Jump to content


Photo

Kevon Seymour's potential in McDermott scheme


  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

#21 Augie

Augie

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,707 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:16 PM

Hasn't been mentioned yet, so I'll do my BBMB duty.
Whaley sucks. He should be fired. We're just spinning the tires. Gilmore gone. Now gillislee is gone. We can't replace those players. According to scientific data I read on the interweb, Whaley was proven to be the worst GM in the history of football. Pegulas needs to sell the team so the new owner will fire him.


If by YET, you mean in the last 12 minutes, then fine.

#22 Rocky Landing

Rocky Landing

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,157 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:18 PM

Glad someone started this thread.

I feel like one of the very few things that Rex did right was properly develop Darby. Rex had good instincts regarding him and they paid off. I suspect that he had the same sort of plans for Seymour. He showed the same kind of promise that Darby did, but didn't have the same opportunity because of Gilmore's presence.

Pundits seem fairly united in the idea that CB is one of our top two needs. Certainly, we are shallow in that regard, but I have high hopes for Seymour. And for Darby, for that matter. I have posted on this site that I believe that Darby is every bit the CB that Gilmore is. I have been flamed for the remark, but stand by that opinion.

I also believe that Seymour has that same potential. I submit that CB is not quite the dire need that pundits claim it to be.

#23 Augie

Augie

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,707 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:24 PM

Glad someone started this thread.
I feel like one of the very few things that Rex did right was properly develop Darby. Rex had good instincts regarding him and they paid off. I suspect that he had the same sort of plans for Seymour. He showed the same kind of promise that Darby did, but didn't have the same opportunity because of Gilmore's presence.
Pundits seem fairly united in the idea that CB is one of our top two needs. Certainly, we are shallow in that regard, but I have high hopes for Seymour. And for Darby, for that matter. I have posted on this site that I believe that Darby is every bit the CB that Gilmore is. I have been flamed for the remark, but stand by that opinion.
I also believe that Seymour has that same potential. I submit that CB is not quite the dire need that pundits claim it to be.


Well, not to argue, but Darby was horrible his first preseason, then played great as a rookie. Another year of Rex coaching and he seemed to regress. I hope all these guys will be comfortable in the new scheme. We need depth, for sure.

#24 Success

Success

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 332 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:25 PM

Glad someone started this thread.

I feel like one of the very few things that Rex did right was properly develop Darby. Rex had good instincts regarding him and they paid off. I suspect that he had the same sort of plans for Seymour. He showed the same kind of promise that Darby did, but didn't have the same opportunity because of Gilmore's presence.

Pundits seem fairly united in the idea that CB is one of our top two needs. Certainly, we are shallow in that regard, but I have high hopes for Seymour. And for Darby, for that matter. I have posted on this site that I believe that Darby is every bit the CB that Gilmore is. I have been flamed for the remark, but stand by that opinion.

I also believe that Seymour has that same potential. I submit that CB is not quite the dire need that pundits claim it to be.


I was going to post something like this - you said it better. I think Darby and Seymour could be a surprisingly great tandem.

They also brought in a lot of guys to compete for depth. I'd bet a coach like McDermott can get the best out of a few.

Conventional wisdom here is that we have to draft a CB high, but it's really not that urgent.

#25 YoloinOhio

YoloinOhio

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,585 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:30 PM

I was going to post something like this - you said it better. I think Darby and Seymour could be a surprisingly great tandem.

They also brought in a lot of guys to compete for depth. I'd bet a coach like McDermott can get the best out of a few.

Conventional wisdom here is that we have to draft a CB high, but it's really not that urgent.

i think it will just depend on how the draft falls. I don't think they will reach for one out of need but will have identified those that best fit the scheme and if one is available at the right value point, gotta pounce.

#26 Success

Success

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 332 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:34 PM

i think it will just depend on how the draft falls. I don't think they will reach for one out of need but will have identified those that best fit the scheme and if one is available at the right value point, gotta pounce.


Agreed - taking a CB high certainly wouldn't shock me.

Can't wait. I love the draft. It feels like the start of the season.

#27 jr1

jr1

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,737 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:36 PM

I believe in this kid. He excelled in college despite vision problems 



#28 Augie

Augie

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,707 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:38 PM

I believe in this kid. He excelled in college despite vision problems


But, don't forget, Whaley sucks!

(Seymour can't play QB.)

#29 End The Drought

End The Drought

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 62 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 11:00 PM

4.39 is not really that fast.  it's essentially 4.4
under 4.3 is fast
under 4.2 is very fast
 
4.4-4.5 is pretty good
4.6 is pedestrian in the nfl.
4.7 or above, get out of here.  you're a dt or ol.


So John Ross is not "very" fast?

#30 Augie

Augie

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,707 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 11:07 PM

So John Ross is not "very" fast?


He sleeps at a pedestrian speed. I can do THAT. But when running..... :)

#31 John from Hemet

John from Hemet

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,780 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 01:15 AM

4.39 is not really that fast.  it's essentially 4.4
under 4.3 is fast

under 4.2 is very fast

 

4.4-4.5 is pretty good

4.6 is pedestrian in the nfl.

4.7 or above, get out of here.  you're a dt or ol.

Your making yourself look foolish

 

4.39 is not fast.....lol



#32 Thurman#1

Thurman#1

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,015 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:29 AM

I believe the Bills will draft a CB next week, but unless Lattimore falls in their laps at 10 I think they may focus on a slot CB in the mid-rounds, and focus on elevating Kevon Seymour to starting outside corner role opposite Darby. Josh Norman was also a 6th round pick before he emerged as a top CB under McDermott. I thought Seymour took some lumps as most rookie corners do this past season, Rex's scheme hung them out to dry a lot and I think he did show some good technique as well. This graphic is interesting (h/t @BUFFAL0SOLDI3R)

C9zr4KuWsAMuO0c.jpg

 

 

Seymour might be quicker, more sudden, but he's also slighter and less physical than Josh Norman. IMHO he's going to have some trouble against big physical WRs if he's outside. Maybe I'll be proven wrong about that. Hope so.

 

Norman was built a lot more solidly and muscularly.


Edited by Thurman#1, 20 April 2017 - 02:40 AM.


#33 YoloinOhio

YoloinOhio

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,585 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 06:11 AM

 
 
Seymour might be quicker, more sudden, but he's also slighter and less physical than Josh Norman. IMHO he's going to have some trouble against big physical WRs if he's outside. Maybe I'll be proven wrong about that. Hope so.
 
Norman was built a lot more solidly and muscularly.

this is true but he's also slower. I don't think Seymour fits the "mold" of what I have seen listed as McD's preferences at corner in terms of size and arm length, but he's very athletic. Since Darby is kind of similar (fast and athletic but not a size corner) I think we can assume we will draft a big corner to go along with them. Fortunately this is a great draft for that.

Edited by YoloinOhio, 20 April 2017 - 06:12 AM.


#34 WhitewalkerInPhilly

WhitewalkerInPhilly

    Professional Kool-Aid Drinker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,384 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 06:25 AM

I liked all of Seymour's measurables when we took him last year. Unfortunately, it seems like Rex's scheme constantly throws the boundary corners to the wolves. I have a feeling that Darby and Seymour have a bounce back year, but I would really like to see some added depth. That said, this is apparently the year to do it, especially if we have 3 5th round picks.



#35 oldmanfan

oldmanfan

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 785 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 06:33 AM

It will be interesting to see how these guys perform in McDermott's more zone based concepts. I think a main reason they let Gilmore go , in addition to the $$, is that they didn't think he would fit their coverage schemes well.

#36 horned dogs

horned dogs

    The Anti-Viagra

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,105 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 07:41 AM

4.39 is not really that fast.  it's essentially 4.4
under 4.3 is fast

under 4.2 is very fast

 

4.4-4.5 is pretty good

4.6 is pedestrian in the nfl.

4.7 or above, get out of here.  you're a dt or ol.

Jeez! What is wrong with you lately, nobody is buying



#37 Juice_32

Juice_32

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 07:47 AM

4.39 is not really that fast.  it's essentially 4.4
under 4.3 is fast
under 4.2 is very fast
 
4.4-4.5 is pretty good
4.6 is pedestrian in the nfl.
4.7 or above, get out of here.  you're a dt or ol.

As a former sprinter I will tell you for a fact that 4.39 is fast.

You're sounding a bit Uncle Rico-ish here lately.

Edited by Juice_32, 20 April 2017 - 07:48 AM.


#38 NoSaint

NoSaint

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,388 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 07:53 AM

4.39 is not really that fast.  it's essentially 4.4
under 4.3 is fast
under 4.2 is very fast
 
4.4-4.5 is pretty good
4.6 is pedestrian in the nfl.
4.7 or above, get out of here.  you're a dt or ol.


is there anyone that has broken 4.2? its pretty incredibly rare to see someone break 4.3

you could probably shift those to:

breaking 4.3 is incredibly fast
breaking 4.4 is very fast

and obviously disclaimer for positions/weight classes changing those assessments, but generally talking for the "runners" out there on the field with those brackets

#39 Boyst62

Boyst62

    Hall of Farmer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,728 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 07:58 AM

Your making yourself look foolish
 
4.39 is not fast.....lol

its not.

Learn2speed. Dbs and wrs need to be low 4.3 at least.

As a former sprinter I will tell you for a fact that 4.39 is fast.

You're sounding a bit Uncle Rico-ish here lately.

I was a college sprinter, also. But this isn't Rico. The NFL players are small right now. They need to be faster. Especially as DL and lbs are getting bigger. I'm not impressed with 4.39

is there anyone that has broken 4.2? its pretty incredibly rare to see someone break 4.3

you could probably shift those to:

breaking 4.3 is incredibly fast
breaking 4.4 is very fast

and obviously disclaimer for positions/weight classes changing those assessments, but generally talking for the "runners" out there on the field with those brackets

perhaps. But if you look at times the average is getting faster and faster as these guys learn to run. Maybe the bias is his game speed. Which appears slow. Similar to Gilmore. Darby has game speed. Byrd had game speed. Goodwin did not. Mckelvin had great game speed.

#40 KellyToughII

KellyToughII

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 593 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 08:17 AM

I for one, think he will do great in this scheme.