Steelers select Dri Archer in Round 3

[deljzc]

No one is saying he's going to suck.

All we're saying is the CHANCE he underachieves is probably greater than a normal #97 pick in an NFL draft. We base this on historical data of other smaller "athletes" that don't quite have positions or places on an NFL field. There are always EXCEPTIONS. Hell, life is interesting because of exceptions.

In my opinion, when judging the correctness of a decision it is not the result, but the logic, analysis and conclusions that go INTO the decision that we should base history on. Every decision, right and wrong, don't always lead to the best/worst outcomes. Some good decisions lead to bad outcomes. Some bad decisions lead to good outcomes. Too many here want to concentrate on the result and not the logic and use of information that lead to a decision in the first place.

 

[FordFairLane]

Parker was bigger stronger and broke tackles, but he still got hurt and never cam back from it. Size doesn't prevent injury. Hope the kid works out.

Parker did not break a lot of tackles. He was a speed back and when that left so did his nfl career.

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

How do people not grasp that the real criticism is not Archer himself, but that the Steelers chose to address a minor, possibly non-existant need instead of addressing real needs at CB, pass rush, and WR.

Let's assume Archer is Devin Hester or even Darren Sproles. Would you have traded the 3rd round pick for either of them before the draft?

I would not. Because they would still be just role players on the steelers and they have real holes to fill.

WR was a big need. Let's face it, they got lucky that Bryant was available in round 4. CB was a big need. They spent a 5th rounder on CB. They should have taken 2 of each.

Here's who they could have drafted instead of Archer
Jaylen Watkins CB Florida
Bashaud Breeland CB Clemson
Ross Cockrell CB Duke - the steelers visited with him and supposedly were very high on him.

Now you have 2 CBs in camp and the odds of one of them being good enough to play as a rookie is greatly increased. The Steelers have drafted late round CBs

Look at 2011. The Steelers drafted Curtis Brown in Rd 3 and Cortez Allen in Rd 4. Brown has been terrible and Allen looks like a player if he can stay healthy. Glad the Steelers didn't just assume Brown was all they needed.

The same thing happened in 2009 when the Steelers doubled up with Keenan Lewis and Joe Burnett. 1 hit, 1 miss.

Now look at the track record of Tomlin's dtraft where he takes just 1 CB
2013 - Terry Hawthorne RD 5 - cut
2012 - Terrence Frederick Rd 7 - cut
2010 - Crezdon Butler RD 5 - cut
2007 - William Gay Rd 5.

Do you see why many people wanted the steelers to double dip at CB? Because their track record isn't very good.

 

[t-man]

When did I say anything different? I think he'll struggle to dress at times, and at others be an oft-injured KR who struggles to find a role on offense. That's how I've felt since the draft; not sure I've wavered at all.



I guess, if that gets your dick hard. But I'm not attempting to tell the future. I think all of those PICKS would have been much better, smarter PICKS than Archer. I think that, as of May 2014, they have better futures and more potential value. At this stage, all these guys are are picks. Potential future chess pieces. We don't even know what they look like in shoulder pads. ****, Darren Sharper was a serial rapist and nobody knew it. All I have to judge these guys by is some film clips and scouting reports. The reason I'm so down on the Archer picks is because he doesn't look 50/50 like the rest of these guys; he looks like the longest of longshots. But I don't know. Maybe he throws on 20 lbs of muscle and turns into Roger Craig, it's just historically unprecedented and flies in the face of common sense, so I think the pick was stupid.

As to whether they pan out better than Archer, I don't think I care nearly as much as you do. Archer's the Steeler, and he's the one I care about.

Whoah there ************, now just hold on a second. I have said, SEVERAL times these guys are all scrubs to me, I don't follow a ******* LICK of college ball, so on draft day these are all happy surprises to me. I do recall having some reservations about some based on some things I've seen here in the past, but at the same time, since I don't follow the "practice ball" as I call it, I don't have ANY preconceived notions about these guys. What I get are measureables from the combine, the coaches input, what I see from the draftnicks, and what I observe from the highlight reels. That's it. So yeah, you can ******* go on and on about "What gets my dick hard" but really, what annoys the everloving **** out of me is some ******* asshat coming on here two years from now and just jizzing all over his ******* keyboard about how he just ******* KNEW guy a, b, or c would be better than the guy we took, when it happened. Now, oddly, we almose NEVER see a ******* post to verify this, because ****, it's easy to say some ******* team should have taken Tom Brady before round 6 after he's won a few superbowls, isn't it?

So, yeah, even a blind squirell, nut, and all that, but the bottom line is this will be nice, because 2 years from now, we'll see how ******* good you were, nostradomus. It won't be based on 2 years from now's looking back, it will be based on N O W. See how that's different?

THAT makes me happy, because it's rare that we have such chances to see these things.

Joe

 

[t-man]

How do people not grasp that the real criticism is not Archer himself, but that the Steelers chose to address a minor, possibly non-existant need instead of addressing real needs at CB, pass rush, and WR.

Let's assume Archer is Devin Hester or even Darren Sproles. Would you have traded the 3rd round pick for either of them before the draft?

I would not. Because they would still be just role players on the steelers and they have real holes to fill.

WR was a big need. Let's face it, they got lucky that Bryant was available in round 4. CB was a big need. They spent a 5th rounder on CB. They should have taken 2 of each.

Here's who they could have drafted instead of Archer
Jaylen Watkins CB Florida
Bashaud Breeland CB Clemson
Ross Cockrell CB Duke - the steelers visited with him and supposedly were very high on him.

Now you have 2 CBs in camp and the odds of one of them being good enough to play as a rookie is greatly increased. The Steelers have drafted late round CBs

Look at 2011. The Steelers drafted Curtis Brown in Rd 3 and Cortez Allen in Rd 4. Brown has been terrible and Allen looks like a player if he can stay healthy. Glad the Steelers didn't just assume Brown was all they needed.

The same thing happened in 2009 when the Steelers doubled up with Keenan Lewis and Joe Burnett. 1 hit, 1 miss.

Now look at the track record of Tomlin's dtraft where he takes just 1 CB
2013 - Terry Hawthorne RD 5 - cut
2012 - Terrence Frederick Rd 7 - cut
2010 - Crezdon Butler RD 5 - cut
2007 - William Gay Rd 5.

Do you see why many people wanted the steelers to double dip at CB? Because their track record isn't very good.

So, let me see if I have this right, because some of the previous Tomlin corner picks didn't work out, we should pick a whole bunch of em, regardless of how good they are, just to be safe? Am I ******* reading that right? I mean, seriously? Jeezuz. Sometimes I think this **** can't POSSIBLY get any dumber, and then a post like this comes along, and YEP, it does.

Joe

 

[keslerclan]

I have already stated that I would have taken CB with the first 2 picks several times. I disagree with the pick BUT like TMC wasn't 'on board' w the Shazier pick (at first),, after listening to their logic and mindset as to why they went w Shazier, he started coming around. I'm not any different on the Archer pick. Admittedly, I didn't look at all I could have w Archer's available tape BECAUSE I never expected the pick. After throwing a complete , I listened to what their thinking was, looked at all the stuff I hadn't previously and determined that he has some of the skills that a McCluster and Tavon Austin have without the refinement. Is it worth a late 3rd? Not really BUT it could be.

I would rather have taken someone who projected better to our scheme but I didn't make the pick and he IS on our team. Sure, as fans we have to prepare for the worst and hope for the best BUT I don't see anything about the kid that says he cannot be effective in the way they describe. I think he is head and shoulders a better "jack of all trades" player than any of the 'scatbacks' we have had BUT I still would rather have had Abbredaris who could be AB 2. I do not. IMO honest opinion, I think he could be an 'added dimension' and a game changer if used correctly. Will they use him correctly? Who knows? I think he could be a dangerous weapon IF he is not trotted out onto the field for his obligatory 'gadget play' or 2. I GET WHY they thought he could be special just like a bunch of other players that washed out or became famous despite their obvious limitations.

Like I said before, if he gets 1-2 runs and 1-2 targets per game, hopefully that means he's on the field for more than 2-4 plays or he will not likely succeed. He doesn't NEED the element of surprise but it would help us NOT to 'project' our play before we run it.

 

[keslerclan]

No one is saying he's going to suck.

All we're saying is the CHANCE he underachieves is probably greater than a normal #97 pick in an NFL draft. We base this on historical data of other smaller "athletes" that don't quite have positions or places on an NFL field. There are always EXCEPTIONS. Hell, life is interesting because of exceptions.

In my opinion, when judging the correctness of a decision it is not the result, but the logic, analysis and conclusions that go INTO the decision that we should base history on. Every decision, right and wrong, don't always lead to the best/worst outcomes. Some good decisions lead to bad outcomes. Some bad decisions lead to good outcomes. Too many here want to concentrate on the result and not the logic and use of information that lead to a decision in the first place.

BTW, del, I wish I could have said MOST of this ^^^. Sure, it's safe to say "not everyone is saying he's going to suck" but a bit different to say "no one...". Also, while any idiot with an analytical sense about him can see that the deck is stacked against Archer (myself included), it behooves me to see 'making up extra ****, ghosts (things that are not objective sounding) about his game. IMO, calling him a part-time, fumble-prone, unskilled speedster is ignoring what the kid actually did at KSt. He looks more polished as a route runner than some of the 'size queens' in this draft by far. he has better skills as a receiver than Mike "one trick" Wallace by far. So much to say that IF he were Wallace's size...he would be a phenom. The kid did not receive much in the way of 'higher learning' when it came to the nuances of his game...because he didn't need it. Name 10 players in the NFL that has scored every 10 times he touched the ball. That cannot be ignored.

Using logic and statistical analysis we can say that his work is cut out for him. Do you really need to go that far? A statistician could also find that bigger player are more likely to be injured in a collision sport than smaller ones too. Mass x acceleration...and all that jive. Some of the top all-purpose yardage guys 'make it' (Antonio Brown) and some don't (Tony Sands); some are so screwed up that the jury is still out (Damaris Johnson-Phi) and some others who are small have found a home (McCluster, Ace Sanders, Tavon Austin). The kid could be the next big thing or injured without ever playing a meaningful game. NOTHING in his resume is closely similar to another player. He's faster and shiftier than anyone, period. He is smallish like this guy or that. He catches passes and runs routes and has as many receptions (or more) in college than many guys drafted before him (w or w/out stature issues). He has more route-running experience than Bryant (and more receptions) yet...Bryant is accepted as an experienced route runner and WR where Archer is not. Why? because he is small and has limited upside whereas Bryant is BIG and has unlimited upside. I get it. I promise you this...MANY more BIG men failed to make it in the NFL than tiny ones. WHY? Because 6'-2" **** CBs get taken before talented 5'-8" ones. Lazy 6'-3" receivers with calf-brains get drafted before speedy, smarter 5'-9" ones. Most of the time, the odds prevail...that's why the bank wins. What about guys like DeSean Jackson who, at less than 170# has found success (even w **** for brains). Archer isn't an Academic wash-out like he has been portrayed here by some either. He was a college stud who took liberties w his attendance. When he made up a course he hadn't finished previously, unbeknownst to him, it wasn't counted and he was declared academically ineligible. He wasn't a stupid kid. Can't fix stupid. He was fixed and never had the issue again.

I say it again, while I wouldn't have done the same w the pick, I think he has a better chance to make it (as far as what they expected w the pick) than most. This is based upon his skillset which is beyond speed. He would have been a good player w McCluster's speed; he has much more. He would be a decent, albeit small target as a slot man without his speed (we just paid a guy his size to be a slot WR who has little wiggle, size or speed AND signed him to a 2/yr 3mil contract).

 

[Tibs]

Good read for our Archer-challenged members:

Steelers Dri Archer will line up in multiple positions, creating conflict on opposing defenses
http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...teelers-dri-archer-position-role-offense-2014

The question is, how will the Steelers use that speed?

"Playing in the backfield, playing some slot, playing some H-back, playing some fullback and helping the special teams," Archer told Robinson at the Steelers' rookie minicamp Friday.

So everywhere, basically.

The notion of the 173-pound Archer lining up ahead of Le'Veon Bell in a power-I formation is comical and seemingly more fit for an experimental formation in Madden 2014, but the idea is more using him to divide and pressure defenses. Typically, a larger linebacker is going to have responsibility for the fullback, when one is on the field. Same would go for an H-back. The presence of a player fitting approximately none of the stereotypical traits of an NFL fullback will force opposing defenses into conflict.

These kinds of things are paramount to the team's continued offensive success, whether Archer gets the ball or not. Simply stated, opposing defenses will have to either dedicate one of their fast players to covering Archer, or they'll have to show a straight zone defense. Whichever path they choose, quarterback Ben Roethlisberger will see that in his presnap read, and can choose whichever play will put the most conflict on the defense.

Call Archer a decoy, but it's more like the Steelers' version of an option offense. Putting Archer on the field in a no-huddle situation could create significant mismatch advantages when facing teams with shallow defensive personnel to handle that kind of speed.

 

[bermudasteel]

How many pages was Jarvis' thread last year?

I wonder if Korky got a 40 page tribute when we signed him way back when...

 

[bermudasteel]

Good read for our Archer-challenged members:

Steelers Dri Archer will line up in multiple positions, creating conflict on opposing defenses
http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...teelers-dri-archer-position-role-offense-2014

The question is, how will the Steelers use that speed?

"Playing in the backfield, playing some slot, playing some H-back, playing some fullback and helping the special teams," Archer told Robinson at the Steelers' rookie minicamp Friday.

So everywhere, basically.

The notion of the 173-pound Archer lining up ahead of Le'Veon Bell in a power-I formation is comical and seemingly more fit for an experimental formation in Madden 2014, but the idea is more using him to divide and pressure defenses. Typically, a larger linebacker is going to have responsibility for the fullback, when one is on the field. Same would go for an H-back. The presence of a player fitting approximately none of the stereotypical traits of an NFL fullback will force opposing defenses into conflict.

These kinds of things are paramount to the team's continued offensive success, whether Archer gets the ball or not. Simply stated, opposing defenses will have to either dedicate one of their fast players to covering Archer, or they'll have to show a straight zone defense. Whichever path they choose, quarterback Ben Roethlisberger will see that in his presnap read, and can choose whichever play will put the most conflict on the defense.

Call Archer a decoy, but it's more like the Steelers' version of an option offense. Putting Archer on the field in a no-huddle situation could create significant mismatch advantages when facing teams with shallow defensive personnel to handle that kind of speed.

And some here think we're the Steelers of the 70's still...

 

[bleeds]

As for his size. Yes, NFL players pack on weight. But presumably, all or most of them do. If we're going to assume Archer will put on a little weight, then we need to assume Devin Hester and Dexter McCluster did as well, and stop comparing their combine weights. Common sense dictates he will always be at least about 20 pounds behind the 8-ball. As for Archer's potential to add mass, I have plenty of doubt. He's a small-framed guy who's already 23. Dunno about you, but I was done growing at 23. All the lifting in the world wasn't going to make my frame get longer or my shoulders more broad and able to pack on 15 pounds of lean muscle mass. I think it's more than safe to assume his best-case scenario is to play around 5'7 180, and nobody that size cuts in on the next level. Some guys with similar builds may become good kick returners for a few years before they inevitably snap in half; even then, I don't value special teams quite as much as some do. And kickoff returns are being phased out of the league; they might be completely gone within a few years.

What, did you smoke and eat McDonalds?!?
An Athlete's physical peak is normally around 28, and they can still add lean muscle mass well into their 30's.
And all "weight" isn't the same either.
I'm gonna assume you are as expert at athletic weight training as you are at draft analysis.
Fact is, very few, even professional trainers, know what they are doing, and definitely the kind of weight you want to add to an OL vs a RB/WR is different, but TODAY'S NFL sure has a lot more guys with frames in the 5'8 180 lb range that are being utilized in a myriad of ways, including several on our own team, that have miraculously not snapped in half yet.

Again, this comparison to the HISTORY of the NFL RB at under 180 lbs is also way off target.
Don't know if you guys noticed, but the game has changed Dramatically in the last few years; offenses are wide open, rules restrict the D and how they can hardly touch a guy past the LOS anymore, let alone hit or tackle them like they used to. Don't know if you noticed the myriad of rules they are putting in to protect the receiver/ball carrier.

And again, we are talking about a 3rd round pick - BARELY a 3rd round pick, as he was a COMP PICK, so he might as well be a(n early) 4th round pick.
The odds of him making it in the NFL - REGARDLESS of size/speed/college production/injury history/etc - are already stacked against him. So, even if he washes out, it doesn't mean he's a bust, he's barely expected to contribute in the NFL anyways.
No reason to get your panties in a bunch because you think he's going to not make it. You're probably right. You've got to also admit that WHOMEVER ELSE they took at this pick was probably not going to make it either, regardless of any of his other measurables.

I say let the kid show what he can do. Get him on the field, he is quick and elusive, something very valuable in today's NFL.
If he doesn't make it to his "second contract" who cares? Neither do hardly any other RBs or WRs taken anywhere in the draft. That's why they have one every year, to get more guys to churn through the meat grinder known as the NFL. They are lucky to get out of the game with a few million in the bank and their body and style of life still maintained.
We will need another set of dudes to entertain us in a few years.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

 

[blitzburghv5]

I get a feeling some forum fans here are wantin to boycott over one goddamn draft pick. I never thought one pick in a 3RD ROUND could be so polarizing....well...yeah i could...only at STEELER NATION.

 

[ianv2012]

I get a feeling some forum fans here are wantin to boycott over one goddamn draft pick. I never thought one pick in a 3RD ROUND could be so polarizing....well...yeah i could...only at STEELER NATION.

this is quite the norm here, lol

 

[CorpusDsteelers]

I'd take a Devon Hester or Sproles for a third round pick!!! Crazy that you would take an unknown CB over a proven nfl player because we have other holes to fill. Maybe is was not luck that Bryant was there but to FO knew he would be and archer would not. Pretty sure they are set at Wr with DHB and lance Moore additions. They most likely are not done adding free agents come June 2nd, waiver wires and camp cuts.

 

[slashsteel]

I think they simply wanted value at the 3rd pick, and wasn't sure Archer gave them that at where he was selected.

I know I wasn't sure.

Mostly based on his small stature. And his last year of college being banged up which would point most people right back to his lack of size.

But yeah the NFL is changing perhaps he can survive long enough to make some plays.

I just would have preferred a few rounds lower in that experiment.

Wish for the best, and root for him to succeed.

But that doesn't change the my idea that they reached for a midget gadget player.

Dri fly fly

hopefully a OH MY

instead of a WHY

hi

 

[TMC]

He catches passes and runs routes and has as many receptions (or more) in college than many guys drafted before him (w or w/out stature issues). He has more route-running experience than Bryant (and more receptions) yet...Bryant is accepted as an experienced route runner and WR where Archer is not. Why? because he is small and has limited upside whereas Bryant is BIG and has unlimited upside. I get it. I promise you this...MANY more BIG men failed to make it in the NFL than tiny ones. WHY? Because 6'-2" **** CBs get taken before talented 5'-8" ones. Lazy 6'-3" receivers with calf-brains get drafted before speedy, smarter 5'-9" ones. Most of the time, the odds prevail...that's why the bank wins.

You continue to state that Archer is a more experienced route runner/receiver than other pure receivers in this draft and that simply is not true. Not at all. It is absolute rubbish. Archer played runingback. He lined up a large majority of the time in the backfield. If you watch full games, not highlights, but full games, he lined up as a receiver or slot player less than 10 times per game. If he lined up out wide, say 10 times per game, for his last three years of college football, say they played 13 games a season, that is 390 times in his career, because he did NOT do it in high school. Bryant started at receiver for Clemson last season. Tajh Boyd threw the football 413 times last year alone. So, Bryant lined up and ran routes 400+ times last season. He acted as a receiver 413 times. The season prior, I am sure while his catch numbers are lower, he lined up and ran routes. He did it two seasons ago. He did it all through high school and pop warner, because he is a receiver.

You also forgive his fumbles and point at some of the most prolific fumblers in the history of the NFL to excuse it, because they made the HOF (in a distant era), then he should be fine too.

Not sure who called him an academic washout, but the one class he did not receive credit for would not have been an issue IF he had enough total credits to qualify. If you are on the razor's edge with credits and lose one, then get suspended, I would not think you are a Mensa candidate. Is your argument really that he failed to work hard enough in college? Okay, point taken. He is smart enough to handle the work, just won't do it.

So, we can all agree he lacks the size desired in the NFL. The differences are, while I state he missed a full season of playing time for academics, you argue he was just too lazy to show up. While I argue he is not a polished route runner and lacks experience in that area, you point towards total catches (even though the majority are dumps out the backfield) as an indicator he is better than pure WRs. While I argue he fumbles too much, you point towards HOFs that also fumbled too much.

Still do not see the positives. I see excuses.

And, the Steeler coaches state he is a RB first that will play various positions, not a slot receiver. If the plan was to get a pure slot WR, why not draft a guy that played WR ALL THE TIME. A guy you do not have to teach routes, nuances of the game, how to make body adjustments to the ball, and all the stuff he does not do.

But, continue to make excuses. Oddly enough, another similarity to Chris Rainey, because if I bring him up right now, people make excuses as to why he is not with the Steelers anymore.

 

[jitter77]

I do not care about the pick either way, but I think the size thing is non-sense. How can people say he was banged up because of his size. How many players get banged up in college or pro. It doesnt matter if your skinny or fat or tall or short. People get hurt playing football. Smaller players kinda bounce around / off more. If you have 2 250 pound guys colliding instead of a 250 vs 170 guy the 2 250 pound situation creates more force. Its also about using and controlling your body. One time when I was still in middle school I weighed about 120. I was playing with the neighbor kids and for some reason the one thought it would be fun to take a full run at me. He was around 160 pounds or so came running at me full speed. I braced myself, lowered my shoulder, and kinda lunged into him when he got to me. I did not budge and he went straight on his *** like a rock. Smaller guys have been small all their life and are used to playing small. Archer's size may limit him in other ways, but I dont think the injury thing is valid.

 

[Stryker]

He is making this team as a RB who can also line up as a WR/KR/PR. The position flexibility is the positive as well has his speed/quicks.

He's not as big or strong as Parker, not doubt there, but he is faster and more elusive in the open field. When you can get defenders to trip over their own feet without touching you, you obviously have a good understanding of momentum vs you own quicks. This is much like in hockey, when you have a talented player with tons of speed, they use the defenders momentum changes to close the gap and gain an advantage to get a shot off or beat the defender with speed. This kid is doing it on FEET not skates. Pretty fun to watch, and I feel he will make NFL players look foolish when he gets into the open field.

I also understand that he is not a polished WR. No argument there. However, he is one of the best pass catching RBs in this draft. He WILL create mismatches in the slot, not by lining up in the slot at the LOS, but by shifting from the backfield to the slot. It's all about position usage and using your player's talents to your advantage. If a LB splits out on this kid, look out. Outside WR can run a 10yd in, and bang Dri is running a fly with the safety having to delay due to the crossing WR. This is where his deep speed can fool and succeed vs a D. Not like Wallace lining up and running against CB & S help, but with understanding the personnel and taking advantage of the mismatches.

Also with his experience as a RB, I'm not in the least bit worried about him being shut down by bump and run or press coverage. I think teams will learn pretty fast that it's different to hit a WR at the LOS than it is to hit a RB at the LOS who is used to contact.

This is a new NFL. It is now built for speed and playmakers. Dri can be a playmaker. I only hope they utilize him correctly as opposed to running Rainey up the middle every time he got the damn ball...

 

[Idioteque]

It's funny to me how many posters are obsessed with how right/wrong other posters are about draft picks. Half this board mocks ESPN and local sportstalk because of the same ****.. then come here to yip yip yip about anybody with an opinion. I have never claimed to be some ******* draft expert or aspiring GM. But now I've got yippers like t-man and Co. wanting to.. what.. track my draft pundit record? LOL. As I said, whatever makes your dick hard. I could not imagine giving less of a **** what the Steeler Nation forums think of my amateur talent evaluation. Especially when they're such cheerleading ******* that they're telling me Colclough and Marcus Gilbert were solid picks, and that it's silly to doubt Dri ******* Archer.

 

[Vader]

I do not care about the pick either way, but I think the size thing is non-sense. How can people say he was banged up because of his size. How many players get banged up in college or pro. It doesnt matter if your skinny or fat or tall or short. People get hurt playing football. Smaller players kinda bounce around / off more. If you have 2 250 pound guys colliding instead of a 250 vs 170 guy the 2 250 pound situation creates more force. Its also about using and controlling your body. One time when I was still in middle school I weighed about 120. I was playing with the neighbor kids and for some reason the one thought it would be fun to take a full run at me. He was around 160 pounds or so came running at me full speed. I braced myself, lowered my shoulder, and kinda lunged into him when he got to me. I did not budge and he went straight on his *** like a rock. Smaller guys have been small all their life and are used to playing small. Archer's size may limit him in other ways, but I dont think the injury thing is valid.

You really think it's worse/ or as bad for a 260 lb guy to hit a 170 lb guy than a 350 lb guy? You get this info from an encounter you had as a kid? There is more to hitting than size but all things being equal the larger guy is going to be hurt less than a smaller guy in an impact of the two. I played football and I can guarantee you I'd much rather hit a small RB than a 350 lb lineman.

Bettis is known for hitting guys so much they didn't want to tackle him anymore. Wonder why? Since they are small than him he should be getting more hurt and avoiding contact right? Isn't that your theory? wow... just wow.

 

[Idioteque]

I get a feeling some forum fans here are wantin to boycott over one goddamn draft pick. I never thought one pick in a 3RD ROUND could be so polarizing....well...yeah i could...only at STEELER NATION.

Yes, we get it. You're the only real fan and I secretly hate the Steelers. Another fine contribution.

I think you'd fit in great on a Jaguars board.

 

[Idioteque]

What, did you smoke and eat McDonalds?!?
An Athlete's physical peak is normally around 28, and they can still add lean muscle mass well into their 30's.
And all "weight" isn't the same either.
I'm gonna assume you are as expert at athletic weight training as you are at draft analysis.
Fact is, very few, even professional trainers, know what they are doing, and definitely the kind of weight you want to add to an OL vs a RB/WR is different, but TODAY'S NFL sure has a lot more guys with frames in the 5'8 180 lb range that are being utilized in a myriad of ways, including several on our own team, that have miraculously not snapped in half yet.

Again, this comparison to the HISTORY of the NFL RB at under 180 lbs is also way off target.
Don't know if you guys noticed, but the game has changed Dramatically in the last few years; offenses are wide open, rules restrict the D and how they can hardly touch a guy past the LOS anymore, let alone hit or tackle them like they used to. Don't know if you noticed the myriad of rules they are putting in to protect the receiver/ball carrier.

And again, we are talking about a 3rd round pick - BARELY a 3rd round pick, as he was a COMP PICK, so he might as well be a(n early) 4th round pick.
The odds of him making it in the NFL - REGARDLESS of size/speed/college production/injury history/etc - are already stacked against him. So, even if he washes out, it doesn't mean he's a bust, he's barely expected to contribute in the NFL anyways.
No reason to get your panties in a bunch because you think he's going to not make it. You're probably right. You've got to also admit that WHOMEVER ELSE they took at this pick was probably not going to make it either, regardless of any of his other measurables.

I say let the kid show what he can do. Get him on the field, he is quick and elusive, something very valuable in today's NFL.
If he doesn't make it to his "second contract" who cares? Neither do hardly any other RBs or WRs taken anywhere in the draft. That's why they have one every year, to get more guys to churn through the meat grinder known as the NFL. They are lucky to get out of the game with a few million in the bank and their body and style of life still maintained.
We will need another set of dudes to entertain us in a few years.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

You did a fantastic job repeating the same vague bullshit from the first 30 pages of "You're not a real fan! Idioteque isn't a professional GM after all!" whining. I'm sure it's a coincidence that nobody of Archer's size or injury history makes much of an impact. I'm sure that, past 23, Archer's frame is continuing to grow and extend, and he'll pack on the (typically required) 15-20 pounds of muscle mass. (Not that he needs it, of course, because we apparently have numerous contributing players his size.) If not, I'm sure that he's The Anointed One who will buck every trend and prove that NFL RBs/WRs don't need to be hit.

 

[Vader]

I don't think Neloms believes the "smaller you are the harder you hit" theory:

 

[TAS]

I do not care about the pick either way, but I think the size thing is non-sense. How can people say he was banged up because of his size. How many players get banged up in college or pro. It doesnt matter if your skinny or fat or tall or short. People get hurt playing football. Smaller players kinda bounce around / off more. If you have 2 250 pound guys colliding instead of a 250 vs 170 guy the 2 250 pound situation creates more force. Its also about using and controlling your body. One time when I was still in middle school I weighed about 120. I was playing with the neighbor kids and for some reason the one thought it would be fun to take a full run at me. He was around 160 pounds or so came running at me full speed. I braced myself, lowered my shoulder, and kinda lunged into him when he got to me. I did not budge and he went straight on his *** like a rock. Smaller guys have been small all their life and are used to playing small. Archer's size may limit him in other ways, but I dont think the injury thing is valid.

You don't care if you're hit by a semi truck or a car as long as you see it coming?

 

[Sarge]

There is some real hate in this thread. Plenty of laughs too. All over a 3rd round pick. 38 pages. LOL.