NoSaint Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 i think it's more about the number of snaps than number of games as a rookie. Kiko played like 100% of defensive snaps as a rookie and he did get worn down by the last qtr or so of the year. That could happen to Ragland but as you mentioned he's a guy who has played 2-3 extra college games the last two years Hes also bigger, no? Kiko was on the small we de taking big NFL hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Is that still true? Most major college teams are now playing 14-15 games by the time it's all said and done. My guess is yes, but for different reasons. When these players graduate or announce they're going pro, they're put under the most intense regiment of honing skills to show off at the combine or their schools' pro day. Relentless work on molding their speech patterns, what & how to say everything perfectly correct -and how to sell it; creating an adult persona they've likely never considered in their neophyte adult life while completely undoing every characteristic they've shown since being a 'Can't Miss' High school prospect 5 years earlier; a level of PT they've never endured to showcase their physique for the 'Meat Show'. Virtually a non-stop 'professional' education curriculum aimed at garnering their (and their agents') maximum financial possibility. Many observers overlook or are unaware of this radical commitment and respect the toll it inevitably takes on the players. They'll have never experienced it before and won't again -at the same degree. For a semi-comparison, I spend 12 hrs a day sitting at a comfortable desk staring at triple monitor screens reviewing nuclear documents. I barely get up to go to the breakroom. Cushy? Yes, but I'm exhausted at days end ( and can barely focus my eyes..) Anyway, I'm convinced these aspects -more than additional games played/Travel/Team commitments outside of the gridiron, etc. play a major role in a drop off of on-field performance for many/most rookies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 For a semi-comparison, I spend 12 hrs a day sitting at a comfortable desk staring at triple monitor screens reviewing nuclear documents. I barely get up to go to the breakroom. Cushy? Yes, but I'm exhausted at days end ( and can barely focus my eyes..) Anyway, I'm convinced these aspects -more than additional games played/Travel/Team commitments outside of the gridiron, etc. play a major role in a drop off of on-field performance for many/most rookies. While in college I worked construction in the blazing heat of the south during the summers. The kind of heat where people black out standing on the roof of a half built apartment. Shattered arms and legs. After college I took my first job in banking. It was apples and oranges, but in many ways it was far more taxing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 thinking on this finally. he will make a big stop at least every 3rd game on a 3rd down to stop a 3 point attempt.... sounds reasonable. but that would be 1 ppg. a run stuffer can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent 91 Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 We went from 54 sacks to 21 in Rex's first year. I'm a strictly wait and see method with Rex. I still dont get how thats possible. How do you take a team... almost the exact samw line up and cant produce even half of the previous year sack total Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I still dont get how thats possible. How do you take a team... almost the exact samw line up and cant produce even half of the previous year sack total Mind boggling stuff indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsmovinup Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) Some analytics guy on WGR today said he had Ragland as a sixth rounder. Im not saying I agree with that and I thought the guy was nuts at first but he did have some interesting thoughts on analyzing players. Given that the failure rate is about fifty percent in the first round NFL scouting clearly has plenty of room for improvement. One thing I didn't hear him address was players and the specific system they might be used in being a factor. That matters and it sounds like Ragland is a great fit for this particular scheme. Well find out come the fall. My gut tells me Ragland will do just fine. Edited May 5, 2016 by Billsmovinup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 rex was able to accomplish a 7 point swing last year on D, so maybe he'll do it again....😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 A 7 PPG swing on one side of the ball would be ridiculous! However, if all they do is convert 1 TD into a FG, that is a 4 point improvement. And if the D improves and they improve field position and allow the Offense to score 1 more FG a game, then combined we have a 7 PPG swing for the team. Where does a 4PPG improvement on D and a 3PPG improvement on O put us? edit: Answering my own question... A 3PPG improvement on O would give us 26.7 PPG, and be the #4 scoring offense. A 4PPG improvement on D would give us 18.4PPG and the #4 scoring defense. That's playoffs guaranteed, if not a Super Bowl appearance. We were one of the worst teams in giving up 3rd and long (and 3rd downs in general).....If they can improve on that and get off the field, that swing (3-4 points) will come. The same goes with the offense. If they can improve on the 3rd downs, then the offense stays on the field and that will be the difference in winning against Brady Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Obviously, Brandt thought The Bills scoring defense was worse than it was at 22.4 ppg. He probably was thinking of the Jints who were in the 27 ppg range. Once somebody whispered in his ear that a seven point swing would make them the second best scoring defense, he edited his comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 It's just cool to see people go overboard praising the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Obviously, Brandt thought The Bills scoring defense was worse than it was at 22.4 ppg. He probably was thinking of the Jints who were in the 27 ppg range. Once somebody whispered in his ear that a seven point swing would make them the second best scoring defense, he edited his comment.It would have made them the best scoring defense by 2 points!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I still dont get how thats possible. How do you take a team... almost the exact samw line up and cant produce even half of the previous year sack total the curse. simple enough. do not minimize this very real and tangible feature of the equation that is the Bills history. It has been lifted now after all these years. Look forward. Live long and prosper It's just cool to see people go overboard praising the Bills. makes me feel icky. did i black out again? I need the negativity to feed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Go home, Gil Brandt. You're drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts