Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   2015 NFL Draft Forum (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=47)
-   -   Onterio McCalebb, RB, Auburn (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52976)

Caulibflower 05-15-2012 02:24 PM

Onterio McCalebb, RB, Auburn
 
I've been watching a bit of his tape lately, and he's a guy that has always stood out to me when watching Auburn games. Hasn't ever been the feature back, but seems like he's always a threat to break off a huge play when he's in the game. I've begun thinking there are an awful lot of similarities between him and CJ Spiller, but he doesn't seem to be getting nearly the press Spiller was going into his senior season. The guy's got great hands, he's super fast and smooth, and he's a legitimate return man. If he runs in the 4.3s, like a lot of people expect him to, could he break into the first round discussion? He's got Dyer there, and Spiller had James Davis, Reggie Bush had LenDale White. McCalebb seems to be that kind of player.

He's got a 6.46 career yards per attempt average in the SEC with 2016 rushing yards in three seasons - he's been a situational player, but he entered that role as soon as he stepped on campus. Was second on the team in receiving yards last year. 27.9 KR average over his career.

So let's say everything goes best-case scenario - weighs in at the combine at 185 or so, runs a 4.3... Could he break into the first round conversation? Is he a day-two pick? Again, just to be clear - I don't see him as a "starting running back" - but with the way offenses are continuing to evolve, there's definitely a demand for versatile, fast running backs with good hands, and McCalebb's demonstrated that against elite competition. To me, if Isaiah Pead, Ronnie Hillman and LaMichael James are going Day 2, McCalebb shouldn't go any lower. Thoughts?

(Video)

Don Vito 05-15-2012 02:30 PM

Dyer is at Arkansas State now

Raiderz4Life 05-15-2012 02:32 PM

I would say RD 3 or 4 would be appropriate for him.

BamaFalcon59 05-15-2012 02:36 PM

More Chris Rainey than CJ Spiller.

Caulibflower 05-15-2012 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Vito (Post 2999605)
Dyer is at Arkansas State now

Really? What happened there? First I've heard of this. :oops:

Caulibflower 05-15-2012 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raiderz4life (Post 2999609)
I would say RD 3 or 4 would be appropriate for him.

Yeah, and I mean, that's what a lot of people say this time of year, but there's always those players who shoot up. Especially if Dyer is gone, how high could he rise if, say, he runs for 1,000 yards and is a focal point of the offense? Maybe McCluster would be another relevant comparison.

Don Vito 05-15-2012 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caulibflower (Post 2999647)
Really? What happened there? First I've heard of this. :oops:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...damages-auburn

He was suspended for the bowl game, he and Chizik didn't get along, and he wanted to be closer to home.

Caulibflower 05-15-2012 03:26 PM

Dyer's going to go nuts against Sun Belt defenses. Yeesh, that's gonna be nasty.

BamaFalcon59 05-15-2012 04:19 PM

McCluster was on another level from McCalleb.

Caulibflower 05-15-2012 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BamaFalcon59 (Post 2999804)
McCluster was on another level from McCalleb.

C'mon, man. There's always this hindsight bias where people want to say players whose college careers are over are on some different level than current players. "Nah, man, so-and-so was waaaaay better than so-and-other-so."

Really? They both played in the SEC. Here's their production Freshman-Junior years.

- McCluster -

2006: 8 att, 68 yds, 8.5 ypc, 31 lng, 1 TD - 15 rec, 232 yds, 15.5 avg, 49 lng, 1 TD.
2007: 6 att, 63 yds, 10.5 ypc, 29 lng, 0 TD - 27 rec, 326 yds, 12.1 avg, 46 lng, 2 TD.
2008: 109 att, 655 yds, 6.0 ypc, 40 lng, 6 TD - 44 rec, 625 yds, 14.2 avg, 56 lng, 1 TD.


- McCalebb -

2009: 105 att, 565 yds, 5.4 ypc, 62 lng, 4 TD - 6 rec, 58 yds, 9.7 avg, 0 TD.
2010: 95 att, 810 yds, 8.5 ypc, 70 lng, 9 TD - 7 rec, 86 yds, 12.3 avg, 23 lng, 1 TD.
2011: 112 att, 641 yds, 5.7 ypc, 60 lng, 5 TD - 32 rec, 344 yds, 10.8 avg, 51 lng, 2 TD.

And McCalebb has done more in the return game. McCluster's big year was his senior year, and McCalebb is going into his senior year without last year's starter, so I'd expect a similar increase in production. You might point to 2010 and say he was benefiting from Cam Newton, but he was averaging 8.5 yards per carry, and then last year without him, he became the team's second-leading receiver while still averaging 5.7 a pop on a much less dynamic team. Take those things in hand with their small statures, and I think they have a pretty similar playing style. And remember, McCluster didn't time very well - McCalebb is expected to be a 4.40-kind of guy. I'm not trying to say he's better than McCluster, but we're talking about second-round types of players here, and I'm not exactly sure what puts McCluster "on another level." I'm just wondering what would keep McCalebb out of the second round, given the other names that've been thrown out there. He's been a dynamic, explosive player in CFB's toughest conference... what's not to like, other than his size?

I suppose I'm bringing it up because I typically see him outside of the top ten in RB rankings, and that just seems low given precedent and what he offers.

Caulibflower 05-15-2012 08:15 PM

^^^ Their stats are almost-inverted; McCluster became much more involved in the run game his junior year, while McCalebb really made an impact in the passing game his junior year. But their respective roles on their offenses were very similar - small, extremely quick big-play guys who you could get the ball to in a variety of ways. If anything, McCalebb has been a bigger part of his offense thus far than McCluster was at the same point in his career.

And McCalebb does a good job of hitting holes. Like any speed guy, there are going to be plays where you wish he wouldn't have danced and gotten down field faster, but I like that when I see footage against teams like LSU he'll just plant his foot when he sees a seam and stretch the defense through the middle; if the hole's there, he usually takes it.

cajuncorey 05-15-2012 09:03 PM

a coward between the tackles not sufficent for the premier league, computer numbers are not enough for these types of backs. test them on the iron. if there lower half is real (ie darren sproles squating 800+) perhaps he can survive. beware of the scat back my friend.

critesy 05-15-2012 09:59 PM

as a huge auburn fan i'll give the low down.

he's about 5'10 170 (highest i see him getting is 175)
he'll definitely run in the 4.3's.
he has no shiftiness what so ever, just runs really really fast.
trips over his feet when he does try to juke.
amazing hands.
tough guy for his size. takes huge hits and always gets up.
great vision. running and returning.

auburn has moved to a pro style offense this year with malzahn gone and it'll be interesting to see how he's used. im guessing the same as past years as a situational player.

im guessing he'll go 4th.

JHL6719 05-15-2012 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by critesy (Post 3000436)
as a huge auburn fan


my condolences

TACKLE 05-15-2012 10:42 PM

Any chance he's asked to become a primary slot WR at the next level like McCluster?

critesy 05-15-2012 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TACKLE (Post 3000556)
Any chance he's asked to become a primary slot WR at the next level like McCluster?

meh, i dont think so. i cant really see him do much other than returning, or special packages for him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHL6719 (Post 3000528)
my condolences

ya ya good job, youre an alabama fan. since saban came the iron bowl is 3-2 in your favour. its not like youve been all superior.

Caulibflower 05-16-2012 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cajuncorey (Post 3000258)
a coward between the tackles not sufficent for the premier league, computer numbers are not enough for these types of backs. test them on the iron. if there lower half is real (ie darren sproles squating 800+) perhaps he can survive. beware of the scat back my friend.

One must not be too quick to associate a necessarily elusive running style with cowardice; featherweights must be judged on their willingness to be pulverized while utilizing their strengths, such as they are. Watch him pull through the middle of the Bayou Horde. Ever more, the premeir league covets speed, and the spindly Tiger can run.

cajuncorey 05-16-2012 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caulibflower (Post 3000752)
One must not be too quick to associate a necessarily elusive running style with cowardice; featherweights must be judged on their willingness to be pulverized while utilizing their strengths, such as they are. Watch him pull through the middle of the Bayou Horde. Ever more, the premeir league covets speed, and the spindly Tiger can run.

In the real universe the Boxer position, as George Orwell would describe it, is reserved for those capable of not only recieveing punishment not on only on the exterior but on the interior as well. As well as there ability to move along the X axis. Speed would be placed 3rd, that is why Mark Ingram, of whoms computer numbers are ungodly yet he goes in the first despite that. He goes on to gain 4 yards a carry for the next 7 years boring yet sufficient.

As speaking for your spindly Tiger, Defenses in the premeir league do not open up as the proverbial red sea would. I am reminded of a time back in 2001 when we selected Michael Bennett in the first in the fake universe, in the real universe he goes in the 4th. His mind and body deteriorated as did the Id, ego and super ego.

To conclude the so called featherweights are purely gimmicks and wrinkles you may include but not worthey of day 1 or day 2 attention

Caulibflower 05-16-2012 02:51 PM

That may be so. But the point is that in the fake universe, the spindly Tiger's peers have been routinely valued at a premium, even when it's clear that other Boxers, such as the Cowboy-Hat Province's Aryan galloper, can be found well beyond the most glorious, more critical, initial rounds of conscription.

BamaFalcon59 05-16-2012 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caulibflower (Post 3000154)
C'mon, man. There's always this hindsight bias where people want to say players whose college careers are over are on some different level than current players. "Nah, man, so-and-so was waaaaay better than so-and-other-so."

Really? They both played in the SEC. Here's their production Freshman-Junior years.

- McCluster -

2006: 8 att, 68 yds, 8.5 ypc, 31 lng, 1 TD - 15 rec, 232 yds, 15.5 avg, 49 lng, 1 TD.
2007: 6 att, 63 yds, 10.5 ypc, 29 lng, 0 TD - 27 rec, 326 yds, 12.1 avg, 46 lng, 2 TD.
2008: 109 att, 655 yds, 6.0 ypc, 40 lng, 6 TD - 44 rec, 625 yds, 14.2 avg, 56 lng, 1 TD.


- McCalebb -

2009: 105 att, 565 yds, 5.4 ypc, 62 lng, 4 TD - 6 rec, 58 yds, 9.7 avg, 0 TD.
2010: 95 att, 810 yds, 8.5 ypc, 70 lng, 9 TD - 7 rec, 86 yds, 12.3 avg, 23 lng, 1 TD.
2011: 112 att, 641 yds, 5.7 ypc, 60 lng, 5 TD - 32 rec, 344 yds, 10.8 avg, 51 lng, 2 TD.

And McCalebb has done more in the return game. McCluster's big year was his senior year, and McCalebb is going into his senior year without last year's starter, so I'd expect a similar increase in production. You might point to 2010 and say he was benefiting from Cam Newton, but he was averaging 8.5 yards per carry, and then last year without him, he became the team's second-leading receiver while still averaging 5.7 a pop on a much less dynamic team. Take those things in hand with their small statures, and I think they have a pretty similar playing style. And remember, McCluster didn't time very well - McCalebb is expected to be a 4.40-kind of guy. I'm not trying to say he's better than McCluster, but we're talking about second-round types of players here, and I'm not exactly sure what puts McCluster "on another level." I'm just wondering what would keep McCalebb out of the second round, given the other names that've been thrown out there. He's been a dynamic, explosive player in CFB's toughest conference... what's not to like, other than his size?

I suppose I'm bringing it up because I typically see him outside of the top ten in RB rankings, and that just seems low given precedent and what he offers.

Well, McCluster was nothing before his senior year. Or, at most, a shadow of what he would become.

McCluster didn't become a viable prospect until he began to dominate SEC defenses his senior year, and not by simply running around them. McCalleb won't do that.

BaLLiN 05-16-2012 10:35 PM

idk why, but kinda reminds me of ted ginn..

BamaFalcon59 05-17-2012 09:56 AM

Hah, that's about right. Ginn was even faster and had more wiggle though.

villagewarrior 05-17-2012 10:06 PM

McCalebb always seems to be making plays when I watch Auburn. I like play makers.

critesy 05-18-2012 04:09 PM

ted ginn is a real good comparison. best one to come of mind.

BaLLiN 05-18-2012 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BamaFalcon59 (Post 3002390)
Hah, that's about right. Ginn was even faster and had more wiggle though.

well we don't know for sure about the speed, but Ginn really doesn't have much wiggle either albeit he is more elusive. They both look like long striders that read defenses pretty well but won't do much without being in space to build up speed. I don't really know how good of a return man McCalebb is, but just from the stretch plays he seemed alot like Ginn.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.