Introducing Chad Davis UNT CB

[MeanGreenTexan]

19 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

GOMG2013 being a FBS player is tough and it's best to have a thick skin and let criticism slide off you.  Being the Family or Friend of a FBS player is also tough, and again it's best to let criticism of them slide off you.  

Especially if that 'criticism' isn't really criticism at all... rather disagreeing with a beat reporter that you feel slighted your rank, or some dude with a podcast who hasn't seen much of Davis over the offseason because of his injury.   Of course people are going to think a highly-regarded JUCO guy (Jenkins) getting alot of reps with the 1's is going to push Davis coming off injury.

I think I speak for most here though when I say I'm glad Davis is starting and I hope he proves Vito wrong and becomes one of our top 5 players.

[Cerebus]

2 minutes ago, GOMG2013 said:

Apparently the coaches think very highly of him and think he is good.  Boy didn't go through Fall camp and he is starting SMU.  With a messed up knee. Doesn't that speak for itself?  

I'm not saying your wrong.  I'm saying you're taking personal. 

If Chad ever hears this "trash talk" I am sure he just takes it as motivation.  Do the same.  Revel in it when he become all conference.  

[GangGreen]

58 minutes ago, GOMG2013 said:

 Chad didn't get the man crush nate is getting now.  

Oh, I think he is.

[GangGreen]

Look at it like this GOMG2013, Larry Brown will always be remembered for his six interceptions for the 1995 Super Bowl Champs in the regular season and two in the Super Bowl. The truth be told, it only happened because no one wanted to throw the ball to the other side of the field.

Deion Sanders was not only a Hall of Famer, but he made a very average cornerback into a Super Bowl MVP. If Chad Davis can have that same effect on his teammates, he has done his job. 

I can't wait to see this secondary. If all of them can live up to their potential, we may have something special. I have been watching this team since the 2000 season and have never thought going into a season that our secondary would actually be a help and not a hindrance.

If they play tough as a unit, not as individuals, they are going to be fun to watch. Chad Davis will be instrumental in making this a reality.

Edited September 1, 2016 by GangGreen

[GOMG2013]

50 minutes ago, GangGreen said:

Oh, I think he is.

tee hee hee

[GOMG2013]

58 minutes ago, Cerebus said:

I'm not saying your wrong.  I'm saying you're taking personal. 

If Chad ever hears this "trash talk" I am sure he just takes it as motivation.  Do the same.  Revel in it when he become all conference.  

those players rarely read this stuff.  

i would be a hypocrite to complain about criticism.  I am a critic and will continue to be one.  I have criticized Chad and others on here.  I have no problems going back and forth with anyone.  You still dont understand.  I am criticizing the method.  If film and gameplay was used to come up with the opinion I wouldn't have a problem.

Billysee said stuff about Chad his soph year.  It was based on live game watching or either HS or Soph film.  it was accurate too.  I ripped on Chad when he gave up the quick slant TD vs Rice.

I am quite certain some people did not know he even made plays and had a decent year until this thread and looking at the highlights.  I accomplished what i wanted.  if some think he sucks, at least it is based on something that makes football sense.

[UNTLifer]

I like pie.  What kind of pie does Chad like?

[GOMG2013]

2 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

I like pie.  What kind of pie does Chad like?

tee hee hee...you so funny...

2 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

I like pie.  What kind of pie does Chad like?

don't like talking football huh?  I get it. there's lots of stuff out there you may be interested in other than sports...

[GrandGreen]

Not sure why anyone is that concerned with someone on this board or Vito's opinion when it comes to player evaluation.   The coaches are certainly not taking advise from Vito or any fan on anything that occurs on the field.   Fans and certainly sportswriters have opinions and will express them, that's part of college athletics.   Not sure what has been said about Davis, but fans have been merciless with most of the QB's, NT has trotted out.  

Players do read these boards and I am sure don't like a lot of what is stated here.   They can use that as motivation, or complain; but the crucial thing is how they perform and impress the coaches.   

Edited September 1, 2016 by GrandGreen

[aztecskin]

Felt like we already had this conversation, but I'll reiterate some things here. 

1. I don't think Chad Davis is bad, or not good, nor do I take time to specifically disrespect him. - > http://meangreennation.com/tag/chad-davis/ -- no where in there do I disrespect him. I noted his accomplishments as I saw them in the context of the entire game or the entire team. @GOMG2013 really didn't like my saying he would likely lose playing time to an Ashton Preston or someone else. I explained my reasoning -- dude has been injured recently and (especially if we lose) the team needs to look at the depth chart as we move forward later in the season. I understand him saying that it could have been more well argued. Sure. That's fine. 

2. I don't know about all this other bad analysis talk. The logic in saying  "Chad's accomplishments were minimized" -- and then   "Chad hasn't made a ton of plays...Who has?" in the same post is deserving of its own criticism. I will say that for me specifically -- Adam -- spend more time writing about who was involved in plays and other things .. . like the corners that get picked on most -- Whitfield, Buyers, Jones, Brooks. I think it is good criticism to say "hey maybe mention that Davis is solid enough not to get picked on". And I accepted that. That's true. But as @GOMG2013 said, there wasn't a whole lot of plays to be highlighted AND there is only so much time. If anything I would say I do 'incomplete' analysis as a regular ass dude on the internet. And I am fine with that criticism. Lord knows I would like more time to do more complete analysis. 

3. As I said (i think on the pod) that I don't want to drag Chad Davis to make a point. But I don't know about spotlighting him to make a meandering point about the level of analysis on the internet -- especially when there is such a low bar to publishing 'better' analysis -- when that point is not well made. The scouts that evaluate are not reading MGN for analysis nor is it affecting their reports. The average fan might be only slightly poorly served by not highlighting him but if where is the INTRO TO EVERY OTHER PLAYER ON THE ROSTER. It does not follow. 

All that said, I agree that I would also like more awesome, qualified, clever, entertaining coverage of UNT football. 

I hope to see all of you on Saturday. I will be wearing green. 

[97and03]

[Got5onIt]

[UNTLifer]

15 hours ago, GOMG2013 said:

don't like talking football huh?  I get it. there's lots of stuff out there you may be interested in other than sports...

I like talking football, a lot.  I also get it that you are a fan of Chad Davis, which I am too.  Chad is poised to have a big senior season and I hope he accomplishes that and more, but the arguing over who is getting better coverage by the media, etc... is ridiculous.  I understand Chad may be a personal friend, but don't take the write-ups personal.  Brooks has had a great camp which makes the whole team better.  Maybe our opposition reads the articles on Brooks, and if he performs up to expectations, sees the same on film and then they start throwing at Chad.  Chad could have a monster year.  Let's face it, our DB's are extremely strong this year with, in alphabetical order, Brooks, Davis, Gray and McClain, with Preston in a hybrid/nickel spot.  Those pushing for playing time, Jenkins, Baulkman, Turner, etc... could argue they should be starting.  It is a good problem to have.  Let's hope they live up to the hype, then I can sit back, eat my apple pie and enjoy their punishment of the opposing team. 

Here's to a fun year of rebuilding, Littrell and staff success, record contributions to the MGClub, Littrell and staff deciding they love Denton and want to build a legacy here, etc...

[GOMG2013]

14 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

I like talking football, a lot.  I also get it that you are a fan of Chad Davis, which I am too.  Chad is poised to have a big senior season and I hope he accomplishes that and more, but the arguing over who is getting better coverage by the media, etc... is ridiculous.  I understand Chad may be a personal friend, but don't take the write-ups personal.  Brooks has had a great camp which makes the whole team better.  Maybe our opposition reads the articles on Brooks, and if he performs up to expectations, sees the same on film and then they start throwing at Chad.  Chad could have a monster year.  Let's face it, our DB's are extremely strong this year with, in alphabetical order, Brooks, Davis, Gray and McClain, with Preston in a hybrid/nickel spot.  Those pushing for playing time, Jenkins, Baulkman, Turner, etc... could argue they should be starting.  It is a good problem to have.  Let's hope they live up to the hype, then I can sit back, eat my apple pie and enjoy their punishment of the opposing team. 

Here's to a fun year of rebuilding, Littrell and staff success, record contributions to the MGClub, Littrell and staff deciding they love Denton and want to build a legacy here, etc...

i have no problem with the opinion or coverage.  I have a problem with the method.  Ranking players without looking at game film is the problem.  I don't care who the players is.

There are obvious statements that exposes very little game film was considered.  And if a person doesn't have the time to look at film, then go ask someone for input that knows more.  If a person looked at film and said Chad played horrible, I wouldn't have any problems with that.  

Is there an issue with the critics being criticized and the analysts being analyzed?  They offered their opinions...I can't offer mine?  Difference is, I have given game highlights and not Spring and Fall camp reports.  Seems like a few don't like what i have done, but like i said before, some fans have been educated and know more about a player on the team. Someone else should have been doing this, but since it hasn't been done, i decided to take matters into my own hands.  sorry if you or anyone else is offended.  Put bad or incomplete info out there, expect to get called out and others to do the same.

[Cerebus]

[Christopher Walker]

1 hour ago, GOMG2013 said:

i have no problem with the opinion or coverage.  I have a problem with the method.  Ranking players without looking at game film is the problem.  I don't care who the players is.

There are obvious statements that exposes very little game film was considered.  And if a person doesn't have the time to look at film, then go ask someone for input that knows more.  If a person looked at film and said Chad played horrible, I wouldn't have any problems with that.  

Is there an issue with the critics being criticized and the analysts being analyzed?  They offered their opinions...I can't offer mine?  Difference is, I have given game highlights and not Spring and Fall camp reports.  Seems like a few don't like what i have done, but like i said before, some fans have been educated and know more about a player on the team. Someone else should have been doing this, but since it hasn't been done, i decided to take matters into my own hands.  sorry if you or anyone else is offended.  Put bad or incomplete info out there, expect to get called out and others to do the same.

@aztecskin and his peeps probably watch and re-watch more game film than most other people on this board however. Their opinions are well-informed.

[Mean_Green09]

Passes thrown against them

Chad Davis 2/4 58 yards and TD. His INT came off a pass defended by Hamilton. 

Nate Brooks 3/5 61 yards and TD

I will say Davis gave up the Hail Mary which was a majority of his yards. He did also get toasted by Sutton early in the game that shouldve been a 43 yard TD had M. Davis not air mailed it.

Brooks gave up the 52 yard bomb to Proche which was excellent coverage. It was just a better pass.

Im not down on either guy. I think they both played really well yesterday. All those times we saw Davis scramble there was good coverage.

Moore gave up the 88 yard TD pass. Not sure how a true FR gets matched up with Sutton. Still he let Sutton get inside.

Thought our LBs were lost in coverage a couple of times. Especially Eijya. 

Hamilton for as big as he is did a good job in coverage.

 

 

[GOMG2013]

A hail Mary is on the secondary.  Chad was there.  Should have made the play.  Jumped too early. Bad technique, trying to get a cheap pick and pad stats instead of knocking it down. You should have a player underneath and a saftey over top that does not let anyone get behind him.  Saftey was out of position especially considering it was sutton.  

Technique wise Chad did a lot of things questionable in my opinion.  I do not think he played well at all.  He was burnt on that overthrow.  Not understanding no safety over the top on sutton.  Same with the 88 yarder.  Must have been rolling the saftey  to the other side or helping to stop the run.  I haven't seen the replay of the game yet.  

I liked Nate's coverage.  Both plays he gave up, you gotta just tip your hat to the WR.  Nate did his job.  

Chad made a nice play on the INT. I can't take that away from him, but it was still a bad game to me.