Pouha 300lbs?

Glenn Greenstein · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 83

That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?

Archived from group: alt>sports>football>pro>ny-jets

"John C · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 2

On Aug 14, 7:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
wrote:
> That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
> If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?

Fit?

buRford · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 12

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:39:45 GMT, "Glenn Greenstein"
wrote:

>That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>

Pouha's listed at 325, on the Jets roster.

Glenn Greenstein · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 83

"buRford" wrote in message @4ax.com...
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:39:45 GMT, "Glenn Greenstein"
>
> wrote:
>
>>That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>>If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>>
>
> Pouha's listed at 325, on the Jets roster.

http://tinyurl.com/2jq5yy

Glenn Greenstein · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 83

"buRford" wrote in message @4ax.com...
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:39:45 GMT, "Glenn Greenstein"
>
> wrote:
>
>>That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>>If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>>
>
> Pouha's listed at 325, on the Jets roster.

Try this one as well
http://www.nj.com/jets/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1187065247239670.xml&coll=1

JETSRULE06 · Joined: 07 Aug 2007 Posts: 1

On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
wrote:
> That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
> If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?

I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
to be effective at a particular position. No, you can't play NT at 250
lbs. But that doesn't mean you can't play it at 300, as opposed to 320
lbs. The notion that you have to be over 320 lbs to be a successful
run-stopping DT is just ridiculous. The most physically dominanting DT
I ever saw was the late Jerome Brown, who played for the Eagles from
1987-1992. The guy was barely 290 lbs, but ask Parcells how "easy" it
was to get him blocked.

Robertson may not be a good NT for other, more technical reasons. But
it's not as simple as him not stuffing his face with enough
cheeseburgers in the offseason.

MZ · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 54

wrote in message @k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
> wrote:
>> That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>> If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>
> I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
> displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
> to be effective at a particular position. No, you can't play NT at 250
> lbs. But that doesn't mean you can't play it at 300, as opposed to 320
> lbs. The notion that you have to be over 320 lbs to be a successful
> run-stopping DT is just ridiculous. The most physically dominanting DT
> I ever saw was the late Jerome Brown, who played for the Eagles from
> 1987-1992. The guy was barely 290 lbs, but ask Parcells how "easy" it
> was to get him blocked.
>
> Robertson may not be a good NT for other, more technical reasons. But
> it's not as simple as him not stuffing his face with enough
> cheeseburgers in the offseason.

I agree. Some of the best NTs out there are not the biggest. Technique and
just a general football ability are far more important. It also depends on
how the weight is carried. NTs tend to be shorter, so their marginally
higher weights (compared to a DE like Seymour, who's 6'5 I think) translate
into a much lower center of gravity. People say all sorts of things about
NT weight, but when do you hear about height?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think Robertson will do fine
*if* Ellis continues to progress at his end and *if* the RE spot is actually
filled by someone effective this year. I have my doubts about Coleman, but
his contract tells us that he's the guy.

Glenn Greenstein · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 83

"MZ" wrote in message @giganews.com...
> wrote in message
> @k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
>> wrote:
>>> That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>>> If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>>
>> I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
>> displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
>> to be effective at a particular position. No, you can't play NT at 250
>> lbs. But that doesn't mean you can't play it at 300, as opposed to 320
>> lbs. The notion that you have to be over 320 lbs to be a successful
>> run-stopping DT is just ridiculous. The most physically dominanting DT
>> I ever saw was the late Jerome Brown, who played for the Eagles from
>> 1987-1992. The guy was barely 290 lbs, but ask Parcells how "easy" it
>> was to get him blocked.
>>
>> Robertson may not be a good NT for other, more technical reasons. But
>> it's not as simple as him not stuffing his face with enough
>> cheeseburgers in the offseason.
>
> I agree. Some of the best NTs out there are not the biggest. Technique
> and just a general football ability are far more important. It also
> depends on how the weight is carried. NTs tend to be shorter, so their
> marginally higher weights (compared to a DE like Seymour, who's 6'5 I
> think) translate into a much lower center of gravity. People say all
> sorts of things about NT weight, but when do you hear about height?
>
> I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think Robertson will do fine
> *if* Ellis continues to progress at his end and *if* the RE spot is
> actually filled by someone effective this year. I have my doubts about
> Coleman, but his contract tells us that he's the guy.
Actually, I never thought Robertson was undersized, but I kept reading here
how Pouha is going to supplant Robertson since he is the prototypical size
to play the position.
I wonder what all these so called experts on NT are going to say, now that
Robertson is actually heavier than Pouha.

Michael · Joined: 07 Aug 2007 Posts: 3

wrote in message @k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
> wrote:
>> That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>> If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>
> I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
> displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
> to be effective at a particular position.

I agree. I'd love to see Mike Nugent get some time in on the line. Smile

Only kidding. You know... There were a lot of "undersized" players that
were tagged by the experts as never being able to be effective and they
turned out to be outstanding players. Karl Mecklenberg, Mark Stepnosky, Pat
Swilling, Sam Mills come to mind. If I keep thinking I'm sure I'll remember
a bunch more. Also... LB seems to be a position that has had a lot of
undersized players over the years that turned out to be great players.

Michael

Tutor · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 5

Michael wrote:
> wrote in message
> @k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
>>wrote:
>>
>>>That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>>>If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>>
>>I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
>>displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
>>to be effective at a particular position.
>
>
> I agree. I'd love to see Mike Nugent get some time in on the line. Smile

> Only kidding. You know... There were a lot of "undersized" players that
> were tagged by the experts as never being able to be effective and they
> turned out to be outstanding players. Karl Mecklenberg, Mark Stepnosky, Pat
> Swilling, Sam Mills come to mind. If I keep thinking I'm sure I'll remember
> a bunch more. Also... LB seems to be a position that has had a lot of
> undersized players over the years that turned out to be great players.
>
> Michael
>
>

Joseph Edward Klecko
Position: DE/DT/NT
Height: 6' 3'' Weight: 263

Glenn Greenstein · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 83

"Tutor" wrote in message $1_1@nntp2.nac.net...
> Michael wrote:
>> wrote in message
>> @k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>>>>If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>>>
>>>I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
>>>displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
>>>to be effective at a particular position.
>>
>>
>> I agree. I'd love to see Mike Nugent get some time in on the line. Smile

>> Only kidding. You know... There were a lot of "undersized" players that
>> were tagged by the experts as never being able to be effective and they
>> turned out to be outstanding players. Karl Mecklenberg, Mark Stepnosky,
>> Pat Swilling, Sam Mills come to mind. If I keep thinking I'm sure I'll
>> remember a bunch more. Also... LB seems to be a position that has had a
>> lot of undersized players over the years that turned out to be great
>> players.
>>
>> Michael
>
> Joseph Edward Klecko
> Position: DE/DT/NT
> Height: 6' 3'' Weight: 263

I'm not really sure if OL were tipping the scales at 320 to 340 back in
Joe's day.

Glenn Greenstein · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 83

"Tutor" wrote in message $1_1@nntp2.nac.net...
> Michael wrote:
>> wrote in message
>> @k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>>>>If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>>>
>>>I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
>>>displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
>>>to be effective at a particular position.
>>
>>
>> I agree. I'd love to see Mike Nugent get some time in on the line. Smile

>> Only kidding. You know... There were a lot of "undersized" players that
>> were tagged by the experts as never being able to be effective and they
>> turned out to be outstanding players. Karl Mecklenberg, Mark Stepnosky,
>> Pat Swilling, Sam Mills come to mind. If I keep thinking I'm sure I'll
>> remember a bunch more. Also... LB seems to be a position that has had a
>> lot of undersized players over the years that turned out to be great
>> players.
>>
>> Michael
>
> Joseph Edward Klecko
> Position: DE/DT/NT
> Height: 6' 3'' Weight: 263
Funny actually now that I think about it.
Kleco played DT back in those days. Today, he would be considered an OLB.

Tutor · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 5

Glenn Greenstein wrote:
> "Tutor" wrote in message
> $1_1@nntp2.nac.net...
>
>>Michael wrote:
>>
>>> wrote in message
>>>@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Aug 14, 8:39 am, "Glenn Greenstein"
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>That was his weight as reported in the Daily News.
>>>>>If Robertson is undersized at 310 lbs, what do you call this?
>>>>
>>>>I call it not subscribing to a silly way of thinking commonly
>>>>displayed by fans and the media - that you need to be a certain weight
>>>>to be effective at a particular position.
>>>
>>>
>>>I agree. I'd love to see Mike Nugent get some time in on the line. Smile

>>>Only kidding. You know... There were a lot of "undersized" players that
>>>were tagged by the experts as never being able to be effective and they
>>>turned out to be outstanding players. Karl Mecklenberg, Mark Stepnosky,
>>>Pat Swilling, Sam Mills come to mind. If I keep thinking I'm sure I'll
>>>remember a bunch more. Also... LB seems to be a position that has had a
>>>lot of undersized players over the years that turned out to be great
>>>players.
>>>
>>>Michael
>>
>>Joseph Edward Klecko
>>Position: DE/DT/NT
>>Height: 6' 3'' Weight: 263
>
> Funny actually now that I think about it.
> Kleco played DT back in those days. Today, he would be considered an OLB.
>
>

Klecko woould not even be drafted these days. He was regarded as
severely undersized even then. The man played with the best
leverage I have ever seen. He routinely blew up OLmen 50 - 75 lbs
more than him. I'll never understand why he is not in Canton.

Glenn Greenstein · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 83

"graybeard" wrote in message @4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:26:23 -0400 Tutor
> wrote:
>
>>Klecko woould not even be drafted these days. He was regarded as
>>severely undersized even then. The man played with the best
>>leverage I have ever seen. He routinely blew up OLmen 50 - 75 lbs
>>more than him. I'll never understand why he is not in Canton.
>
> It's a travesty that the only defensive player in NFL history to go to
> the Pro Bowl at three different positions is not in the HOF. Oh well, at
> least Joe is in the National Polish-American Sports Hall of Fame.
> --
> graybeard
Did they put his picture next to Ivan Putski?

buRford · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 12

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:34:29 GMT, "Glenn Greenstein"
wrote:

>
>"graybeard" wrote in message
>@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:26:23 -0400 Tutor
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Klecko woould not even be drafted these days. He was regarded as
>>>severely undersized even then. The man played with the best
>>>leverage I have ever seen. He routinely blew up OLmen 50 - 75 lbs
>>>more than him. I'll never understand why he is not in Canton.
>>
>> It's a travesty that the only defensive player in NFL history to go to
>> the Pro Bowl at three different positions is not in the HOF. Oh well, at
>> least Joe is in the National Polish-American Sports Hall of Fame.
>> --
>> graybeard
>Did they put his picture next to Ivan Putski?
>

Wasn't he Russian?
Maybe next to Carl Yastrzemski (sp?)?

LISTEN TO LOUIE & WIN! Dear College Football Fans, The odds for the upcoming College Football Bowl Games have been released - and I have *already* placed my wagers. If YOU want to WIN a-lot of MONEY go to: ----- Despite this bein

Just a little insiiiiiide information. You guys are gonna have to trust me on this but I have some very inside information that everyone on the team hates Quinn.

Good article from Dennis Dodd A few excerpts: ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== And Florida is not through, not after showing massive potential against the 'Canes. In the opener, 40 of the 90 players who dressed had n

Great game from a Pats fan Well done. Enjoy it. I like the way your team plays. Real football.

1998 The Giants were 5-8 when the powerful Broncos rolled into town on Dec. 13, 1998, with a record of 13-0. They were the defending champs, on their way to their second straight title. And the Giants - the Kent Graham-led Giants - beat them.