Mack was more like a jack of all trades and also master of all trades. Not a fair comparison. 

Mack is not an elite pass rusher, sorry

---

Mack is not an elite pass rusher, sorry

Man. I was on your side and then you say this. Come on.

---

So you wouldnt of took Khalil Mack untill the 3rd round last year?

 

Player A:  MACK

 

75 TFL

28.5 Sacks

186 Solo Tackles

4 Ints

 

4.65 40

40 Vert

128 Broad

7.08 3 cone

4.18 Shuttle

 

 

Player B:  FOWLER

 

33.5 TFL

14.5 Sacks

73 Solo Tackles

0 Ints

 

4.60 40

32.5 Vert

112 Broad

7.40 3 cone

4.32 Shuttle

 

 

 

That is a pretty crappy comparison…but go with it

---

That comparison came directly from NFL.com.

I do think Mack is a little better as a prospect but i dont think there is that big of a gap.  Also think its a fair comparison

---

Man. I was on your side and then you say this. Come on.

I dont think he is elite when it comes to rushing the passer, good but i dont think he is an elite pass rusher. 

---

So you wouldnt of took Khalil Mack untill the 3rd round last year?

 

I remember a very lively debate about the very subject of Khalil Mack going at #3 last year.  That really was a unique situation.  Khalil Mack was a linebacker with pass rush ability.  The question was whether a linebacker is worth #3 or whether he was a pass rusher.  He had elite production, especially forcing fumbles and tackles for loss.  He also tested very well physically.  The question being: Would Khalil Mack be worth #3; the conclusive answer was.... I don't know, maybe?

---

I do think Mack is a little better as a prospect but i dont think there is that big of a gap.  Also think its a fair comparison

 

Double his on field production and beat him in basically every combine category except the 40…I think you whiffed

---

Wow, I just realized Mack had less sacks than Skuta last year. Doesn't mean much in the scheme, just interesting.

---

I remember a very lively debate about the very subject of Khalil Mack going at #3 last year.  That really was a unique situation.  Khalil Mack was a linebacker with pass rush ability.  The question was whether a linebacker is worth #3 or whether he was a pass rusher.  He had elite production, especially forcing fumbles and tackles for loss.  He also tested very well physically.  The question being: Would Khalil Mack be worth #3; the conclusive answer was.... I don't know, maybe?

Mack also rushed the passer a lot with his hand in the ground

---

those NFL.com comparisons are crap.

 

it's just a quick way for people to see "oh - this player may play a similar role or has similar potential to that NFL player"

 

 

Danielle Hunter, a guy who had like 3 sacks in his entire career at LSU, is compared to Jason Pierre-Paul.

 

Let's grab him at #3 then!

---

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

Mack also rushed the passer a lot with his hand in the ground

 

Certainly.  And that was the debate.  An elite pass rusher is certainly worth #3, but was he a linebacker or pass rusher at the next level?  There was argument against him being worth #3 as a linebacker, which was fair.

 

I will say that as much as Mack rushed the passer at Buffalo, it was only half as much as Dante Fowler did, even when Fowler was a linebacker.  

---

those NFL.com comparisons are crap.

 

it's just a quick way for people to see "oh - this player may play a similar role or has similar potential to that NFL player"

 

 

Danielle Hunter, a guy who had like 3 sacks in his entire career at LSU, is compared to Jason Pierre-Paul.

 

Let's grab him at #3 then!

 

Bad comparison, but he's a hell of a player.

---

I may receive some flack for this, but I think Matt Miller does a good job analyzing players, at least on the comparison front. I mean he does have Ray over Beasley, so his overall opinion is whack, but his comparisons seem pretty good.

 

Anyway, he compares Fowler to Chandler Jones of the Patriots. Main points, both men are onfield terrors due to endless motor and athleticism. Both are defensive chess pieces due to playing end and linebacker. Fowler has same upside as positional weapon.

---

I may receive some flack for this, but I think Matt Miller does a good job analyzing players, at least on the comparison front. I mean he does have Ray over Beasley, so his overall opinion is whack, but his comparisons seem pretty good.

 

Anyway, he compares Fowler to Chandler Jones of the Patriots. Main points, both men are unfield terrors due to endless motor and athleticism. Both are defensive chess pieces due to playing end and linebacker. Fowler has same upside as positional weapon.

 

I don't see it.  No knock on either of them.  Chandler is a whole lot longer and quite a bit slower.  

---

I don't see it.  No knock on either of them.  Chandler is a whole lot longer and quite a bit slower.  

 

in the 40, yeah... but he was actually significantly faster in the 3 cone drill - meaning he changes directions and bends better than Fowler.

---

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

 

 

Anyway, he compares Fowler to Chandler Jones of the Patriots. Main points, both men are onfield terrors due to endless motor and athleticism. Both are defensive chess pieces due to playing end and linebacker. Fowler has same upside as positional weapon.

 

I'd still prefer the guy that going to line up and beat the OT to sack the QB and the Offense knows it yet can't stop it rather than a chess piece.

---

I'd still prefer the guy that going to line up and beat the OT to sack the QB and the Offense knows it yet can't stop it rather than a chess piece.

 

100% agree.

---

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

Double his on field production and beat him in basically every combine category except the 40…I think you whiffed

I know you are the biggest stat guy on here but Mack played 4 years and started every year at Buffalo.  Fowler played 3 years and started 2 of them at Florida.  Plus if Fowler played and started 4 years in the MAC Conference against those teams you dont think his stats would be much better?

---

in the 40, yeah... but he was actually significantly faster in the 3 cone drill - meaning he changes directions and bends better than Fowler.

 

Coincidently, did you know Dante Fowler and Luke Joeckel tied in the 3 cone with a 7.40.  The more you know...   :teehee:

---

I know nothing accurate will ever be said, but this seems to be the consensus I'm gaining.

 

Beasley is the one trick pony, whose one trick happens to be getting after the QB.

 

Fowler is very versatile scheme wise, but due to lack of any dominate feature should be ignored at 3.

 

Close enough?

---