Friday, March 03, 2017

Mamula narrative never dies

Some use Mike Mamula as a representative of a NFL Combine warrior who never lived up to the hype. I like to use his story as an example of the laziness and predictability of the media. While the frequency of of mentions of Mamula's performance has died down a bit the past few seasons, he is still noted ever time the NFL Combine rolls around.

What I liked about this article is that it actually includes just how impressive Mamula was during his workout in Indianapolis. He performed in 1995. Now -- in 2017 -- many of his numbers remain the best ever for a defensive lineman. Teams can use Mamula as a cautionary tale of putting too much emphasis on the Combine. But prospects should still use him as a role model. Mamula had his moment and he crushed it. No apologies necessary.


TheGuru said...

I worked with a guy in the late 1990s who went to high school with Mamula. According to him, Mamula was a great athlete who did not have the passion for football that others expected of him.

mod34b said...

mammal also got 49/50 on wonderlic

how well would you do? SAMPLE TEST (no cheating)

( i got all correct)

Knucklehead said...

He wasn't that bad in the NFL. The Media talked up his combine numbers and then tore him down because he didn't have as many sacks as they wanted. Phili press is brutal. only New York and Boston are tougher on players. Point being, if he played in Buffalo or KC he would not have had deal with as much BS.

His equivalent today is Jadeveon Clowney.

CT said...

Clowney is better. But, guy got injured and wasn't bad before that. Think he would've had a good career otherwise. Sometimes it's just not meant to be. Don't understand the preoccupation. Stud on tape. Stud at combine. Injury. It's nobody's fault except those in the media who are lazy. Basically, all of them.

Sports media is a close second to the MSM in terms of laziness and rote narratives. LAZY.

Napolean Bonaparte said...

All I remember or care about is how entertaining it was to watch Mamula play for BC. If he didn't have passion for the game - he sure as hell fooled me.

Georgia Eagle said...

Did anybody pick him up after being cut by the Eagles?

NEDofSavinHill said...

CT nailed it on the media. Landry is similar to Mamula. Neither can be blocked by one player.

JBQ said...

I believe that Mamula left as a junior. His performance in the bowl game win against Kansas St is still one to remember. He was jumping over defensive linemen to make sacks. If I remember correctly, he had something like five sacks against a superior team. He was an above average player in the pros. The competition level just increased exponentially. Mike did BC proud. Maybe just maybe, there are more important things in life than the NFL. He had plenty of money and decided to get married. The NFL culture is a savage one based on "living for the moment". It is progressively getting worse. Now with the concussion nightmare built on massive steroid use and abuse, the NFL is beginning to implode. The union has to have been bought off to agree to such a stupid contract. You can sign a contract for millions one day and be cut the next with no obligation. Contract years step up and that is an incentive to cut the player. Without a doubt, the old book on Texas football "Meat on the Hoof" has come back to haunt the NFL. Recently, the head of the NFL had a year in which he was paid 42 million in contract and incentives. Is this a "super classic" case of "unbridled capitalism" or what? Mike Mamula has nothing to be ashamed of and neither does BC for its high standards of personal integrity. You can look at BC as a place of "rarified air" on the Heights or as a form of Mt. Olympus. I choose to take the latter view. The other D-1 Catholic program at the "French School of BJK" down on the plains has "stubbed its toe in more ways than one in an effort to fit in with the big bucks. Father Jenkins has stated that ND would drop football if it ever went semi pro. If you believe that one, the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale. Nevertheless, BC needs to a "take sniff of reality" of late in regard to football and basketball. High ideals are not conducive to the acceptance of "stupid".

knucklehead said...

Clowney could be better. Hasn't proved it yet. Just like Mamula. As of now clowney is a bust.

Mamula was incredible at BC. Literally. Watch the tape of him playing against Donavan McNabb. Clowney was chasing down loser SEC QB's. Nobody close McNabb.

Plus BC changed their housing rules on account of Mamula. No athletes in the mods.

A person in the town I grew up in was mamulas roommate at BC. Guy pulled mamula out of MA's one night when the place was going up and they were buds since.


CT said...

Mamula was incredible at BC. He was there when I went. Played bball with him actually. He def wanted to be skins. Anyway, not arguing his college pedigree, I watched every college game of his, although you always want an argument, right? No. Clowney just had a great yr in Houston because, shocker, he was finally healthy. He is an order of magnitude more talented. Just gotta have some luck. And I loved Mamula. Stop with the QB comparisons. The SEC was far better two and three yrs ago than the Big East or whatever 25 yrs ago. Spurrier said Clowney was one of two players he ever saw who couldv'e gone from high school straight to the pros. Teams schemed away from him. There is no higher compliment.

Knucklehead said...

I argue when I am correct.

There is not an SEC QB in the last 30 years as good as McNabb. Tebow?

Mamula was injured for a season in the NFL too.

He had 30% more sacks in his first four years of playing than Clowney in his.

Like I said, maybe Clowney has decided he wants to "play" and has a better career but he is/ was not better than Mamula. They are pretty much mirror images of each other in terms of how they play and how their early career went. He did better than Clowney in the combine. Plus he played in the NFC East and in a preexpansion NFL. Much tougher competition than the AFC South.

On every basis he was better than Clowney.

Knucklehead said...

Peyton Manning was as good actually. Nobody Clowney played against is anywhere near as good as McNabb.

CT said...

Based on playing vs one QB? Ok dude. Whatever. Last 30 yrs? Absurd.

When u have microfracture surgery, u may need more time than tearing an ACL.

Ur comparing a DE vs opposing QBs? Not olines? Yeah ok. This is a stupid thread. And that's ur fault. I feel dumber for reading u.

Knucklehead said...

You brought up o-lines, good. I was treating them all as equal for a simple argument but you are making my point. Look at the lines in the NFC in the 90's, 00's versus any o-line in the NFL today. Tell me he didn't play against better competition A and produce more(which is obvious from the results) B. You are hung up on the SEC.

Genius, give me the name of one SEC QB whose college and pro career was/is better than McNabb. Who is Clowney chasing down that can avoid him or evade him? Nobody.

"Ok dude whatever"? Jesus Christ. You sound like the Will Ferrell look alike (Reilly) in the new King Kong movie.

CT said...

Why are you comparing a DE to a QB?? He didn't play against McNabb? Maybe MM did twice? Great point. Yeah, if he was a corner or a safety.

Your posts are literally stupid. Seriously. JC is 3 full seasons behind MM's career. Playing a different position. Good talk. Do you watch the sport? Honest question. Because I read your posts and they are really interesting.

CT said...

By the way. Wasn't McNabb a frosh in '95? What yr did MM enter the draft? '95? So...

CT said...

Basically you're hung up.

mod34b said...

SEC Abs?

Peyton manning
Eli Manning
Cam Newton
Dak Prescott
Matt Stafford
Jay Cutler

vs ACC

Matt Ryan
R Wilson (i guess)
J winston
M Shaub
P rivers?
tyrod taylor
ej manuel
guy on Minn (from FSU)

Knucklehead said...

Vick, Ward, Weinke

Knucklehead said...

They are both rush DE's. If that is not comparable then nothing is.

An ACL in 1995 was devastating. Today, sprinkle some HGH on it and it is fixed in 6-8 months.

Love how you latch on to minutiae. He only played him twice. blah, blah.

The point is Mamula had more production at the same point in his career in the same position. He was better.

Again, Clowney MIGHT MIGHT end up having more production but at this point he is 30% behind Mamula and plays against noticeable lighter competition.

Is ignorance bliss CT?