 6th rounder. But people freak about about 1st-4th round picks

would love to know if any other team had him projected as high as we did.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by AbeBeta

it is a reasonable rule given that the guy is from such a small school and that we may have grossly underestimated his physical condition.

Me, I think we get a little ahead of ourselves scouting small college guys. It always seems like Jerrry is trying to look super smart by landing the next Larry Allen or something.

Small school guys are long shots. That's a great UDFA pickup but not so great as a 4th round pick

Arkin was a consensus 4th round grade by every draft source I looked at. He was not some Matt Johnson reach.

[AbeBeta]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Arkin was a consensus 4th round grade by every draft source I looked at. He was not some Matt Johnson reach.

You sure about that?

He was on Gosselin's top 100 - but all that means is that Gosselin knew we liked him in the 4th

[Star4Ever]

Originally Posted by AbeBeta

Actually the only point that has been made is about how people see hits but ignore misses.

If you look at the guys playing in the NFL, the prototype is a guy from a strong college program. Certainly there are exceptions, but they are far less common than you make them out to be.

Most guys from small schools haven't faced any legitimate competition. That makes selecting them a bit like selecting a high school player in MLB. You are betting on development but can very rarely expect the guy to step in and play well right off the bat.

Small school guys are great but most need time to develop. Nate Newton had three years of professional experience before he was starting (two years in the USFL and one year as a backup in Dallas). He was four years out of college.

[View Full Quote]Erik Wiliams and Larry Allen are exceptions -- and both were likely the best small college OL to come out of that generation. Williams would have been getting inducted to the HOF if he continued his pre-accident level of play. You can't simply point to the exceptions and think they are relevant to all small college players

No one is saying you can apply it to ALL small college players. My point is just the opposite of what you're saying and what others are saying in this thread. You can't discount a player ONLY because they played at a small school. To do so is very short sighted.

[jnday]

Originally Posted by Primetime42

I don't think you understand how weight training in the NFL works.

He he doesn't have the drive to lift without a coach, he needs to be gone anyway. Do you think these guys went into the lockout without some type of program to follow concerning his strength and conditioning? If he did not, he has no desire to improve.

[Primetime42]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

clearly you don't

When not activated you do have more time to W/T and he had the whole season to work on it. No injuries from games and less practice work as well-especially under the new CBA rules . So he has had enough time frankly to show something which he has not.

Sure bring him to camp. Just do not expect anything from him

Even if that were true, he'd have what? An extra 16 days? It's not like he was on the practice squad. You simply don't lift the same during the season that you would in the offseason.

lol @ less practice work. Is he supposed to go lift while the rest of the team is on the field at Valley Ranch?