Your top 3 at 28- 2/16

[Floatyworm]

Tim Williams LB Alabama
Raekwon McMillan MLB Ohio St
Quincy Wilson CB Florida
Obi Melifonwu SS Connecticut
Dan Feeney RG Indiana

 

[Sydla]

watching some videos of him and he can really play,could be really be special if you want a great Press corner.

Oh he can play, that's for sure.

But he's a nitwit. Normally, I am one to overlook some silliness but this guy skipped a drug test and then called out the UF Athletic Department publicly for suspending him. He's been rumored to be a guy with some questionable drug choices.

You wanna go down that rabbit hole again like we did with Gregory? And let's note, Gregory wasn't exactly a total knucklehead off the field or in the locker room. Same with a guy like Spence who had questionable drug issues.

Tabor has a drug issue in the past AND he's shown to be an out of control knucklehead. That's a scary combination.

 

[KingintheNorth]

J. Peppers - great athlete, big program, Secondary ties with one of our coaches

I forgot about that.

Something to keep an eye on.

 

[tm1119]

Oh he can play, that's for sure.

But he's a nitwit. Normally, I am one to overlook some silliness but this guy skipped a drug test and then called out the UF Athletic Department publicly for suspending him. He's been rumored to be a guy with some questionable drug choices.

You wanna go down that rabbit hole again like we did with Gregory? And let's note, Gregory wasn't exactly a total knucklehead off the field or in the locker room. Same with a guy like Spence who had questionable drug issues.

Tabor has a drug issue in the past AND he's shown to be an out of control knucklehead. That's a scary combination.

The drug tests are a big problem...his ego might be even bigger. Seems like the type of kid that's more worried about the $ and fame then being a good NFL player. Which, hey good for him for making it to that point, but I wouldn't invest a 1st round pick in him. If he can mature and get off twittter long enough to get his head on straight he could be a lock down CB for sure, but there's always that IF. Won't surprise me to see him go before us honestly tho...not hard to argue that he's the 2nd best CB based on talent alone

 

[Sydla]

The drug tests are a big problem...his ego might be even bigger. Seems like the type of kid that's more worried about the $ and fame then being a good NFL player. Which, hey good for him for making it to that point, but I wouldn't invest a 1st round pick in him. If he can mature and get off twittter long enough to get his head on straight he could be a lock down CB for sure, but there's always that IF. Won't surprise me to see him go before us honestly tho...not hard to argue that he's the 2nd best CB based on talent alone

Drug issue is not an automatic disqualifier.

Being a knucklehead is not an automatic disqualifier.

Being a knucklehead with some past drug transgressions and rumors? That's a bad combination.

 

[AzorAhai]

That sometimes comes with the position. There's a head case in Kansas City that went about nine picks before Byron who I wouldn't mind having right about now.

And people said the same things he's saying about Tabor about Peters. Nobody here wanted to touch him despite his talent.

 

[Sydla]

And people said the same things he's saying about Tabor about Peters. Nobody here wanted to touch him despite his talent.

Peters was a knuckled head in college who got himself kicked off the team eventually. But you rarely get penalized in the NFL if you act like an idiot from time to time. NFL teams seem to have far more tolerance for dumbness than college teams do.

Tabor has a drug issue in his past. He skipped a test on purpose because he knew he would fail it. And he's a knucklehead. You get suspended in the NFL with drug issues. We know that all too well.

Peters and Tabor are not exactly the same type of problem.

 

[AzorAhai]

Peters was a knuckled head in college who got himself kicked off the team eventually. But you rarely get penalized in the NFL if you act like an idiot from time to time. NFL teams seem to have far more tolerance for dumbness than college teams do.

Tabor has a drug issue in his past. He skipped a test on purpose because he knew he would fail it. And he's a knucklehead. You get suspended in the NFL with drug issues. We know that all too well.

Peters and Tabor are not exactly the same type of problem.

Peters was much more than a knucklehead. He choked a coach and got kicked off the team for his many issues. Let's not downplay the severity of how bad those things he did were, while making a bigger deal about Tabor because it's convenient.

 

[Sydla]

Peters was much more than a knucklehead. He choked a coach and got kicked off the team for his many issues. Let's not downplay the severity of how bad those things he did were, while making a bigger deal about Tabor because it's convenient.

Who downplayed the severity?

But in the NFL, you hear stories all the time of players getting in scuffles in locker rooms, with coaches, etc. Shoot, we had a DE run up to a coach and slap the clipboard out of his hands in a fit of rage and the Cowboys did nothing about it. There was a story a couple of years ago of a player hitting a coach in Philly in a locker room scuffle. Nothing happened.

But what's the one knucklehead thing you really can't do in the NFL? Screw up a drug test. That gets you suspended, no questions asked. So when you have a kid who has a drug issue in his past AND also shows to be a total idiot, that's a huge red flag.

 

[xwalker]

Drug issue is not an automatic disqualifier.

Being a knucklehead is not an automatic disqualifier.

Being a knucklehead with some past drug transgressions and rumors? That's a bad combination.

It's all about probabilities to me.

Probability that a player can develop into a quality NFL player (non-character issues).
Probability that a player will fail a drug test.
Probability that a players character will hold him back from developing as a player (coach-able, etc.).
Probably of injury (Injury history players).

I would only completely remove players that I just didn't want to have on the team. This is not a draft pick, but Greg Hardy was good on the field and didn't get suspended, but he was not coach-able (at least not by Garrett). This is the type of player that I would remove from the draft board if you know that the coaches will not want him on the team.

I would just de-rate drugs issue players or hot-heads as opposed to completely removing them from the board.

I thought Randy Gregory was a high probability of failing a drug test; whereas, Noah Spence was a much lower probability relative to Gregory because Spence had stayed clean for over a year, but Gregory failed at the very most important time (the combine).

 

[AzorAhai]

Who downplayed the severity?

But in the NFL, you hear stories all the time of players getting in scuffles in locker rooms, with coaches, etc. Shoot, we had a DE run up to a coach and slap the clipboard out of his hands in a fit of rage and the Cowboys did nothing about it. There was a story a couple of years ago of a player hitting a coach in Philly in a locker room scuffle. Nothing happened.

But what's the one knucklehead thing you really can't do in the NFL? Screw up a drug test. That gets you suspended, no questions asked. So when you have a kid who has a drug issue in his past AND also shows to be a total idiot, that's a huge red flag.

And if he fails a combine drug test then it's a big deal. Until then, I really don't care all that much. Including all of his character concerns.

You've been around long enough to have heard all the rumblings. Former players have guessed around 70-80% of NFL players smoke weed. Unless you're Randy Gregory or Josh Gordon, the majority of players do it and are smart enough not to fail a test they know is coming.

 

[AzorAhai]

It's all about probabilities to me.

Probability that a player can develop into a quality NFL player (non-character issues).
Probability that a player will fail a drug test.
Probability that a players character will hold him back from developing as a player (coach-able, etc.).
Probably of injury (Injury history players).

I would only completely remove players that I just didn't want to have on the team. This is not a draft pick, but Greg Hardy was good on the field and didn't get suspended, but he was not coach-able (at least not by Garrett). This is the type of player that I would remove from the draft board if you know that the coaches will not want him on the team.

I would just de-rate drugs issue players or hot-heads as opposed to completely removing them from the board.

I thought Randy Gregory was a high probability of failing a drug test; whereas, Noah Spence was a much lower probability relative to Gregory because Spence had stayed clean for over a year, but Gregory failed at the very most important time (the combine).

If a player fails a test they've known is coming for months in advance, they would be off my board completely. That kind of stupidity/addiction is likely to end in further suspensions

 

[Sydla]

If a player fails a test they've known is coming for months in advance, they would be off my board completely. That kind of stupidity/addiction is likely to end in further suspensions

What about a player that knows a drug test is coming and then ignores it knowing he's likely to fail. And then when the school suspends him for his screw up, he takes to twitter and says his athletic department "sucks".

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I don't really start studying players until the combine. I don't have time to watch all 300+ of them.

Past years I would look at corners and then he would run a 4.58. Same with WR. No bueno.

 

[AzorAhai]

What about a player that knows a drug test is coming and then ignores it knowing he's likely to fail. And then when the school suspends him for his screw up, he takes to twitter and says his athletic department "sucks".

The majority of these schools don't even care if players fail a test. He was probably suspended because he didn't show up instead of a failure. And again, it's not that big of a deal. If he passes his combine test, he'll be in the same boat as 80% of the rest of NFL players. And at that point, by your own words, the NFL doesn't care as much about knuckleheads in the locker room. Oh, and btw, Peters failed a drug test in college as well. Sooo...

 

[Sydla]

The majority of these schools don't even care if players fail a test. He was probably suspended because he didn't show up instead of a failure. And again, it's not that big of a deal. If he passes his combine test, he'll be in the same boat as 80% of the rest of NFL players. And at that point, by your own words, the NFL doesn't care as much about knuckleheads in the locker room. Oh, and btw, Peters failed a drug test in college as well. Sooo...

That's hypocrisy on your part though. So you'll take a kid off the board if he fails a test he knew was coming but it's OK that a kid purposely misses a test that he was likely going to fail.

How does that make any sense?

And for the record, there are definitely guys like Peters who show themselves to be idiots that pan out. But it's a risk reward situation. And when you are the Cowboys, who have been burned by this in recent history, it's probably wise to try to steer clear of the Tabor types.

 

[AzorAhai]

That's hypocrisy on your part though. So you'll take a kid off the board if he fails a test he knew was coming but it's OK that a kid purposely misses a test that he was likely going to fail.

How does that make any sense?

Because it's college and the consequences aren't near as severe. And while I'm not completely aware of the procedure in college, I doubt the players have a date months in advance. Add in most schools don't even give a **** about anything other than a PED failure and it's not a big deal to fail a test in college. Most schools don't even suspend them if they fail or even report it for that matter.

The combine is a test they have a specific date they have known since before they declared. That test results in being placed in the program with actual random tests and a much higher chance of actually being suspended. There's significant consequences that players know about failing the combine and there's minimal consequences to failing one in college.

Not to mention these are kids in college. If you aren't taking players because they smoked weed in college, you're picking from a very shallow pool.

 

[Sydla]

Because it's college and the consequences aren't near as severe. And while I'm not completely aware of the procedure in college, I doubt the players have a date months in advance. Add in most schools don't even give a **** about anything other than a PED failure and it's not a big deal to fail a test in college. Most schools don't even suspend them if they fail or even report it for that matter.

The combine is a test they have a specific date they have known since before they declared. That test results in being placed in the program with actual random tests and a much higher chance of actually being suspended. There's significant consequences that players know about failing the combine and there's minimal consequences to failing one in college.

Not to mention these are kids in college. If you aren't taking players because they smoked weed in college, you're picking from a very shallow pool.

Again, this is just bizarre rationalizing. And college kids do know when tests are coming, as one is always administered usually right before the season. Tabor was given one in Sept two years ago and I was wrong, he didn't fail to show. He apparently told the athletic department he was declining to take the test.

Regardless of how lenient you think college is, the facts of the matter are still the same. You'll take a kid off the board if he fails a test but won't on a kid who declines to take the test (and we all know the reason why he declined) and your rational while one is different is that colleges aren't as strict as the NFL?

What?

 

[AzorAhai]

Again, this is just bizarre rationalizing. And college kids do know when tests are coming, as one is always administered usually right before the season. Tabor was given one in Sept two years ago and I was wrong, he didn't fail to show. He apparently told the athletic department he was declining to take the test.

Regardless of how lenient you think college is, the facts of the matter are still the same. You'll take a kid off the board if he fails a test but won't on a kid who declines to take the test (and we all know the reason why he declined) and your rational while one is different is that colleges aren't as strict as the NFL?

What?

My rationale is there's very minimal consequences in college. If you are in the NFL drug program, the odds of actually being suspended are much higher than if you aren't because it becomes random and frequent. We're at an impasse, so good day.

 

[rkell87]

Peppers
Williams

Trade