Is it time to declare Claiborne a bust?

[Rockport]

You know me. Not one to throw a player under a bus just for attention.

As I always say, I put a lot of stock in what players say about their teammates. And almost none in what unhappy fans choose to believe.

Claiborne's thrown himself under the bus with his poor player. Just because someone criticizes a player doesn't mean he's doing it for attention. That kind of response from a moderator is unfortunate.

 

[dallasdave]

BS, there are many players who were well below the avg who were great players Dan Marino did not score high yet Ryan Fitspatrick posted one the highest. Fitspatrick may be a lot smarter off the field than Marino but when it comes to football and knowledge of how to play the game to make quick reads and figure out what is taking place Fits does not even come close. Wonderlic proves nothing on the field, saying he can't learn, it is football not rocket science I know that is hard for people here to figure this out. Funny fans who have never played at that level seem to know more than guys who do it for a living, Claiborne knows and understand the game, he has been injured and that test proves nothing.

Yeah, give Claiborne a chance this year, because he has the talent and has been injured. I feel Claiborne could still have a good career with the Cowboys

 

[Rockport]

It takes more cherry picking to find his bad gsmes than it does his good ones. Final 5.5 games played...that's called a trend sir.

Getting benched is called "you're not good".

 

[Doomsday101]

Yeah, give Claiborne a chance this year, because he has the talent and has been injured. I feel Claiborne could still have a good career with the Cowboys

I agree. I think this is a critical year for Claibone. He needs to be out on the field and producing not sitting on the bench injured. Last season it started in mini camp with the sprained MCL, then a shoulder injury that kept him out then a hamstring that sidelined him. The last game vs Philly he played solid ball but he has to be out there doing the job if he is sitting on injury list he does us no good.

 

[Idgit]

Claiborne's thrown himself under the bus with his poor player. Just because someone criticizes a player doesn't mean he's doing it for attention. That kind of response from a moderator is unfortunate.

If it helps any, it wasn't unfortunate in the context it was actually posted in. Only in the context you're trying to present it in. And I agree that just because someone criticizes a player it doesn't necessarily mean they are doing it for attention. That's obvious, or should be.

 

[Rockport]

If it helps any, it wasn't unfortunate in the context it was actually posted in. Only in the context you're trying to present it in. And I agree that just because someone criticizes a player it doesn't necessarily mean they are doing it for attention. That's obvious, or should be.

So unless you know it for a fact, then you shouldn't throw it out there.

 

[cowboyvic]

Cs thrown himself under the bus with his poor player. Just because someone criticizes a player doesn't mean he's doing it for attention. That kind of reslaiborne'ponse from a moderator is unfortunate.

In this case the moderator is right. Mo

Claiborne's thrown himself under the bus with his poor player. Just because someone criticizes a player doesn't mean he's doing it for attention. That kind of response from a moderator is unfortunate.

In this case the moderator is right. i hate to break it to guys like you, but Mo Claiborne is the least of this team's problems.he's not the one who is choking away games. we all know who that is.

 

[Idgit]

So unless you know it for a fact, then you shouldn't throw it out there.

Not sure which post you're referring to, exactly, but that doesn't follow either. Just because not all criticism of a player is a request for attention, it doesn't follow that no criticism of a player is a request for attention. Nor that all requests for attention should be ignored if you don't know for a fact that it's actually attention-seeking behavior.

That said, I don't think I've said anything particularly controversial in this thread. If you disagree, it'd be helpful if you used the quote function to point it out for me.

 

[Rockport]

Not sure which post you're referring to, exactly, but that doesn't follow either. Just because not all criticism of a player is a request for attention, it doesn't follow that no criticism of a player is a request for attention. Nor that all requests for attention should be ignored if you don't know for a fact that it's actually attention-seeking behavior.

That said, I don't think I've said anything particularly controversial in this thread. If you disagree, it'd be helpful if you used the quote function to point it out for me.

The first sentence in your post #153.

 

[Rockport]

In this case the moderator is right. Mo
In this case the moderator is right. i hate to break it to guys like you, but Mo Claiborne is the least of this team's problems.he's not the one who is choking away games. we all know who that is.

I agree that Claiborne is not the sole reason the defense was the 3rd worst ever in NFL history last year, it was the whole defense. And that can be blamed on the GM.

 

[cowboyvic]

I agree that Claiborne is not the sole reason the defense was the 3rd worst ever in NFL history last year, it was the whole defense. And that can be blamed on the GM.

+1000. your post is right on the money.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Funny fans who have never played at that level seem to know more than guys who do it for a living, Claiborne knows and understand the game, he has been injured and that test proves nothing.

So a mans who say fans no nothing is quick to write: "That test proves nothing."
Funny how you, with all your acumens and knowledge and hairsuite inside info on the NFL, is quick to dismiss the test as something that do not prove "nothing." I assume you have vetted the test and done studies as to the efficacy and edibleness of it when wiser minds like the NFL and other pro football mens and womans have deemed it important.

Tell me, Mr. expertise, how you know the test means nothing. What wiser and higher knowledge do you half that those who administer the test do not know?
Tell me because I would really like to no!

Yeth, I thought so.

ANOTHER FUNNY FAN WHO DO NOT NO NOTHING!

HARUMPH!

 

[Idgit]

The first sentence in your post #153.

Here, let me go look that up for you....

Me saying 'I'm not one to throw a player under a bus for attention'? I gather you thought that, by ommittion I was saying that you were. I wasn't. I was referring to the tendency to throw players under the bus prematurely on sports boards in general and on CZ in particular. If I'd wanted to make an example of anything you'd said in this thread in particular, I'd have just quoted you and pointed it out as an example

I do think your original post was premature, and that you're being overly dramatic in the thread in general, if that helps you to know where I'm coming from better. I also think the topic is a reasonable one to at least discuss, and I don't think you started it necessarily for attention. I assumed you started it because it ties in with your conviction that OL and DL is what wins games, and you'd have rathered the two picks we'd used for Mo had been spent there, instead. But that's just a wild guess on my end.

 

[Doomsday101]

So a mans who say fans no nothing is quick to write: "That test proves nothing."
Funny how you, with all your acumens and knowledge and hairsuite inside info on the NFL, is quick to dismiss the test as something that do not prove "nothing." I assume you have vetted the test and done studies as to the efficacy and edibleness of it when wiser minds like the NFL and other pro football mens and womans have deemed it important.

Tell me, Mr. expertise, how you know the test means nothing. What wiser and higher knowledge do you half that those who administer the test do not know?
Tell me because I would really like to no!

Yeth, I thought so.

ANOTHER FUNNY FAN WHO DO NOT NO NOTHING!

HARUMPH!

Because there are enough HOF who took the test and did not fair well. if it had such impact then how the hell did they make the HOF? Because studies have been done that fine no
correlation of the test to how a player will or will not produce.

Educational experts have made these claims. The test has nothing to do with football and some guys who have scored high have not had success while many who scored low have gone on to HOF careers it is calledf proof is in the pudding. The test has nothing to do with football and while it may be helpful in other professions it does not determine a damn thing when it comes to having a good or bad player. Dexter Manly could not spell cat if you spotted him the C and T yet the man could play football and understand the game more so that some pud knocker on a message board.

 

[Rockport]

Here, let me go look that up for you....

Me saying 'I'm not one to throw a player under a bus for attention'? I gather you thought that, by ommittion I was saying that you were. I wasn't. I was referring to the tendency to throw players under the bus prematurely on sports boards in general and on CZ in particular. If I'd wanted to make an example of anything you'd said in this thread in particular, I'd have just quoted you and pointed it out as an example

I do think your original post was premature, and that you're being overly dramatic in the thread in general, if that helps you to know where I'm coming from better. I also think the topic is a reasonable one to at least discuss, and I don't think you started it necessarily for attention. I assumed you started it because it ties in with your conviction that OL and DL is what wins games, and you'd have rathered the two picks we'd used for Mo had been spent there, instead. But that's just a wild guess on my end.

I liked the pick at the time. Really good CB's are really hard to find. A good one will help your pass rush and vice versa. I also feel that after 2 years of evidence on the field of regression instead of progression, that he lacks the cognitive ability to make the dramatic improvements he needs in order not to become a bust. Whether he ultimately is labeled a bust or not is still out there. But so far at least, he's been a bust.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Because there are enough HOF who took the test and did not fair well. if it had such impact then how the hell did they make the HOF? Because studies have been done that fine no
correlation of the test to how a player will or will not produce.

Educational experts have made these claims. The test has nothing to do with football and some guys who have scored high have not had success while many who scored low have gone on to HOF careers it is calledf proof is in the pudding. The test has nothing to do with football and while it may be helpful in other professions it does not determine a damn thing when it comes to having a good or bad player. Dexter Manly could not spell cat if you spotted him the C and T yet the man could play football and understand the game more so that some pud knocker on a message board.

Yes, the ubiquitous "studies" and pointing to the Marinos.
I half heard it all before.
Listen, I am not a fan nor am I a nonfan of the Wonderlic. It is just there. The NFL deem it a good thing. So I am left to deduce ( I learned that word from a Sherlock Holmes cartoon) that the test serve a purpose and arrive at a fair appraisal of a mans thoughts, like "This man can think." "This mans can add." "The mans can connect the dots." etc.

Yet you dismiss the test.
You half to let the NFL know -- not me -- what a lousy thing it is, because you clearly half the inside lead on that test and in your onion it is useless.

By all means pls pass on your valuable information about "studies" and anecdotal evidence to the powers that be and are.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yes, the ubiquitous "studies" and pointing to the Marinos.
I half heard it all before.
Listen, I am not a fan nor am I a nonfan of the Wonderlic. It is just there. The NFL deem it a good thing. So I am left to deduce ( I learned that word from a Sherlock Holmes cartoon) that the test serve a purpose and arrive at a fair appraisal of a mans thoughts, like "This man can think." "This mans can add." "The mans can connect the dots." etc.

Yet you dismiss the test.
You half to let the NFL know -- not me -- what a lousy thing it is, because you clearly half the inside lead on that test and in your onion it is useless.

By all means pls pass on your valuable information about "studies" and anecdotal evidence to the powers that be and are.

NFL looks for everything but wonderlic does not stop teams from going after players they deem have the talent to play the game. If wonderlic meant that much why would a team grab a guy who graded lower than what is considered good? and it is not just the Cowboys. Being book smart and football smart is not exactly the same

 

[thechosen1n2]

I think so. He's played so poorly, that I think he's got too far to go to even be an adequate CB. And with a Wonderlic score of 7, he's not capable of learning how to play the position at the NFL level.

No, i think we are not using him properly. Hes a man to man press cover guy, not a zone CB. So we are playing him not only out of position, but also we have no pass rush. Of course he looks bad.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

NFL looks for everything but wonderlic does not stop teams from going after players they deem have the talent to play the game. If wonderlic meant that much why would a team grab a guy who graded lower than what is considered good? and it is not just the Cowboys. Being book smart and football smart is not exactly the same

You half a good response. Duely noted and accepted.
I know you are a busy mans so I will let you go now and I will go look at the web for all them "studies."

 

[Rockport]

No, i think we are not using him properly. Hes a man to man press cover guy, not a zone CB. So we are playing him not only out of position, but also we have no pass rush. Of course he looks bad.

He's a press cover guy who can't press cover. That's why he was benched.