PFT: Marvin Austin described as “excuse-making con artist”

[Hoofbite]

Lol, so you quote me multiple times sans my posts that actually put everything in context: "I just don't like the tone and vigor in which he says them. I don't think he comes off objective at all. When you say things like "con-artist" or has a "fake smile" in the case of Cam Newton, you've taken it to a personal level which seems completely out of place.

It would be like a teacher discussing someone's daughter at a parent/teacher conference saying something like "Sally can't pay attention in clase because she's lusting after her male classmates and looking to ***** around," instead of saying "Sally has a hard time focusing."

I'm not running an apologetic for any of these kids, because like you said, "charachter counts." There is just something wrong with someone like Nawrocki and his approach."

Further, my responses regarding maturity is a response to ChocoLab glibbly saying "these guys are all grown men..."

They are no more grown men than any other 19-20 year old college kid.

At no point have I defended any of the mentioned players, I've only criticized Narwocki's specific style of articulating that criticism.

I know you thought you had a cute point to make, but it's completely off the mark.

Cute point?

You all but said that people the age of 20-22 should be expected to be immature.

They are no more grown men than any other 19-20 year old college kid.

And guess what, they are no less grown men than any other 19-20 year old college "kid".

Fact of the matter is, some people of that age are mature and some aren't. END OF STORY.

And that's why including it in an scouting report is important.

Just like any other attribute or characteristic that isn't uniformly distributed amongst the population.

If all things are equal between one prospect or another, who would you pick........immaturity or maturity?

 

[realtick]

Fact of the matter is, some people of that age are mature and some aren't. END OF STORY.

Thanks for making that grand generic statement. One to meditate on for sure.

And that's why including it in an scouting report is important.

Just like any other attribute or characteristic that isn't uniformly distributed amongst the population.

If all things are equal between one prospect or another, who would you pick........immaturity or maturity?

What are you failing to compute?

Nobody (meaning me) has made the argument that character concerns should not be included in scouting reports. END OF STORY

If you continue on with that nonsense then you're simply full of crap and wanting to stubbornly stick to your guns thinking you've made a point originally.

So when you're looking at a scouting report, searching for the most in-depth, objective analysis on a player, you're looking for venomous riffs from the scouts like "he's a con-artist," "he's got a fake smile," "he's got a murderous heart," "there's no fire in his eyes," et cetera?

Those type of non-tangible, unprovable, subjective, petulant comments are unecessary. There is no need to attempt to get into psychoanalysis of the player. Narwocki doesn't have that ability, but I'm guessing you think he does.

Do you comprehend that?

Hilarious, I paste a complete post of what I said earlier that puts everything into context, and you completely ignore it and forward the same nonsense.

Should I paste again so you can try to dismiss it for the third time?

 

[CCBoy]

Thanks for making that grand generic statement. One to meditate on for sure.



What are you failing to compute?

Nobody (meaning me) has made the argument that character concerns should not be included in scouting reports. END OF STORY

If you continue on with that nonsense then you're simply full of crap and wanting to stubbornly stick to your guns thinking you've made a point originally.

So when you're looking at a scouting report, searching for the most in-depth, objective analysis on a player, you're looking for venomous riffs from the scouts like "he's a con-artist," "he's got a fake smile," "he's got a murderous heart," "there's no fire in his eyes," et cetera?

Those type of non-tangible, unprovable, subjective, petulant comments are unecessary. There is no need to attempt to get into psychoanalysis of the player. Narwocki doesn't have that ability, but I'm guessing you think he does.

Do you comprehend that?

Hilarious, I paste a complete post of what I said earlier that puts everything into context, and you completely ignore it and forward the same nonsense.

Should I paste again so you can try to dismiss it for the third time?

LOL, Realtick...to some of the 'older' farts, gloating is rather important as an art form. But I get to file for Social Security in three weeks, so I guess I had better go mute now.

But just imagine what would happen if a taste for lamb tar tar and bone marrow was cultivated in a dish...

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Interesting. On one hand it can be more helpful if they tell you how severe a players character concerns are. If you leave it to a one word blanket statement that covers all possible personalities then you will be misleading people. For instance Pacman Jones and Dez Bryant do not deserve to be in the same category in terms of character concerns. Pacman is an attempted murder and Dez is immature mentally and emotionally.

On the other hand, if I was a public scout I would have a hard time being so hard on(giggidy) young guys. I would be very sure about what Im saying b/c youre asking to be embarrassed if you are so relentless in your descriptions.

 

[InmanRoshi]

Where was the immaturity pass when I was 20 years old?

You got one, whether you know it or not. When you were 20 you probably often said something incredibly dumb, ignorant or arrogant around others, as we all did, and the people around you (particularly if they were older) just dismissed it as immaturity and didn't make a big deal of it.

That's the difference between you and these players. Nawrocki is roasting these players in publications not for breaking laws or even for breaking rules like showing up late, but for how they "came across", which is completely and utterly subjective, to a bunch of middle aged or older men. No one is reporting how you "came across" at 20 to middle aged men old or older men in National Publications.


Besides that, I would love to hear what Nawrocki would have to say about a 22 year old Michael Irvin coming out of University of Miami. If he thinks Cam Newton is a turd because he "says the right thing too often in interviews", he would probably think a 22 year old Irvin is the living embodiment of the Anti ******. Personally, I'm glad Nawrocki isn't running the Cowboys draft room. I don't want criminals, but I like guys in the lockeroom who "come across" with swagger and confidence. Football is a sport for alpha males, not Boy Scouts.

 

[BAT]

If Marvin Austin falls to the Cowboys at 71, then they have to grab him. The guy is a former blue chipper who falls due to character concerns. Not work ethic, not production, not measurables. Austin is very good on the field, with the potential to be even better. He's just not so good hiding all the goodies that most college football players get.

Its Dez all over again. Except at better value.

 

[Hoofbite]

Thanks for making that grand generic statement. One to meditate on for sure.

Gotta start at the most basic level when someone makes a broad-sweeping generalization based on running into a couple of sorority girls and frat guys while on campus.

What are you failing to compute?

Nobody (meaning me) has made the argument that character concerns should not be included in scouting reports. END OF STORY

I guess it's probably a good thing I never claimed that anyone (meaning you) had made that argument. I wasn't intending to but guess I see how I might have conveyed that. I was simply pointing out that not everyone believes in an overall lack of immaturity in this age group, as evidenced by character concerns getting significant attention and being included in scouting reports.

If you continue on with that nonsense then you're simply full of crap and wanting to stubbornly stick to your guns thinking you've made a point originally.

So when you're looking at a scouting report, searching for the most in-depth, objective analysis on a player, you're looking for venomous riffs from the scouts like "he's a con-artist," "he's got a fake smile," "he's got a murderous heart," "there's no fire in his eyes," et cetera?

Those type of non-tangible, unprovable, subjective, petulant comments are unecessary. There is no need to attempt to get into psychoanalysis of the player. Narwocki doesn't have that ability, but I'm guessing you think he does.

Do you comprehend that?

First off, I don't care about the guy at all. I don't think anything of him, haven't read his stuff and generally don't care about him. But, I would wager that he at least has the ability to accurately write down quotations and form opinions based on information given to him from legitimate sources.

You realize his comments are based on information he has gotten from scouts, don't you?

I mean, lets just make sure you read the actual article and saw the part where it says:

Has earned a reputation in the NFL scouting community as a "finger-pointing, excuse-making con artist"

That's a quote from a scout and a sentiment that is likely shared by others.

Hilarious, I paste a complete post of what I said earlier that puts everything into context, and you completely ignore it and forward the same nonsense.

Should I paste again so you can try to dismiss it for the third time?

You can paste it again all you want but it still won't be any more relevant now than it was then. The first post is you defending the criticism for immaturity. The second post is you basically saying that the specific age group is immature. The last quote was the post that I was directly replying to.

The post you keep referring to has nothing to do with the claim you made about college age kids being immature. That post was about you not liking Nawrocki's approach which I really don't care about.

In case it isn't blatantly obvious yet, I'm calling your broad-sweeping generalization of 20-22 year olds ridiculous. I don't care what you think of Nawrocki's reporting of what he has been told.

 

[Randy White]

to the 3rd round, by some miracle, Dallas better jump all over that, character issues or not. I don't know much about his off the field problems, but if they're not drug related, alcohol related, or overall felony type issues, this guy is just too talented to pass up at that point. Hell, even considering him in the 2nd round is not a bad idea either, although I wouldn't necessarily pick him there.

I wouldn't select him in the 1st round because he comes off as a bit of a space cadet, ie: doesn't take the game seriously enough, but he IS that talented. I'll even go as far as saying he's just as talented as another favorite of mine: Marcell Dareus, but he's not as committed as Marcell.

 

[realtick]

I guess it's probably a good thing I never claimed that anyone (meaning you) had made that argument. I wasn't intending to but guess I see how I might have conveyed that.

Lol, yeah you did. In fact, you effectively accuse me of it again in this last post.

First off, I don't care about the guy at all. I don't think anything of him, haven't read his stuff and generally don't care about him. But, I would wager that he at least has the ability to accurately write down quotations and form opinions based on information given to him from legitimate sources.

So you haven't even read the player breakdowns in question from Nawrocki? For instance, his take on Cam Newton?

Thanks for playing...

You can paste it again all you want but it still won't be any more relevant now than it was then. The first post is you defending the criticism for immaturity. The second post is you basically saying that the specific age group is immature. The last quote was the post that I was directly replying to.

The post you keep referring to has nothing to do with the claim you made about college age kids being immature. That post was about you not liking Nawrocki's approach which I really don't care about.

In case it isn't blatantly obvious yet, I'm calling your broad-sweeping generalization of 20-22 year olds ridiculous. I don't care what you think of Nawrocki's reporting of what he has been told.

Classic.

The entire progression of my responses (outside of the responses to your posts where I'm defending myself from something I never suggested) is one consistent stream of thought that has everything to do with how Nawrocki is delivering his criticisms, NOT the fact he is reporting on immature kids.

Of course you don't care about me "not liking Nawrocki's approach," because to do so would be to actually engage in what I was talking about.

No, you came into the thread swinging hard because you thought you had a strong point to make. Unfortunately, it was completely off-the-mark. Perhaps you thought it was a complete masterpiece and feel like it would be a shame to have it dismissed not appreciated based off its irrelevancy. That appears to be the case.

The entirety of the angle you're trying to work can be summed as follows: "Ha ha, you're saying all kids are immature that age, but that's not truuuue, some kids are mature, so you're wrong!"

 

[gmoney112]

I'm not surprised. A lot of these players are coddled in high school and college and think they're above having to study or act in a reasonable manner. The amount of Ratliffs to Haynesworth's nowadays are becoming fewer and fewer. Imagine interviewing for a job with an annual salary of $1 million+, would you expect the interviewer to address your character?

I like Hudson out of FSU. I think he could start day 1.

 

[burmafrd]

that is what so many that say "dont worry about maturity" don't get. These guys have been treated special and given passes on stuff since they were in high school at least. That is why so many of them screw up as they go into the pros.
Dez seems to be a perfect example of that; Bennett is another. When you have those concerns, you have to be sure they are worth it. Now as regards to someone who has flat out lied and stolen things like Cam Newton has (unless you buy that he never knew a THING his father was doing) then you have to be worried. Claiming he wants to be an "Icon" and a "entertainer" is not something guaranteed to make you warm and fuzzy about picking him in the top 10.

 

[realtick]

I actually find it 'refreshing' to hear Nawrocki dissing players that have character concerns with his own brand of hyperbole. Alot of us feel the same way about Cam and Austin but I truly hope that we're wrong about our 'gut instinct'. I hope that they actually have some moral substance to their makeup besides the 'alpha-male' DNA in their genes.
:laugh2:

I don't.

I think it's the type of talk you expect on a message board. Not from a guy who purports himself to be a professional and "expert." If he is aiming for that crowd then I guess he's found an audience.