Flozell Adams vs. Doug Free

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,997
Reaction score
27,917
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
burmafrd;3172460 said:
Get a LT or frankly any good tackle in FA and you spend money just like for Bigg.

Just like speed and quickness is not everything for a LT, same for strength and technique. You need ALL of it to be a top LT. Quickness in your footwork is probably the biggest factor, then ability to maintain balance as you move, then strength to fight off the bull rushes. Technique can take the place of strength to a certain extent.

Oh and the idiot that said just becaue brewster is 6'4" he cannot play tackle is a true moron. WHAT MATTERS is how long the arms are and how you set up. I mean think about it- 2" matters HOW MUCH on the O line?

I mean if that was the Case then Romo and Brees should not be allowed to play QB- they are both several inches shorter then most of the top players at that position.

I don't think Larry Allen even reached 6'4" quite frankly and he was a terrific tackle.

No, it's not about height.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
jobberone;3172509 said:
It's not the only way. It's the least expensive way though. And the preferred way.

Football is mostly a young man's game so it is best to get them when they are young. Most players peak relatively early in their careers and begin to decline earlier compared to most other sports. This is mostly due to injuries which also seem to increase in incidence as players get older.

I would like a couple of young OL - maybe a tackle//guard sort of guy and a center/guard prospect as well.

I will say that I am happy with Free as the future at LT and I wouldn't trade up to try and get a LT prospect. Free is going to be good. For those of you worried about him getting bullrushed, I don't remember Tuck being able to take advantage of him a few weeks ago when they played and he is one of the best bullrushing DEs in the league.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
MichaelWinicki;3172514 said:
I don't think Larry Allen even reached 6'4" quite frankly and he was a terrific tackle.

No, it's not about height.

Length of arms is more important than height.

If you have really good feet, you can get away with being a bit shorter.

I don't immediately recall any Pro Bowl level LTs who were 6' 3" or shorter - Allen may have been an exception but he was a physical freak of nature - a once in a generation sort of player. It is a shame about those ankle and knee injuries as he was a force in the late 90s.
 

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,997
Reaction score
27,917
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Eskimo;3172529 said:
Length of arms is more important than height.

If you have really good feet, you can get away with being a bit shorter.

I don't immediately recall any Pro Bowl level LTs who were 6' 3" or shorter - Allen may have been an exception but he was a physical freak of nature - a once in a generation sort of player. It is a shame about those ankle and knee injuries as he was a force in the late 90s.

True. Larry was a physical freak.

He was also a 2nd rounder.

You can get good value in the 2nd round.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
MichaelWinicki;3172558 said:
True. Larry was a physical freak.

He was also a 2nd rounder.

You can get good value in the 2nd round.

Except we have a long running 2nd round curse.

Name one player we have picked in the last ten years in the second round who has turned out to be a very good pick.

The only one I can think of is Gurode and he took quite a few years to develop. Julius Jones was okay but outside of the first year was nothing too special. Bennett remains to be seen. This year we didn't even have one in the end.

I think we should make picks in the first round unless there are no players with first round grades. I suggest we avoid the 2nd round altogether and try to work in rounds 3-5 where there is often the most value.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
BTW theogt and MW, you guys all seem to have shutup about our offense being nearly as good as San Diego which is laughable to say the least.

Too much ownage to reply?:)
 

burmafrd

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,820
Reaction score
3,379
NO, since certain people just ignored all the FACTS they posted there was no reason to try and convince the dead of mind.
 

jobberone

Kane Ala
Messages
54,219
Reaction score
19,659
Eskimo;3172527 said:
Football is mostly a young man's game so it is best to get them when they are young. Most players peak relatively early in their careers and begin to decline earlier compared to most other sports. This is mostly due to injuries which also seem to increase in incidence as players get older.

I would like a couple of young OL - maybe a tackle//guard sort of guy and a center/guard prospect as well.

I will say that I am happy with Free as the future at LT and I wouldn't trade up to try and get a LT prospect. Free is going to be good. For those of you worried about him getting bullrushed, I don't remember Tuck being able to take advantage of him a few weeks ago when they played and he is one of the best bullrushing DEs in the league.

I've never said Free couldn't be a LT. Just that it wasn't the right time for him barring injury. I see no reason not to let them compete next year but I still don't see him beating Flo out. But if he does then Flo will just be the backup LT. There's a lot that can happen between now and then including injuries, drafting OL, trades and FA.
 

burmafrd

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,820
Reaction score
3,379
Its really only been this year that we have seen Flo start to go downhill. Last year he was injured so that really does not count. He has been healthy this year but seems to be losing ability. Sad but for the really big guys they tend to go fast- their body just gives out quicker then the smaller guys. And if agility and not strength is key its worse. Even if Free is a good LT we still need a young backup or developmental player, since Flo could decide to retire once he is no longer a starter. We will have to think about a replacement for Colombo in a couple of years anyway. Brewster is a possibility but we really do not know. I think at least a second rd tackle is a must this draft.
 

CowboyMcCoy

Business is a Boomin
Messages
12,749
Reaction score
235
burmafrd;3172682 said:
Its really only been this year that we have seen Flo start to go downhill. Last year he was injured so that really does not count. He has been healthy this year but seems to be losing ability. Sad but for the really big guys they tend to go fast- their body just gives out quicker then the smaller guys. And if agility and not strength is key its worse. Even if Free is a good LT we still need a young backup or developmental player, since Flo could decide to retire once he is no longer a starter. We will have to think about a replacement for Colombo in a couple of years anyway. Brewster is a possibility but we really do not know. I think at least a second rd tackle is a must this draft.

I sort of agree with a poster from earlier in the thread. We should keep Flo, and at the very least, give him a shot inside.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
CowboyMcCoy;3172687 said:
I sort of agree with a poster from earlier in the thread. We should keep Flo, and at the very least, give him a shot inside.

Obviously the fact of the matter is that Flo can still starting in this league at LT but he is not the player he was a couple of years ago. So he is a perfect player to trade because someone in the league will still think he is worth something substantial and will give us a first day pick.

Meanwhile, we have created a spot for Free at LT and a draft pick to develop a backup OL and get our next starter in a couple of years.
 

UnoDallas

Benched
Messages
5,914
Reaction score
0
burmafrd;3172460 said:
Oh and the idiot that said just becaue brewster is 6'4" he cannot play tackle is a true moron. WHAT MATTERS is how long the arms are and how you set up. I mean think about it- 2" matters HOW MUCH on the O line?

I mean if that was the Case then Romo and Brees should not be allowed to play QB- they are both several inches shorter then most of the top players at that position.

oh I guess your talking about this moron

I still see him as a guard/center - JMO

well we see come next training camp

but I bet your life he is at guard next year

I wonder if I should bookmark this an remind you who has sense
 

Vintage

The Cult of Jib
Messages
16,714
Reaction score
4,888
If Brewster is at LG next year.... and Free starts at LT... thats a pretty damn athletic side of the OL.

Would be nice if Free and Brewster panned out to where that becomes a good left side of the OL to make that work.
 

casmith07

Attorney-at-Zone
Messages
31,538
Reaction score
9,312
CowboyMcCoy;3172687 said:
I sort of agree with a poster from earlier in the thread. We should keep Flo, and at the very least, give him a shot inside.

Yeah but who do you replace inside? Can Flozell pull as well as Kosier or Leonard Davis?
 

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,997
Reaction score
27,917
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
casmith07;3172778 said:
Yeah but who do you replace inside? Can Flozell pull as well as Kosier or Leonard Davis?

Exactly.

Adams moving inside could have happened 5 years ago, but not now.

I don't think he would be better than Kosier or Davis.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
casmith07;3172778 said:
Yeah but who do you replace inside? Can Flozell pull as well as Kosier or Leonard Davis?

Flo can't play Guard. He doesn't have much knee bend or much lateral quickness.. He gets buy purely on strength and arm length which help you out alot more at tackle then guard. It is really quite amazzing that Flo can still play. I wouldn't take the chance of letting him protect Romo's blind side for a single snap next year.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
Eskimo;3172575 said:
BTW theogt and MW, you guys all seem to have shutup about our offense being nearly as good as San Diego which is laughable to say the least.

Too much ownage to reply?:)
Are you referring to the post you made that doesn't refute that our WRs produce more, our RBs produce more, our QB produces more, and our entire offense produces more than the Chargers?

Sorry, I didn't see any reason to respond to something that doesn't refute all of the above -- or at least come close to making an argument that resembles the Chargers being significantly better than our offense. You may be able to make some esoteric argument based on some narrow view of hand-picked statistics, but I don't care to play that game because it's obvious you'll just keeping moving the goal post until you're satisfied with the results.
 

Eskimo

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
496
theogt;3172884 said:
Are you referring to the post you made that doesn't refute that our WRs produce more, our RBs produce more, our QB produces more, and our entire offense produces more than the Chargers?

Sorry, I didn't see any reason to respond to something that doesn't refute all of the above -- or at least come close to making an argument that resembles the Chargers being significantly better than our offense. You may be able to make some esoteric argument based on some narrow view of hand-picked statistics, but I don't care to play that game because it's obvious you'll just keeping moving the goal post until you're satisfied with the results.

Whatever, it makes no point to unblindfold the blind. The metics you used ignore strength of opposition so you don't prove much when you use your handwaving to try and make up the difference in scoring offense between the two teams. The metric that shows they are elite at #2 and we are mediocre at #13, scoring 6 ppg less. Pathetic comeback there - esoteric statistic when you ignore the straightforward results of scoring offense.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
Eskimo;3172908 said:
Whatever, it makes no point to unblindfold the blind.
Says the guy who was making claims in this thread about their receivers being better when you admitted yourself that you had no idea what they were actually producing.

Eskimo said:
I will admit that I overestimated Floyd and thought he had been much more productive than he actually has been.
The truth is, you shot your mouth off without actually knowing what the facts were, and now you're simply mining statistics trying to find something, anything that makes your original statement anywhere close to true.
 

dogunwo

Franchise Tagged
Messages
10,322
Reaction score
5,701
jobberone;3170897 said:
That's the rumor. He is obviously a swing tackle right now subbing at RT. He will likely inherit the LT position when Flozell leaves us.

Right now Flo is the best LT on the team. Everybody who thinks otherwise isn't paying attention. And he's much better than serviceable at LT. He actually plays at a high level. There haven't ever been that many LTs who play virtually mistake free. The expectations at LT are unreasonable for the few vocal minority here.

:hammer:
 
Top