jterrell;5055020 said:This might be the smartest thing Stretch has stated.
And not because I like Warmack better but because Cowboys history is littered with Randy White, Jay Ratliff, Larry Allen, Big E. Guys who want (and do) to hurt people and enjoy being paid to do just that.
It isn't scientific but that to me is scouting real talk. 100%.
Take the guy who'd win in a fight because basically every game is 11 guys going man for man with 11 other guys.
Athleticism is huge but you can't be a football player without serious toughness and a desire to dominate.
Chocolate Lab;5055173 said:Good grief, that room example was not his only basis of evaluation. It was just a way of illustrating his belief that if two guards are very close in ability, he'd prefer the more physical, "meaner" guy.
Let's not act like that's some lunatic fringe opinion, either. Nate Newton said the exact same thing: Cooper is really good, but he'd prefer the nastier, more physical player -- especially for this team.
He's just saying he's meaner and tougher than Cooper. And Warmack isn't as mobile as Cooper but he still can move well enough to get out to the second level and pull. Warmack isn't a phone booth blocker like you are trying to describe, that is more like Warford who is even less mobile than Warmack but still isn't exactly a slug.Crown Royal;5055143 said:I stay relatively quiet during times like this, because I don't watch much college ball and am not a draft junkie. I like the NFL, college does little for me.
That said, I'm not impressed with that evaluation. Attitude absolutely matters, but this seems to indicate that Cooper has the wrong attitude. That's silly; by all accounts he seems to have an EXCELLENT attitude, motor, etc.
Larry Allen was one of the strongest men in the NFL, but in his hey day he was also incredibly agile for a man of his size. What concerns me from everything with Warmack is he will have to deal with VERY FAST defensive tackle. You have to kick out to be a good guard in this league. He may be a great man blocker in the run game, but if he's left defending the 3 gap while the tackle next to him is on an island against a 5 or 7 gap DE, how is he going to perform?
I'm not saying it would be poorly, or that Warmack isn't fantastic. I hear he is. But the scout's reasoning for taking him is just terrible.
Like I said, I can't speak to either of them because I don't watch college. I'm just saying that the exact quote given here is not much of a differentiator for me.speedkilz88;5055329 said:He's just saying he's meaner and tougher than Cooper. And Warmack isn't as mobile as Cooper but he still can move well enough to get out to the second level and pull. Warmack isn't a phone booth blocker like you are trying to describe, that is more like Warford who is even less mobile than Warmack but still isn't exactly a slug.
Joe Rod;5055357 said:All I know is that Livings and Berny would be on the receiving end of a whoopin from either one, so I am hoping that one of them falls to us at 18.
Chocolate Lab;5055173 said:Good grief, that room example was not his only basis of evaluation. It was just a way of illustrating his belief that if two guards are very close in ability, he'd prefer the more physical, "meaner" guy.
Let's not act like that's some lunatic fringe opinion, either. Nate Newton said the exact same thing: Cooper is really good, but he'd prefer the nastier, more physical player -- especially for this team.
Chocolate Lab;5055173 said:Good grief, that room example was not his only basis of evaluation. It was just a way of illustrating his belief that if two guards are very close in ability, he'd prefer the more physical, "meaner" guy.
Let's not act like that's some lunatic fringe opinion, either. Nate Newton said the exact same thing: Cooper is really good, but he'd prefer the nastier, more physical player -- especially for this team.
FuzzyLumpkins;5055393 said:Except that they are not very close athletically.