Rating: (0 votes - average)

1st-What it has to do with is that a player's size doesn't mean squat!

2nd-Freeney is a 3 time ALL PRO & 7 time Pro Bowler. Considering he's only been in the league 10 years, I'd say that's pretty darn good.

Last- Prototypes really don't impress me. Let me just start off with a small list of guys who don't fit the "prototypes" of their positions, but seem to do quite well. I'll stick with current players.

#1 - Drew Brees - at 5'11", he's considered short. Future HOF
#2 - Dwight Freeney - at 6'1", he's considered short. See above details
#3 - Steve Smith - 5'9" Severely undersized under the status quo
#4 - Darren Sproles - 5'6" (& that's generous)
#5 - London Fletcher - 5'10" Another Future HOF

Those are just a few "undersized" players that don't fit the "prototype". I could go on about guys like Sam Mills, Emmitt Smith, LaDainian Tomlinson, Darrell Green, etc... All were guys considered under-sized per their positions.

That, my friend, is the point. You cannot judge what a player brings to the table by "prototypes". Gallette can play, has a motor, & has heart. Something that our prototypical $68 million starter hasn't had since pay day.

Marlboro Man

Man, I would LOVE that draft they have on Bleacher Report.

FinSaint

I know what your point was about the size, I was only saying that an exception doesn't make a rule. Naturally, we can find many such examples like you already stated of players who didn't fit the "prototype mold," but were still very successful. But, I would counter you by stating that those are just anomalies when compared to the number of players that had great success and fit right into that "prototypical stereotype."

I would also continue by saying that RB sizes are not comparable in the same way as small demeanor is often more of a advantage to a RB than a disadvantage, because they get "hidden" behind big O-Linemen, which makes it hard for the defenders to spot them before it's too late. Big RBs are more often susceptible to injuries because they tend to run more straight up, and get hit/tackled on their lower body because of it causing f.e. a lot of knee injuries.

I did not say that Freeney wasn't a good (or even great) DE, only that he isn't maybe as dominant of a DE as is often the perception about him, and that his run defense isn't probably his strongest area, which may or may not be because of his size. I was only trying to make comparables to what may be one of the hindrances to JG becoming a dominant DE for the Saints, and Freeney wasn't initially brought up by me as an example.

And that statement, my friend, is just completely untrue. Of course a player's size means something and often quite a bit depending on the particular position we are considering. To say that it doesn't mean anything is just ridiculous. How many 5-11 DTs are there in the NFL?

And just to restate the fact that I'm not in any shape or form saying that Gallette can never be an all-around complete DE and a perennial starter for the Saints because of his size. I was only saying that his size is something that he will have to find ways to work around in order to reach the level of someone like Freeney.

BTW, if you were referring to Will Smith with "our prototypical $68 million starter" I would add that Smith is also on the smaller side if compared to the prototype I presented earlier.

"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno

SloMotion

When you talk about an athlete's 'size' in relation to football, two things come to mind:

• It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog
• A good big man beats a good little man every day

At 6'2", 258lbs, Galette is a tad small for a DE, not so small that it's an extreme liability, but it did say in the article, "has difficulty in shedding blockers and making tackles ... making containment, and pushing the runners back inside." ... that's kinda' key in being a successful DE in the NFL.

He's got plenty of fight (and speed), which is good because you need it when you're facing 300lb+ offensive tackles most plays. Those are the "good big men" I was talking about.

19 tackles, 4.5 sacks and considered the 'best pure pass-rusher' on the team ... not too bad for a second-year guy and a lot of NFL rosters carry guys specifically for third-down passing situations.

You can coach a guy to defend the run, you can't coach him 'heart'. Junior Galette got some 'heart'. Spags gonna' work some magic with this guy, ga-ron-tee.

halloween 65

Junior and Romeus will be KINGS. We just got to get a push in the middle.

FinSaint

Is that the new NFL LA expansion franchise?

SloMotion

... Los Angeles Kings? ... hmmm ... I've heard that somewhere before ... got kinda' a ring to it ... we'll turn this into a 'hockey' board yet, ... J/K!

FinSaint

Yeah, it should be something like the LA "Gridiron Kings" etc. so as not to cause any mix ups with the NHL franchise.

SloMotion

No, it could work, they had the baseball 'St. Louis Cardinals' and the football 'St. Louis Cardinals' at the same time ... unless of course you're insulting the average Los Angeles sports fan by saying they would be confused and unable to differentiate between the two teams, in which case, I fully support what you're saying,

blackangold

In the thread "your spags fix our D" I gave my projected 2012 roster for starting D. I'd like to hear what you would disagree with.

There are a few things I kept in mind. First, re-signing the big three will eat most if not all of the cap space we have which will limit the ability to sign the big name FA. Second, I trust Loomis, look at the UDFA on offense he was able to get (Colston, Nicks, Evans, PT) and make into very productive players because of his ability to find the diamond in the rough. We have the diamonds on the defensive side of the ball, however they are still stuck in the rough because of a DC who played to complex and failed to teach fundamentals of the game. Spags will come in and realize he has a plethora of talent to work with.