ant2ney

Reuben Foster 'incident' at the combine

83 posts in this topic

On 3/11/2017 at 4:38 PM, terps85 said:

O/U 20 seconds on the clock if Foster is there at 16?

Erase the 0 on that number, and I'll take the under

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RavensDieHard21 said:

Believe that all you want. We land Foster and this defense will be freaking scary. 

Those smaller LBs get washed in the run game often or get caught out of position because they are asked to line up all over the place. Sometimes outmatched. 

Mosley and Foster with Williams back and Jefferson here would wreak havoc. Clean lanes will often be paved into the backfield. Both can stuff the run, blitz well, make the play calls, sniff out screens, and cover very well. Foster is also a Bernard pollard like hitter as well. Laying the hammer will be a thing again

With bwill, Mosley/foster, and Jefferson at all 3 levels, we may not allow more than 50 RYPG. We could let our edge guys pin their ears back every single play in any formation, as long as we have those 4 on the field teams won't run the ball effectively.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, January J said:

I'm salivating over this possibility.

We'd probably have the best linebacker and safety duo in the league. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ravensnation5220 said:

Guys....i just realized Hasaan Riddick is bigger than Reuben foster....foster is only 6'0 230

I'm coming around to joey's point of view now though that reddick probably isn't an ILB in our defense though so the size comparison makes some sense for a guy who I expect to come off the edge more than I initially thought

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rossihunter2 said:

I'm coming around to joey's point of view now though that reddick probably isn't an ILB in our defense though so the size comparison makes some sense for a guy who I expect to come off the edge more than I initially thought

I still think if we draft him that high it's because of his versatility, if a team takes him and doesn't take advantage of his range sideline to sideline and coverage ability then they're taking him for the wrong reason. His pass rush ability is more of an added value in my eyes. I can't leave him on the edge all day, he'll get engulfed vs the run. And Stanley made him non-existent when they played each other. He has more potential as a free roaming linebacker, with the ability to put his hand in the dirt and rush the passer. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think Riddick fits in a 3-4 scheme. He's going to have to be an olb in a 4-3 defense.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

I really don't think Riddick fits in a 3-4 scheme. He's going to have to be an olb in a 4-3 defense.

i agree hes probably best suited to will linebacker in a 4-3 but i think that he can be a stand up olb in a 3-4 - he's a matchup problem in the front 7 which is what you are drafting with him - i think he's most effective rushing the passer so that's where he'll be - on the outside mostly which he wont always be able to do in a 4-3 - the different base packages play to different strengths of his because of his versatile strengths

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2017 at 7:47 PM, rossihunter2 said:

i agree hes probably best suited to will linebacker in a 4-3 but i think that he can be a stand up olb in a 3-4 - he's a matchup problem in the front 7 which is what you are drafting with him - i think he's most effective rushing the passer so that's where he'll be - on the outside mostly which he wont always be able to do in a 4-3 - the different base packages play to different strengths of his because of his versatile strengths

He'll probably be used the same way the falsons use Vic Beasley. That's what i project him to be at least

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2017 at 5:02 PM, ravensnation5220 said:

Guys....i just realized Hasaan Riddick is bigger than Reuben foster....foster is only 6'0 230

Yea - he dropped some 20 pounds going into this past season. He's played at a significantly bigger size than that though. He trimmed down for more speed/range. It def helped.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2017 at 7:09 PM, RaineV1 said:

I really don't think Riddick fits in a 3-4 scheme. He's going to have to be an olb in a 4-3 defense.

The reality is most teams are in sub packages >60% of the time anyways... 

But i think hes a fit in any scheme. No reason he couldnt play ILB or OLB in a 3-4... and use him as a matchup guy on 3rd downs and in obvious passing situations. Try to get him a 1on1 with a TE or a slower RT and let him go to town.

Thats his biggest value so thats what you want him doing on money downs... but hes got enough athleticism and versatility to play the run, blitz, or cover on early down to keep himself on the field.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ravensnation5220 said:

The say he tested positive....he had a diluted sample. How is that the same thing?

they consider it a fail if its diluted so they count it as positive.

 

I am all for grabbing this guy in the 2nd round.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ravensnation5220 said:

The say he tested positive....he had a diluted sample. How is that the same thing?

Diluted samples typically register as a positive.

Because normally the only way you'd get a sample that diluted is by tampering, using some sort of diuretic, or way over hydrating.... why typically only happens when someone knows theyre going to test positive and are trying to hide it. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Diluted samples typically register as a positive.

Because normally the only way you'd get a sample that diluted is by tampering, using some sort of diuretic, or way over hydrating.... why typically only happens when someone knows theyre going to test positive and are trying to hide it. 

I've had a diluted urinalysis with just regular hydration and no tampering

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Diluted samples typically register as a positive.

Because normally the only way you'd get a sample that diluted is by tampering, using some sort of diuretic, or way over hydrating.... why typically only happens when someone knows theyre going to test positive and are trying to hide it. 

It was just championship level hydration lol

C94ecllUAAAM94q.jpg

Edited by ravensnation5220
5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You never really know with a diluted sample, but it's another red flag that teams have to consider.  That puts him in the program so if he is a user, he's already got a strike against him before he even has a job.  Sometimes you can get a diluted sample with regular hydration and it truly is a mistake that gets rectified in the next test.  Sometimes though, it's used to hide usage.  I used to work in HR and I'd wager to guess the percentage of people who failed the 2nd test after providing a diluted sample was about 70%.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rmw10 said:

You never really know with a diluted sample, but it's another red flag that teams have to consider.  That puts him in the program so if he is a user, he's already got a strike against him before he even has a job.  Sometimes you can get a diluted sample with regular hydration and it truly is a mistake that gets rectified in the next test.  Sometimes though, it's used to hide usage.  I used to work in HR and I'd wager to guess the percentage of people who failed the 2nd test after providing a diluted sample was about 70%.

He said he was sick and had food poisoning

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I've had a diluted urinalysis with just regular hydration and no tampering

It happens... im not saying it definitely means foul play.

But it usually means either water was poured into the sample after the fact, the person taking the test drank a ton of water within 2 hours of the test, or the person has been taking a diuretic leading up to the test along with drinking a ton of water to clean their system and shed water weight.

Yea, you could definitely just drink a lot of water by routine and have your urine come out that diluted.

 

But in the NFL diluted is failing and puts you in the protocol. No way these players advisors are letting them do anything to risk coming up with a diluted sample if the player is clean. They prob make sure they dont drink any water 4-6 hours prior to the test to make sure of it.

Im guessing though that some players decide that getting a failing test back that was diluted at least gives them plausible deniability and will hurt their draft stock less than an out right failure.... so they weigh the decision and pull for a diluted sample.

Thatd be my guess here. But it certainly isnt a guarantee.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ravensnation5220 said:

He said he was sick and had food poisoning

I mean, that could be the case, but that could certainly be an excuse too.  Regardless, it's another minor red flag that teams have to consider.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

You never really know with a diluted sample, but it's another red flag that teams have to consider.  That puts him in the program so if he is a user, he's already got a strike against him before he even has a job.  Sometimes you can get a diluted sample with regular hydration and it truly is a mistake that gets rectified in the next test.  Sometimes though, it's used to hide usage.  I used to work in HR and I'd wager to guess the percentage of people who failed the 2nd test after providing a diluted sample was about 70%.

Agreed.

The series of events or coincidences that would need to take place to get a diluted sample naturally are honestly hard to do... and as you said, if it is an honest mistake will be proven so 99.9% of the time with a 2nd test.

You literally have to be downing water at a really high rate leading right up to the minute you take the test to naturally come up with a diluted sample.

 

 

Sidenote -- didnt jernigan have a diluted test at the combine? Or am i thinking of someone else?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Agreed.

The series of events or coincidences that would need to take place to get a diluted sample naturally are honestly hard to do... and as you said, if it is an honest mistake will be proven so 99.9% of the time with a 2nd test.

You literally have to be downing water at a really high rate leading right up to the minute you take the test to naturally come up with a diluted sample.

 

 

Sidenote -- didnt jernigan have a diluted test at the combine? Or am i thinking of someone else?

This isn't true though.  Plenty of people with normal drinking habits can turn in a diluted sample.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all because that nurse kept him wait for so long causing him to drink inordinate amount of gatorade

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

This isn't true though.  Plenty of people with normal drinking habits can turn in a diluted sample.

That depends on the threshold for a diluted result.

Considering the NFL has a policy where diluted = failed no matter what, and not "retest" ive got to imagine the creatinine levels and specific gravity measurements are toward the extremes of the "diluted" scale.... and it really isnt possible for someone with normal drinkings habits to reach those levels.

Normally the reason for a clean person to come up diluted is that they were nervous about not being able to pee on command and end up drinking a lot of water before the test... 

It'd only be normal for the person to come up diluted based on their "normal drinking habits" if they're very active and drink 3L of fluid or more per day.... spread out evenly through the day.... and considering this is the NFL we're talking about, not Quest Diagnostics testing regular joes -- we're talking finely tuned athletes who come from big programs with all sorts of nutrition and hydration experts on staff -- im sure theyve developed their test criteria to accommodate for individuals who hydrate that regularly.

 

Edited by BOLDnPurPnBlacK
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, trevorsteadman said:

Top 5 pick now available at #16 lets gooooooooo

Right plus I heard Him and CJ are very close friends 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now