Philpott says Martellus is a bust - 6/21/08

Chuck 54

Well-Known Member
Messages
20,610
Reaction score
12,618
First, everyone knew he wasn't fast coming out of college...he's not a "stretch the deep middle TE". However, He is expected to block well and be a huge target in the possession game and in the red zone. I still think he'll be that.

Many rookies struggle to learn the playbook, and while we all seem to understand that WR's take a while to learn to play the position in the NFL, it's not uncommon for that to also be true of the TE who also has to recognize coverages and adjust routes quickly.

When a guy is struggling with the mental part of the game, it's not surprising that he drops passes in practice.

1. He should be much better by Preseason.
2. He may not reach his full potential for 2-3 years.
3. We don't need for him to be a STAR at TE just yet.

It's certainly ridiculous to lable a TE a bust at this point, no matter how much he struggles...could be this is just the humbling attention getter that he needs.
 

BuckyG

New Member
Messages
110
Reaction score
0
igtmfo;2125578 said:
I respect Wade like corn bread ... but ..

OK, Martellus in pre-draft meetings looks long and stout like Antonio Gates. I hope he is, but if he isn't, I understand the enthusiasm ..

So Wade has input in meetings a few weeks before the draft, and suddenly Martellus is bumped up as an offensive threat. I can hear Wade:

a) A tall guy like him can get us a first down when we need it.

b) He can catch the ball, outjump anybody, running the fade in the end zone ... etc. A special red zone threat etc. etc.

A "dimension" like Jimmy used to say. Except that Jimmy would draft "dimensions" on Day 2 of the draft .. his fantastic scouts (before Jerry fired them to save cash in early 1993) had both the late-round talent and the "dimension" part down, never since then ..

I was watching the Cowboys fourth round war room on "The Blitz" a few weeks ago and I was shocked at the lack of intelligent discussion over the upcoming fourth round pick. I.e.: The trade with Cleveland (Stephen and Co. turned down Pittsburgh's three next year without even asking Jerry about it ... and other trades on the phone that weren't even brought up in the room) except that there was the concern that T. Choice had knee concerns, and we blew off the high-ranked OT on the board to trade our "now" fourth pick for a "next year" third pick that might only be 10-15 picks ahead of this years' fourth round pick. Hey guys, why no discussion whether Pitt's pick will be higher than Cleveland's? (Two scouts mumbled quickly to Stephen on this video... "We'd rather have Cleveland''s (pick, rather than Pitt's ... I wonder why) .. ALSO Stephen rejected outright at least another trade on the phone .. and mentioned neither/none of these to Jerry ...

What happened to time-value-of-picks? Ciskowski was kind of flummoxed too, and kind of said to the War Room when we were on the clock, generically that "we can get guys like this in the same (fourth) round any year" .. . this was the last word, so Jerry called Cleveland back and traded this pick .. Ciskowski started to talk about "compensatory" but I couldn't hear what he was saying because Jerry was already telling his minions to call Cleveland. Ciskowski might had been saying that "but next year we got a bajillion picks so let's pick a player now ..." but no one heard him ..

Was it a given that Cleveland would finish worse than Pitt next year, or was it Jerry still kind of hacked that the Cle trade last year brought us only the 22 (?) pick this year, and he's doubling-down on Cle finishing back of the pack to give us a high third next year?

Well, anyway, between our extra third and fourth next year, and especially a bunch of compensatory picks, it will even more hard for guys to make the team next year .

My original point: Maybe Wade bought into the hiked skirt and perfumed thigh of a A. Gates clone in draft preparation. Please! The Cowboys are talented but never talented enough to skip the best overall player. (I don't know who it was, sorry ...)

You make it sound as if Bennett was drafted only on potential, not on production. Last year he caught 49 passes--more than Jeremy Shockey in his final year at Miami--for 587 yards and 4 TDs, and some of his best games were against top competition (Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri), and in 2006 he caught 38 passes for 497 yards and 3 TDs. Those are excellent numbers for a college TE. In fact, Bennett's career college numbers are fairly comparable to Kellen Winslow Jr.'s.

Bennett came out early, and from a simplified college offense. He's far from a finished product. His learning curve is steep, hence his early difficulties. Nothing to worry about this early into the process.
 

TheCount

Pixel Pusher
Messages
25,523
Reaction score
8,849
BuckyG;2125606 said:
You make it sound as if Bennett was drafted only on potential, not on production. Last year he caught 49 passes--more than Jeremy Shockey in his final year at Miami--for 587 yards and 4 TDs, and some of his best games were against top competition (Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri), and in 2006 he caught 38 passes for 497 yards and 3 TDs. Those are excellent numbers for a college TE. In fact, Bennett's career college numbers are fairly comparable to Kellen Winslow Jr.'s.

Bennett came out early, and from a simplified college offense. He's far from a finished product. His learning curve is steep, hence his early difficulties. Nothing to worry about this early into the process.

Sorry but Bennett is in not very comparable to either Shockey or Winslow. I see what you're trying to do, but in comparing and quoting numbers, you are omitting some other crucial information.
 

BuckyG

New Member
Messages
110
Reaction score
0
TheCount;2125614 said:
Sorry but Bennett is in not very comparable to either Shockey or Winslow. I see what you're trying to do, but in comparing and quoting numbers, you are omitting some other crucial information.

I'm merely providing information to show that he is hardly a workout warrior being drafted because of measurables, which is what your post implied ("looks long and stout like Antonio Gates", "Jimmy would draft 'dimensions' on Day 2"). I'm not saying he's directly comparable to anybody, only that his college production is comparable to top college TEs, which it is. He has outstanding measurables and athleticism AND he was productive in college against major competition. Which is why the consensus of scouts and credible mocks had him placed about where the Cowboys drafted him. You can certainly make the argument that keeping Fasano made more sense, but one can also argue that Fasano didn't show much and that Bennett has more upside. But you can't claim the guy wasn't a good prospect and a reasonable second-round pick based on his position. You almost make it seem as though Phillips and the draft team just took a flyer on him 'cause he looks good in shorts.

That said, it's not even true that Jimmy drafted "dimensions" only on day 2. He picked Darren Woodson in the second round with the intention of converting a linebacker to strong safety, based on Woodson's potential. That's quite a gamble on an undersized linebacker with no experience at the safety position. By your thinking, that's an unacceptable risk.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Hard to take the article serious when you see this reporter labeling him a bust. Let give him some time and see how things turn out instead of getting up in arms over some drops at a minicamp or OTA
 

Disturbed

A Mere Flesh Wound
Messages
1,451
Reaction score
6
Beast_from_East;2125587 said:
I hope Sweed turns out to be a great player in the NFL, I have nothing against the guy. I just didnt think his play at UT was all that great and he would disappear in games.

Some guys turn out to be better NFL players than college players and vice versa, only time will tell with Sweed.

The UT offensive coach lacks a lot to be desired on utilizing his weapons, and he seems to forget about players at times. In fact, many blue chip players don't seem to progress at UT but they do at the NFL level.

I am still a little surprised with the Bennett selection. Coming from Texas A&M he has a lot to learn. I would have preferred Sweed.
 

TheCount

Pixel Pusher
Messages
25,523
Reaction score
8,849
BuckyG;2125637 said:
I'm merely providing information to show that he is hardly a workout warrior being drafted because of measurables, which is what your post implied ("looks long and stout like Antonio Gates", "Jimmy would draft 'dimensions' on Day 2"). I'm not saying he's directly comparable to anybody, only that his college production is comparable to top college TEs, which it is. He has outstanding measurables and athleticism AND he was productive in college against major competition. Which is why the consensus of scouts and credible mocks had him placed about where the Cowboys drafted him. You can certainly make the argument that keeping Fasano made more sense, but one can also argue that Fasano didn't show much and that Bennett has more upside. But you can't claim the guy wasn't a good prospect and a reasonable second-round pick based on his position. You almost make it seem as though Phillips and the draft team just took a flyer on him 'cause he looks good in shorts.

That said, it's not even true that Jimmy drafted "dimensions" only on day 2. He picked Darren Woodson in the second round with the intention of converting a linebacker to strong safety, based on Woodson's potential. That's quite a gamble on an undersized linebacker with no experience at the safety position. By your thinking, that's an unacceptable risk.

That wasn't my post. The only thing I said before that was that no one should be dropping that many balls in camp.

He's a fine prospect, but the wisdom behind selecting him to this particular team at that particular slot in the draft is obviously debatable.

As for bringing up Woodson, you are once again being pretty optimistic in your comparisons.
 

Kangaroo

Active Member
Messages
9,893
Reaction score
1
Way Way to much over reaction I will let you guys over analyze every little bit of information. What has proved out over time is that all the hype and bust that gets thrown around after a few ota's and some mini camps this time of the year do not tell us anything.

I will stick to my current time and patience I show with all rookies

The problem here everyone has there pet we should have drafted blah blah so a lot of people latch on at any little hiccup see I told you he is going to be a bust.

I hated many of draft picks I just like to give them time to fail or succeed. The ones I get worried about are the guys that show up fat and out of shape; fall asleep in meetings and do not bust there arse. (Rodgers is an example but I still gave him time before writing him off)
 

speedkilz88

Well-Known Member
Messages
36,997
Reaction score
23,163
igtmfo;2125578 said:
What happened to time-value-of-picks? Ciskowski was kind of flummoxed too, and kind of said to the War Room when we were on the clock, generically that "we can get guys like this in the same (fourth) round any year" .. . this was the last word, so Jerry called Cleveland back and traded this pick .. Ciskowski started to talk about "compensatory" but I couldn't hear what he was saying because Jerry was already telling his minions to call Cleveland. Ciskowski might had been saying that "but next year we got a bajillion picks so let's pick a player now ..." but no one heard him ..

Was it a given that Cleveland would finish worse than Pitt next year, or was it Jerry still kind of hacked that the Cle trade last year brought us only the 22 (?) pick this year, and he's doubling-down on Cle finishing back of the pack to give us a high third next year?

Well, anyway, between our extra third and fourth next year, and especially a bunch of compensatory picks, it will even more hard for guys to make the team next year .

My original point: Maybe Wade bought into the hiked skirt and perfumed thigh of a A. Gates clone in draft preparation. Please! The Cowboys are talented but never talented enough to skip the best overall player. (I don't know who it was, sorry ...)
You need to watch it again. Jerry was unsure about the trade because he wanted to take a player( OT Anthony Collins), but Ciskowski told him that there would be better o-lineman available next year in the same area. Jerry recently admitted that they had planned on taking an o-lineman in the 3rd round this year but the guy that they thought would be there wasn't afterall. The o-linemen went quicker in the draft than they had predicted.
 

bbgun

Benched
Messages
27,869
Reaction score
6
Doesn't look too fazed by the criticism.

http://img146.*************/img146/5707/74818472yh4.jpg
 

cowboys2233

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,712
Reaction score
1,983
tomson75;2124798 said:
Just because you preface a premature comment by saying it's premature, doesn't make it any more viable. It's still premature.

This may end up being the case, that Bennett is indeed a bust, but the coaches aren't going to give up on a guy before training camp....and neither should anyone else.

The only other reports I've heard mentioning the guy have been of mixed review. A few drops, some great catches, and that he's had a difficult time absorbing the playbook. That being said, I don't like hearing that he looks slow.

Yes, it may be premature, but slow is slow. It took all of five seconds of watching Skyler Green to know that he would never make it in the NFL. Bennett looked pretty impressive on the vid of the dunk though!
 

Disturbed

A Mere Flesh Wound
Messages
1,451
Reaction score
6
bbgun;2126117 said:
Doesn't look too fazed by the criticism.

http://img146.*************/img146/5707/74818472yh4.jpg

May not be smart enough to realize it is criticism. :D
 

BuckyG

New Member
Messages
110
Reaction score
0
TheCount;2125875 said:
That wasn't my post. The only thing I said before that was that no one should be dropping that many balls in camp.

He's a fine prospect, but the wisdom behind selecting him to this particular team at that particular slot in the draft is obviously debatable.

As for bringing up Woodson, you are once again being pretty optimistic in your comparisons.

Sorry if I mixed up whose post was whose.

The Woodson point was not to compare him to Bennett, but to refute the notion than Jimmy Johnson only drafted for "dimension" on Day 2. Drafting someone in the second round with the notion of switching the player's position is gambling on something as yet unseen, i.e., dimension. In that sense, both DeMarcus Ware and Anthony Spencer were a bit of a gamble as well, and they were first-round picks. The point is that teams often draft high based on potential. However, Bennett actually had good production in college at the position he'll play in the pros combined with rare size and athleticism. That's hardly taking a flyer on a guy who never did anything until the Combine.
 

Nors

Benched
Messages
22,015
Reaction score
1
Kangaroo;2124796 said:
This is called over reaction typical if a rookie does not look like a pro bowler in 5 seconds they are a bust

:bang2::bang2::bang2:


Would this be the same type of people that use to raved about chutch in practice on 11 on 11 drills and put Romo down because Chad threw that rocket ball.

How did that turn out

badly
 

Boysboy

New Member
Messages
4,852
Reaction score
0
This has got to be THE dumbest thread of the year!

For the record-Andy Reid(for example) SITS his players on the BENCH in their ROOKIE years(although the idiots in WIP and the pathetic fans in Philly keep throwing stones at him for it)-but ultimately, the results, as much as I hate to admit it, have been outstanding for his team(i.e. Chris Gocong).
I am shocked, SHOCKED at alot of you guys who think Bennett is a bust just b/c he's not Jason Witten/Jay Novacek on DAY ONE of OTAs.:bang2:
 

links18

Well-Known Member
Messages
24,377
Reaction score
20,195
wayne motley;2125593 said:
First, everyone knew he wasn't fast coming out of college...he's not a "stretch the deep middle TE". However, He is expected to block well and be a huge target in the possession game and in the red zone. I still think he'll be that.

Many rookies struggle to learn the playbook, and while we all seem to understand that WR's take a while to learn to play the position in the NFL, it's not uncommon for that to also be true of the TE who also has to recognize coverages and adjust routes quickly.

When a guy is struggling with the mental part of the game, it's not surprising that he drops passes in practice.

1. He should be much better by Preseason.
2. He may not reach his full potential for 2-3 years.
3. We don't need for him to be a STAR at TE just yet.

It's certainly ridiculous to lable a TE a bust at this point, no matter how much he struggles...could be this is just the humbling attention getter that he needs.

I guess the question then is how much of an improvement will he be over Fasano? We gave up on Fasano after only 2 years, yet it is supposed to take up to 3 to reach his potential. What is it about Fasano that caused us to give up on him so quickly? If we didn't make the trade with the Fins, we would still have Witten, Curtis and Fasano. Who could we have gotten with the 2nd we used to take Bennett? Can we call him a bust after 2 years if he doesn't "get it" by then? Is a Bennett struggling to learn the play book better than a disappointing Fasano PLUS the player we would have gotten with the 2nd?
 

Boysboy

New Member
Messages
4,852
Reaction score
0
links18;2127256 said:
I guess the question then is how much of an improvement will he be over Fasano? We gave up on Fasano after only 2 years, yet it is supposed to take up to 3 to reach his potential. What is it about Fasano that caused us to give up on him so quickly? If we didn't make the trade with the Fins, we would still have Witten, Curtis and Fasano. Who could we have gotten with the 2nd we used to take Bennett? Can we call him a bust after 2 years if he doesn't "get it" by then? Is a Bennett struggling to learn the play book better than a disappointing Fasano PLUS the player we would have gotten with the 2nd?

Overall-I was happy with the Fins' high 4th rounder-we got that Choice kid(who's gonna give us RB depth even more), and Akin Adoyele was gonna get cut anyways.
 

Kangaroo

Active Member
Messages
9,893
Reaction score
1
links18;2127256 said:
I guess the question then is how much of an improvement will he be over Fasano? We gave up on Fasano after only 2 years, yet it is supposed to take up to 3 to reach his potential. What is it about Fasano that caused us to give up on him so quickly? If we didn't make the trade with the Fins, we would still have Witten, Curtis and Fasano. Who could we have gotten with the 2nd we used to take Bennett? Can we call him a bust after 2 years if he doesn't "get it" by then? Is a Bennett struggling to learn the play book better than a disappointing Fasano PLUS the player we would have gotten with the 2nd?

Yes 2 years can be enough for some guys. If the guy does not work hard and put in the effort then yes you may cut him earlier than the 3 year mark.

We have read that Bennett came back with notes and clarifying questions on his responsibilities that sounds like a guy that is working hard and understands that this offense is way more complicated than Frans
 
Top