Why is McNutt only a 4th round projection?

LOL, you guys act like the NFL is full of sub 4.4 guys. It's not. The NFL is LITTERED with WR's that run in the mid 4.5's. Three teams at random and thier top WR's from last year...

Dallas
Miles Austin 4.47
Dez Bryant 4.52

Detroit
Nate Burleson 4.51
Calvin Johnson 4.35
Titus Young 4.42

Saints
Marques Colston 4.55
Lance Moore 4.52

Solid, average, OK, it's all the same. McNutt has solid/average/OK speed for an NFL WR.
 
All right, fine, Duffman. He's projected in the fourth round in part because he only has solid/average/OK speed for an NFL WR. Good enough?
 
DuffMan said:
LOL, you guys act like the NFL is full of sub 4.4 guys. It's not. The NFL is LITTERED with WR's that run in the mid 4.5's. Three teams at random and thier top WR's from last year...

Dallas
Miles Austin 4.47
Dez Bryant 4.52

Detroit
Nate Burleson 4.51
Calvin Johnson 4.35
Titus Young 4.42

Saints
Marques Colston 4.55
Lance Moore 4.52

Solid, average, OK, it's all the same. McNutt has solid/average/OK speed for an NFL WR.
Click to expand...

Must... not... back... down....
 
wundergrape said:
1. He's a WR from the Big Ten.
2. He's new to the position.
3. "Solid speed" is generous - in the Big Ten, yes, in the NFL, no.
4. His team went 7-6 last year, and he lacks exposure as a consequence.
Click to expand...
#4 is pretty meaningless; if you're good they'll find you. Case in point, the fighting Zookers had 2 first rounders.
 
He led the B10 in receiving yards, yards per game, TD's, was second in receptions, 3rd in YPC. He owns virtually every single WR record Iowa has. He was Iowa's best receiver in both his JR and SR year. He produced solid stats as a Soph while still new to the postition. Next to Blackmon (who blew everyone away) McNutt had arguably the best stats of any of the top 40 WR prospects in this years draft. How is that not elite production?

6-3 216 easily puts him in the top 25% of WR's in the league. That's a hell of a lot closer to "elite" than "decent".
 
Last edited:
FCAS said:
#4 is pretty meaningless; if you're good they'll find you. Case in point, the fighting Zookers had 2 first rounders.
Click to expand...

Very true, by I think Jenkins got pretty lucky. That guy is a fricken twig, one solid hit from a safety and he's done.
 
DuffMan said:
Why would I back down? What I said was 100% correct as edvidenced.
Click to expand...

Right... solid = average/OK....

We all know McNutt was a great college receiver and I think he will could be a decent pro in the right situation, but he lacks the explosive speed that gets receivers drafted higher than the middle rounds.

Where do you think he should be drafted?
 
1hawkeye1 said:
Oh, now we're adding "standpoints" are we?;)
Click to expand...

You have to use something as a bench mark. You claimed 100 guys could do what he does. I countered by saying then why didn't they? Out of all the WR's drafted his numbers will put him top 5 easy, and you could argue 2-3.
 
LG210 said:
Right... solid = average/OK....

We all know McNutt was a great college receiver and I think he will could be a decent pro in the right situation, but he lacks the explosive speed that gets receivers drafted higher than the middle rounds.

Where do you think he should be drafted?
Click to expand...

With his numbers and mesurables he'd be a 2nd or 3rd round pick if he went to an SEC school.
 
DuffMan said:
With his numbers and mesurables he'd be a 2nd or 3rd round pick if he went to an SEC school.
Click to expand...

Well, holy moley... looks like you could have a bright future as an NFL scout.

They can make a "Moneyball" sequel about you, perhaps called "Butterball".

(PS--He couldn't really separate from B10 CBs. What makes you think that he could have put up those numbers in the SEC?)

Edit: Third round would be reasonable for McNutt, so you may have made much ado about nothing.
 
Last edited:
LG210 said:
Wow--great comeback.

It's almost as if you say stupid stuff and then try to convince yourself that you were right.
Click to expand...

Feel free to counter anything I've said with an actual argument of your own backed with facts and stuff.... wait... that's not your style.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top