Curran changes his mind on Dez Bryant

[spacecrime]

Any writer who compares the two is just lazy. They are absolutely nothing alike. I don't see any similarity between Bryant and the 1998 Moss coming out of college. Moss is the most physically gifted WR ever. He's over 6'4" with a reported 51" vertical who runs a 4.25 40. Bryant is 6'2" and runs a 4.52 40 with a 38" vertical. In terms of production, Bryant had only one great season (87-1480-19). Both of Moss' seasons were outstanding putting up 78-1709-28 and 96-1820-26. Each guy had off field concerns, but they were completely different. Bryant got a suspension for lying to the NCAA and is said to have a diva attitude. Moss had been arrested multiple times and had done time. Where are the similarities all these reporters are seeing?

You are absolutely right, but don't blame the reporters. The person who compared Dez Bryant to Randy Moss was Dez Bryant. Pre-draft, he said he was just like randy Moss because Moss slipped in the draft and Bryant was slipping badly in the mocks. And just like Moss he (Bryant) would show everyone and he would make them all pay for passing on him just like Moss did. (last time a guy said that, it was Kellen Winslow Jr).

Then, when he was drafted, his on-air comment was that Dallas just got a great player.

Okaaaay, Dez.

 

[bb07]

I thought he has irregular heartbeat and attention problem.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I thought he has irregular heartbeat and attention problem.

He's getting attention, no problem. opcorn:

 

[Triumph]

CB was the biggest need.

Bill Belichick "Defense Wins Championships", to Bob Kraft when he was hired as NE's HC. That still hasnt changed and you dont win Superbowls with CB's like Wilhite, or hoping Wheatley stays healthy and praying that Butler has what it takes to compete in the NFL.

The Bend - Dont - Break defense, has been busted for a few years running. NE hasnt been able to stop the big play and get off the field on 3rd down. Redzone defense has been bad.

On defense, McCourty is the key to winning another Championship. On offense , getting back to spreading the ball around to multiple targets, instead of having 2 or 3 fantasy football guys carry the offense.

 

[Triumph]

He's getting attention, no problem. opcorn:

HA HA

Good one.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

On offense , getting back to spreading the ball around to multiple targets, instead of having 2 or 3 fantasy football guys carry the offense.

We seemed to do just fine with David Givens and Deion Branch as our top 2 and Patten/Brown as the lower options back in the day. Brady needs targets, not more superstar wideouts especially ones like Bryant that come with baggage.

 

[efin98]

Curran: On further review . . .

its quite funny media members writing opposing articles in boston...

Not that funny...actually a smart move. Do a complete turnaround to get hits for your column while the others are still stewing in their juices over the Patriots not taking the available beloved stud, that way if he holds out in camp or becomes a prima donna media slut you get to be the first one to say "I told you so!" before the contrariens do.

 

[Sicilian]

Have to agree with Curran here. He made it clear his rating was based on where the receiver was drafted. As first round picks and the #1 or #2 option on most passig downs, I'd expect a lot more than a pedestrian 40 some catches each. They didn't have a lot more production that Edelman, a 7th round pick who did not have the opportunities they had because he was a #4 receiver and missed a couple games AND never played WR before.

If the Pats had picked Nicks and he only had 40-odd catches, he'd be called a bust in this forum.

I might disagree with you on Britt, given that Tennessee is a run first team that had Collins throwing for the first half and a foot-happy Young for the second half. Expecting a late 1st rounder to jump in and put up huge numbers in that situation is probably unreasonable.

But your general point (if I'm gleaning it right) I agree with. It seems your chances of finding a good receiver don't drop all that much the further down the draft you go, at least compared to some other positions. It's high risk no matter where you draft them, so why not look for value late if you've got other areas of need.

 

[bresna]

Two things: if you're going to talk about a receiver whose pre-draft hype failed to match his NFL production, you *have* to include Chad Jackson. Curran doesn't. Also, Curran doesn't even *list* Chad Jackson on his sidebar for 2006, instead stopping at #26 Santonio Holmes. Holmes is to Jackson as Demaryius Thomas is to Dez Bryant.

 

[primetime]

Have to agree with Curran here. He made it clear his rating was based on where the receiver was drafted. As first round picks and the #1 or #2 option on most passig downs, I'd expect a lot more than a pedestrian 40 some catches each. They didn't have a lot more production that Edelman, a 7th round pick who did not have the opportunities they had because he was a #4 receiver and missed a couple games AND never played WR before.

If the Pats had picked Nicks and he only had 40-odd catches, he'd be called a bust in this forum.

Receivers take awhile to develop, though. Larry Fitzgerald only had 58 catches his rookie year; Calvin Johnson only 48. Edelman was an extremely pleasant surprise but plays in a pass-happy offense where 4 receivers are often used. Britt and Nicks played in run-first offenses, and Nicks was fighting depth (Steve Smith, Mario Manningham) and Britt had to deal with the QB situation (CJ was the leading receiver for the Titans with a paltry 50 catches). I can see the argument for Heyward-Bey, but Nicks and Britt were contributors to their teams and put up the kind of numbers you'd expect for rookie receivers.

 

[primetime]

Also of note is that if all the underclassmen declare, next year's draft promises to be one of the best WR drafts ever. Green, Jones, and Floyd are all better prospects than Bryant... and the Patriots own two 1st round picks. Floyd has played in the Weis system, too.

 

[upstater1]

Why should Curran be applauded for a very slanted shot at the kid?

What has this kid done that's so bad?

Why does he deserve to get ripped apart like that?

For being late to practice?

Please. If this were a Patriots draftee, you guys would all be up in arms.

If someone had attacked Brandon Meriweather like that the very weak after he was drafted, people here would be totally pissed.

 

[TB146]

Do you think Moss is hearing all of these Dez Bryant comparisons? And is insulted by them? And is maybe motivated to show that even after 12 years he can still outplay the kid? (Although, his record is enough to prove that, and I don't think he particularly needs motivation right now)

Anyway, I'm not at all disappointed that we didn't draft Bryant. As someone already mentioned, the Pats WR pipeline is full of promising talent, and I'm not counting Moss out for next year... I think if the Pats offer him a respectable contract, there's a good chance he'll stay. Even if he does go, the young prospects have good smarts, abilities and humilities.

 

[patchick]

Not that funny...actually a smart move. Do a complete turnaround to get hits for your column while the others are still stewing in their juices over the Patriots not taking the available beloved stud, that way if he holds out in camp or becomes a prima donna media slut you get to be the first one to say "I told you so!" before the contrariens do.

There's some truth to that, certainly. But the fact is, we all do reevaluate our initial opinions of decisions. Surely anybody who was around this board on day 1 of the draft remembers reactions like...

"BB you ******* suck as a GM, wholy hell."
"WTG Bill, you have officially lost it.....maybe you need to have a microphone in some other war rooms?"
"epic fail"
"I really don't want to admit this, but I think Belichick has lost his forking marbles!"
"Come on Bill, get your head out of your ***** and stop wasting picks!"
"Please unlock the voting so I can vote FAIL like 1200 times!"

...and then just 24 hours later, the "umm, on second thought, awesome draft!" posts? I have more respect for Curran reevaluating now, rather than watching how all the picks actually turn out before weighing in with a new "opinion."

 

[Sicilian]

Two things: if you're going to talk about a receiver whose pre-draft hype failed to match his NFL production, you *have* to include Chad Jackson. Curran doesn't. Also, Curran doesn't even *list* Chad Jackson on his sidebar for 2006, instead stopping at #26 Santonio Holmes. Holmes is to Jackson as Demaryius Thomas is to Dez Bryant.

He was only listing 1st round picks. Chad went in the 2nd round.

 

[unoriginal]

There's some truth to that, certainly. But the fact is, we all do reevaluate our initial opinions of decisions. Surely anybody who was around this board on day 1 of the draft remembers reactions like...

"BB you ******* suck as a GM, wholy hell."
"WTG Bill, you have officially lost it.....maybe you need to have a microphone in some other war rooms?"
"epic fail"
"I really don't want to admit this, but I think Belichick has lost his forking marbles!"
"Come on Bill, get your head out of your ***** and stop wasting picks!"
"Please unlock the voting so I can vote FAIL like 1200 times!"

...and then just 24 hours later, the "umm, on second thought, awesome draft!" posts? I have more respect for Curran reevaluating now, rather than watching how all the picks actually turn out before weighing in with a new "opinion."

Parity with messageboard loudmouths shouldn't be the target professional writers shoot for.

 

[patchick]

Parity with messageboard loudmouths shouldn't be the target professional writers shoot for.

Quite so. But is it worse for a writer to do a public about-face when he changes his mind, or to stick to a position that he now thinks was a mistake just to maintain a facade of consistency?

Personally, I think the honesty of the former is kind of refreshing. It sure beats the usual "here are 10 reasons why I wasn't really wrong, even though everything has turned out to be the exact opposite of what I said."

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Why are so many Boston writers doing articles about Bryant right now? He didn't even get drafted in the division, and unlike the Gresham story, there isn't even anything hinting that BB might've wanted him. So I don't get it, why don't we just write about every other first rounder then? Just dumb.

Because Jones traded into our slot to take him. Seems logical to me that there'd be more than usual interest in him in the local media, since one of the "gaps" that the pundits all agreed the Pats needed to fill in the Draft was at WR.

 

[Patspsycho]

Quite so. But is it worse for a writer to do a public about-face when he changes his mind, or to stick to a position that he now thinks was a mistake just to maintain a facade of consistency?

Personally, I think the honesty of the former is kind of refreshing. It sure beats the usual "here are 10 reasons why I wasn't really wrong, even though everything has turned out to be the exact opposite of what I said."

It's too bad the Methuselahs, the Shanknancy, Bob Ryan, and Breers can't follow your lead. Why they continue to be employed when they do nothing but attract acrimony is beyond me. They allow Mike Reiss to leave, and hire a writer who can't be bothered to retract what he says about Dez Bryant.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Curran: On further review . . .

its quite funny media members writing opposing articles in boston...

I read something like this and part of me wants to say, "well, that's a pleasant change, here we have a mediot who can admit that he was wrong."

However, the other part of me wants to scream at how quick these "experts," who have never in their lives had to make a single, meaningful operating decision that impacts people's lives and livelihoods, are to jump all over guys like Belichick and Pioli and Caserio when, in perfect 20/20 hindsight, it turns out that they actually happened to have made a mistake at one time or another. Yeah, it's nice to be paid to "opine" without consequences.