OT: Breer: Scout: Dez Bryant best WR prospect in 10 years

[Yfz01]

Randy Moss - 174 receptions for 3,529 yards and 54 TDs in 2 years. (excluding a bowl game where he caught 5 TDs)

Larry Fitzgerald - 161 balls for 2,677 yards and 34 TDs in 2 years.

Andre Johnson - 88 receptions for 1777 yards and 20 TDs in 3 years.

Dez Bryant - 127 receptions for 2002 yards and 26 TD's in 2 years. (exclude the 4 games he played last season)

Calvin Johnson - 178 receptions for 2927 yards and 28 TD's in 3 years.

Michael Crabtree - 231 receptions for 3,127 yards and 41 TD's in 2 years.

Braylon Edwards - 97 receptions, 1330 yards, and 15 TD's in 1 year.


Anyone I'm missing? Randy Moss was easily the most productive and has the best tangibles. Crabtree was the second most productive but ran slowly. Larry Fitzgerald and Braylon Edwards are next if you go by single season production. After that, i'd go Dez Bryant, Calvin Johnson, and Andre Johnson.

As far as intangables go; Randy Moss & Calvin Johnson followed by Andre Johnson, Braylon Edwards, Larry Fitzgerald, Dez Bryant, and Michael Crabtree.

 

[bradmahn]

But you're talking about a guy who in his best college year had half of Bryant or Crabtree's production.

That's why Jackson was not considered an all-world college receiver.

Chad Jackson led the SEC in receiving with 88 receptions in '05 (one more than Bryant's career best, and a single season record at Florida to boot). He did have big-time production in the toughest conference in the nation and a great combine. He was considered one of the best receiving prospects in that draft, and look what happened in that case. I'm not saying Bryant isn't going to be a good player, but let's not anoint him yet; he is still a prospect, and that means he only has potential to be a hall of famer, regardless of how well he killed competition at Oklahoma State.

Couple the prospective receiver issue with the fact that a good chunk of the flame-outs from the first round wasted their talent because of troubles with substance abuse and diva-dom, and Bryant's questionable concern jumps out as a reason to think he just may have a chance of busting. I'd rather take the risk of a pothead Hernandez in the fourth and hedge my gamble with a smaller down payment in addition to adding another prospect who many consider a "safe" pick (McCourtey).

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Scouts fall in love with the athletically gifted. As do some HC's and GM's and owners. Fans make excuses and rationalize. Gifted doesn't always translate from college, where a player can rely on his gifts vs. consistently less gifted competitors. At the next level there are gifted players playing opposite you and gifted coaches and coordinators scheming to contain you so intangibles like adaptability and instincts and drive often tip the balance. That's why we train our own scouts to look beyond the obvious and scout for the system. This system requires a WR who above and beyond physical tools has the capacity to become a technician. Bryant wasn't just late a few times, he was reportedly chronically late and not just to practices but to games. He wasn't being asked to perform in a complex offense, and even at that he reportedly was limited in his assignments and had to be coached up play by play from the sidelines because of his inability to absorb and execute an entire offense.

Rather than label him the best prospect, this scout might have had a more valid point if he'd pronounced him the most gifted prospect he'd seen in ten years. The problem is, players seldom meet expectations on this level unless they possess certain intangibles and are bright enough and dedicated enough to grasp that relying on your gifts at this level actually limits your potential. And in a system like this given the complex schemes we run, relying on any one players physical gifts ends up limiting everyone else's potential to succeed including the HC and his staff. Here a player can't even get on the field unless he embraces the system and the accountability it demands and can consistently execute within the scheme. Gifts aside, Bryant doesn't project to be a player who can be counted on to. Which is why both Bill and Josh passed on him twice.

Dallas doesn't operate a terribly cerebral offense. He may be a better fit there. Although they've had some gifted athletes on that offense in recent years in the end it didn't produce the anticipated result. Breer should know that better than most, and if he were remotely cerebral in his own right he whould have figured out why that is...and why this team has been to 4 superbowls and won three in the time it's taken Jerry to even win a playoff game or two in this decade. Instead of wasting his few remaining brain cells on the quest to uncover why Hernandez was drafted a round later than projected, he should have grasped that equally if not more troubling concerns led Dez Bryant to drop from his top ten projection to the bottom third of the round.

 

[upstater1]

Randy Moss - 174 receptions for 3,529 yards and 54 TDs in 2 years. (excluding a bowl game where he caught 5 TDs)

Larry Fitzgerald - 161 balls for 2,677 yards and 34 TDs in 2 years.

Andre Johnson - 88 receptions for 1777 yards and 20 TDs in 3 years.

Dez Bryant - 127 receptions for 2002 yards and 26 TD's in 2 years. (exclude the 4 games he played last season)

Calvin Johnson - 178 receptions for 2927 yards and 28 TD's in 3 years.

Michael Crabtree - 231 receptions for 3,127 yards and 41 TD's in 2 years.

Braylon Edwards - 97 receptions, 1330 yards, and 15 TD's in 1 year.


Anyone I'm missing? Randy Moss was easily the most productive and has the best tangibles. Crabtree was the second most productive but ran slowly. Larry Fitzgerald and Braylon Edwards are next if you go by single season production. After that, i'd go Dez Bryant, Calvin Johnson, and Andre Johnson.

As far as intangables go; Randy Moss & Calvin Johnson followed by Andre Johnson, Braylon Edwards, Larry Fitzgerald, Dez Bryant, and Michael Crabtree.

This isn't an argument against Randy Moss but Randy played in a very poor conference compared to the other guys. Crabtree was in a wacky pass happy offense. His numbers are indeed through the roof, but look at his YPC. I also like Bryant's single season better than the guys you listed, he had more yards, a lot more TDs and only 9 fewer receptions.

 

[upstater1]

Chad Jackson led the SEC in receiving with 88 receptions in '05 (one more than Bryant's career best, and a single season record at Florida to boot). He did have big-time production in the toughest conference in the nation and a great combine. He was considered one of the best receiving prospects in that draft, and look what happened in that case. I'm not saying Bryant isn't going to be a good player, but let's not anoint him yet; he is still a prospect, and that means he only has potential to be a hall of famer, regardless of how well he killed competition at Oklahoma State.

Couple the prospective receiver issue with the fact that a good chunk of the flame-outs from the first round wasted their talent because of troubles with substance abuse and diva-dom, and Bryant's questionable concern jumps out as a reason to think he just may have a chance of busting. I'd rather take the risk of a pothead Hernandez in the fourth and hedge my gamble with a smaller down payment in addition to adding another prospect who many consider a "safe" pick (McCourtey).

I guess I'm putting as much emphasis on yards and tds. Bryant had 1500 and 19 to Jackson's 900 and 9.

 

[upstater1]

Scouts fall in love with the athletically gifted. As do some HC's and GM's and owners. Fans make excuses and rationalize. Gifted doesn't always translate from college, where a player can rely on his gifts vs. consistently less gifted competitors. At the next level there are gifted players playing opposite you and gifted coaches and coordinators scheming to contain you so intangibles like adaptability and instincts and drive often tip the balance. That's why we train our own scouts to look beyond the obvious and scout for the system. This system requires a WR who above and beyond physical tools has the capacity to become a technician. Bryant wasn't just late a few times, he was reportedly chronically late and not just to practices but to games. He wasn't being asked to perform in a complex offense, and even at that he reportedly was limited in his assignments and had to be coached up play by play from the sidelines because of his inability to absorb and execute an entire offense.

Rather than label him the best prospect, this scout might have had a more valid point if he'd pronounced him the most gifted prospect he'd seen in ten years. The problem is, players seldom meet expectations on this level unless they possess certain intangibles and are bright enough and dedicated enough to grasp that relying on your gifts at this level actually limits your potential. And in a system like this given the complex schemes we run, relying on any one players physical gifts ends up limiting everyone else's potential to succeed including the HC and his staff. Here a player can't even get on the field unless he embraces the system and the accountability it demands and can consistently execute within the scheme. Gifts aside, Bryant doesn't project to be a player who can be counted on to. Which is why both Bill and Josh passed on him twice.

Dallas doesn't operate a terribly cerebral offense. He may be a better fit there. Although they've had some gifted athletes on that offense in recent years in the end it didn't produce the anticipated result. Breer should know that better than most, and if he were remotely cerebral in his own right he whould have figured out why that is...and why this team has been to 4 superbowls and won three in the time it's taken Jerry to even win a playoff game or two in this decade. Instead of wasting his few remaining brain cells on the quest to uncover why Hernandez was drafted a round later than projected, he should have grasped that equally if not more troubling concerns led Dez Bryant to drop from his top ten projection to the bottom third of the round.

The Scout did say, "based on the tape" he was the best.

So, he didn't actually say he was the best prospect.

I thought this is what the discussion was about. If you only watched the tape and knew nothing else, who would you take?

I think I'd still end up with Larry Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson, but Bryant would be next.

 

[bucky]

The Scout did say, "based on the tape" he was the best.

So, he didn't actually say he was the best prospect.

I thought this is what the discussion was about. If you only watched the tape and knew nothing else, who would you take?

I think I'd still end up with Larry Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson, but Bryant would be next.

This is such a distorted argument. First, you already know how well Calvin Johnson, Roy Williams, etc. turned out. So you cannot objectively compare them to a guy like Bryant. A better comparison would be to a guy like Crabtree. Second, if you watch tape of the players in college, they all come from such different offenses, it makes it very difficult to compare them in an apples to applies comarison. Third, and perhaps most importantly, you cannot put a grade on a player just from watching game tape. That's only half the battle. So the entire tweet is really void of any substance. I'm sure the coach said "10 years" because he was trying to make a statement and picked a number that sounded impressive. And Breer is just trying to stir things up. I remember 3 or 4 years ago when he was working for the Herald, he claimed that David Thomas was the best TE in training camp. So his evaluation is to be taken with a couple of grains of salt.

 

[upstater1]

This is such a distorted argument. First, you already know how well Calvin Johnson, Roy Williams, etc. turned out. So you cannot objectively compare them to a guy like Bryant. A better comparison would be to a guy like Crabtree. Second, if you watch tape of the players in college, they all come from such different offenses, it makes it very difficult to compare them in an apples to applies comarison. Third, and perhaps most importantly, you cannot put a grade on a player just from watching game tape. That's only half the battle. So the entire tweet is really void of any substance. I'm sure the coach said "10 years" because he was trying to make a statement and picked a number that sounded impressive. And Breer is just trying to stir things up. I remember 3 or 4 years ago when he was working for the Herald, he claimed that David Thomas was the best TE in training camp. So his evaluation is to be taken with a couple of grains of salt.

I disagree in the sense that you cans till find archived posts on Patsfans.com projecting Calvin Johnson as a draft pick, and there was a lot more excitement about him long before we knew of Bryant's problems.

Second, a good argument could be made that Crabtree too is much more of a sure-thing--even given his diva-attitude--since he had about 50 catches in the NFL last year without a full season. We know Crabtree can do at least that, and on that basis I would probably take him over an unknown.

Third, a lot of college pass offenses are rudimentary. Belichick made this point recently, and a lot of that probably has to do with the QB. But you can still see players go up for balls in traffic, jump for balls, outrun others, show good hands, etc. You can still watch the tape and say, WOW, this guys is faster, has better hands, uses his body to come down with the ball, runs crisp routes, and he does it better than anyone I've seen nin college over the last 10 years.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Let's put it this way. IF the Pats had drafted Bryant, the ball washing here would be unbearable. Lots of hypocrits here. He's a great prospect, with incredible tools, would probably be the best prospect at WR we've taken in ages.

 

[Rob0729]

Let's put it this way. IF the Pats had drafted Bryant, the ball washing here would be unbearable. Lots of hypocrits here. He's a great prospect, with incredible tools, would probably be the best prospect at WR we've taken in ages.

I can only speak for myself, but I have plenty of posts prior to the draft that stated that I didn't think Bryant was a good fit for the Pats.

Personally, I think in the Pats' offense, he would be Chad Jackson 2.0. I think Julian Edelman might actually be more successful in the Pats' offense than Bryant might have been. It doesn't matter how fast you run or how high you can jump if you read the presnap read wrong and Brady throws towards the sidelines and you run towards the middle of the field.

Belichick spent the day with the guy and it clear that he didn't want him (watch this weekend's Patriots Total Access and you will see that when they traded with the Cowboys they knew that the Cowboys were going to draft Bryant and that even went into their decision to trade with them or accept another offer). I am sure they went over game film and I am betting that Bryant didn't do well.

 

[Pats726]

Breer should just go back to Dallas, where he could fellate Dez Bryant for the next 10 years. I've never seen anyone so bitter because the team he covers didn't draft his binky.

I agree...he should go back to Dallas where his ego and head ballooned out of proportion..I take what he said with a grain of salt...

 

[Rob0729]

The only real problem I have with Breer is that he put a puff piece on Bryant in this Sunday's newspaper. The only thing this was to accomplish was to sway public opinion that he is right that the Pats blew it for not getting Bryant. Personally, I think that is questionable journalism.

I don't mind writers who bash the Patriots or take the contrarian view (although I think much of the media in this town have taken the Red Sox mentality of the fellowship of the miserable). I do hate when writers write with a hidden agenda and I feel that was what Breer's piece was this weekend. Not only does he not mention his own disapointment in the Pats not taking Bryant, he mentions that others were not happy in the decision as if it was a huge groundswell with him as an objective observer.

 

[Sivy]

Wes Welker

 

[TruthSeeker]

I can only speak for myself, but I have plenty of posts prior to the draft that stated that I didn't think Bryant was a good fit for the Pats.

Personally, I think in the Pats' offense, he would be Chad Jackson 2.0. I think Julian Edelman might actually be more successful in the Pats' offense than Bryant might have been. It doesn't matter how fast you run or how high you can jump if you read the presnap read wrong and Brady throws towards the sidelines and you run towards the middle of the field.

Belichick spent the day with the guy and it clear that he didn't want him (watch this weekend's Patriots Total Access and you will see that when they traded with the Cowboys they knew that the Cowboys were going to draft Bryant and that even went into their decision to trade with them or accept another offer). I am sure they went over game film and I am betting that Bryant didn't do well.

Just because BB decided not to draft Bryant, doesn't mean it won't wind up being a mistake. Bethel Johnson over Anquan Boldin waves hello. And I can show dozens of BB mistakes over the last 5 draft years. That being said, I think he did a very good job this year, I can honestly say, I liked every pick from round 2 to 7.

 

[Underdog]

Not to beat a dead horse, but everyone swears that one reason that Bryant wasn't out getting in trouble like guys who don't put football first is that Bryant basically lives for football and nothing else. That's his only thing. That being said, he was late to practice a few times. Guess what, I follow college football, and this is not an uncommon thing.

Is it even possible to go out and get in trouble in Stillwater, though?

 

[Rob0729]

Just because BB decided not to draft Bryant, doesn't mean it won't wind up being a mistake. Bethel Johnson over Anquan Boldin waves hello. And I can show dozens of BB mistakes over the last 5 draft years. That being said, I think he did a very good job this year, I can honestly say, I liked every pick from round 2 to 7.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Even if Bryant is a superstar in Dallas, we may never know if Belichick made a mistake. Again, the Cowboys' offense is a dumbed down offense compared to the Patriots because Romo is a dumbed down QB compared to Brady. The knock on Bryant is his football intelligence. He went to a system where that isn't as much of a problem. With the Pats, it would be.

Belichick makes mistakes. Every coach/GM does. But just because Bryant does well in the Cowboys' system doesn't neccessarily mean he would do well in the Pats' system.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

everyone in college gave dez bryant a big cushion at the line of scrimmage. he won't get that in the NFL.

 

[upstater1]

Is it even possible to go out and get in trouble in Stillwater, though?

It's actually not possible. I was once on campus for a job interview that was offered.

This is how I explain my experiences.

1. I came wanting to like the place because my only other job offer at the time was a small libarts college north of Chicago.

2. Driving along the highway, my host pointed out that the dead grass everywhere was called yellow grass.

3. Kids playing in their yards all seemed to be wearing sweats with big maroon blotches all around them. I was told there's a lot of iron in the dirt and it doesn't come out of your clothes.

4. We pulled into town and my jaw dropped as the host pointed out the housing for faculty and middle class people. On the northside of the town, huge McMansions from oil wealth. Southside, ugh.

5. 5 stores in downtown.

6. A big old drinking pub for college students next to campus. Looked like a barn.

7. Everyone was blonde, and as I got up early one morning to prepare for interviews (the time was about 6:45 and my first interview was at 8) I was walking around campus with a coffee trying to recover when cheery blondes kept greeting me with, "Hi'Yall!" I have to admit, it was both alluring and frightening in a Stepford way. They take politeness seriously there.

8. The town is named Stillwater NOT because the waters are still there, but because the town STILL HAS WATER!!!!!

 

[DisgruntledTunaFan]

There's not way Bryant is better than Calvin Johnson. He'd be destroying this leauge if he had a decent QB.

If Dallas' OL plays with the question marks that it currently has, I can't seen Bryant putting up decent numbers.

I was disappointed they didn't draft an OT, or at the very least S Nate Allen(who went to the Eagles), because they have holes in the secondary as well.

 

[WelshPat]

False, he didn't produce in college like Randy Moss or Larry Fitzgerald did. They were better prospects. Moss easily was the best prospect, he just had major off the field issues.

You clearly didn't read what i said...

The thing that made Calvin different was there were NO character issues. None.

And btw, Fitz run in the 4.6's and the combine (hindsight shows us that Fitz clearly plays faster) , and Moss had loads of baggage. Moss also had Chad Pennington throwing him the ball, Calvin had the ultra-crappy Reggie Ball, that hurt his production.

So no, Moss was not clearly the best prospect. There were concerns about his ability to beat press coverage, and then there's the off the field stuff.