Dallas Goedert

[GleefulGary]

Yup, just like James White and Corey Clement. Why would any team give those 2 guys jobs?

While I admit that with as great of O-lineman as the Badgers seem to put into the NFL, the "greatness of their running backs might be inflated a bit. However, if you are writing a story about Wisconsin RB's and are going to hang your hat on using Ron Dayne and Montee Ball as your proof that the Badgers have turned out a long line of overrated backs, I think you are writing a pretty weak script.

Arguably only one Wisconsin RB that has been drafted since 2000 has actually lived up to the value of where they were picked, and that would be James White. Clements wasn't picked, and obviously, is good value for where he was at.

So out of the 6 RB's that have been drafted since 2000, one has shown good value for draft position (I'm not counting Anthony Davis because he was a 7th round pick and nobody cares about those, so it doesn't matter that he never played). I would say that shows a pretty long line of overrated backs that is a factually strong script. Perhaps even a vintage Spielberg script.

That's not to say that all Wisconsin RB's are bad, obviously they aren't...it's just value. I think with RB's in general, better value is found in low round picks. Take Dallas for example...they could have, and should have taken Jalen Ramsey over Zeke Elliot. Would have made a profound difference to their team. What the Eagles, Pats, Saints and multiple other teams are showing us fans is that by and large, a RBBC makes more sense value wise.

 

[GleefulGary]

I see what you're saying and I know a lot of people can be homers with Wisconsin players, but I'm actually a Georgia fan and besides Hayden Hurst, Fumagalli is the most complete tight end in this class. Now, I'm not saying he's the best tight end, but he can block, run routes, and has terrific hands. Goedert, Andrews, and Gesicki are more receivers and don't really have the ability to block just yet. Fumagalli isn't the most athletically gifted player, but he's savvy and finds ways to get open. It's not just Wisconsin homers this time.

I mean, I don't think draftniks are that incredibly high on Fumagalli either, but maybe some are. I can think of a decent number that I would have over Fumagalli.

1: Mark Andrews - Oklahoma
2: Dallas Goedert - SDSU
3: Hayden Hurst - USC
4: Mike Gesicki - PSU
5: Dalton Schultz - Stanford

and then you have a plethora of guys like Chris Herndon, Ian Thomas, Fumagalli, Durham Smythe who are all around the same impact level, but have different strengths/weaknesses depending on team. I would probably have Hurst higher, but he's going to be a 25 year old rookie. Good player though.

But yeah, Fumagalli can block, he can run routes, and he does have good hands. However, he doesn't block very well, he doesn't run routes very well, and he's not very fast. He's not going to be any better, impact wise, than Lance Kendricks...so he's a TE2 imo. He's not bad, I just think we can do better.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It's longer than that. Since 2000, five Wisconsin backs have been drafted in the top 3 rounds: Dayne, Ball, Bennett, Calhoun, Gordon. All of them failed to make good on the draft investment. Their college production was the primary argument in their favor. Dayne and Ball are obvious. Bennett had a great single year and never topped 500 yards again. Calhoun did nothing. Gordon was hyped as a franchise talent after making a living at Wisconsin on jet sweeps and outside zone. He doesn't have the juice to do that in the NFL when the blocking in front of him isn't as good, thus he's a pedestrian player who was drafted to be a star.

James White is different in that he was not overdrafted. I'm not anti-Wisconsin backs. The point is not that they can't play. I'm just saying that the system and OL talent in Madison pads their stats and gets them overdrafted routinely. It's a pattern. For some reason, White's hype over production stayed under control and he was a fine draft pick (may it was his size).

What's funny to me about Clement is that I actually suggested that the Packers take him in the ~5th round based on his measurables, and the same crowd that normally pumps up the Badger prospects assured me that he would be a wasted pick. So much for that.

EDIT: It's no different than looking at air-raid offensive systems in college and realizing you shouldn't overreact to QB stats in those programs.

Again, if you are going to evaluate college talent based on how well another player, from the same college, at the same position did in the NFL, I think you are short changing yourself. While I fully admit that a scout needs to take into consideration all the factors surrounding a college players success, I would be surprised if one of their criteria were "nahhh, strike him off the list, he played for the Badgers at RB".

 

[GleefulGary]

Again, if you are going to evaluate college talent based on how well another player, from the same college, at the same position did in the NFL, I think you are short changing yourself. While I fully admit that a scout needs to take into consideration all the factors surrounding a college players success, I would be surprised if one of their criteria were "nahhh, strike him off the list, he played for the Badgers at RB".

That...that's not what he said.

 

[Dantés]

Again, if you are going to evaluate college talent based on how well another player, from the same college, at the same position did in the NFL, I think you are short changing yourself. While I fully admit that a scout needs to take into consideration all the factors surrounding a college players success, I would be surprised if one of their criteria were "nahhh, strike him off the list, he played for the Badgers at RB".

I tried to go to lengths to say that that's exactly NOT what I mean.

My point, which you may disagree with and that's fine, is that Wisconsin's personnel and system have inflated running back statistics for a long time and has gotten a number of them drafted ahead of where their talent dictated (in my opinion), they belonged. Thus you get a mediocre talent like Montee Ball taken in the 2nd, a top 100 level talent like Gordon taken mid-1, etc.

I would never strike a guy at a position off a list because of school. But if there's a pattern and logical connection between a program and a position (e.g. "this system can tend to inflate guys' numbers"), I would certainly consider that as one of the factors, like you said above.

Prior to the 2015 draft, I was still a San Diego Chargers fan and they needed a back in the worst way. A lot of fans wanted Gordon. I watched and rewatched almost every game he played in 2014. When I raised concerns about his game (e.g. poor vision between the tackles), I was usually met with arguments regarding his gaudy statistics. And that's exactly why Badger backs have gotten overhyped. The offense gets them huge numbers and their shortcomings get glossed by the numbers. But unfortunately, you can't bring the stats with you to the NFL.

Suffice it to say I was furious when the Chargers not only drafted Gordon round one, but traded up to do so. But had he fallen into the next round, I would have been happy to take him. I'm not against the players, I'm against the value inflation.

 

[Mondio]

I don't think Ball had mediocre talent as much as he had less than mediocre discipline and work ethic. Off field things took him out and they shouldn't have. He had more ability than White or Clement. He just squandered it. Same with Moss way back when

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You can use that argument through hindsight with just about any college program and/or busted pick. Same could be said about a few Bama RB's, Ohio State, just about every major football program has had its share of busts, some more so in one position. Heisman trophy winners could be included.

I think we are in agreement that you have to look at just how a college player got to where he is, but to use the broad stroke of "Bader Running Backs are historically overdrafted" is stretching it in my opinion and possibly causing your team to lose out on guys like White and Clement.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't think Ball had mediocre talent as much as he had less than mediocre discipline and work ethic. Off field things took him out and they shouldn't have. He had more ability than White or Clement. He just squandered it. Same with Moss way back when

Same thing has been said about Ron Dayne. Look at Eddie Lacy. When a guy makes it to the NFL, he may have a ton of talent, but if he doesn't focus or apply himself, it really doesn't matter what school he was drafted out of.

 

[Dantés]

I don't think Ball had mediocre talent as much as he had less than mediocre discipline and work ethic. Off field things took him out and they shouldn't have. He had more ability than White or Clement. He just squandered it. Same with Moss way back when

He had more *production* than White or Clement. But Clement tested as a better athlete in just about every way-- though you have to compared combine numbers to pro day. White is a bit of an outlier has he is a niche player in the NFL. Hard to compare him to early down backs when he's become more of a receiving specialist.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

He had more *production* than White or Clement. But Clement tested as a better athlete in just about every way-- though you have to compared combine numbers to pro day. White is a bit of an outlier has he is a niche player in the NFL. Hard to compare him to early down backs when he's become more of a receiving specialist.

LOL...nor do White and Clement fit your narrative.

 

[Dantés]

You can use that argument through hindsight with just about any college program and/or busted pick. Same could be said about a few Bama RB's, Ohio State, just about every major football program has had its share of busts, some more so in one position. Heisman trophy winners could be included.

I think we are in agreement that you have to look at just how a college player got to where he is, but to use the broad stroke of "Bader Running Backs are historically overdrafted" is stretching it in my opinion and possibly causing your team to lose out on guys like White and Clement.

What about when you're saying it before they're drafted? Is that still hindsight? And obviously, I do not think recognizing that Badger running backs often get overdrafted means you miss out on guys like Clement... I am the one who thinks they're often overrated and I was the only guy I was aware before the draft that was interested in Clement. It just means, in my opinion, that if they're going to get overdrafted, you let someone else do it.

To be clear, I would absolutely use the same caution when assessing Alabama running backs. The trend is more pronounced at Wisconsin, but not exclusive to it. But the difference at Alabama is that their backs, who also benefit from running behind great lines, are often top-notch athletes themselves, whereas Wisconsin has more often had middling talents who have been made to look better than they are. But to be sure, you still get guys like T.J. Yeldon who looked like 3 down studs for the Tide but are really role players in the NFL.

Ohio State is not the best example to lump in with the other two. Since 2000, they've only had three backs go in the top 3 rounds (Elliott, Hyde, and Wells), and two of them hit.

 

[Dantés]

LOL...nor do White and Clement fit your narrative.

What are you not getting?

I wanted Clement. The Badger homers poo-pooed the idea-- he didn't have the production of former Badger backs so he didn't have the shine on him.

I have no problem with where White was drafted. It was appropriate. That's why he doesn't fit the trend. You're acting like I'm anti-Wisconsin RB, but I'm not. I'm just acknowledging a trend that their draft value often gets inflated. Because it does.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Ohio State is not the best example to lump in with the other two. Since 2000, they've only had three backs go in the top 3 rounds (Elliott, Hyde, and Wells), and two of them hit.

Think you forgot about Maurice Clarett (2005, 3rd rd) and Joe Montgomery (2nd rd. but 1999)

What are you not getting?

I wanted Clement. The Badger homers poo-pooed the idea-- he didn't have the production of former Badger backs so he didn't have the shine on him.

I have no problem with where White was drafted. It was appropriate. That's why he doesn't fit the trend. You're acting like I'm anti-Wisconsin RB, but I'm not. I'm just acknowledging a trend that their draft value often gets inflated. Because it does.

I understand what you are saying "view Wisconsin RB's cautiously, they may not be as good as they appear". While there could be some truth to that with a some of the RB's that came out of Wisconsin, the exact opposite seemed to happen with Clement and White. It is no different than any position or any player from any college.

BTW, I was one of those opposed to drafting Clement, but for me it was due to a character issue, not his talent. I am glad to see that he may have grown up. LOL on you not having a problem where James White was drafted, I would loved to have selected him instead of Khyri Thornton, Richard Rodgers or Carl Bradford.

Someone earlier used that same notion with Fumagalli, "overrated Badger homer, no TE's from Wisconsin have been any good" and all I have been saying is: Wouldn't a good scout look at more than just stats or what school a player played at in making his evaluation? Do you think Ron Dayne was the #2 RB taken in the draft at #11 because he was a sure 2000 yds/season runner in the NFL? I'm sure he "slipped" some, because of how the Badger OL was that year. Same with Ball and whoever else you might want to throw in there. Years later, after the fact, it is very easy to see if a player should have been drafted and where.

Take a look at the draft Dayne came out of, see how many of those guy jump out at you as rock solid draft picks at when they were selected. Same could be said for just about any draft.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?season=2000

 

[GleefulGary]

So what I'm getting from all those words is that we should never draft Wisconsin RB's, right?

 

[GleefulGary]

"Someone earlier used that same notion with Fumagalli, "overrated Badger homer, no TE's from Wisconsin have been any good"

Where did anybody say that?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

"Someone earlier used that same notion with Fumagalli, "overrated Badger homer, no TE's from Wisconsin have been any good"

Where did anybody say that?

Now don't go erasing it if it was you!

I can try to find it and I was paraphrasing, but it was followed up eloquently by someone pointing out Owen Daniels and Kendricks.

 

[Dantés]

Think you forgot about Maurice Clarett (2005, 3rd rd) and Joe Montgomery (2nd rd. but 1999)



I understand what you are saying "view Wisconsin RB's cautiously, they may not be as good as they appear". While there could be some truth to that with a some of the RB's that came out of Wisconsin, the exact opposite seemed to happen with Clement and White. It is no different than any position or any player from any college.

BTW, I was one of those opposed to drafting Clement, but for me it was due to a character issue, not his talent. I am glad to see that he may have grown up. LOL on you not having a problem where James White was drafted, I would loved to have selected him instead of Khyri Thornton, Richard Rodgers or Carl Bradford.

Someone earlier used that same notion with Fumagalli, "overrated Badger homer, no TE's from Wisconsin have been any good" and all I have been saying is: Wouldn't a good scout look at more than just stats in making his evaluation? Do you think Ron Dayne was the #2 RB taken in the draft at #11 because he was a sure 2000 yds/season runner in the NFL? I'm sure he "slipped" some, because of how the Badger OL was that year. Same with Ball and whoever else you might want to throw in there. Years later, after the fact, it is very easy to see if a player should have been drafted and where.

Take a look at the draft Dayne came out of, see how many of those guy jump out at you as rock solid draft picks at when they were selected. Same could be said for just about any draft.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?season=2000

Well said.

It's not different in that you always want to look at context. It is different in that you've got a trend here, so you may want to look harder.

I do not understand this particular LOL.

Yes, and yet we see NFL teams do really dumb things every year.

Yes, and it's very easy to see where a trend is emerging in a particular system at a certain position.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I do not understand this particular LOL.

good color coding BTW, once I figured out what you were doing with it, I knew you just didn't eat a bag if skittles while typing.

Seems we agree, in a round about way.

Concerning my comment on White and Clement and I still have to say the jury is still out on Clement. Maybe those 2 guys could be viewed as "undervalued" from a draft standpoint. How and why, who knows. Was it the "Badger RB Effect"? White probably, along with his size. Clement I think had the red flags with character and really had kind of a clouded history at Wisconsin with that and injuries. But when he played healthy, he was a solid RB and possibly an UDFA gem for the Eagles.

 

[Dantés]

good color coding BTW, once I figured out what you were doing with it, I knew you just didn't eat a bag if skittles while typing.

Seems we agree, in a round about way.

Concerning my comment on White and Clement and I still have to say the jury is still out on Clement. Maybe those 2 guys could be viewed as "undervalued" from a draft standpoint. How and why, who knows. Was it the "Badger RB Effect"? White probably, along with his size. Clement I think had the red flags with character and really had kind of a clouded history at Wisconsin with that and injuries. But when he played healthy, he was a solid RB and possibly an UDFA gem for the Eagles.

I think we do.

On Clement, I knew he had issues, but he seemed quite gifted, athletically. I was hoping GB would take a flier on him in the later rounds. You're not risking much there.

I would think if he never plays for Philly ever again, he's already going down as an UDFA gem.

 

[Dantés]

Now don't go erasing it if it was you!

I can try to find it and I was paraphrasing, but it was followed up eloquently by someone pointing out Owen Daniels and Kendricks.

To bring it back on topic-- I jumped in to discuss Gordon but currently have no opinion of Fumagalli. I haven't watched him closely at any point to be able to make a case one way or the other.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

To bring it back on topic-- I jumped in to discuss Gordon but currently have no opinion of Fumagalli. I haven't watched him closely at any point to be able to make a case one way or the other.

I kind of figured that.

I get why non-Badger fans think some of us are just homers in talking about Badger players, but some of us are very familiar with Badger players, because we have watched them play for up to 4 years. Does that make our opinions great? Probably not, but a lot better than what my opinion would be on some guy playing in the SEC.

 

[Dantés]

I kind of figured that.

I get why non-Badger fans think some of us are just homers in talking about Badger players, but some of us are very familiar with Badger players, because we have watched them play for up to 4 years. Does that make our opinions great? Probably not, but a lot better than what my opinion would be on some guy playing in the SEC.

I really don't think it's that bad here with the Badger fans. Of course, it's only been one season and last year most of the UW prospects were legit.

It's intriguing to me that Zierlein grades Fumagalli as his 10th TE, and almost certainly will end up 11th once Andrews gets slotted in there.

 

[Snoops]

If goedert has a good combine he would likely go in the first round id imagine Seattle maybe they need a tightend with willson and graham both free agents