mark clayton video highlights

Ok, but for the record once again, the official combine times for Williamson and Clayton are 4.38 and 4.41.

 

Dude you're gonna go into f'n meltdown if they pick Williamson aren't you?

 

Actually I already made it clear that I'm not going to be that disappointed no matter who we pick, mostly because I'm not that excited about anyone we could. There's always the possibility that I'm wrong about Williamson, and even if I'm not, we're still a good team and have had a pretty darn good run in the draft recently. Sooner or later you're going to miss on one, whether it's somebody I like or not.

 

I normally don't get into these discussions but I thought I might give my opinion. I think the reason why Williamson is ranked higher is because of potential. Potential is very hard to put into #'s. I would be completely happy with either of them. Williamson should fit with our offnese better and has the "potential" to be a better overall receiver. jmho

 

You never know how prospects will turn out, but I think it's been established that Clayton is a better fit for our offense while Williamson may fill a need better. And we never did get around to explaining this supposed potential.

 

I think I can agree with that.

 

:xyzthumbs If we do select Williamson, I hope I end up more wrong about him than I have been about anyone.

 

...must resist...must resist....

allright, I really hate to keep the fifty Williamson threads going but I'd say that from my perspective, Williamson does have a bit more RAC ability, a little more deep ability, and his deficiencies in routes probably won't bother us as much - based on how we liked to use Smith, anyway. If we're looking for another Colbert, but more powerful? That's roughly how I considered Clayton at the end of the year. More safe, routes, drops. Though, honestly, between Colbert and Smith, I don't think they're all that worried about drops, since they each dropped more passes over their individual years starting opposite Muhammad than Muhammad himself, who's well known for it.

 

i think clayton blows colbert away as far as RAC goes. he seems to be much more elusive, better balance, better cutting, better stop-and-go and great hands.

 

It sort of depends on what you mean. If you're talking about just running straight by defenders, that might be true. But if you're talking about making moves and breaking open, every single scouting report I've read gives Clayton a huge edge there. (ESPN: "(Williamson) is not overly elusive and won't "shake" defenders in space. Got away with natural speed and burst at the collegiate level but will need to become more proficient with moves in the NFL.")

You see the same thing on film. Clayton makes a lot of guys miss, Williamson doesn't (although he can run by a lot of them). We've already talked about how Williamson is a long strider, not someone with particularly quick feet. That's why Clayton is faster in short spaces.