cage Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 The phrase "upside" has been so widely and loosely used, I'd like to find out what the definition is for this. I can't even offer one to start the discussion as its nearly lost all meaning for me Its typically thrown out as justification of why we should keep player A over player B... ex. Steve Johnson has more "upside" than Josh Reed or why we should acquire player A... ex. Troy Smith has more "upside" than any of the QBs on our roster Definitions please, this has become a useless phrase! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hossage Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Normally it equates to physical potential, athleticism, raw talent. But the NFL doesnt develop players like it used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heitz Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 potential /thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDD Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Normally it equates to physical potential, athleticism, raw talent. But the NFL doesnt develop players like it used to. Upside is similar to potential. In the words of Bill Parcells, "it means you haven't done nothing yet." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 "The direction of a breakout in relation to a geometric pattern or a resistance. A breakout that breaks through a resistance is referred to as a breakout upside. It portends a rally." http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.asi...g3MnQQUEm5y9bdg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted July 1, 2010 Author Share Posted July 1, 2010 "The direction of a breakout in relation to a geometric pattern or a resistance. A breakout that breaks through a resistance is referred to as a breakout upside. It portends a rally." http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.asi...g3MnQQUEm5y9bdg Now I definitely get why we keep using the phrase.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WotAGuy Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Now I definitely get why we keep using the phrase.... I always took "upside" to mean: "Hasn't played enough to have been proven to be a bust that can be readily replaced by another teams' undrafted free agent castoff". For example, "Brian Brohm has more upside than Fitz" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I think, if you're to "bottom line" it ... if Player A has more upside than Player B, then Player A is a better fit for your team - for the present and the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanInLV Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I would say upside means a player, when given the right circumstances/setting could outperform/outproduce another player. The term upside is commonly used in fantasy football. Example: Hines Ward May be a better player than texans WR Jacoby Jones on any given Sunday..... But when Ward is facing the Ravens, and Jones is facing Detroit, it may be better to start Jones in your line-up. Just my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
profile Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 "Upside" If it is used in a sentence about quarterbacks not currently on our roster, then it actually means.. "I hate Trent Edwards" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 JP Losman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 JP Losman More like Matt Leinart. That they still think he has any is the only explanation I can see for the Cards still sticking with that chump. At least the Bills parted ways with Losman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Upside = potential Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxer Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Someone with a good amount of raw talent that has yet to learn the fine aspects and secrets of his playing position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 The word is sometimes used to describe a player with good physical characteristics who has yet to produce much at the NFL level. I don't like using the word in that sense, because it would imply that a player's potential is analogous to his physical potential. But Joe Montana lasted until the third round because of his lack of arm strength. He had plenty of upside--that is, plenty of potential to achieve greatness at the NFL level--but his upside did not consist of outstanding physical traits. When evaluating a player's upside, it's important to look not just at his physical traits; but at the things he did well at the college level. Montana, for example, was a very accurate college passer, and excelled at hitting his receivers in perfect stride. That's upside, albeit not of the physical variety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted July 1, 2010 Author Share Posted July 1, 2010 OK, so lots of good responses... My question then becomes why are we so down on Demetrious Bell (lets ignore the injury for a moment) The guy seems to define "upside"... young, cheap, highly athletic, has some start under his belt, put in a very difficult situation last year -- learning no-huddle -- last second cut of Langston Walker -- all sorts of other injuries on the line -- 2 other rookie starters -- starting 5 had 0 pre-season games under their belt -- firing OC at start of season with Van Pelt thrown in -- new coaching staff seems to be thinking well of him despite having no ties to a 7th rounder they didn't draft I'm sure I could add more if I thought about it some more. His "upside" seems remarkable, we should be excited about how much he'll improve his second year, but everyone seems to be down on him. I don't know jack about being an offensive linemen and have reviewed no tape of his body of work, so if anyone can explain to me why we're negative about Bell, but ga-ga over the "upside" of a bunch of others, who are backups here or elsewhere I would appreciate it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WotAGuy Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I don't know jack about being an offensive linemen and have reviewed no tape of his body of work, so if anyone can explain to me why we're negative about Bell, but ga-ga over the "upside" of a bunch of others, who are backups here or elsewhere I would appreciate it Admissions like this will not be tolerated!!! On this board, we are all experts and keen judges of football talent - and the sooner you admit to that, the better off we'll all be! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle flap Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Admissions like this will not be tolerated!!! On this board, we are all experts and keen judges of football talent - and the sooner you admit to that, the better off we'll all be! ha ha...duh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxer Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 OK, so lots of good responses... My question then becomes why are we so down on Demetrious Bell (lets ignore the injury for a moment) The guy seems to define "upside"... young, cheap, highly athletic, has some start under his belt, put in a very difficult situation last year -- learning no-huddle -- last second cut of Langston Walker -- all sorts of other injuries on the line -- 2 other rookie starters -- starting 5 had 0 pre-season games under their belt -- firing OC at start of season with Van Pelt thrown in -- new coaching staff seems to be thinking well of him despite having no ties to a 7th rounder they didn't draft I'm sure I could add more if I thought about it some more. His "upside" seems remarkable, we should be excited about how much he'll improve his second year, but everyone seems to be down on him. I don't know jack about being an offensive linemen and have reviewed no tape of his body of work, so if anyone can explain to me why we're negative about Bell, but ga-ga over the "upside" of a bunch of others, who are backups here or elsewhere I would appreciate it I was going to give examples when I wrote what I understand for upside, Bell and Peters were the two that I thought off. Bell still has upside no matter how bad a year he had last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sllib olaffub Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I think the reason so many people get down on Bell is because they want to see him play more - like Hardy - they've got the physical measurables that should equate to excellence on the field, but they just haven't maximized their skills. If we could see Bell practice, and have the coaches and teammates say, "Wow, this guy is good", then we wouldn't necessarily feel like we're cheap when we don't go after guys like McNiel and Gaither. As it is right now, the prospect of Bell being our opening day starter is all very much a mystery. And, I think, people see long injuries and they assume a player is weak, or lacking in motivation, mental toughness. As for development - with guys like Maybin and Bell, their second years should show us something - if we are in the same place with them after this season, then I think you have to look to replace them, so you're not depending on them. I think that is a big difference between good teams and bad teams with "upside" and "potential" - namely, good teams have starters in place that have proven capable of starting - they don't have a lot of guys that need to immediately live up to potential, or that are being rushed into developing. They get playing time as they can handle it, and in the meantime can learn from the veterans ahead of them. In situations like ours - we're depending on some players to play at a high level without having had the time to develop, and so we're naturally going to see growing pains, and we've just got to hope that early setbacks don't damage their confidence and hinder their development - like, I think, happened to Edwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts