Seems like Beasley should have an easier transition because that is basically all the Leo is told to do...

That's one way to look at it but I believe if Fowler was asked to do what Beasley was then they would have very similar numbers. Also having a player with the versatility of Fowler couldn't hurt. Gus would love to have a player that can do multiple things at a high level. Would help disguise their intentions more.

---

Crab Cakes and Football! That's what Jacksonville does!

I didn't say he dropped back into coverage. He just didn't line up to get the qb like Ray or Beasley. Fowler played contain, the run, and was asked to read and diagnose plays before acting. Very different from what Beasley was asked to do. Shouldn't be any debate there.

Agree, Fowler was asked to do much more than Beasley ever was

---

I didn't say he dropped back into coverage. He just didn't line up to get the qb like Ray or Beasley. Fowler played contain, the run, and was asked to read and diagnose plays before acting. Very different from what Beasley was asked to do. Shouldn't be any debate there.

 

Oh, ok.  Yeah, that's true and I agree there.  However, I don't think the disparity in rush opportunities was that great.  And if you look at the defenses, Clemson was the #1 defense and Florida was the #15.  Both are very good, elite defenses.  When you look at 3rd down, however, Clemson is a run away #1 in 3rd down stops while Florida plummets to 52nd.  This tells me that Clemson had significantly better pass rush on pass rush downs.  Now, its not conclusive that the credit all goes to Beasley and the blame all goes to Fowler, but this stat is very telling as far as ability to rush the passer. 

---

Oh, ok.  Yeah, that's true and I agree there.  However, I don't think the disparity in rush opportunities was that great.  And if you look at the defenses, Clemson was the #1 defense and Florida was the #15.  Both are very good, elite defenses.  When you look at 3rd down, however, Clemson is a run away #1 in 3rd down stops while Florida plummets to 52nd.  This tells me that Clemson had significantly better pass rush on pass rush downs.  Now, its not conclusive that the credit all goes to Beasley and the blame all goes to Fowler, but this stat is very telling as far as ability to rush the passer. 

I think you're dead on here.  Beasley has the potential to be the NFL sack leader while playing.  He's that good and explosive.

 

Fowler, on the other hand, may do a number of things better, but in the actual art of rushing the passer - I don't see how he can be anything more than "slightly above average" - if that.

 

If Fowler is the pick, I think it's Gus Bradley pounding the table for him... personality wise he seems like the perfect Gus Bradley player.  

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

That's one way to look at it but I believe if Fowler was asked to do what Beasley was then they would have very similar numbers. Also having a player with the versatility of Fowler couldn't hurt. Gus would love to have a player that can do multiple things at a high level. Would help disguise their intentions more.

 

What evidence is there that Beasley can't play an Otto role in our defense as well as Fowler?  If anything, I think Otto fits Beasley even better than Leo.  I don't think there is anything that would lead someone to the belief that Beasley can't perform Otto functions other than he hasn't had to do a ton of it in college - although certainly not completely abstinent. 

 

There is tangible speculation to Fowler being unable to fulfill a leo/otto role at the next level based off of poor physical testing. 

---

Wow, seriously? He was moved to C because FSU had no center, but that had depth behind Erving. Erving was an elite LT and it made the line better as a whole to get 2 good players on the field as opposed to 1. Cam Erving wouldn't be drafted much lower as a LT than a C - maybe late 2nd.


I can't believe people are even arguing that someone with 33 sacks vs someone with 14 sacks is even debatable as far as pass rush ability goes. Especially when you consider Fowler feasted against right tackles and tight ends when Beasley was beating high level LTs.

You never move an elite LT to center for any reason. You move a decent LT to center if you have another decent LT that can fill the spot. So no Erving was not an elite LT and will be drafted higher as an interior lineman.

---

"Sucess Is Not a Goal, It is a By-product"

If Fowler is the pick, I think it's Gus Bradley pounding the table for him... personality wise he seems like the perfect Gus Bradley player.  

Fowler from a personality/charisma/culture level does seem like the perfect Gus player. On the field Beasley is much more of a fit for the Gus Bradley defense. It will be interesting to see which type of fit is more important to Gus if the pick comes down to those two.

---

It just so happens that the LEO position often puts the player in position to use their speed rush to go around everyone. That particular ability is essential for the position.


 

It's absolutely killing me how many here utterly fail to distinguish between the LEO position and a traditional 4-3 RDE. Fowler might be the next Tony Brackens, but Brackens would not have been an ideal LEO. Vic Beasley is everything you want from a LEO and more, and much of the criticism I've read relates to the "more," which is really just icing on his cake.

 

i dont care what position youre looking at them for. LEO OTTO SAM BUCK WILL DE, 4-3 3-4, Over, who cares?

 

you take the most talented player. i wasnt making any kind of argument for fowler over beasley there. 

 

all i was saying was that his statement was erroneous and beasley often gets stood up if his speed rush doesnt work. 

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

What evidence is there that Beasley can't play an Otto role in our defense as well as Fowler? If anything, I think Otto fits Beasley even better than Leo. I don't think there is anything that would lead someone to the belief that Beasley can't perform Otto functions other than he hasn't had to do a ton of it in college - although certainly not completely abstinent.


There is tangible speculation to Fowler being unable to fulfill a leo/otto role at the next level based off of poor physical testing.

Beasley might be a better LEO candidate but OTTO has Fowler written all over it. I don't even think the biggest Beasley lover will debate that. Beasley simply isn't strong enough or big enough to set edge like Fowler can. Beasley also can't shed blockers like Fowler can. Beasley got manhandled far too often in the run game by TEs. Finally Fowler can drop back and has very fluid hips for a man his size. Beasley is a big question mark in that area.


You can't really go wrong with either guy but Fowler just fits with what Dave and Gus want to do here.

---

Crab Cakes and Football! That's what Jacksonville does!

Fowler has INTs? I see two passes defensed for Fowler maybe that's what you were thinking (or my stats sheets are wrong)...in which case Beasley has nine in comparison. 

 

 

Uh yeah... I thought I saw two INTs, but I went back and they're not there. My bad.

---

'02

Beasley might be a better LEO candidate but OTTO has Fowler written all over it. I don't even think the biggest Beasley lover will debate that. Beasley simply isn't strong enough or big enough to set edge like Fowler can. Beasley also can't shed blockers like Fowler can. Beasley got manhandled far too often in the run game by TEs. Finally Fowler can drop back and has very fluid hips for a man his size. Beasley is a big question mark in that area.


You can't really go wrong with either guy but Fowler just fits with what Dave and Gus want to do here.

You havent met KYJaggy.  He thinks Beasley does everything better than Folwer including setting the edge and better in coverage, he probably thinks Beasley could even play QB.  I mean look at that spyder chart

---

You never move an elite LT to center for any reason. You move a decent LT to center if you have another decent LT that can fill the spot. So no Erving was not an elite LT and will be drafted higher as an interior lineman.

 

That is a pretty blanket statement.  Especially considering that it has been reported ad nauseum that Erving was moved to Center precisely for those reasons and for no other reasons than to get the 2 best players on the field.  As I stated before, most tackles can't play Center - its a completely different physical skill set.  Maybe I'm just weird, but I think being a 2-time 1st team All American at Left Tackle demonstrates, that at the very least, you are considered elite amongst your peers.

---

Beasley might be a better LEO candidate but OTTO has Fowler written all over it. I don't even think the biggest Beasley lover will debate that. Beasley simply isn't strong enough or big enough to set edge like Fowler can. Beasley also can't shed blockers like Fowler can. Beasley got manhandled far too often in the run game by TEs. Finally Fowler can drop back and has very fluid hips for a man his size. Beasley is a big question mark in that area.


You can't really go wrong with either guy but Fowler just fits with what Dave and Gus want to do here.

 

 

You havent met KYJaggy.  He thinks Beasley does everything better than Folwer including setting the edge and better in coverage, he probably thinks Beasley could even play QB.  I mean look at that spyder chart

 

I'll debate it all day.  The tape I've seen shows that Fowler has issues with bigger, stronger NFL caliber tackles, even at setting the edge and the likely reason is that he has the upper body strength of a wide receiver.

 

You may have an argument that Beasley isn't big enough to set an edge - that remains to be seen and is still an unknown.  The argument that he isn't strong enough is a joke though.  Beasley benched more than every other defensive lineman and linebacker in the entire combine, including nose tackles.  He's plenty strong enough.

---

You havent met KYJaggy. He thinks Beasley does everything better than Folwer including setting the edge and better in coverage, he probably thinks Beasley could even play QB. I mean look at that spyder chart

Hah! Jaggy is fully aboard the Beasley train but he seems to have decent knowledge about a lot of other players in the class.


What really gets me is people confuse athlete and football player. There's a big difference and a lot of people around here don't understand that.

---

Crab Cakes and Football! That's what Jacksonville does!

The whole issue that most seem to be missing is that the Leo is asked to do 1 thing….rush the passer

 

Setting the edge//Coverage ability//block shedding all that is really irrelevant at the endgame…the most important and just about only thing is the "Rushing the QB" part/skill.

 

Fowler can be a better edge setter…Fowler can be a better drop into coverage guy….but at the end of the Day that isn't what the Leo is asked to do.

 

 

The Leo isn't a "versatility" position…it is a pretty darn "Specialized" position.

---

You may have an argument that Beasley isn't big enough to set an edge - that remains to be seen and is still an unknown. The argument that he isn't strong enough is a joke though. Beasley benched more than every other defensive lineman and linebacker in the entire combine, including nose tackles. He's plenty strong enough.

I'm glad you brought that up. Benching 225 lbs 35x or whatever it was is impressive but Beasley does not play that strong. He gets stood up so many times when his speed rush fails him and it will fail him even more once he's in the league.


Note: Benching 225 lbs 35x has more to do with stamina and endurance than it does pure strength so don't confuse the two. Boselli benched only 23x I believe. All you have to do is be strong enough which Fowler is. Fowler is much stronger between the lines than Beasley and that's all that matters in my book.

---

Crab Cakes and Football! That's what Jacksonville does!

Hah! Jaggy is fully aboard the Beasley train but he seems to have decent knowledge about a lot of other players in the class.

What really gets me is people confuse athlete and football player. There's a big difference and a lot of people around here don't understand that.

 

So 33 sacks a footballer player does not make?

 

Some people act like Beasley is a combine wonder…the dude produced on the field too

---

I absolutely think Beasley would be a better OTTO than Fowler. Fowler miiiiight set the edge better (definitely not proven), but Beasley far better as the pass rusher and I have zero doubt Beasley would be better in coverage after some practice too. Beasley was a linebacker for a year after all, and his lateral movement skills would suggest far better capabilities in coverage. 

---

The whole issue that most seem to be missing is that the Leo is asked to do 1 thing….rush the passer

 

Setting the edge//Coverage ability//block shedding all that is really irrelevant at the endgame…the most important and just about only thing is the "Rushing the QB" part/skill.

 

Fowler can be a better edge setter…Fowler can be a better drop into coverage guy….but at the end of the Day that isn't what the Leo is asked to do.

 

 

The Leo is a "versatility" position…it is a pretty darn "Specialized" position.

I agree with this, if they want to just go pure Leo, I would go with Beasley, but if they want to get more creative with a player and go with the best football player I would go Fowler.  Pure Leo though I would agree, go Beasley. 

---

I'm glad you brought that up. Benching 225 lbs 35x or whatever it was is impressive but Beasley does not play that strong. He gets stood up so many times when his speed rush fails him and it will fail him even more once he's in the league.


Note: Benching 225 lbs 35x has more to do with stamina and endurance than it does pure strength so don't confuse the two. Boselli benched only 23x I believe. All you have to do is be strong enough which Fowler is. Fowler is much stronger between the lines than Beasley and that's all that matters in my book.

 

There is no definitive way to prove such a statement unless one goes against both….

 

A LB with built up speed will look a lot stronger on initial contact with OL than a DE making contact after 1-2 steps.

---