TT signs punter

[vince]

You’re saying it’s ridiculous to project a punter’s potential by comparing his simulated NFL punting performance with other punters’ actual performance doing the same thing, but it’s reasonable to project a punter’s potential based on a specifically-selected, isolated video of an entirely different game, with different rules, different kicking circumstances altogether – as Bedard did?

What reasonable (or ridiculous) measures do you think the Packers took, and the other five teams would have taken, to project his potential? I’m pretty sure they didn’t fly in the Bears and invite 70,000 into Lambeau to play a few games and try him out, or ask all the other punters in the league to show up to the Hutson Center to compare him to.

A demonstration of his leg strength in punting the football enables one to reasonably assess whether he has the potential to succeed. Now we will see if he can fulfill that potential in different weather and in game situations. That is/was all fully acknowledged. The comparison to the leg strenght of other punters taking the same action on the football gives the closest context available. His leg strength compares adequately (perhaps favorably) with other punters on other teams in the league.

Bedard's blog and McGinn’s article are only reasonable if you want to assume the negative before this guy is tested in game situations. No one would assume that Prokick Australia is objective - as I stated, but his coach’s quote in McGinn’s article is about the only reasonable perspective in the article.

Long shot? Not at all. He's there to help them win a Super Bowl. Now he has to produce.

Again, no one expects objectivity from this guy’s trainers, but people do have the right to expect objectivity from the JSO. McGinn and Bedard clearly are not here, in my opinion, and rarely are when it comes to coverage of Ted Thompson’s GM activities. Sure they pay lip-service to objectivity to enough of an extent to keep themselves above board, but they consistently ignore information which would shed a positive light on situations – as they’ve done here - and highlight negative spins – as they’ve done here. In fact, they typically ignore positive article opportunities altogether, and consistently give a negative spin on neutral news items that can’t be ignored. They’re “reasonable” if you want to be paid lip-service to half the facts and circumstances and ultimately be consistently proven wrong. This goes back to McGinn's article last offseason about how the state of the Packers was the worst it's been since the 70's. That may have been a reasonable perspective, but it was also blatantly wrong and incredibly biased.

Regarding Bryan’s learning curve, it’s not like he’s an offensive lineman here PB. If he can catch the snap (he can), take 2 steps and position the ball (he can) and kick it far and high, far or high, and maybe even angle it too, in game situations, he’s 99% there. He’s been controlling kicks, often on the run, as a rucker already, and he’s demonstrated the potential for those things to the Packers staff personally and in the video. From there, his Australian Rules skills may even help him make a tackle down field if needed. He probably can run a fake and throw the ball some. That’d put him ahead of the learning curve for most punters.

Regarding the above comments, Smith didn’t refute what McGinn said. How exactly does one refute a statement about another statement about other anonymous’ people’s opinions? He stated that they are incorrect. What else would you ask him to do?
The quote was from an Australian forum that follows the activities of Australian Rules Football. If you go back a couple pages and read the thread, I think it’s reasonable to assume that Johnny is who he says he is. Johnny Smith
The referenced videos were from Bedard’s blog.

[pbmax]

You’re saying it’s ridiculous to project a punter’s potential by comparing his simulated NFL punting performance with other punters’ actual performance doing the same thing, but it’s reasonable to project a punter’s potential based on a specifically-selected, isolated video of an entirely different game, with different rules, different kicking circumstances altogether – as Bedard did?

I don't think Bedard draws any conclusions from that video. It was at the end of the blog post. If he did, then he is an idiot. But there is no indication he did.

What reasonable (or ridiculous) measures do you think the Packers took, and the other five teams would have taken, to project his potential? I’m pretty sure they didn’t fly in the Bears and invite 70,000 into Lambeau to play a few games and try him out, or ask all the other punters in the league to show up to the Hutson Center to compare him to.

Man did you get up on the wrong side of the grumpy bed. I doubt the Packers did anything of the sort. What the Packers DO have is a record of every punter they have ever worked out or seen at the combine. Therefore, they have points of comparison for the punter that we do not.

A demonstration of his leg strength in punting the football enables one to reasonably assess whether he has the potential to succeed. Now we will see if he can fulfill that potential in different weather and in game situations. That is/was all fully acknowledged. The comparison to the leg strenght of other punters taking the same action on the football gives the closest context available. His leg strength compares adequately (perhaps favorably) with other punters on other teams in the league.

I agree on potential. But you were comparing his video kick stats to actual kicks on NFL games. There were no people rushing the kid in the workout. So to determine if he has the necessary leg strength, you need an apples to apples comparison. I do not agree that you can conclude what you did in the last sentence of that paragraph from a workout video; esp. one that has been edited.

[quote]but his coach’s quote in McGinn’s article is about the only reasonable perspective in the article.

Long shot? Not at all. He's there to help them win a Super Bowl. Now he has to produce.

From whose perspective is this reasonable? As a fan, I would like to believe this kid will kick us to the Super Bowl. But he has never played the game before. So while the coach's confidence is understandable, his conclusion is not reasonable.

Sure they pay lip-service to objectivity to enough of an extent to keep themselves above board, but they consistently ignore information which would shed a positive light on situations – as they’ve done here - and highlight negative spins – as they’ve done here. In fact, they typically ignore positive article opportunities altogether, and consistently give a negative spin on neutral news items that can’t be ignored.

This contention is demonstrably false. If JSO wanted you to be convinced the punter would fail, then the workout video would not have been made available as the first video link. Other items by JSO writers have been catastrophes, but this one fails to meet your test for bias.

Regarding Bryan’s learning curve, it’s not like he’s an offensive lineman here PB. If he can catch the snap (he can), take 2 steps and position the ball (he can) and kick it far and high, far or high, and maybe even angle it too, in game situations, he’s 99% there. He’s been controlling kicks, often on the run, as a rucker already, and he’s demonstrated the potential for those things to the Packers staff personally and in the video. From there, his Australian Rules skills may even help him make a tackle down field if needed. He probably can run a fake and throw the ball some. That’d put him ahead of the learning curve for most punters.

If there was no more to the learning curve than that, college punters would routinely latch on in their rookie years. They do not. There is a high failure rate. His experience in Australia will clearly help him, but not every Aussie football player succeeds either. And no one keeps a punter based on downfield tackling. Its great, and I loved Jon Ryan's attitude while covering, but it isn't anywhere on the list of concerns.

And thanks for the link to the story from your earlier post.

[vince]

I don't think Bedard draws any conclusions from that video. It was at the end of the blog post. If he did, then he is an idiot. But there is no indication he did.

Of course Bedard doesn't explicitly draw a conclusion from the video, and of course there is just enough hint of objectivity so as to not explicitly lose credibility. As you said, doing that would demonstrate that he's an idiot. Idiots don't hold jobs very long. Bedard is not and idiot.

It would be most reasonable and objective to just include the punting video and perhaps a breakdown of some factual analysis, but he doesn't. He includes the punting video and then criticizes it with his opinion. Then he adds the completely irrelevant video.... Why do you suppose he would pick that one video out of the others available which profile Bryan to add in? Random selection? How is the inference from the inclusion of this video reasonable when you say he would be an idiot for drawing the only conclusion that it drives?

What the Packers DO have is a record of every punter they have ever worked out or seen at the combine. Therefore, they have points of comparison for the punter that we do not.

I couldn't agree more. Too bad Bedard and McGinn completely ignored this fact and instead premised their coverage by attempting to discredit the Packers. It's quite possible - perhaps even probable based on your statement here, that the Packers have improved their situation with this move, but, while the idea is paid lip-service through a thin veil of objectivity, you have to search to find any acknowledgement of that in their work.

I agree on potential. But you were comparing his video kick stats to actual kicks on NFL games.

My sole purpose in the comparison was to take the best data available for context in order to demonstrate potential - not a ridiculous thing to conclude. But unfortunately, that is something JSO only reluctantly acknowledges under their veil of objectivity, but in fact went out of their way to deny IMO.

Bryan may well not make the regular season roster. As his own coach said, "Now he needs to produce." It's reasonable to acknowledge that based on what is known, Bryan isn't a "long shot" as the question was posed to his coach. He's on the team. There aren't enough spots for long-shot punters. Now he has to produce. The part about him helping the team try to win the Super Bowl is the meaningless sentence in teh quote. The rest of what he said are what is relevant to the point at hand.

Skepticism doesn't equal reality. And an imbalanced article that pays lip service to one perspective doesn't equal objectivity. In my opinion, the balance of the JSO pieces are hardly objective. Including counterpoints to an argument - and then immediately attempting to defeat them does not make a piece objective. In fact, it's usually necessary to make the intended position more persuasive.

[vince]

Not surprisingly, JSO completely omitted McCarthy's comments on the punting situation altogether from their coverage at the NFL annual meetings.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/insider/index.shtml

McCarthy likes his punters...

"I know the ability in our competitive punting situation we have today is better than what it was last year," McCarty said. "I feel strongly that we’ll be better just from a pure productive standpoint of just punting the football."

Remember, last year at this time the Packers had Jeremy Kapinos (who ended up winning the job, struggled in 2009 and then was not offered a contract for 2010) and Durant Brooks, both of whom had punted in the league previously.

Masthay is a first-year player who kicked at Kentucky from 2005-08, while Bryan is a 28-year old former Australian Rules Football player who has never played American football.

"I think there's more ability there," McCarthy said. "Where they are, what they've shown to this point, I think it'll be noticeable to all you guys when you see them kick for the firs time. ... They're both strong physically when you look at them, they're both tall, linear guys. They have good fundamentals. There's a lot of talent there."

Edit: Here's Silversteen's article, which is basically the same as the GBPG blog above. He was just slower in getting it published. McCarthy sees potential in two inexperienced punters