+ Reply to Thread
Page 53 of 58 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 571
  1. #521
    All-Pro B&RWarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    7,852
    I like Pugh, and yes one team had him rated as an elite OL prospect. We were not that team.

    He is not comparable to Lane Johnson as far as potential is concerned. Every other team had had Johnson, Joeckel, and Fischer as the elite 3 and then there are the rest.

    If he can pass protect then we got what was advertised. If he can run block as well then we got what I really wanted. I felt we needed a young roadgrader to reinvigorate the running game. Snee has 2-3 years left at the most. Other than him we don't have a legitimate mauler. We need one to be our best.

  2. #522
    i dunno how much of a mauler he'll be, but if we use him as a G, expect him to look like every other G we've had where we pull and trap with him. One of the reasons I wouldnt mind if he were G, is his agility/movement/understanding of what to do at the 2nd level. He'd fit right in pulling outside the opposite tackle or downblocking a DT

  3. #523
    Quote Originally Posted by B&RWarrior View Post
    I like Pugh, and yes one team had him rated as an elite OL prospect. We were not that team.

    He is not comparable to Lane Johnson as far as potential is concerned. Every other team had had Johnson, Joeckel, and Fischer as the elite 3 and then there are the rest.

    If he can pass protect then we got what was advertised. If he can run block as well then we got what I really wanted. I felt we needed a young roadgrader to reinvigorate the running game. Snee has 2-3 years left at the most. Other than him we don't have a legitimate mauler. We need one to be our best.
    thats ur take n its respectable. i myself, feel that pugh compared to johnson athletically/potentially the same ways fisher and joekel did. johnson tested through the roof, no disputing that. i just question his mental makeup/understanding of the position. more than 1 scout from what i've read feel he is actually a risky pick. tremendous potential...thats what gets coaches fired.


    pughs almost like the best quality of all 3 the top OTs in 1. He has the athleticism (not to the extent but he does have good athleticism) that Johnson is banking off of. He has the technique/understanding of angles as Fisher. He's built to be an OL similar to Joekel.

    If someone is up to it, compare Pughs measurements to Fishers and Joekels. Then compare Pughs collegiate career to Johnsons. Dunno how a person could claim he wasnt a 1rst rd talent when doing that. he had as clean a collegiate career of any OL prospect in a decade.
    Last edited by giantsfan420; 07-04-2013 at 12:21 PM.

  4. #524
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    97,305
    Quote Originally Posted by giantsfan420 View Post
    i dunno how much of a mauler he'll be, but if we use him as a G, expect him to look like every other G we've had where we pull and trap with him. One of the reasons I wouldnt mind if he were G, is his agility/movement/understanding of what to do at the 2nd level. He'd fit right in pulling outside the opposite tackle or downblocking a DT
    I think having a "mauler" can be overrated. When we had Diehl, Seubert, O'Hara, Snee, and MacKenzie we had an awesome OLine and not a "mauler" among them. Their playing together for as long as they did had more to do with their success than anyone one individual's talents.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


  5. #525
    All-Pro B&RWarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    7,852
    Pugh is way ahead of Johnson in his understanding of the position. Pugh is polished and almost technically flawless at the college level. Pugh was a late riser. He performed well at the Senior Bowl against other NFL prospects and that is when scouts took notice.

    Athletically he doesn't compare to Johnson...not even close. We are all free to have our opinions, but the have to have some basis for them. We still don't know who the better football player will be, but the combine stats alone will tell you who the better athlete is.

    Lane Johnson ran a 4.7 in the 40! To put that in perspective Herzy runs a 4.9! Athletically Johnson is head and shoulders above any other OL prospect.

    Pugh has very good agility and footwork in his own right, but he's not the athlete LJ is.

  6. #526
    All-Pro B&RWarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    7,852
    Quote Originally Posted by RoanokeFan View Post
    I think having a "mauler" can be overrated. When we had Diehl, Seubert, O'Hara, Snee, and MacKenzie we had an awesome OLine and not a "mauler" among them. Their playing together for as long as they did had more to do with their success than anyone one individual's talents.
    I beg to differ. Snee was always an A1 run blocker. Mauler when healthy, especially in his prime.

  7. #527
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    97,305
    Quote Originally Posted by B&RWarrior View Post
    I beg to differ. Snee was always an A1 run blocker. Mauler.
    No begging allowed.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


  8. #528
    All-Pro B&RWarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    7,852
    Quote Originally Posted by RoanokeFan View Post
    No begging allowed.
    LOL

  9. #529
    Quote Originally Posted by B&RWarrior View Post
    Pugh is way ahead of Johnson in his understanding of the position. Pugh is polished and almost technically flawless at the college level. Pugh was a late riser. He performed well at the Senior Bowl against other NFL prospects and that is when scouts took notice.

    Athletically he doesn't compare to Johnson...not even close. We are all free to have our opinions, but the have to have some basis for them. We still don't know who the better football player will be, but the combine stats alone will tell you who the better athlete is.

    Lane Johnson ran a 4.7 in the 40! To put that in perspective Herzy runs a 4.9! Athletically Johnson is head and shoulders above any other OL prospect.

    Pugh has very good agility and footwork in his own right, but he's not the athlete LJ is.
    ur not understanding my point. im not saying pugh compared to johnson athletically. im saying pugh compared to johnson athletically the same ways fisher and joekel compared to Johnson athletically. it was more of a comparison towards the other 2 OT prospects.

  10. #530
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    97,305
    Quote Originally Posted by B&RWarrior View Post
    LOL
    I guess my point was that they worked so long as a unit, almost uninterrupted for years, they knew what each other would do in any given situation and that's what made them a powerhouse unit.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts