Skins work out JaMarcus Russell (and a bunch of other free agents)

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Forget the details, you missed the point about QB talent evaluation.

Let me remind you that Al Davis benched Marcus Allen and Eric Dickerson for Nick Bell in 1992. Two Hall of Famers were benched for a scrub. It means nothing that he was benched by arguably the most dysfunctional organization in the last 20 years.

No, you argued that because of all the coddling he got, he was oh-so-poor immature and that's why he played so poorly. That's a load of bull because there have been MANY recent QBs who have displayed play-making ability early in their careers.

Everyone knows he's physically talented; it doesn't matter because just like Ryan Leaf, he'll never get it.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

No, you argued that because of all the coddling he got, he was oh-so-poor immature and that's why he played so poorly. That's a load of bull because there have been MANY recent QBs who have displayed play-making ability early in their careers.

Everyone knows he's physically talented; it doesn't matter because just like Ryan Leaf, he'll never get it.

So, I didn't mention QB talent evaluation being hit-or-miss? I didn't mention that JR was drafted by a dysfunctional organization?

As for the fact that some people mature faster than others, you're right. Many recent QBs have displayed play-making ability early in their careers -- but, not all. Why? I don't know, but I'm sure that circumstances have some influence. Sounds to me like you don't think circumstances have anything to do with the development of JR.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

So, I didn't mention QB talent evaluation being hit-or-miss? I didn't mention that JR was drafted by a dysfunctional organization?

As for the fact that some people mature faster than others, you're right. Many recent QBs have displayed play-making ability early in their careers -- but, not all. Why? I don't know, but I'm sure that circumstances have some influence. Sounds to me like you don't think circumstances have anything to do with the development of JR.

He could have woken up when he was benched and like Vince Young, have an epiphany. It apparently didn't happen.

Also, who are these QBs who stunk it up and then proceeded to light it up later? And by "stunk it up" I mean play terribly, not so-so or "ok".

They weren't doing much three years ago for the Raiders. Weak comparison.

Oh, and the body language and play of his teammates when he walked into the game against us last year? Any willingness to play for him apparently flew out the window. It's quite clear that he was wallowing in the life of his 50 mil and couldn't give a damn about football.

So what if the organization is dysfunctional, Russell could have been motivated by the simple desire to get back the starting job. A benching should be a huge wake-up call to the QB to play well or else. Even that wasn't enough.

[takethecake]

I have to echo the sentiments that we're JUST bringing him in for a workout, nothing else. Relax people...

[Player_HTTR]

Originally Posted by takethecake

I have to echo the sentiments that we're JUST bringing him in for a workout, nothing else. Relax people...

Echo.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

He could have woken up when he was benched and like Vince Young, have an epiphany. It apparently didn't happen.

Also, who are these QBs who stunk it up and then proceeded to light it up later? And by "stunk it up" I mean play terribly, not so-so or "ok".

I guess I'll never convince you that the NFL has missed on QBs, because I'll name guys like Brad Johnson, Trent Green and Tony Romo and you'll just say something about how you knew all along they were better than terrible.

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Oh, and the body language and play of his teammates when he walked into the game against us last year? Any willingness to play for him apparently flew out the window.

Isn't it possible the body language and play of his teammates had something to do with poor leadership and the fact they were going nowhere?

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

It's quite clear that he was wallowing in the life of his 50 mil and couldn't give a damn about football.

This you are right about, and it's actually the point I have been trying to make. He was immature, like most young adults, and it's possible that has changed (or could in the future). Don't write him off just yet. That's all I'm saying.

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

So what if the organization is dysfunctional, Russell could have been motivated by the simple desire to get back the starting job. A benching should be a huge wake-up call to the QB to play well or else. Even that wasn't enough.

You act as if the only thing that matters for success is a good QB. You act as if Russell just had to make the decision to be good, and they would have won the Superbowl, regardless of how bad the rest of the organization was.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I guess I'll never convince you that the NFL has missed on QBs, because I'll name guys like Brad Johnson, Trent Green and Tony Romo and you'll just say something about how you knew all along they were better than terrible.

First of all, talent is a "natural ability or quality of a person". Work ethic, is not something like arm strength or pocket presence.

You keep on citing flaws in talent evaluation, but you keep on missing what flaws you actually are citing and not making the actual connection between evaluating Russell and a Romo.

The difference in the flaws regarding Romo, etc were a matter of overstating lack of physical ability and lack of popular media exposure. They had, however, the mental intangibles to QB in the league. Not just from a work ethic, but instincts like pocket presence, etc.

The flaw in evaluating Russell's talent was overstating his PHYSICAL attributes and overlooking his mental areas. . People saw physical talent in Russell. They still do now. They didn't get that wrong.

They WERE wrong that he would have the work ethic to pan out.

As for actual MENTAL TALENTS, like pocket presence, he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. It's up to him to prove he actually has the ability to go through his progressions, etc, AFTER shoring up his work ethic, IF he ever does. I'm pretty sure everyone was hollering that he was mentally talented too, but he hasn't verified that expectation either.

I wasn't into football around 2007, but I'm pretty sure a lot of people thought Russell was going to be a sure thing. You're right that people didn't evaluate Russell correctly. Incorrect in the sense that they thought he was going to be any good.

Isn't it possible the body language and play of his teammates had something to do with poor leadership and the fact they were going nowhere?

No, they played like they gave a damn when Gradkowski was in there. They still do now. He also displayed a "deer in headlights" way of playing. He took sacks after holding the ball for a long time.

You act as if the only thing that matters for success is a good QB. You act as if Russell just had to make the decision to be good, and they would have won the Superbowl, regardless of how bad the rest of the organization was.

You're extremely vague in how this "toxicity" provided such a huge disincentive for Russell to do anything that even his pride of losing the starting job and job insecurity were not enough to provide a counterincentive and start working his ass off.

Vince Young woke up in part because of that and some other reasons.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

First of all, talent is a "natural ability or quality of a person". Work ethic, is not something like arm strength or pocket presence.

You keep on citing flaws in talent evaluation, but you keep on missing what flaws you actually are citing and not making the actual connection between evaluating Russell and a Romo.

The difference in the flaws regarding Romo, etc were a matter of overstating lack of physical ability and lack of popular media exposure. They had, however, the mental intangibles to QB in the league. Not just from a work ethic, but instincts like pocket presence, etc.

The flaw in evaluating Russell's talent was overstating his PHYSICAL attributes and overlooking his mental areas. . People saw physical talent in Russell. They still do now. They didn't get that wrong.

They WERE wrong that he would have the work ethic to pan out.

As for actual MENTAL TALENTS, like pocket presence, he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. It's up to him to prove he actually has the ability to go through his progressions, etc, AFTER shoring up his work ethic, IF he ever does. I'm pretty sure everyone was hollering that he was mentally talented too, but he hasn't verified that expectation either.

I wasn't into football around 2007, but I'm pretty sure a lot of people thought Russell was going to be a sure thing. You're right that people didn't evaluate Russell correctly. Incorrect in the sense that they thought he was going to be any good.

So, NFL scouts missed on Romo because they thought he wasn't enough of an athlete, and he currently ranks 4th best in passer rating all-time. We obviously know they were wrong about Romo.

But, NFL scouts missed on Russell because they thought he was more mature than he really is, and there is absolutely no way they could be wrong about it (now or in the future) because the reasoning is different?

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

No, they played like they gave a damn when Gradkowski was in there. They still do now. He also displayed a "deer in headlights" way of playing. He took sacks after holding the ball for a long time.

I disagree about them giving a damn due to Gradkowski, but whatever.

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

You're extremely vague in how this "toxicity" provided such a huge disincentive for Russell to do anything that even his pride of losing the starting job and job insecurity were not enough to provide a counterincentive and start working his ass off.

Vince Young woke up in part because of that and some other reasons.

Incentive has nothing to do with Russell's performance, and I never argued that. Incentive and maturity are unrelated. You are arguing that he had all the incentive in the world, and that alone should have been enough for him to turn into something. I'm saying it takes more than that -- it takes a team.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

So, NFL scouts missed on Romo because they thought he wasn't enough of an athlete, and he currently ranks 4th best in passer rating all-time. We obviously know they were wrong about Romo.

But, NFL scouts missed on Russell because they thought he was more mature than he really is, and there is absolutely no way they could be wrong about it (now or in the future) because the reasoning is different?

You keep on trying to spin it as a "they were wrong". Maturity is not the same as work ethic or skills like pocket presence. Besides, the guy had one of those tougher and touching childhood stories that would make anyone expect him to be one of the MORE mature people out there, not less.

They(or at least Mike Mayock) was right that he had a work ethic concern.

And really, do NFL scouts do this much work for someone post draft? They're busy checking out that next year's draft class. When people are talking about JaFatcus failing or not, it the media and fans on message boards like us.