Would Clay Matthews be a great OTTO? Im trying to picture other players except Bruce Irving from the Seahawks.

Think 3-4 OLB, and you've got a pretty clear picture of what an OTTO is and who might be a fit for it.

---

Right now, the "otto" is nothing more than a myth. So far we haven't even found someone good enough to actually play it.

 

---

A player who can rush the passer and have the versatility to drop back in coverage isn't worth the #3 spot? I highly disagree. The problem is finding that player who can do both, and equally well.

 

Khalil Mack is worth every bit of his draft pick. He would have been the ideal OTTO. 

---

The high standard comes with selecting a position like tweener/rush OLB at pick #3.

 

They just aren't picked there often.  The ones that are, are HOFers (Lawrence Taylor at #2.)

 

The point is, IMO - if you can move out, you better if you're left selecting from tweener rushers.  You're likely to get a similar caliber guy (perhaps even one that's a better fit even if not at the same position) even after trading down.

 

This is the danger in a reach.  There's no better example of reaching, than if we'd go with one of these OLBs with #3, IMO.  In the very best case... you've lost value in the pick even if the player is productive.  If you trade out, it's more likely that not only do you get the right value for the picks, you'll also likely to have several players you're happy with instead of one.

 

That's a high standard not only for OTTO, but any position.

 

A prime Julian Peterson, IMO, would be a reasonable expectations of #3 OTTO.

---