Rivals: Clayborn is #2 overall player in the nation

[DJK15]

And the #1 DE. I remember last season I was laughed off the board for saying that Clayborn had the potential to be as good as Suh this year. Guess I wasn't that far off.

Rivals.com 2010 Top 100 Players Countdown photos

 

[Cybyassociation]

And the #1 DE. I remember last season I was laughed off the board for saying that Clayborn had the potential to be as good as Suh this year. Guess I wasn't that far off.

Rivals.com 2010 Top 100 Players Countdown photos

Just because he is ranked about the same as Suh does not mean he is as good as Suh. IMO, still pretty far off. I'm not saying he is not good, so dont try to put your Hawkeye spin on it. Clayborn is not the defensive dominator that Suh was. He is a very good player and worthy of that ranking.

 

[chadm]

Just because he is ranked about the same as Suh does not mean he is as good as Suh. IMO, still pretty far off. I'm not saying he is not good, so dont try to put your Hawkeye spin on it. Clayborn is not the defensive dominator that Suh was. He is a very good player and worthy of that ranking.

^^^^ this^^^^

 

[weR138]

And the #1 DE. I remember last season I was laughed off the board for saying that Clayborn had the potential to be as good as Suh this year. Guess I wasn't that far off.

Rivals.com 2010 Top 100 Players Countdown photos

Cool story, ******.

 

[isucyfan]

On the field and off, he sure packs a punch.

 

[The_Architect]

Clayborn is really really good but I don't think anyone compares to Suh, he's just that much better and that's no slight on AC.

 

[TruClone]

On the field and off, he sure packs a punch.

Well done! I would think that Hi-C and Kool-Aid would be chomping at the bit to have him as their ad spokesman once he has relinquished his athletic eligibility.

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

Nobody in our lifetime will be as dominant as Suh, to even suggest it makes me think you are high as a kite.

 

[chadm]

Nobody in our lifetime will be as dominant as Suh, to even suggest it makes me think you are high as a kite.

I would not go that far. History has told us that at some point someone has been better at about every position in sports.

 

[tm3308]

Nobody in our lifetime will be as dominant as Suh, to even suggest it makes me think you are high as a kite.

I think the best way to put this is: can Clayborn potentially be just as much of a game-changer this year as Suh was last year? I do think so (though I am a little biased). BUT Clayborn plays defensive end. It's easier to dominate a game from the DE spot than it is for a DT like Suh. So Clayborn could have just as big of an impact, but he's not as good as Suh because he's at a position that makes his will easier to impose. Fair enough?

But there have been a few DT's that I've seen in my life who were at least close to as good as Suh. Warren Sapp (in his prime) comes to mind. He wasn't the same style of DT, but he was arguably just as dominant. We may never see a DT like Suh again (meaning as lean, athletic, etc.), but that doesn't mean we won't see one better. He's just so different from the norm when you picture defensive tackles.

 

[Cybyassociation]

I think the best way to put this is: can Clayborn potentially be just as much of a game-changer this year as Suh was last year? I do think so (though I am a little biased). BUT Clayborn plays defensive end. It's easier to dominate a game from the DE spot than it is for a DT like Suh. So Clayborn could have just as big of an impact, but he's not as good as Suh because he's at a position that makes his will easier to impose. Fair enough?

But there have been a few DT's that I've seen in my life who were at least close to as good as Suh. Warren Sapp (in his prime) comes to mind. He wasn't the same style of DT, but he was arguably just as dominant. We may never see a DT like Suh again (meaning as lean, athletic, etc.), but that doesn't mean we won't see one better. He's just so different from the norm when you picture defensive tackles.

You are a lotta biased. Clayborn < Suh. End of story.

 

[tm3308]

You are a lotta biased. Clayborn < Suh. End of story.

Did you even read the rest of the post? Or did you stop at "Biased"? Because I pretty clearly said that Clayborn is NOT as good, but could be just as big of a game-changer because of the position he plays.

 

[ISUCLONES15]

And the #1 DE. I remember last season I was laughed off the board for saying that Clayborn had the potential to be as good as Suh this year. Guess I wasn't that far off.

Rivals.com 2010 Top 100 Players Countdown photos

Trust me, you are still being laughed off the boards and this link you provided does nothing to stop the laughing. Suh is a once in a lifetime talent. The guy was a man amongst boys. The most dominant college football player on the DL I have ever seen. Clayborn is a very good player, but he couldn't hold Suh's jockstrap.

 

[Cybyassociation]

Did you even read the rest of the post? Or did you stop at "Biased"? Because I pretty clearly said that Clayborn is NOT as good, but could be just as big of a game-changer because of the position he plays.

Obviously I did. You rambled on about how he (Clayborn), is not as good, but maybe he could be. He doesnt play the same position, but he could be as good at another position. Take off your blinders. Clayborn is an impressive player but he is not and will not be as dominant as Suh...at any position. Stop getting so upset, no one is saying that Clayborn is not a good player.

 

[azn4cy]

I think the best way to put this is: can Clayborn potentially be just as much of a game-changer this year as Suh was last year? I do think so (though I am a little biased). BUT Clayborn plays defensive end. It's easier to dominate a game from the DE spot than it is for a DT like Suh. So Clayborn could have just as big of an impact, but he's not as good as Suh because he's at a position that makes his will easier to impose. Fair enough?

But there have been a few DT's that I've seen in my life who were at least close to as good as Suh. Warren Sapp (in his prime) comes to mind. He wasn't the same style of DT, but he was arguably just as dominant. We may never see a DT like Suh again (meaning as lean, athletic, etc.), but that doesn't mean we won't see one better. He's just so different from the norm when you picture defensive tackles.

I see your point, I just see Suh as a different level than Clayborn, and that's not even a slight to AC, just that Suh was that much better than any other DL.

Regardless, Adrian deserves his ranking, I just think it's a pretty tool move for DJK to come on here and gloat about that ranking as if it somehow justifies his statement.

Tim Couch was the #1 ranked QB coming out of college. So was Peyton Manning. Doesn't make them the same player.

 

[tm3308]

Obviously I did. You rambled on about how he (Clayborn), is not as good, but maybe he could be. He doesnt play the same position, but he could be as good at another position. Take off your blinders. Clayborn is an impressive player but he is not and will not be as dominant as Suh...at any position. Stop getting so upset, no one is saying that Clayborn is not a good player.

You clearly didn't get the point of my post. DE's have an easier time taking over a game. That doesn't mean that Clayborn is as good at playing DE as Suh was at playing DT. It simply means that a less talented player who plays defensive end can take over a game the way Suh did from DT, because it's EASIER for DE's to do so. The level of his impact may be the same (And I didn't say he would do that, just that he could potentially do it), but his talent is clearly below Suh's.

 

[tm3308]

I see your point, I just see Suh as a different level than Clayborn, and that's not even a slight to AC, just that Suh was that much better than any other DL.

Regardless, Adrian deserves his ranking, I just think it's a pretty tool move for DJK to come on here and gloat about that ranking as if it somehow justifies his statement.

Tim Couch was the #1 ranked QB coming out of college. So was Peyton Manning. Doesn't make them the same player.

I agree. Suh was at a completely different level, talent-wise. Less talented players than Suh (AC) can make just as big of an impact as Suh did, if they play DE, because it's easier for them to do so from that position.

 

[azn4cy]

I agree. Suh was at a completely different level, talent-wise. Less talented players than Suh (AC) can make just as big of an impact as Suh did, if they play DE, because it's easier for them to do so from that position.

True story. Though AC is no doubt a beast. Funny you mentioned Sapp, AC would make a nice addition to my Buccaneers... McCoy and Price and AC would be just like the 2000 era Bucs.

 

[Redhawk94]

Clayborn has the POTENTIAL to be dominant like Suh, but I wouldn't count on it. There have been a lot of all americans and top 10 draft picks, but I can't remember too many defensive lineman that dominated a game like Suh did last year.

 

[hippiehawk]

Clayborn has the POTENTIAL to be dominant like Suh, but I wouldn't count on it. There have been a lot of all americans and top 10 draft picks, but I can't remember too many defensive lineman that dominated a game like Suh did last year.

Clayborn wasn't getting much attention until the Orange Bowl, and now you see him at or near the top of a lot of these lists. I conclude from this that many of the people hyping Clayborn have only seen the Orange Bowl.

I believe Scouts Inc (via ESPN) actually graded out the best prospects for next year's draft based on tape and had Clayborn something like 17th. That strikes me as more likely to be accurate, though I'd put him even lower if he intends to play himself into shape like he did last year (he has all but admitted that he did this last year to the press).