Punter Try-Outs?

[turbodiesel#44]

Again making **** up. I didn't say Frost couldn't improve, you tried to say I did. Grow the **** up and argue like a man. Quit it with the high school BS and address what I say instead of making up what I said.

You said we needed to bring in youth at the position and let him develop. Frost is 28. Young for a kicker, but apparently not in your eyes. I'm not making it up. You posted it in this very thread. Stand behind your word if you want respect from me.

[zCommander]

I've already said everything about this issue on multiple threads. Frost is average, and inconsistent on a level entirely above Brooks. You think Brooks has potential to improve, but you think Frost can't because he's 28. Yes, I wanted Frost's head along with Hall's, but JG stuck with him and Frost improved. Would I have liked to upgrade Frost? Of course. But I never felt that was worth a pick on a punter, and I certainly didn't see it during the contest in preseason.

Someone has to draft a rookie before they can become a vet. Last time I checked vet punters don't grow on trees that are ripe for plucking.

Take a look at these two links and you will see that Brooks is already pretty close to what Frost was when he came here in 2005.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/teams/stats?team=was&year=2005 <--Frost

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/teams/stats?team=was&year=2008 <--Brooks

Pay attention to the number of punts between the two. And the longest punt kicked by whom and how many yards were returned

[Rocky21]

Punt average doesn't mean jack if the punter is out kicking the coverage. Why not look at punts inside the 20? Or touchbacks?

Or punts returned for touchdowns. Here Brooks is # 1 in the NFL.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?season=2008&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PUNTING&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=PUNTING_RETURN_TOUCHDOWNS&d-447263-n=1

The coaches have done a great job getting us to 4-1, and I'm going to take their patience with Brooks over the incessant chest-thumping of a couple fans. Maybe Brooks is doing the things the team is asking him to do.

Or maybe not. Coach Danny Smith on Durant Brooks "He's got to prove that he can punt in this league, and to this point he hasn't proven that."

Last year we gave up return TDs also, but I guess those were Brooks' fault as well.

Frost gave up ZERO returns TD's last year. You seem to be making things up at this point.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=PUNTING&d-447263-s=PUNTING_RETURN_TOUCHDOWNS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

[elkabong82]

1. Because we had an average guy already.

2. Unless punters are really, really bad they don't affect game outcomes much.

3. Other positions are far more pressing and valuable to this team and more worthy of a pick, even late. Look at Horton starting. We still need Corner, LB and Line depth. You can't keep putting these positions all off until the next draft, especially if the guys need development.

4. There is a mental pressure to kicking in the NFL unlike any other position. Except for the snap, it is largely a solo job unlike the team aspect of every other play. You can't pull a kid out of school and assume he "has it".

5. Our aveage punter had some intangibles that Brooks doesn't. Namely tens of thousands of practice snaps with our long snapper and placekicker, the ability to tackle and the fact he NEVER had a kick returned in his entire career.

1) So now that we have a rookie punter who is struggling, average is ok? Do you know how to form an opinion without using hindsight?

2) Punters do affect gameoutcomes at times. If it's late and they give a good boot to pin the opponent within the 5, that is affecting the game. Field position is a VERY important aspect of football, and this just furhter reveals how ignorant you truly are when it comes to football, and how much of a hypocrite you are for questioning others football accumen.

3) Yeah, other positions are more important in the 6th round. People get probowlers in the 6th round all the time.

4) No, you pull a kid with potential out of college and devlop him, just like you do with every other position in football.

5) Wow, I guess that stat is all Frost and has nothing to do with the other 10 guys on the field :doh:

Has the team not shown you that they are capable of making smart decisions? Have you not learned from JC, Rogers, and others that just because a player isn't great right away it doesn't mean they can't develop into a great player? But it isn't about any of that for you. You already stated you didn't want the team to draft a punter. So this isn't even about football for you, it's matter of you not getting what your selfish self wanted, and just like ASF with JC, you're on here very early just to try and thump your chest. It's only been 5 weeks, so trying to say anything definitive about Brooks is just plain stupid. The kid has potential, and most of us hope he can realize that potential soon. Only a few are foolish enough to try and proclaim him a bust after just 5 weeks. Only a few are stupid enough to continue to show impatience with rookies, eventhough they are gradually proving them wrong.

[elkabong82]

You said we needed to bring in youth at the position and let him develop. Frost is 28. Young for a kicker, but apparently not in your eyes. I'm not making it up. You posted it in this very thread. Stand behind your word if you want respect from me.

No I didn't. Again you're making **** up. Quote me where I said we needed youth at the position. Back up what you claim for once. All I've said is I understood the team's desire to bring in someone younger and devlop them, that maybe they thought they had gone as far with Frost as they could. I didn't say I agrred, just that In understood the decision. There's a difference.

[elkabong82]

Or punts returned for touchdowns. Here Brooks is # 1 in the NFL.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?season=2008&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PUNTING&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=PUNTING_RETURN_TOUCHDOWNS&d-447263-n=1

Or maybe not. Coach Danny Smith on Durant Brooks "He's got to prove that he can punt in this league, and to this point he hasn't proven that."

Frost gave up ZERO returns TD's last year. You seem to be making things up at this point.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=PUNTING&d-447263-s=PUNTING_RETURN_TOUCHDOWNS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

Yeah, I'm sure the other 10 guys on the field had nothing to do with the TDs, it was all Brooks' fault Nevermind the block in the back that got called back for no reason, nevermind the fact the 2 guys who got the TDs are 2 of the most dangerous return men in football.

Smith is down on him, but that doesn't mean Brooks can't improve. The coaches are sticking with him, and like I said, at this point that is good enough for me. It's only been 5 games.

I said retunr TD, not punt return TD. We gave up a KR TD to Leon Washington of the Jets. The point there was that return TDs aren't the sole fault of the kicker or punter. It's not making stuff up, simply you interpreting my words as you want them to be instead of how they actually are, that's a page right out of turbodiesels book: debating for dummies.

[texasthunder]

Derrick Frost is 17th in the league in punting average. Durant Brooks is 33rd.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?season=2008&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PUNTING&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=PUNTING_AVERAGE_YARDS&d-447263-n=1

Derrick Frost is 16th in net average. Durant Brooks is 33rd.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?season=2008&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PUNTING&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=PUNTING_NET_AVERAGE&d-447263-n=1

Only 4 punts have been returned for touchdowns in the league this year and two came from Brooks. Two other guys have 1 a piece. Derrick Frost is average and he is outpunting our rookie. I think you guys that keep defending this kid need to look inward and possibly reconsider.

Why are you comparing a punter with 5 years of NFL experience to a punter who has 5 games of experience ??

[zCommander]

Why are you comparing a punter with 5 years of NFL experience to a punter who has 5 games of experience ??

This is why I posted the result from 2005 season for Frost above. But I guess some people don't like to go back in time or something.

Link: http://extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=5644792&postcount=127

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

1. Because we had an average guy already.

2. Unless punters are really, really bad they don't affect game outcomes much.

3. Other positions are far more pressing and valuable to this team and more worthy of a pick, even late. Look at Horton starting. We still need Corner, LB and Line depth. You can't keep putting these positions all off until the next draft, especially if the guys need development.

4. There is a mental pressure to kicking in the NFL unlike any other position. Except for the snap, it is largely a solo job unlike the team aspect of every other play. You can't pull a kid out of school and assume he "has it".

5. Our aveage punter had some intangibles that Brooks doesn't. Namely tens of thousands of practice snaps with our long snapper and placekicker, the ability to tackle and the fact he NEVER had a kick returned in his entire career.

1. "Because we had an AVERAGE guy already".....

So, on the face of the pick, taking one of the best punters to come out of college in many a long year wouldn't be a beneficial upgrade on a guy you yourself call AVERAGE?

2. "Unless punters are really, really bad they don't affect game outcomes much.".....

Uhmmm, how many games in this league are blow outs? Most games are tight, down to the wire affairs. Field position is KING, particularly in tight contests. Give a team a shortened field, there invariably gona' score easier. Get a solid punter, who DOES affect field position with a booming punt, and the jobs that much more difficult. You do get the basic principles of football right?

3. "Other positions are far more pressing and valuable to this team and more worthy of a pick, even late. Look at Horton starting. We still need Corner, LB and Line depth. You can't keep putting these positions all off until the next draft, especially if the guys need development.".....

Now, I agree with you to a point here. Secondary and line depth, part. the O-line, is needed. But see point 2. The kicking game is a key element to any ball club. If you can get a stud, you take him..... and then LET him assimilate to life as a pro, which, ya' know, is gona' bring the bad games as he develops.

4. "There is a mental pressure to kicking in the NFL unlike any other position. Except for the snap, it is largely a solo job unlike the team aspect of every other play. You can't pull a kid out of school and assume he "has it". ".....

Isn't that what your contradictory doing here in expecting Brooks to be an all pro from the get go?

5. "Our average punter had some intangibles that Brooks doesn't. Namely tens of thousands of practice snaps with our long snapper and place kicker, the ability to tackle and the fact he NEVER had a kick returned in his entire career.".....

Besides all the inconsistencies of the guy you readily agree was only AVERAGE, Brooks is a ROOKIE. How is he expected to have the same number of reps in practice a mere 4 weeks game time into his pro career? Nothing like letting a guy develop huh?

Hail.

[elkabong82]

Here's some more fun with stats.

Since punt average seems to be the most important stat for some of you, let's look at the career of the guy who has the best punt average in the NFL, Donnie Jones of the Rams with 52.7.

His rookie year, 2004, he had 26 punts and 38 yard punt average. In 2005 and 2006 he was with the Dolphins (the Seahawks cut him because they had the same lack of patience some of you all have) and averaged 43.5 and 42.8. Last season with the Rams he averaged 47.2, and this year he is currently at 52.7.

So the best punter in the NFL right now, in terms of punt average, struggled his rookie year averageing in the 30's. However, he developed over time and became good. Why can't the same courtesy of patience be extended towards our punter?

http://www.nfl.com/players/donniejones/profile?id=JON237997

[turbodiesel#44]

1) So now that we have a rookie punter who is struggling, average is ok? Do you know how to form an opinion without using hindsight?

LOL. My argument hasn't changed one iota since draft day or preseason. Check the punter threads here on ES for proof.

2) Punters do affect gameoutcomes at times. If it's late and they give a good boot to pin the opponent within the 5, that is affecting the game. Field position is a VERY important aspect of football, and this just furhter reveals how ignorant you truly are when it comes to football, and how much of a hypocrite you are for questioning others football accumen.

OK then, name three games won or lost by a punter. How about one?

3) Yeah, other positions are more important in the 6th round. People get probowlers in the 6th round all the time.

I guess you haven't seen our new safety. Many players come from late rounds and make pro bowls and win Super Bowls. Many late rounders need development, and many wash out. All the more reason to concentrate your picks on positions of need.

4) No, you pull a kid with potential out of college and devlop him, just like you do with every other position in football.

Not at the loss of points and possibly games TO DEVELOP A FREAKING PUNTER WHO IS 33RD IN A LEAGUE OF 32 TEAMS. At his rate of improvement, he will be as good as the guy we cut in 3 or 4 years. Maybe.

5) Wow, I guess that stat is all Frost and has nothing to do with the other 10 guys on the field :doh:

You really don't have a clue. Brooks has already given away 2 touchdowns and one, maybe 2 FG's. OUR PUNTER IS GIVING AWAY POINTS, and you are OK with that?:doh:

Has the team not shown you that they are capable of making smart decisions? Have you not learned from JC, Rogers, and others that just because a player isn't great right away it doesn't mean they can't develop into a great player? But it isn't about any of that for you. You already stated you didn't want the team to draft a punter. So this isn't even about football for you, it's matter of you not getting what your selfish self wanted, and just like ASF with JC, you're on here very early just to try and thump your chest. It's only been 5 weeks, so trying to say anything definitive about Brooks is just plain stupid. The kid has potential, and most of us hope he can realize that potential soon. Only a few are foolish enough to try and proclaim him a bust after just 5 weeks. Only a few are stupid enough to continue to show impatience with rookies, eventhough they are gradually proving them wrong.

He seems to have left his potential back in school. This is the big leagues. We rely on our punter for field position. What position is worthy of giving away points while we wait for potential except QB? None, unless you are a loser. I'm talking to you.

[elkabong82]

He seems to have left his potential back in school. This is the big leagues. We rely on our punter for field position. What position is worthy of giving away points while we wait for potential except QB? None, unless you are a loser. I'm talking to you.

Like I said, it's only been 5 games. Instead of exhibiting any kind of patience with a young player, you are on here trying to crap all over him just so you can say "I was right." Those are some pretty pathetic priorities, typically the same ones held by a loser. I'm talking to you.

All you've done is contradict yourself throughout this thread. "We can't afford to wait on Brooks" and "A good team can overcome bad punting, the Skins proved that". "Name 3 games won or lost by a punter, how bout 1?" and "Brooks is costing us points." So according to you, Brooks is terrible and we are going to lose games because of him, we can't risk having him in there. But at the same time punters don't win or lose games and a good team wins despite bad punts. Whatever hypocrite.

[turbodiesel#44]

Like I said, it's only been 5 games. Instead of exhibiting any kind of patience with a young player, you are on here trying to crap all over him just so you can say "I was right." Those are some pretty pathetic priorities, typically the same ones held by a loser. I'm talking to you.

Do you wonder why we don't just cut our veteran WR's and "develop" the rookie WR's? Because we would lose. Normally a punter can't hurt you that much, but Brooks is that bad. Keep defending him. After he has lost a few games for us, maybe he will achieve mediocrity like the guy we cut. Then we can blow another pick.

[elkabong82]

Do you wonder why we don't just cut our veteran WR's and "develop" the rookie WR's? Because we would lose. Normally a punter can't hurt you that much, but Brooks is that bad. Keep defending him. After he has lost a few games for us, maybe he will achieve mediocrity like the guy we cut. Then we can blow another pick.

I'll bet you were saying the same ignorant stuff about JC as well. Again, you're trying to make definitive statements about a rookie after just 5 games. Your lack of patience is dumbfounding.

Still waiting on you to back up your claims about what I said with actual quotes. Still waiting on you to address your contradictory statements. Still waiting on your opinion about the NFL leader in punt average, Donnie Jones, having an average of 38 his rookie year.

So now Brooks will lose a couple games for us? I thought you said good teams don't lose because of bad punting, and that punters don't win or lose games. Oh, but now they do because it fulfills your assertions about Brooks. All you're doing is speculating, and you're going over the top with it now as well. You are acting like a child, and contradicting yourslef, all for the sake of being able to say "I was right." The truly sad thing is that if you would exhibit ANY kind of patience for our young players, you'd be able to say "I was right" more often.

[TheLongshot]

I haven't read the whole thread, but I bet there aren't really many better options out there. I know there are a few teams (Green Bay, Seattle) who are looking to upgrade their punting unit, but they haven't made moves because the players aren't out there.

Jason

[turbodiesel#44]

I'll bet you were saying the same ignorant stuff about JC as well. Again, you're trying to make definitive statements about a rookie after just 5 games. Your lack of patience is dumbfounding.

Still waiting on you to back up your claims about what I said with actual quotes. Still waiting on you to address your contradictory statements. Still waiting on your opinion about the NFL leader in punt average, Donnie Jones, having an average of 38 his rookie year.

I haven't made any contradictory statements. I agree you are dumbfounded. And you are getting desperate making up stuff I said about JC or anybody else. Why don't you let go of Brook's nuts and start grunting. Maybe your own will drop.

Brooks is not only dead last in the NFL with distance, he is dead last with net, which reflects hang time. And he is responsible for half of the 4 TD returns on punts this year in the entire league.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=punt&league=nfl&season=2&year=2008

[elkabong82]

I haven't made any contradictory statements. I agree you are dumbfounded. And you are getting desperate making up stuff I said about JC or anybody else. Why don't you let go of Brook's nuts and start grunting. Maybe your own will drop.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

"I haven't made any contradictory statements." lol. Whatver dude, come join us in the real world when you're done with your vacation in fantasy land. I already quoted both statements where you contradicted yourself (sadly it wasn't the only time in this thread). You said punters don't cost good teams games and the Skins proved that. You also said we can't risk having a rookie punter in. If a punter won't cost us a game, then what's the risk? You even went on to say Brooks will wind up costing us games, eventhough you said a punter won't cost us a game, and that they in general don't win or lose games. Yeah, no contradiction there

And again you cling to punt average, and ignore that the league leader averaged only 38 his rookie year.

And again, nice juvenile retort. What is your obsession with male genetalia? It's pretty disturbing. Try sticking to actual arguments and stop with the kiddy stuff, it's getting pretty offensive and it isn't necessary.

[turbodiesel#44]

Normally a punter can't hurt you that much, but Brooks is that bad.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

"I haven't made any contradictory statements." lol. Whatver dude, come join us in the real world when you're done with your vacation in fantasy land. I already quoted both statements where you contradicted yourself (sadly it wasn't the only time in this thread). You said punters don't cost good teams games and the Skins proved that. You also said we can't risk having a rookie punter in. If a punter won't cost us a game, then what's the risk? You even went on to say Brooks will wind up costing us games, eventhough you said a punter won't cost us a game, and that they in general don't win or lose games. Yeah, no contradiction there

Try to keep up. Maybe put the bong down.

[zoony]

Time to move on gentlemen.