ESPN says Sash is slow?

L

lilrabbi

Well-Known Member
I first started to see the light of how idiotic the ESPN draft "gurus" can be (at least the "scouts" end of it) when they were salivating over Jake Locker throughout his horrible season and his horrendous senior bowl.

This confirms it: every safety that is rated well above Sash has the comment on their "heigh/weight/speed" category, "above average straight line speed" or "better than most safeties." And on Sash's page it says, "Possesses good overall measureables for the position but top-end speed appears to be below average." The great thing about this is that the 40 times from the combine show that sash is faster than all but one safety ranked ahead of him - Carter from Oklahoma, who ran it in 4.59 compared to Sash's 4.62. Maybe he looks slower because he's white? Because he's from Iowa? Because he's from the Big10?

And the ESPN bozos had time to get it right - they didn't write anything on Sash's profile until weeks after the combine. They are a joke.
 

Normally I would agree with you. But Sash did time better than almost every safety rated higher than him. What makes him slow and the others not, when he ran faster at the Combine?
 
He isn't fast.

Maybe they looked at more than his 40 time?

If this were flopped around and his 40 time was bad you'd say "well they should look at tape not just him running in shorts and a t-shirt"
 
It's probably not an Iowa or Big Ten thing necessarily, but I think it is a mental preconception thing. The writer thought Sash would time below average (you can come up with your theory as to why) and then when looking at his time that's how he assumed it was even though there was proof otherwise.
 
Well, he may not be the fastest safety in the draft, but I wouldn't challenge his hitting ability, maybe play him closer to the line instead of 20 yards off the LOS?
 
I don't know why I have to keep telling people how much better their lives will be when they stop paying attention to anything that comes from ESPN.
 
I have no idea on how Sash's time compares to other safties entering the draft this year but I wouldn't be surprised if ESPN did not go out of their way to make the big10 look good in any way shape or form, they are competing business ventures.
 
DexterMorgan said:
He isn't fast.

Maybe they looked at more than his 40 time?

If this were flopped around and his 40 time was bad you'd say "well they should look at tape not just him running in shorts and a t-shirt"
Click to expand...

True, and I definitely don't consider him "fast". But he's pretty even with most of the other players rated ahead of him. I just don't why he has "below-average" speed, while the other players have "above-average" speed. Personally, I think Sash plays a little faster than his 40 time. Not a lot, but a little. If you told me before the combine that he would run between 4.55 and 4.65, I would have bought that without any hesitation. He's not fast, but he's not really any slower than his competition at this point.
 
tm3308 said:
True, and I definitely don't consider him "fast". But he's pretty even with most of the other players rated ahead of him. I just don't why he has "below-average" speed, while the other players have "above-average" speed. Personally, I think Sash plays a little faster than his 40 time. Not a lot, but a little. If you told me before the combine that he would run between 4.55 and 4.65, I would have bought that without any hesitation. He's not fast, but he's not really any slower than his competition at this point.
Click to expand...

I honestly wouldn't even know.
 
So let me get this straight, ESPN's nefarious plan to denegrate the Big 10 is so intricate, that they will alter the scouting report of a mid-round safety almost no one cares about in order to further there goal.

Oh. My. God.
 
Iowafarmgirl said:
So let me get this straight, ESPN's nefarious plan to denegrate the Big 10 is so intricate, that they will alter the scouting report of a mid-round safety almost no one cares about in order to further there goal.

Oh. My. God.
Click to expand...

I think the opposite is more likely to be true than what you say here. It's easier to believe that they overrate players from other (SEC) conferences, rather than underrating Big Ten guys on purpose.

I don't have an issue with the actual assessment on Sash. I just don't get the disparity in terms of speed in Sash's scouting report and the reports of other players who ran times in the same range.
 
tm3308 said:
I think the opposite is more likely to be true than what you say here. It's easier to believe that they overrate players from other (SEC) conferences, rather than underrating Big Ten guys on purpose.
Click to expand...

It's not easy to believe that they overrate playes from the SEC. The SEC has won 5 consecutive national championships has performed very well in bowl games during that same time period.

In the past 5 years, what Big Ten teams have performed well in bowl games, other than Iowa?
 
cuinknk said:
It's not easy to believe that they overrate playes from the SEC. The SEC has won 5 consecutive national championships has performed very well in bowl games during that same time period.

In the past 5 years, what Big Ten teams have performed well in bowl games, other than Iowa?
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was easy to believe. I said it's easiER to believe than that they purposely downgrade players from the Big Ten.

Regardless, they've got several players rated ahead of Sash (as they should be). But when he runs faster than most of them at the combine, and also has pretty good game speed, how do they have better speed than he does?
 
Farmgirl and Ppierce - you're totally missing the point.

It wasn't an "article" or a tweet or anything like that. This is ESPN's position by position, player by player scouting report. I'm not saying Sash is necessarily better than the 4 or 5 guys rated ahead of him. What I am pointing out is that he actually posted a faster 40 time than all of them but one - and that one was a hair faster - and ESPN says about all of those with slower times that they have "above average speed for the position" while they say Sash has "below average speed."

Again, I'm okay with saying there are other safeties that have a higher ceiling than Sash and will go higher in the draft. But if he has posted better 40 yard dash times than they have, don't say they are "above average" in speed while he is "below average" in speed. It is just absurd and shows some seriously poor reading and/or thinking ability on the part of McShay, Wiedl, etc.

It is like the Senior bowl when all of Locker's receivers were getting P.O.'d at him because he throws way high over the middle and they're getting their heads taken off, and all McShay can do is rave about Locker's accuracy. I still don't understand that love affair, honestly. The thing with Sash? I don't know. It is probably just their preconception that Iowa football = slow.

Another thing that bugged me was at the combine, Clayborn had the top times in all the short distance quickness drills, which is arguably the most or second most important (behind the bench press) drill for defensive linemen. They (ESPN/Scouts Inc.) didn't mention that at all. NFL scouts (if you read other sites to see what actual insiders were saying) were very impressed with Clayborn and his agility and quickness. All ESPN could talk about was the nerve issue which causes his right arm to not go as high as his left during wingspan measurements.

Anyway, I knew there would be people saying not to listen to ESPN anyway, but I just enjoyed the glaring idiocy of their scouting reports v. actual fact. That is why they work for ESPN and not an NFL team.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top