Mark Clayton Highlight Video!

junk

I've got moxie
Messages
9,294
Reaction score
247
chicago JK said:
I figure this is a good place to put this. Here is a an answer from Rob Rang regarding Clayton and Williamson. Rob Rang is one of the better draft guru's out there from NFLdraftscout.com
*****************************
Williamson is a bit raw, but has such tools to work with. With time, he could be the top receiver from this class, but his immediate impact will be strictly as a big play specialist, not the guy who rely on for 3rd down and seven.

Clayton is what he is. He's a very good athlete, who makes himself a very good receiver with routes and hands. He should be a receiver who is capable of starting immediately and is exactly the type to get open on 3rd and seven, but three years from now Williamson, if he improves as he should, could be one of the real difference-makers in the league.

What you're really asking though is who would I take.

Allow me a stumbling analogy. If I have an average income and someone offers me an envelope guaranteed to be filled with $1,000 or five envelopes - four of which have $10 and one that has $10,000, I probably take the one that has the grand and go to Sizzler that night.

Therefore, if it was me, I'd take Clayton and be happy with the consistent, reliable production.

Very good analogy by Rang.
 

InmanRoshi

Zone Scribe
Messages
18,334
Reaction score
90
The problem I have with Clayton is that I don't think he'll be able to just step in right away.

His style of play is not one that adapts easily to the NFL. He's not going to be able to just run around freely and juke out people in the secondary like you see in his highlight video. Not in a league where LB's run like cornerbacks. He's not going to be able to be cute, dance around and put a 360 spin move on Brian Dawkins without losing teeth and short term memory. YAC in the NFL is hard to come by unless you can either out run people (Marvin Harrison) or push them around (TO).

I made a comparison to Josh Reed on the other board. That's who Clayton reminds me of in stature, style and college production. Some other examples I can think of are Pete Warrick, Troy Edwards and Santana Moss. All of them were hugely successfull in college. Reed, Edwards and Warrick have been disappointments in the Pros. Moss has turned out to be a pretty decent #2 WR, after he adjusted his game to the NFL. He didn't do crap until his 3rd year in the league, and I'm not sure Clayton is on his level as an athlete (Moss was a track star at Miami). All of these gusy found out that the NFL is much more of a straight line game for WR's, and less juking and jiving.

Its not about dancing around and being cute in this league like it is in college. Its about having the skills to line up man on man to beat him. Then you get what you can, while you can ... because help is on the way and its coming in a hurry. I think Williamson's game better translates to the NFL.
 

Dough Boy

Seldom Seen
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
0
junk said:
You know I watched them both and saw good things from both receivers. I was very anti Williamson early for many of the same reasons pointed out, but I also saw him do some very good things in his film. I didn't see any more body catches than I did from Clayton and did see a guy who went up and got the ball with his hands. That one handed catch where he fought off the defender was a terrific catch. Bottom line, I didn't think one highlight video was any more conclusive than the other, they both had their share of big plays.

Clayton looked like the superior route runner, which I would expect from the scouting reports I had read. He also had much better moves after the catch although I would chalk many of them up to simply terrible tackling and lack of pursuit, but definitely not all.

Clayton will produce more immediately and is the safer pick. Williamson will need some seasoning and has more bust potential, but has a much higher upside in my opinion.

The Dallas offense needs explosive playmakers on offense so I wouldn't be opposed to adding either of these guys. Typically, WRs take a year or two to begin having a signficant impact as they learn the nuances of the game. Being behind Key and Glenn (and possibly Morgan) on the depth chart would assure them time to develop. That is why I think it is important to add a WR this year, you can do it without having to rely on that guy immediately.

I do like Williamson's speed which could be a factor early. Running a deep pattern is pretty easy to pick up and make your mark on the game early.

Something we don't see in highlight videos is how each stacks up as a run blocker. I would assume that Williamson should be good at this since he comes from a run first offense, but is he? How does Clayton do? What about special teams? Do either of them return punts or kicks?


Great Post. Willimason broke as many tackles as Clayton. Clayton had as many body catches as Willimason. Clayton is more polished route runner and Willimason has more upside. To argue that one is a bad draft choice is flat out stupid. Any true football person would be happy with either.
 

Rack

Federal Agent
Messages
23,906
Reaction score
3,106
Great Post. Willimason broke as many tackles as Clayton.


WHAT?!?! Not only did Clayton break more tackles, but he made more people miss too. Not even close.
 

ghst187

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,594
Reaction score
11,425
I don't think Williamson has all that much more "upside" like everyone is insisting. Why, because he's 3 inches taller? Clayton is pretty tough and will fight for a ball. And I think any "upside" advantages Williamson might have had over Clayton went away when they changed the rules to where you can't think of touching a WR. Let's not forget that Clayton also ran a 4.40 40 and has well proven that he can be a very productive WR. He's polished and has everything you'd want in a WR, except a lot of height. Williamson hasn't proven anything except that he has good size and decent speed. Clayton actually reminds me a lot of Terry Glenn...a less fragile version with better RAC. I'm not tryin to hate on Williamson but I think for our situation, if we are going to take a WR and are choosing between these two guys, I'd go with Clayton. We've blown too many draft picks in the last 10 years to keep taking huge gambles on guys that could be monumental busts. At least play the odds every now and then.
I think Mike Williams is about the only guy I'd consider rolling the dice on.
 

ghosttown cowboy

Wyoming's #1 boys fan
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
859
Clayton is a very good run blocker, and he returned punts this year after Antonio Perkins went down with a knee injury. He returned one for a TD against oklahoma state.
 

Danny White

Winter is Coming
Messages
12,496
Reaction score
391
ghosttown cowboy said:
Clayton is a very good run blocker, and he returned punts this year after Antonio Perkins went down with a knee injury. He returned one for a TD against oklahoma state.

And here it is... :D

Clayton punt return TD


Most people don't think of him as a PR, but he definitely can return a kick. He just got stuck behind one of the all-time greats in Perkins.
 
Top