'16 AZ DE Jonathan Kongbo UT Signee 2/3/16

#215
#215
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Myles Garrett and Derrick Barnett are already better than Clowney the college player.
Click to expand...
They are both great.But my college room mate is a SEC line judge.He has been in the SEC for 12 years.He told me a couple of times Clowney was the best DL he has ever seen play.That's a pretty big compliment coming from him.
 
Last edited:
#217
#217
GLDunlap said:
Not better than the 2012 version Clowney. Not even close.

*Derek
Click to expand...

Barnett had 3 less sacks and 3 less TFLs in his Freshman year, than Clowney did in 2012. Barnett had 72 total tackles to Clowneys 54.

In 2 years, and Barnett still has a bowl game, Barnett has 133 total tackles, 32 TFLs, and 19 sacks.

In 3 years, Clowney had 129 total tackles, 47 TFLs, and 24 sacks.

I would say it is close, Clowney's big hits got him more glamour is people's minds. Barnett is on pace for way more sacks and same amount of TFLs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 people
#220
#220
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Myles Garrett and Derrick Barnett are already better than Clowney the college player.
Click to expand...

Wow. You must not have seen Clowney play in college. For his size, there have been very few players that have matched his speed and skill. As much as I love Barnett, he isnt on that level. Garrett isnt either.
 
#221
#221
Dust10 said:
Easy to forget, but Clowney was absolutely dominant.
Click to expand...

But inconsistent. He was the Randy Moss of defensive ends. He played when he wanted to play.

Give me a Derek Barnett that is not as talented but gives his all every play over someone like Clowney that is all world in talent but not drive.

FYI I think Garrett is more talented than Clowney. In addition to a better motor.
 
Last edited:
#222
#222
BigOrangeTrain said:
Wow. You must not have seen Clowney play in college. For his size, there have been very few players that have matched his speed and skill. As much as I love Barnett, he isnt on that level. Garrett isnt either.
Click to expand...

But what about motor? That's one of the most important attributes for a DE. Clowney rarely pursued the action when the play went away from him. Stuff like that is why I was never sold on him. Even if he was a physical freak.

Barnett isn't in the same universe as Clowney when it comes to raw athleticism. But he's been able to produce as much on the field because he plays 100x harder.

In the long run it's guys like Barnett with good not great physical tools but tremendous drive that become great professional football players. While guys like Clowney with all-pro skills but zero drive become busts.
 
#224
#224
It is amazing how many of you guys say "numbers don't lie". Until you say they do. Clowney was a great and disruptive player...when he decided to actually play. He coasted..a lot. The numbers say Barnett and Garret both are better, but you guys say that just because of Clowneys physical tools, which are impressive, that he was better. Why does the fact that he didn't have the most important tool..desire..matter? Numbers in this case don't lie. Barnett is a more effective player...just because he tries harder and more often. That is my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#225
#225
Very fair to compare Clowney and Barrnett. Clowney had more sensational plays for sports center. Numbers don't lie. Barnett will have a career that rivals or surpasses JC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top