Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

One of the experts deemed him as not physical enough, so I have no idea. Never seen him play before. So let's not annoint him yet. Hopefully we've found a good player.

Was Macho Harris still available at our 3rd round pick? I think he was. Without doing research i wonder who was graded out better? For us Barnes must have.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

Macho Harris was still there when we picked Barnes

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=Crash;551834]Macho Harris was still there when we picked Barnes[/quote]

Macho Harris was there because he is not as good as Barnes. Pretty simple. Actually he was there for a couple rounds after that as well. Before his injury, Barnes was projected late first/early second.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=tdSKINS1;551719]I'm a huge Virginia Tech fan and follow the ACC very closely. Yes Barnes is solid and can pop you but come on haha your talking about him as if he is Sean Taylor????? You have got to be kidding. He has one good hit against Cal. God knows i hope he is a steal and a stud. But it doesn't matter we should have got the CB from Vanderbilt. Barnes draft grade was 70 the Vandy guy 87. Lets not get to crazy about this guy yet.[/quote]

I'm surprised that you, as a VT fan, didn't compare Barnes to Victor "Macho" Harris. I think that the two of them are similar. I just love the way both of them play the game all out all the time.

I assume the Skins graded Barnes higher because he is a little faster and a better leaper than Harris. I like the Barnes pick, but I would have been just as happy with Macho Harris.

Barnes is a very good player, although he hasn't played as many games as I would have liked. Also, I really believe that he needs to bulk up some to better protect himself against injury. Other than that, he has all the physical tools. The things I like most about him are his strong competitive desire and that fact that he is a ball hawk.

As for the Vandy guy, I don't like the idea of drafting a small corner. The WR's have gotten so big that a small CB has a greater disadvantage than ever before against them.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

Let's not discount the cerebral part of this pick either. He scored a 41 on the Wonderlic and let's face it, that would be an improvement if that part translates to the field over Rogers and Smoot. It's clear from this offseason our #1 goal has been to build an elite level defense and being able to go at least 4 deep at CB is a major part of that.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

I never understood why ppl are so ready to believe so called pundits and completely question the decision-making process our own staff goes through...I'd be willing to bet that if the pundit's every move was scrutinized like our FO, they wouldn't be so credible. They pretty much only deal with hypotheticals and no one really examines their predictions with a fine tooth comb. 3-5 years after a draft, most of the picks are out of sight out of mind so no one bothers to check how these guys performed compared to how they were projected.

Also you never hear people blaming Kiper/McShay/Whoever for "busts". It wasn't just the oakland raiders FO that thought Jamarcus Russell was next coming of Christ. In the same way, why doesn't anyone call out these pundits for not picking the "sleepers". It seems like a FO is scrutinized for missing out on a guy who ends up being an undrafted or late round superstar. No one ever says Kiper really dropped the ball on Terrell Davis or Tom Brady...

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;551869]I never understood why ppl are so ready to believe so called pundits and completely question the decision-making process our own staff goes through...I'd be willing to bet that if the pundit's every move was scrutinized like our FO, they wouldn't be so credible. They pretty much only deal with hypotheticals and no one really examines their predictions with a fine tooth comb. 3-5 years after a draft, most of the picks are out of sight out of mind so no one bothers to check how these guys performed compared to how they were projected.

Also you never hear people blaming Kiper/McShay/Whoever for "busts". It wasn't just the oakland raiders FO that thought Jamarcus Russell was next coming of Christ. In the same way, why doesn't anyone call out these pundits for not picking the "sleepers". It seems like a FO is scrutinized for missing out on a guy who ends up being an undrafted or late round superstar. No one ever says Kiper really dropped the ball on Terrell Davis or Tom Brady...[/quote]

Some people just step up at the next level and there was no reason to believe that they would have. Sometimes the school that someone comes from, their limited play, or even performance just doesn't give analysts something to work with.

In the end, it's the team employing someone, not Kiper, so you take that at worth.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

obviously the FO is accountable to the organization (and by extension to the fans) but what i'm saying is why do so many fans blindly take the word of the "pundits" over the personnel employed to draft specifically for this team. It's like every decision that the FO makes is questioned and by default is categorized as being a bonehead move. But any two-bit sportswriter can give their opinion about a specific move and everyone immediately takes that to be gospel. No one ever questions about whether the pundits are wrong about this guy.

Look at the very least we shouldn't arbitrarily be considering a pick to be a disaster or annointing someone before these guys have played a single down of football. I think the whole concept of grading a draft/pick before seeing the on-field product is preposterous...

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;552043]obviously the FO is accountable to the organization (and by extension to the fans) but what i'm saying is why do so many fans blindly take the word of the "pundits" over the personnel employed to draft specifically for this team. It's like every decision that the FO makes is questioned and by default is categorized as being a bonehead move. But any two-bit sportswriter can give their opinion about a specific move and everyone immediately takes that to be gospel. No one ever questions about whether the pundits are wrong about this guy.

Look at the very least we shouldn't arbitrarily be considering a pick to be a disaster or annointing someone before these guys have played a single down of football. I think the whole concept of grading a draft/pick before seeing the on-field product is preposterous...[/quote]

Good post.

Just to add I think it's safe to say the team scouts know much more about these guys than the so called experts. So yeah it does seem dumb to take the word of some draft expert over the team who has invested hours upon hours on researching these players.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

Barnes first hit might be the one that bounces Tryon to the practice squad, if not off the team altogether. It looks to be a signal from the FO that Tryon really isn't the CB they had hoped.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;552043]obviously the FO is accountable to the organization (and by extension to the fans) but what i'm saying is [B]why do so many fans blindly take the word of the "pundits" over the personnel employed to draft specifically for this team. It's like every decision that the FO makes is questioned and by default is categorized as being a bonehead move.[/B] But any two-bit sportswriter can give their opinion about a specific move and everyone immediately takes that to be gospel. No one ever questions about whether the pundits are wrong about this guy.

Look at the very least we shouldn't arbitrarily be considering a pick to be a disaster or annointing someone before these guys have played a single down of football. I think the whole concept of grading a draft/pick before seeing the on-field product is preposterous...[/quote]

Do better than 76-84 over ten years and maybe the FO won't look so boneheaded.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=tryfuhl;551630]I don't see why not as long as he keeps training well. He's got the type of frame that still needs some filling out it appears.[/quote]


Glad to see the kid is a heavy hitter. Saw a couple Maryland games on TV. He was pretty decent, but like the report said, he is maybe on the lanky side. He will put on weight over the next 2 years. Just stay healthy and he will be a great pickup indeed.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

The Terps defense was not the same after he got injured last season.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=Beemnseven;552204]Do better than 76-84 over ten years and maybe the FO won't look so boneheaded.[/quote]

Cop out answer I think. Our record over the past 10 years is not on the FO alone.

Re: Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover
 

[quote=Ruhskins;552402]Cop out answer I think. Our record over the past 10 years is not on the FO alone.[/quote]

Well you can't say that you lost individual games because of the FO so much, but it's their responsibility to make sure that they have the players and personnel in place to generate wins. It's that way in all of business, which football is one.