30 for 30 Richard Sherman - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman (/thread-6686.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman (/thread-6686.html)
Pages:
1
2
Re: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman - BostonCard - 02-05-2014
(02-05-2014, 03:09 PM)FarmBoy link Wrote:I don't remember him as excellent in 2010, but perhaps I had just developed to strong a physical conditioning response from his first year at CB to clench my sphincter any time the ball was thrown his way. He was definitely better, but I don't remember the excellence.
This site listed him at #23: http://walterfootball.com/draft2011CB.php
Scout didn't have him in the top 25: http://cfn.scout.com/2/1066865.html
NFL.com had this to say (http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/richard-sherman?id=2495507)
Quote:Sherman is a size prospect with some good intangibles that will help him mold into a contributing backup corner for a press-heavy team. However, he does not possess the natural coverage instincts, fluidity or burst to be considered a future starter. Is comfortable and capable in press man, using his size to disrupt receivers' releases off the line, but doesn't show enough make up speed to consistently recover when beaten. Awareness in zone and off-man are only adequate. Has average ball skills but some upside as a playmaker. Tough against the run but still developing from a technical standpoint. Sherman is a Day 3 prospect
Of course, these rankings could have been influenced by Harbaugh's alleged bad mouthing, so perhaps this doesn't prove anything. But I have real doubt about this story that seems to be accepted truth.
I have to wonder if Sherman keeps a framed copy of those draft evaluation reports... not that he needs any more motivation, but he does seem to feed on this sort of stuff.
BC
Re: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman - LuckE2Bhere - 02-05-2014
(02-05-2014, 01:37 PM)garvin link Wrote:He had some horrifying breakdowns his first year at cornerback, but by his senior year he was excellent. And it seems to me most Stanford fans saw it that way at the time.
This is consistent with my recollection, though I'd add that his "excellent" senior year performance was not necessarily observable via the most traditional metric for his position: INTs. In fact, I recall one analyst describing a conversation he had with Sherman, who (in touting his performance and rebutting this analyst's assumptions) referenced a precipitous decline in the number of times that opposing teams threw to the receiver he was covering as the year progressed... which the analyst then claimed to have verified by going back and looking at tape.
On a somewhat related note, I loved Ed Reynolds, and believe he should have set the INT Return for TD record (obviously a blown call in the UCLA game, that he basically won for us with that play), but I can't help but think that his 1st Team AA status that year was largely a function of those gaudy play stats (which are clearly somewhat "flukey" given the small sample size, in which +/- one or two makes a tremendous difference). When his INT #s fell this year, was he really a "dramatically worse player" as those stats would suggest? Of course not. Fortunately, they allowed him to build a bit of a "rep" nationally, and his pre-season standing probably supported perceptions of him over the course of the season, but while "the tape never lies", it's easy for INT stats to do so (in yet another example, I believe that my Lions' LB DeAndre Levy led the NFL at his position with 6 picks this year, but still only has 11 over the course of a 5-year career... and I'm not banking on more than 2 next year!).
I'll give Richard (and our opposing QBs/OCs that season) the benefit of the doubt, and assume there was a good reason that they stopped throwing the ball in his direction!
Re: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman - FarmBoy - 02-05-2014
Quote:I'll give Richard (and our opposing QBs/OCs that season) the benefit of the doubt, and assume there was a good reason that they stopped throwing the ball in his direction!
It was pretty amazing during the SB that PM only threw to the right side 1-2 times prior to RIchard's injury. ANd the very next offensive snap, PM throws to the right side. If you can take away a third of the field from a HOFer with the high scoring offense of all time, you've got to be doing something right.
Like I said, he was probably better his 2nd year than I remember, because my memory of his Stanford days at CB are so tainted by the big plays he gave up his first year.
Re: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman - CowboyIndian - 02-05-2014
This crap drives me crazy:
"Stanford had its first winning season and first bowl game that year."
When was that...1902?
Re: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman - BostonCard - 02-05-2014
(02-05-2014, 04:07 PM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:This crap drives me crazy:
"Stanford had its first winning season and first bowl game that year."
When was that...1902?
Damn you CowboyIndian. The Buddy/Wlat years seemed so long that I forgot we'd gone to a bowl before then... Obviously I should have added the qualifier, "in a long time", "in Sherman's career" or "in Harbaugh's tenure".
BC
Re: 30 for 30 Richard Sherman - CowboyIndian - 02-05-2014
Ooops...I thought we were quoting someone from off the board. Carry on with your good works, BC.