• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Dri 2.0

ark steel said:
I tried to use profootballreference to get you a list of the players drafted between picks 92 and 102 that have had a season with over 500 yards (regardless of # of TD's). Dri doesn't show up on the list even though I chose to sort with Total Yards from Scrimmage >=0. I will keep working at it. One of my restrictions had to be wrong.
Click to expand...

See if this works, although I know of one flaw:

Drafted between 1992-2015 at picks 92-102.
Had a season with >= .1 Yards from Scrimmage (rushing and receiving). This picks up QBs, too, and, maybe some defenders that had a rushing play. When I try to select only positions, I get no results. For this purpose only checking those with >=.1 Yard from scrimmage should give us something to go by.

That gives us 328 seasons played by players that fit the above (i.e. if a player had 5 of those seasons, he appears on the list 5 times). There are 102 of those seasons where a player that fit the above description had more than 500 yards from Scrimmage.

http://pfref.com/tiny/NopIt

Those that had 1 or more 500 yard seasons.

http://pfref.com/tiny/1vq8O
 
As to the logic of keeping him instead of letting him go. Players get picked and do not measure up to the goals that were set for them frequently. It might make sense to give a guy more chances if he was injured and unable to hit what were the goals set for him. If on the other hand he is just not developing physically and his skill set to hit those goals he should be let go. Dri was here one year and came from a small school so might need more development than some bigger school players. We have Laundry Jones who right now looks like a waste of a roster spot. Jarvis has not been setting things on fire either but has also been hampered by injury. Spence is a good example of a kid that many thought might not walk again but has come back to be at least a contributor.

For many of these guys the roster size limit will be their biggest test. It will come down to a who do you keep question between the guys mentioned and the new guys on the roster. They may not be able to answer the question of can they play at the nfl level with this team if there are players available that can fill more roles or better fill the ones they are being considered for. I suspect that the roster may have more talent than available positions for a change and that is a good thing. It may be the end of the small role player and result in the retention of the players that can play a larger role (sorry dri).

Now with that said I hope dri does become able to do the things at the NFL level he did at college, I just don't think it will happen.
 
yeah... Landry ******* Jones.
everyone ******* up a ******* storm over Dri... but if Landry ******* Jones comes into a game, it's because Ben and Bruce are completely ****** up and the game is 100% lost.
THAT is a wasted roster spot and a wasted pick.
 
Superman said:
yeah... Landry ******* Jones.
Click to expand...
Few people know this but Landry Jones is actually on the cusp of making a huge splash. Landry is like fine wine, just needed a few years to come of age. He's been waiting in the wings, studying Ben up close and is now ready to pounce and take over at a moment's notice. It's been kept under wraps, but camp observers have noticed a strange twitch in Ben's body language when Jones is around; a nervous laugh, a quick glance over his shoulder. It's definitely in the air, it's palpable, there's no denying it. The secret will soon be out, Landry Jones is inching closer and closer to Ben and will be given a fair shot to supplant him in training camp. Zinging perfect spirals all over the field, with plenty of air beneath his deep balls, he's shown a tremendous amount of improvement. Putting in extra time in the film room while also completing three full-distance IronMan triathlons in May has put a bounce in his step and given him some newfound swag. Jones has even been seen walking around the practice fields with a psuedo-gangster limp, rarely taking off his shades. The receivers are mostly intimidated by his presence, unsure of how to react with their allegiences to Ben. But make no mistake, given a strong pre-season performance, Jones may open the year as the starting QB, to the dismay of fans and pundits alike.

:victorious:
 
Last edited:
Tibs said:
Few people know this but Landry Jones is actually on the cusp of making a huge splash. Landry is like fine wine, just needed a few years to come of age. He's been waiting in the wings, studying Ben up close and is now ready to pounce and take over at a moment's notice. It's been kept under wraps, but camp observers have noticed a strange twitch in Ben's body language when Jones is around; a nervous laugh, a quick glance over his shoulder. It's definitely in the air, it's palpable, there's no denying it. The secret will soon be out, Landry Jones is inching closer and closer to Ben and will be given a fair shot to supplant him in training camp. Zinging perfect spirals all over the field, with plenty of air beneath his deep balls, he's shown a tremendous amount of improvement. Putting in extra time in the film room while also completing three full-distance IronMan triathlons in May has put a bounce in his step and given him some newfound swag. Jones has even been seen walking around the practice fields with a psuedo-gangster limp, rarely taking off his shades. The receivers are mostly intimidated by his presence, unsure of how to react with their allegiences to Ben. But make no mistake, given a strong pre-season performance, Jones may open the year as the starting QB, to the dismay of fans and pundits alike.

:victorious:
Click to expand...

So, proof that liberalism does rot the brain....
 
Landry is like fine wine,
Click to expand...

mad-dog-20-20.jpg
 
Tibs said:
Few people know this but Landry Jones is actually on the cusp of making a huge splash. Landry is like fine wine, just needed a few years to come of age. He's been waiting in the wings, studying Ben up close and is now ready to pounce and take over at a moment's notice. It's been kept under wraps, but camp observers have noticed a strange twitch in Ben's body language when Jones is around; a nervous laugh, a quick glance over his shoulder. It's definitely in the air, it's palpable, there's no denying it. The secret will soon be out, Landry Jones is inching closer and closer to Ben and will be given a fair shot to supplant him in training camp. Zinging perfect spirals all over the field, with plenty of air beneath his deep balls, he's shown a tremendous amount of improvement. Putting in extra time in the film room while also completing three full-distance IronMan triathlons in May has put a bounce in his step and given him some newfound swag. Jones has even been seen walking around the practice fields with a psuedo-gangster limp, rarely taking off his shades. The receivers are mostly intimidated by his presence, unsure of how to react with their allegiences to Ben. But make no mistake, given a strong pre-season performance, Jones may open the year as the starting QB, to the dismay of fans and pundits alike.

:victorious:
Click to expand...

I'm thinking L. Jones is Cliff Stoudt v. 2.0, i.e. spends 8 years on the sidelines holding the clipboard and sucks when he finally gets into a regular season game.
 
Ron Burgundy said:
I'm thinking L. Jones is Cliff Stoudt v. 2.0, i.e. spends 8 years on the sidelines holding the clipboard and sucks when he finally gets into a regular season game.
Click to expand...

cmon mannnnnnnnnnnnn








we seen him in preseason we don't need to wait 8 years to know he sucks

:)
 
Cope said:
The thing holding back Archer is not his potential or talent level, it's finding ways to utilize him. There was an article earlier this year about Haley utilizing him 5-7 times per game. It's creating plays to utilize his speed and explosiveness that will hopefully lead to points. A failure to utilize him at all would be the only coaching fail.
Click to expand...


I hope those touches equate to something....... If the "D" can key on his entry into the game, the touches may not equare to much. But that also means, the "D" has to account for him, allowing someone else an oppertunity. I'd take that to a degree.



Salute the nation
 
Cope said:
The thing holding back Archer is not his potential or talent level, it's finding ways to utilize him. There was an article earlier this year about Haley utilizing him 5-7 times per game. It's creating plays to utilize his speed and explosiveness that will hopefully lead to points. A failure to utilize him at all would be the only coaching fail.
Click to expand...

I don't like that thinking.

And I'm not a big fan of players that need an exceptionally different playbook or play design to make them productive. If a player can't play within the basic parameters of the offense and current playbook, then you shouldn't have drafted him. I don't mind EXTRA plays to use a player's talent, but if he can't at least do the basics, then he's not worth it.

I have plenty of issues with coaches and how they use players around the league. I see tons of square pegs in round holes. Some have happened (and are happening) here in my opinion with how we select linebackers (I still think Timmons, Shazier and Spence would all be better suited as weak side 4-3 "WILL" backers or at least a 4-3 system). I still think Tomlin is too quick to pull running backs after a fumble and wasn't really willing to run some of the younger running backs (before Bell) into that tired, 4th quarter zone (rushes 20+ when the thinking stops and instincts takes over). Ziggy Hood was never a 3-4 DE.

But that is different than Dri Archer and how the coaches "use him". Archer has to be a threat out of the base offense FIRST. If he's not than teams will know only to look for "special" plays when he is in the game. That's not good coaching in my opinion.
 
fogdoctor said:
So 3 people on the wagon.

With the speed on the outside and when Bell comes back I think he is going to get his chances. Plus, I think our D is going to suck so we will have to score a lot.

Archer: 500yds. 4 total TDs. I already staked claim to those numbers a while ago.
Click to expand...

McCluster seems to have gotten between 280-500+ rushing/receiving yards per year, so 500+ isn't out of the realm of possibility. McCluster never produced those TD's though (avg 1/year) while averaging a couple of fumbles/year. His best years were 46-53 receptions (2.8-3.3/game). If Haley intends to have Dri in for 5-7 plays per game, then about half would have to go him to expect similar results.

I'm excited to see what Dri can do when given a chance.
 
deljzc said:
I don't like that thinking.

And I'm not a big fan of players that need an exceptionally different playbook or play design to make them productive. If a player can't play within the basic parameters of the offense and current playbook, then you shouldn't have drafted him. I don't mind EXTRA plays to use a player's talent, but if he can't at least do the basics, then he's not worth it.

I have plenty of issues with coaches and how they use players around the league. I see tons of square pegs in round holes. Some have happened (and are happening) here in my opinion with how we select linebackers (I still think Timmons, Shazier and Spence would all be better suited as weak side 4-3 "WILL" backers or at least a 4-3 system). I still think Tomlin is too quick to pull running backs after a fumble and wasn't really willing to run some of the younger running backs (before Bell) into that tired, 4th quarter zone (rushes 20+ when the thinking stops and instincts takes over). Ziggy Hood was never a 3-4 DE.

But that is different than Dri Archer and how the coaches "use him". Archer has to be a threat out of the base offense FIRST. If he's not than teams will know only to look for "special" plays when he is in the game. That's not good coaching in my opinion.
Click to expand...

And that's where we differ. There are scat backs in the league that have been utilized at multiple positions for specific plays and have been very successful in that role. I keep bringing up Metcalf for a reason. That's the type of effectiveness I'd like to see out of a player that isn't in the base offense. Cribbs was used the same way at multiple positions on offense with no starting role. If we have an explosive player, I want to see him play, and it's the coach's job to utilize him effectively.
 
Vader said:
Unless you post it nobody will say a word. They'll all fall back on the "He was really a 4th round pick and isn't a big deal". Just like what happened when Worilds didn't blow up last year. How many people on here said "He'll be great once he starts full time". Now you can't find them anywhere.
Click to expand...

Like how many people who ripped Sanders when the Steelers wanted to keep him are commenting on his season last year?
 
obxsteeler said:
Like how many people who ripped Sanders when the Steelers wanted to keep him are commenting on his season last year?
Click to expand...

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Why should I comment on how he is doing with Peyton Manning when my entire issue with him had to do with the Steelers willingness to allow him to leave after one year? IF the Steelers wanted to keep him then fine but to give away a 3rd round pick for just one season makes no sense.

So I guess you agree with renting him for a 3rd round pick for a year? You know they could have resigned him right?
 
Vader said:
The two aren't mutually exclusive. Why should I comment on how he is doing with Peyton Manning when my entire issue with him had to do with the Steelers willingness to allow him to leave after one year? IF the Steelers wanted to keep him then fine but to give away a 3rd round pick for just one season makes no sense.

So I guess you agree with renting him for a 3rd round pick for a year? You know they could have resigned him right?
Click to expand...

Hopefully we can get this going again....... Holding onto Sanders or letting him go for a 3rd without any real depth behind him.
We also can throw in here how lousy our drafting under Tombert has been.(can we really trust them to use that extra 3rd with success? Heck. Probably would of drafted some 4 - 3 DE or something.)....well sometimes you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. And in this case they surely did fail.
 
stillwright said:
Hopefully we can get this going again....... Holding onto Sanders or letting him go for a 3rd without any real depth behind him.
We also can throw in here how lousy our drafting under Tombert has been.(can we really trust them to use that extra 3rd with success? Heck. Probably would of drafted some 4 - 3 DE or something.)....well sometimes you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. And in this case they surely did fail.
Click to expand...

I have no issues with Tombert drafting WRs. They seem to do pretty well with that. My issue was that brining Sanders back for one year made no sense. Either sign him long term or get the 3rd round pick. Remember this 3rd round pick isn't like comp. picks. It is the 3rd pats** pick and can be traded. Matching the pats** offer and brining Sanders back for one year made no sense to me. If you think Sanders is great then sign him. If not then let him go.

Also in 2013 Sanders caught 44 passes for 600 yards and 1 TD. Many on here think Wheaton isn't doing well at all and he had the exact same numbers last year (his 2nd) with one more TD as Sanders had in 2013 which was his 3rd year. And Wheaton started 11 games last year. Hell Sander didn't start 11 games until his 5th season which was last year.
 
goddamn wont this horse die?

it's been said time and time again, that if we'd NOT have brought back Sanders, our WRs would have been very inexperienced.
 
Bryant was inexperienced last year and seemed to do ok. Experience at being mediocre is not all that valuable, he did not become good till he left this team and has not been good for an extended time yet.
 
Superman said:
goddamn wont this horse die?

it's been said time and time again, that if we'd NOT have brought back Sanders, our WRs would have been very inexperienced.
Click to expand...

So what? You act as if last year's group wasn't inexperienced. They had Brown, Wheaton (who missed almost his entire rookie year), Bryant (rookie), DHB (who started 1 game), Moore (who started 2 games), and J. Brown (2nd year).

In 2013 they had Brown, Cotchery (who had 10 TDs that year), Moye (2nd year), and in both years you have Bell and Miller catching balls.

So how is last year any different? They had more younger guys around last year but Cotchery was the old man around in 2013.
 
That horse might be dead but the whips are still out. With that being said it always seems that the folks that want the discussion to end usually do not have a valid point, there are exceptions but generally the ones that fear facts do not want them brought up.

Ben's first year he was rather inexperienced and the team went 15 and 1, so experience isn't everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top