and the reason some people think Clowney wouldn't make a good LEO is because of his ability to drop back into coverage and edge rush...which is up in the air. Clowney is best fit for straight up rushing the passer than all the facets involved with being a LEO. Ideally you want Clowney as a 5T and a more diverse player as LEO in our defensive scheme, teams would be absolutely reckt. 

 

That's not to say Clowney can't be a LEO, you just wouldn't be getting the maximum you could out of him from that position (and you probably wouldn't be getting the maximum you could form the position itself with him at it either). Ford+Clowney combo would be absolutely deadly.

---

"A man with no sauce is lost.

<p style="text-align:center;">But that same man can get lost in the sauce."

Were they obviously wrong though?

Everyone claims Bruce Irvin has been a great player for Seattle - but I think the team's success is being linked to him being great, when in reality he hasn't done squat this year.


He had a good rookie year, but has been disappointing this year. It's been kept quiet however because it's a non-story as Seattle continues winning.


I think drafting Bruce Irvin again (this year) with the same results that he's given his team would be a mistake.


I mean, he's been pretty good overall... but the jury is still out on him. If he has another year like 2013 next year, I think many people will start scratching their heads about him.


Also, Bruce Irvin is way more athletic than Ford. Ford is a good athlete, but Irvin was an absolute freak. He ran the 40 in 4.41 seconds at 245 lbs.... which is basically the reason he jumped up to #15 overall.

Also, Bruce changed positions this year and played a lot of weak side backer this year.

And with the plethora of rushers the Seahawks had this year, his rushing opportunities were greatly reduced.

---

Making up

Evidence

Depending on

Information

Available

and the reason some people think Clowney wouldn't make a good LEO is because of his ability to drop back into coverage and edge rush...which is up in the air. Clowney is best fit for straight up rushing the passer than all the facets involved with being a LEO. Ideally you want Clowney as a 5T and a more diverse player as LEO in our defensive scheme, teams would be absolutely reckt.


That's not to say Clowney can't be a LEO, you just wouldn't be getting the maximum you could out of him from that position (and you probably wouldn't be getting the maximum you could form the position itself with him at it either). Ford+Clowney combo would be absolutely deadly.

Ummm, the LEO's main concern is rushing the passer.

Unless there's a zone blitz involved, he'll be going forward once the ball is snapped, not backwards.

---

Making up

Evidence

Depending on

Information

Available

I don't see Dee Ford as a first round draft pick. 

 

He struggles against the run. Lacks LB cover skills.

---

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif

Hes gonna be long gone before 39 brehs. 

---

Was it just me, or did anyone else see that Dee Ford jumped the snap count on his first sack?   Maybe offsides?   He has an unbelievably quick first step, but it looked all day like he was anticipating the snap count. 

---

In the postgame show either the last game, or the second to last, (I can't remember which), Marco Coleman said he liked Ford more than Clowney.

 

I know that's just one man's opinion, but it just so happens to be a man who played a dozen or so seasons at a high level as a defensive end in the NFL.

 

That's pretty high praise.

 

 

Marco Coleman has been down on Clowney for a long time. He doesn't like him at all, and its become kind of comical about it.

But maybe he is onto something.  He also mentioned a DT from Either Missouri or Minnesota as a DL he liked more than Clowney. After watching the Senior bowl, his comments may have at least some merit.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

and the reason some people think Clowney wouldn't make a good LEO is because of his ability to drop back into coverage and edge rush...which is up in the air. Clowney is best fit for straight up rushing the passer than all the facets involved with being a LEO. Ideally you want Clowney as a 5T and a more diverse player as LEO in our defensive scheme, teams would be absolutely reckt. 

 

That's not to say Clowney can't be a LEO, you just wouldn't be getting the maximum you could out of him from that position (and you probably wouldn't be getting the maximum you could form the position itself with him at it either). Ford+Clowney combo would be absolutely deadly.

 

But picking both Ford and Clowney would mean not picking a quarterback. If we had only one pick in the draft that pick would obviously be a quarterback because we are no longer able to wait another year for the right guy behind center. And don't try to tell me the sixth pick in the third round is a good time to pick a franchise quarterback - it never is, and especially not this year.

 

Now if you want to talk about Clowney in the first and a quarterback in the second that would be something else, but I would still prefer a quarterback at #3 and Dee Ford at #39.

---

Hes gonna be long gone before 39 brehs. 

 

...yeah....he might go 38.... -_-

---

I don't see Dee Ford as a first round draft pick. 

 

He struggles against the run. Lacks LB cover skills.

 

late 1st/ early 2nd kinda player, IMO

---

Dee Ford had a "payday" week. I think he'll go late 1st round. Prior to the Senior Bowl week, I would have pegged him as a 3rd round guy. His first step quicks were impressive.

---

Dee Ford had a "payday" week. I think he'll go late 1st round. Prior to the Senior Bowl week, I would have pegged him as a 3rd round guy. His first step quicks were impressive.

 

If he was just getting lucky on guessing the snap count, then IMO thats not AS impressive as purely beating your guy with a first step based on athleticism only. It would be almost like getting a head start, per se. Ford is a nice player, but we need to not go overboard here based off of 2 sacks in this game. His overall play over the past 2 seasons is something we should be using as a guide more so than one single Senior Bowl game. 

---

Late 1st/ early 2nd kinda player, IMO

 

I hate the #39 pick more than ever.

---

If he was just getting lucky on guessing the snap count, then IMO thats not AS impressive as purely beating your guy with a first step based on athleticism only. It would be almost like getting a head start, per se. Ford is a nice player, but we need to not go overboard here based off of 2 sacks in this game. His overall play over the past 2 seasons is something we should be using as a guide more so than one single Senior Bowl game.

See the national championship game against FSU's highly touted O-Line.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

I hate the #39 pick more than ever.

 

#culturechanging4wins got us there. 

 

I agree, its a horrible spot to be in given as poor of a record as 4 wins. I hate doing it, but we might have to trade one of our 4th rounders to move up from 39 to get someone we really need. At the price of a 4th, it wouldn't be too steep to do so. 

---

#culturechanging4wins got us there. 

 

I agree, its a horrible spot to be in given as poor of a record as 4 wins. I hate doing it, but we might have to trade one of our 4th rounders to move up from 39 to get someone we really need. At the price of a 4th, it wouldn't be too steep to do so. 

 

We did not pur ourselves in a bad spot by winning four games. Our problem was four other teams finished with the same record. If nobody else was 4-12 in 2013 it would be #35.

 

Fortunately, we can solve that problem if the Browns are happy with only a fourth round pick to move down four spots.

---

If he was just getting lucky on guessing the snap count, then IMO thats not AS impressive as purely beating your guy with a first step based on athleticism only. It would be almost like getting a head start, per se. Ford is a nice player, but we need to not go overboard here based off of 2 sacks in this game. His overall play over the past 2 seasons is something we should be using as a guide more so than one single Senior Bowl game.

If u look at when this thread was made it was before the senoir bowl so it was not based off of that game

---

We did not pur ourselves in a bad spot by winning four games. Our problem was four other teams finished with the same record. If nobody else was 4-12 in 2013 it would be #35.


Fortunately, we can solve that problem if the Browns are happy with only a fourth round pick to move down four spots.

we put us in a great spot with 4 wins

---

We put us in a great spot with 4 wins.

 

Our third day picks are good but the two second day picks suck. What I hate is if Dee Ford is projected as an early second rounder, chances are pretty good he will be gone before #39.

---

Our third day picks are good but the two second day picks suck. What I hate is if Dee Ford is projected as an early second rounder, chances are pretty good he will be gone before #39.

 

Yeah, thats why I suggested trading up with one of the 4th rounders as bait. I wouldn't go higher than that though. We need our picks. 

---