Ryan ChartrandSo-called NFL “experts” and “insiders” have made Ramses Barden into something of a love-it-or-hate-it indie film.
Hardly anyone knew about Barden, the just-graduated Cal Poly receiver – now a sudden cult hit – when he was in the making.
It’s understandable. Even when Kurt Warner, Terrell Owens, Brian Westbrook, Tony Romo and Brandon Jacobs were showing, they were at small, hard-to-get-to Football Championship Subdivision (formerly Division I-AA) theaters.
Overshadowed by Football Bowl Subdivision (I-A) blockbusters high on budget but not on substance, none were bestowed the Academy Award of being taken in the first round of the draft.
Now, after taking in what would equate to about 10 minutes of Barden’s two-hour flick, critics who saw him last week leading up to Saturday’s Senior Bowl in Mobile, Ala. think they’ve seen enough. And the reviews are out.
Thumbs Up C
“Displayed natural hands” – NFLDraftCountdown.com’s Scott Wright, Jan. 20 (a day before listing him as one of five players who especially “helped themselves”)
“Shown the ability to snatch the ball out of the air . capable of shielding away the defender and is often difficult to bring down . could go as high as the second round” – DraftHeadquarters.com’s Shawn Zobel, Wednesday, a day after calling Barden “a stronger Plaxico Burress”
Will “be off the board during the first day of the draft” – Scout.com’s Ed Thompson, who the morning of the game compared Barden’s leaping ability to Larry Fitzgerald’s
“By the end of the weekend (he’d) finish his metamorphosis from player-you-didn’t-know to guy-your-team-needs . since rolling into Mobile … the only questions about Barden center around his potential” – The Sporting News’ Dave Curtis, who Friday named Barden his “player to watch”
“Created a buzz” – Most Valuable Network Tennessee Titans writer Drexel Perry, who wrote Friday that Barden drew comparisons to Marques Colston and Vincent Jackson, also FCS products – the latter of whom was even a Great West Conference Offensive Player of the Year, just like Barden
“(Looked) like he (belonged)” at the practices, showing “more playing speed than advertised” – NFL.com’s Pat Kirwan, who reiterated the Colston comparison Thursday
“Did a good job using his massive frame to shield himself from defensive backs during the week . has the size and growth potential to propel him up the draft boards between now and April” – HoustonTexans.com’s Nick Scurfield, who listed Barden as one of the game’s three “offensive standouts”
Thumbs Down D
“Needs a lot of work . had issues getting separation from the more physical corners” – RealGMFootball.com’s Jeff Risdon, Wednesday
“Showed little separation ability at Senior Bowl practices” – Rotoworld.com’s summary of the analysis of NFL Network’s Mike Mayock, Wednesday
Size “might be all he’s got going for him” and he was “not impressing” – Dave-LionsAndTigers.blogspot.com, Wednesday
“Looks thin” – The Sporting News’ Russ Lande, a former NFL scout, Thursday
“Struggling to get any kind of separation in and out of his breaks . lacks suddenness and always is forced to make plays with corners draped over him” – GryphononCowboys.blogspot.com’s Wes Bunting, Thursday
“Had a nightmare of a week” despite making a “good (19-yard) catch,” adding a 1-yard reception and having “a step on a slant pattern in the end zone” during the game – CollegeFootballNews.com’s Pete Fiutak, Saturday
“Saw his size impair him . had trouble with his release at the line of scrimmage . must refine his technique . to keep his stock from plummeting” – SeahawkNationBlog.com, which listed Barden as one of four “not hot” prospects after the game
Some simply bought a ticket just to get a glimpse of the spectacle who not only measured in at a legitimate 6-foot-6 and 227 pounds, but with a wingspan of 33-3/4 inches and 10-5/8 hands – both the largest of the 12 receivers in Mobile.
The Sacramento Bee and the Palm Beach (Fla.) Post filed in during the week, each writing roughly 700-word spotlights on the man singled out Wednesday as Pro Football Weekly’s Prospect of the Day.
Of course, it only matters what NFL teams think.
“He’s not wide-eyed here – he belongs,” Cincinnati Bengals receivers coach Mike Sheppard told the Palm Beach Post. “The overused word on him between now and the draft will be ‘raw,’ because people will say ‘small school’ and this, that and whatever. He’s better than raw.”
According to the report, even Miami Dolphins head of football operations Bill Parcells was among Dolphins staff interviewing Barden on Jan. 19.
The Baltimore Ravens, PackerChatters.com reported Friday, took particular interest in questioning Barden about the severity of his head injury suffered Wednesday, when he “banged his head against the ground,” keeping him out of practice Thursday.
Baltimore’s interest was corroborated Monday by the Carroll County (Md.) Times’ Aaron Wilson, who named Barden as one of a group of receivers Ravens scouts “spent a lot of time at the Senior Bowl evaluating and talking with.”
Wright reported the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, in addition to the Ravens, displayed interest in Barden on Jan. 20.
They’ll do some movie hopping before sitting back in their seats at the scouting combine in Indianapolis, where Barden will be among receivers observed Feb. 20.
But then again, what do they know?
Steve Largent, Andre Reed, Charlie Joiner and John Stallworth went in the fourth round. Colston and Harold Carmichael were chosen in the seventh. Dwight Clark came off the board in the 10th. Keenan McCardell was selected in the 12th (astute observers would note that’s a full five rounds deeper than today even allows).
Just as it was then, drafting is not a science, no matter how much talent evaluators make it out to be – with supposedly objective boards, charts and standards of numbers.
It’s no more than a bunch of people with different opinions.
– Donovan Aird, a former Mustang Daily sports editor, is a journalism senior and guest columnist.