Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14457839)

Good thing I'm not getting paid 100million dollars huh?


Who really thought when we got Clark the thing we'd be bragging about was his ability to get double teamed? I don't get why holding a player who makes as much as he does and cost as much as he did to acquire to a higher standard is such a foreign concept to you guys. If we give Mahomes the biggest contract ever and he suddenly starts playing like Alex Smith, would you say he's underwhelming or would you start bragging about how well he avoids turnovers and about his hidden touchdowns?

Originally Posted by RealSNR (Post 14457692)

Let's say his production is about the same up until halfway through the season. 4 TFLs in 8 games, 0 sacks, 0 hurries. But a whole lot of the kind of plays where people say, "Well, if you just watched the games, you'd see he's facing chips and double teams constantly and making these heads up plays here and screens and stretches blah blah blah"

Is that good enough? For what we paid for him?

If Jacksonville and their dipshit offensive coordinator and backup tackles can stop him from making shit explode in the backfield by throwing everything but the kitchen sink at him and other teams decide to do the exact same thing, will you be satisfied with that?

If he finished the year with 0 sacks, is that good enough?

Yes, that's a difference making player, but guess what? I said the exact same shit about Justin Houston, because for a time even after he got paid, he was that kind of player. I even made those exact same arguments, saying, "you're not even watching the game" to people who bitched about the contract we gave him and how he didn't show up on the stat sheet.

Hell, many of these same people who are crowing, "HUHR IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT SACKS I KNO FOOTBALL!!!" were bitching about Justin Houston's production when, guess what... he actually WAS productive. No, not all, but some are.

I can already see people furiously typing away and calling this post a stupid hypothetical, but I actually mean it. Is that good enough? And if it isn't good enough, is it good enough for two games? No, not as a team. As an individual player.

You can say Frank Clark is a good player and still say, "He hasn't done what we needed him to do in these past couple games". Maybe he'll destroy the Ravens on Sunday. Great. Then whatever. I just think some people aren't actually watching the games like they claim they are and instead opting to parrot homer talking points that they heard other people bring up in this thread and other places.

Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief (Post 14458277)

So are you drinking now or do you not have an excuse?

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14457840)

From PFF so take it for what it's worth

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Forgot to tweet this on Monday: LT Kolton Miller (<a href="https://twitter.com/kolton_miller?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@kolton_miller</a>) allowed just one quarterback pressure against KC, per <a href="https://twitter.com/PFF?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PFF</a>. No hits, no sacks allowed.<br><br>RDE Frank Clark rushed the passer 36 times vs OAK, and had zero sacks, zero hits, zero hurries.</p>&mdash; Scott Bair (@BairNBCS) <a href="https://twitter.com/BairNBCS/status/1174181602689200128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14458279)

No one said it's all about sacks. It's really not that hard to read before you post. But he really hadn't made any impact plays. We're going to need him to be more than the guy who gets double teamed if we really want this defense to be good enough to beat Tom Brady. Like I've said a million times, when you give up what we did and give him the contract he got, expectations are going to be a lot higher than the average defensive player.

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla (Post 14458283)

How do you feel about Aaron Donald? Best defensive player in the league?

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14458299)

Yes and so far he hasnt been living up to being the highest paid defensive contract in their 2 games either. I don't care how often he gets double teamed.

Originally Posted by Chris Meck (Post 14458298)

Your reading comprehension sucks.

Nothing you've posted there is what I'm saying at all. I've explained it, in plain english.

How about I tea-bag you and take pictures when Clark hits double digit sacks?

LMAO

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14458258)

Frank Clark has 1 pressure this season according to PFR

https://www.pro-football-reference.c...e_advanced.htm

The guy Chris Meck keeps comparing him with leads the league with 15.

Originally Posted by Chris Meck (Post 14458304)

Well, it's certainly a good thing the season isn't two games long, now isn't it?

Your argument is stupid.

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14458305)

He better hit double digits sacks and he probably will. But he hasn't played well these past two games. I don't know why grading players on a game by game basis is so difficult for you guys to comprehend.

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14458312)

Yes it is. But he hasn't been great the past two games. Period.


Here's a question, do you think Mahomes has played well in the two games? Or can you not answer that either because a SeAsOn Is LoNgEr ThAn TwO GaMeS? Because I think he's played great so far. So if I can say Mahomes has played well so far, how come I can't say that Frank Clark hasn't played very well so far?

Originally Posted by Chris Meck (Post 14458327)

Because it's ****ing stupid.

You could say he had a bad game if:
He was getting blown off the ball
He missed multiple tackles
He cost the team with dumb penalties
he blew assignments

None of that is true, if you watch him. The stats you want to talk about will fluctuate from game to game, as I've illustrated, and you just choose to ignore.

Nobody is saying they expect 0 sacks and 0 pressures all ****ing season. What we're saying is, he is playing at a high level and those stats will take care of themselves, because he's too ****ing good for them not to. Just like Derrick Thomas had 7 sacks in one game and then less than a sack a game the rest of the year, which was his best year. You don't look at a 2 game sample and decide what a player is. That's ****ing stupid. Clark's body of work is that he's an elite DE, and he's playing like one, and the stats will all work out just fine.

If George Brett had a couple of games in which he went 0 for 4, it didn't mean he couldn't hit.

There's nothing wrong with Clark, just like there's nothing wrong with Aaron Donald. Those stats will fluctuate, and aren't full indicators of their impact on the game.

Jesus, how many different ways do you need to be shown?

Originally Posted by -King- (Post 14458258)

Frank Clark has 1 pressure this season according to PFR

https://www.pro-football-reference.c...e_advanced.htm

The guy Chris Meck keeps comparing him with leads the league with 15.

Originally Posted by Chris Meck (Post 14458360)

And that chart has Khalil Mack as the #169th best Defensive player according to those 'advanced metrics'.

Kendall Fuller, Thornhill, Breeland, and Hitchens are all better players so far.

Think the Bears want to trade us for one of our better players?

No, because that would be stupid.

Like this argument.