Jump to content

Round 4: Pick 142; Royce Newman, OG Ole Miss


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Joe said:

I made the same argument about Walker Little and got reamed on this board for that because apparently it doesn't matter how good your Tackles are in the run game...

 

That said, Newman's here to be a swing guy a la Billy Turner. I suspect some of his power issues stem from technique as he was able to put up 23 reps on the bench FWIW. 

You got reamed because Walker Little's game tape did not show that he couldn't run block.  You took something that some website said about Walker LIttle and ran with it like it was gospel.  I forget if it was TDN or PFF, but you pretty much quoted verbatim what they said about him, and passed it off like it was your actual assessment after watching tape.

When confronted with this, you ignored everything anyone said, and brought up game clips to prove your point.  And they did not.  They proved the exact opposite.

He was actually quite good in the run game, and ran the same kind of lead play that we just saw.  Only his rep was much smoother and quicker.  His pass protection skills, though (Little), were superior to his run skills.  There was nothing wrong with Walker Little's run blocking.

With those feet and that frame, he easily could have been mentioned as one of the best tackles in this draft, had he played last year and shown that he was fully recovered from his injuries.

Edited by vegas492
And you did the same thing regarding Brady Christensen.
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

23 reps for OL is "bad" though

Bench press reps and actual OL strength is very misleading.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, deathstar said:

LOL the dude makes a 90 degree turn and confronts a linebacker within the space of two-three yards and you’re complaining he didn’t knock the guy down.

When someone reports that this NSFW material, yah, I expected more.

Had it not been NSFW, I would have thought it was a fine rep.  Blame the NSFW label.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, deathstar said:


IMO a little out of control as he turns the corner but pretty athletic rep.

He's just waving ahead the folks he's blocking for /s

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, R T said:

Bench press reps and actual OL strength is very misleading.  

Ok, how is it misleading? No doubt, bench is not EVERYthing when it comes to the overall functional strength needed by an OLineman, DLineman, etc. But no one here has asserted that. But how is bench not ONE of the multiple components to actual OL strength? 

Edited by DWhitehurst
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DWhitehurst said:

Ok, how is it misleading? No doubt, bench is not everything when it comes to the overall functional strength needed by an OLineman, DLineman, etc. But no one here has asserted that. But how is bench not one of the multiple components to actual OL strength? 

i think his point is that it's more "endurance" than "strength".

i.e. "work" is defined as Force x Distance. But, in the trenches it's more valuable to apply 500 lbf over 1 yard than it is to apply 1 lbf over 500 yards. Same amount of "work", different applications.

max bench press is probably somewhat strongly correlated to reps at 225 lb, but it likely differs for certain guys. Additionally, more "work" is required for a guy with 35 in arms to bench press 20x than it is for a guy with 29" arms. The guy with longer arms is doing 20% more "work" on each rep with the same weight.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

i think his point is that it's more "endurance" than "strength".

i.e. "work" is defined as Force x Distance. But, in the trenches it's more valuable to apply 500 lbf over 1 yard than it is to apply 1 lbf over 500 yards. Same amount of "work", different applications.

max bench press is probably somewhat strongly correlated to reps at 225 lb, but it likely differs for certain guys. Additionally, more "work" is required for a guy with 35 in arms to bench press 20x than it is for a guy with 29" arms. The guy with longer arms is doing 20% more "work" on each rep with the same weight.

Yes, no doubt. As a former trainer, bodybuilder, I'm well aware of these things. Don't believe me, but I think Newman can develop more strength in all the functional areas needed, including bench. And bench is not the #1 component to the functional strength needed for an OLineman, but to assert it isn't a component at all is absurd. As I said, because of his particular anatomy, it is unlikely he develops into a 35+ bench guy, but I think I do think he can and will improve his strength in all functional areas needed, including bench. 

Edited by DWhitehurst
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DWhitehurst said:

Yes, no doubt. As a former trainer, bodybuilder, I'm well aware of these things. Don't believe me, but I think Newman can develop more strength in all the functional areas needed, including bench. And bench is not the #1 component to the functional strength needed for an OLineman, but to assert it isn't a component at all is absurd. As I said, because of his particular anatomy, it is unlikely he develops into a 35+ bench guy, but I think I do think he can and will improve his strength in all functional areas needed, including bench. 

I may have missed where someone said it "isn't a component". I just replied to @R T saying it's misleading to do a straight association between bench press and overall strength (which I also generally agree with).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

I may have missed where someone said it "isn't a component". I just replied to @R T saying it's misleading to do a straight association between bench press and overall strength (which I also generally agree with).

Agree that it isn't a straight association. But the background to what I'm saying is someone saying a 23 bench on a 315pnd rookie OLineman isn't a sign that more strength development in this area (in addition to all other areas) is needed and to be expected,  and/or that it cannot be improved upon to 'some' extent simply because they are a longer-armed guy. 35+ bench? No. 28-30 bench? Possibly, with time. (And yes, both leg and core strength are higher priorities). I wish I could bring the Packers trainer into this discussion. Haha

Edited by DWhitehurst
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

23 reps for OL is "bad" though

As @DWhitehurstmentioned, Runyan posted "only" 23 reps and has gotten stronger. I doubt we tag him as a long-term starter from Day 1. He could see early action at RT provided Bakh isn't back from his ACL, but everything I've read on the guy strongly suggests that he's able to adjust, learn quickly, and execute at a relatively high level. What more could you expect TBH?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

I'm not arguing he can't improve, just pointing out that currently strength does not appear to be his "strength" lol

point received and please keep using "'s if nothing else but for the sake of entertainment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DWhitehurst said:

Yes, no doubt. As a former trainer, bodybuilder, I'm well aware of these things. Don't believe me, but I think Newman can develop more strength in all the functional areas needed, including bench. And bench is not the #1 component to the functional strength needed for an OLineman, but to assert it isn't a component at all is absurd. As I said, because of his particular anatomy, it is unlikely he develops into a 35+ bench guy, but I think I do think he can and will improve his strength in all functional areas needed, including bench. 

I think you have taken a giant leap in missing my point. I agree with everything you just said and you basically are stating the case to support my comment, not counter it. Core strength and lower body strength probably has a higher place of importance in NFL strength programs than increasing any players 225 bench press rep count.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, R T said:

I think you have taken a giant leap in missing my point. I agree with everything you just said and you basically are stating the case to support my comment, not counter it. Core strength and lower body strength probably has a higher place of importance in NFL strength programs than increasing any players 225 bench press rep count.  

Sounds good. Thank you for clarifying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...