Lurker

Sadly, the pissers and moaners never go, however...

Hey, Buddy did that, the same people would be screaming REACH!....

You must be so done with this team....

Nicely played...

Yes he did. Not much of a surprise at all.

BPA, as usual. Fills a need when you've got two 31 CBs and a busted McLuv'n...

Agree...

Well, poo....

For a QB, maybe. A RB, no. One of those three guys they give up will likely be a very good player, as would have been the 4th pick had they stood pat. As always, time will tell...

Polian says its a good deal for both teams. Sad to see Bill losing it....

Every defensive snap from those games is alot different than youtube highlights. Tallest munchkin.. If he struggles with the Big Boys, the NFL is going to be even tougher... Mike Mamaula comes to mind. As does Aaron Curry. As does Tim McGarigle... To paraphrase the late John Butler, I'm sure he's a fine young man... Same here. Agree to disagree then, that's what makes TSW a good place to hang out...

Getting another second would be huge. It would give them the flexibility to take a flier on a QB (say if they really like Osweiler) without disrupting the "win now" game plan and pick up a guy like Glenn who could solve many of the depth problems (at worst) and ideally be the solution at LOT...

Yeah, he's gotta be on Buddy's speedial...

Tackle or hit like a LB. I'll take the hybrid LB/S type Barron represents rather than an undersized nickle or dime CB. If, all things being equal, neither the nickle CB or jumbo SS can cover Gronk, I still want a guy who'll punish/wear him down him after each reception... Barron's rebuttal Echoed by Saban

The pass-happy game now being played is altering the demands of the safety position. Here's a good article describing the shift and I could find five more like it in a few minutes of Googling. "In a time when 5,000-yard passers aren't surprising anyone and tight ends are among the NFL leaders in receptions and receiving yards, the safety position is becoming vital for defensive success." "I think you see the evolution of the safety position," Lions head coach Jim Schwartz said. "There used to be the free safety and the strong safety, and the strong safety was always an in-the-box player. Over the last six or seven years that line has pretty much disappeared. There is no more strong safety. There is no more free safety. There are safeties." "Being able to play in the box against the run and also step back and cover the new breed of NFL tight ends is part of the job description now for a safety." Here's an even better article: "What’s most likely to happen is the linebacker and safety positions will blend into one. Linebackers will always play closer to the line of scrimmage, but with improved blitzes and certain offensive matchups, they’ll wind up playing just as much coverage as the safeties play. As important as the Giants’ pass rush was down the stretch last season, an overlooked aspect of the defensive resurgence was that safety Antrel Rolle moved to nickel corner/dime linebacker on passing downs. Rolle, a former Cardinal, was drafted high in the first round as a cornerback. He also happens to be an adept tackler. In short, he’s a safety who can truly cover man-to-man and truly play the run. That kind of versatility not only eliminated many of the matchup problems that New York’s opponents tried to create, it also allowed the Giants to better disguise and execute their defensive tactics. Rolle is not a superstar but his versatile skills give the Giants great elasticity. The more elastic defensive personnel can be, the easier it is for the coaching staff to highlight the strengths of all its players." How TEs are changing the game...and how defenses will have to adapt. "The next chess move will have the defensive coach going to look for the hybrid defensive player - that 6-3, 235-pound linebacker/defensive end who can do it all," Dilfer said. "He has to have great feet (for quickness) not necessarily top-end speed. "Maybe the prototype is (Seattle safety) Kam Chancellor (6-3, 232). Or, when he first came out of college as a safety, (Chicago linebacker) Brian Urlacher. They could catch up with some of these tight ends." Not sure about the Urlacher comparison (there only one of him), but Chancellor is a guy that Barron has been favorably compared to...

I was very disappointing in his underneath pass coverage. He didn't look anything like Mayock's profile of him being the best coverage LB he's seen in many years. He looked a step slow and his man generally caught the ball. Another thing that stood out is how far behind the LOS he often lined up. By the time he engaged the runner, the guy was 3-4 yards down field. He seemed to get caught up in the trash a lot and didn't make enough downhill plays. That may be a function of the linemen in front of him, but he seemed more like a 'catch' tackler than a hole plugger. Clemson didn't do anything special in terms of game planning that I could see.

I agree. I'm not discounting the work that's been done on him by professionals who live and breath this stuff. But it makes me wonder what they're seeing, frankly. The very limited sample I saw (two Clemson games) was enough to give me the sense he plays like Tarzan versus Duke, but looks a lot like Jane against better teams...

Let's agree to disagree...

Small school players can and do succeed. But one of the big challenges they face is how do they do fare against better talent. He failed miserably in the tape I watched vs. Celemson in 2011 and wasn't that great against them in 2010. I hope to find the Virgina Tech video to verify what I saw (not what I read). I don't care about stats or combine results. That can be manufactured, as can interviews and even Wonderlic. I care about movement skills, instincts, the ability to shed blocks and make the play the team needs (not tackles 8 yards down field or after a guy reaches the first down stripe) and projectability to an NFL career. I have yet to see what the hype is about...

That's the problem. It's all talk. When I watch the video, I don't see the emperor's clothes. If you say it enough, it has to be true, right? Just like every mock that has Reiff going to the Bills...

You are what you eat: 2011 BC schedule 2010 BC schedule IMO, he did very little against the few quality opponents BC faced, of which Clemson was the best last year and pretty good darn in 2010. Pat Kirwan said as much a few days ago. As Parcels said the other night, trust what you see, not what you read...

I don't value anyone's opinion more than my own , but here are three other amatuer viewpoints: ESPN ranking (although prior to 2011 season) USA Today ranking (also preseason) NY Times ranking Your right, it's all arbitrary. But to me, Wilson is an adequate starter who's not physical enough in run support, which is a major hole on this defense. The occasional INT (4 last year) isn't enough to cover up that liability. Same with Bryan Scott, who also plays Jumbo SS in nickle and dime. The way defenses are played today, you typically have 3 safeties on the field in passing situations. Letting Barron take those snaps as a rookie and letting him slide into Wilson's spot by year end would be a big plus for this team, IMO...

Could have fooled me...

Yep, can't draft Kalil because Mike Williams was such a bust...