McBeane Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Knock.. ? I'd love to have a defensive lineman that plays mean! This team needs someone with some attitude and fire. +1. I, for one, would take 3-4 15 yard personal fouls/year in exchange for the fire and determination Fairley would bring every down. If he takes a few personals/year, oh well, the upside far outweighs the negatives.
Mango Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 havent watched much of cam newton all year. what i saw tonight was a great athlete run the spread offense and make some plays on his own. his throws werent great, i noticed alot of checking down or dumping off, and when he did go deep he consistantly misfired. most big plays where made by the wr after the catch. i did notice that he always seemed calm and collected in the pocket or even when scrambling. i wanted so bad for him to light it up, and own the ducks, the bills find there franchise guy. he played well, not a no 3 pick. somebody will grab him in the 1st but not the bills. he just didnt make the throws. in chans quick decision offense i am not sure he would perform well. i would have liked to see him make some throws behind center, some 3-5 step drops and release 10 yards over the middle. he could be good, but i was in no way blown away or overly impressed with all the height. he could however be the answer for stud te the bills need. i have mentioned it before. after seeing how strong and athletic the kid is. maybe you just toss him the ball and let him make plays rather than win the game? he is big fast and powerful. hell antonio gates played basketball at ucla
reddogblitz Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 +1. I, for one, would take 3-4 15 yard personal fouls/year in exchange for the fire and determination Fairley would bring every down. If he takes a few personals/year, oh well, the upside far outweighs the negatives. I don't know. I watched him pretty close every play. Looked to me like he took some plays off. He looked good to me, but not a dominatrix monster a la Bruce or Randy White. Still, I'd take him if available at #3. Then I'd put Kyle and him in the middle and play a 4-3. We're not married to the 3-4.
John from Riverside Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 I really dont put that much stock in the combine........if your a player your a player...... And Fairly is a difference maker
NoSaint Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 +1. I, for one, would take 3-4 15 yard personal fouls/year in exchange for the fire and determination Fairley would bring every down. If he takes a few personals/year, oh well, the upside far outweighs the negatives. Didn't he have 3 in the Georgia game alone? And about 4 more that should've been called? If it was rare I wouldn't mention. It's also just about the only knock which says a lot tho
McBeane Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Didn't he have 3 in the Georgia game alone? And about 4 more that should've been called? If it was rare I wouldn't mention. It's also just about the only knock which says a lot tho Is it enough to degrade the talent level he has because of that?
ajzepp Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 I don't know. I watched him pretty close every play. Looked to me like he took some plays off. He looked good to me, but not a dominatrix monster a la Bruce or Randy White. Still, I'd take him if available at #3. Then I'd put Kyle and him in the middle and play a 4-3. We're not married to the 3-4. If I have a guy on my team who can sack the QB, get five tackles for a loss, bring pressure on nearly every down by disrupting the bejeezus out of things, and make the other linemen better, I'm fine with him taking a few plays off here and there. If Carolina doesn't take this kid with the top pick, they're stupid. My preference has been Bowers, but I would love to pick up Fairley and let him loose on Tommy Brady twice every year. That guy was a frickin BEAST today.
sllib olaffub Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Well, Fairley looked by far the better prospect. And, now I've seen bowl games with Bowers and Fairley, and Fairley looks like the best college D-line prospect this year. I'd guess he'll be gone by our pick. But, that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Darius also looks great, and might be a better fit for our system - which, does matter when the two players compared are close in talent but one fits the need more than the other. I wouldn't be surprised with Darius, or Groves, or Fairley if he's there. And, as of right now, I'd be thrilled with any of the top four D-lineman - they all look like they'd help us out. But, as far as Newton is concerned - I don't think I would be very excited about seeing him picked at three. I think I'd be happier with Locker or Gabbert, if we're picking a QB. Or, perhaps better still, one of the beast D-linemen in the first, and one of the group of promising QB's projected to go in the 2-4 rounds, like Dalton, or Kaepernick, or Ponder, or McElroy. Whoever our staff thinks has the "it" down. It looks like there will be 3 or 4 QB's taken in the first this year, and another 4 or 5 taken up to round 5 - so, maybe close to ten QB's taken by round 5 this year. I'd bet, looking at this years crop, that two or so of the later bunch end up being good, and two or so of the first bunch do, too; that there will be similar success ratio between the first tier and the second... so, if our staff can spot the diamond, then all the better.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 So far, I am far more impressed with Fairley and am leaning towards wanting him as our first pick overall. Neither, the only big plays (2) Fairly made he was unblocked, the rest he was getting handled one on one. # 45 Antoine Carter DE 6-4 256 and 49 Michael Goggans DE 6-3 261 looked real good rushing the passer wouldn't mind them latter on in the draft.
NoSaint Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Is it enough to degrade the talent level he has because of that? If he gave up 3 - 15 yard runs for first downs cause he decided to just totally take a play off it would.... What's the difference? 45 yards is ok by you? Its a big hole for him to dig out of. If you believe you can clean it up and it's systematic (which could be very true) then take him. If you think he's a headcase with uncontrollable anger and no football smarts it could be an issue. I tend to lean towards poor coaching but as a potential top 5 pick with that being his biggest red flag it is worrisome he couldn't keep his cool in such an important spot tonight. It was a close game, second half, for the championship and to hand yardage AND snaps to the ducks offense? Shows very bad judgement even if the coaches don't hate it happening. If forced to vote yes or no today - yes he is my 3 but that doesn't mean he's immune to criticism.
FluffHead Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 havent watched much of cam newton all year. what i saw tonight was a great athlete run the spread offense and make some plays on his own. his throws werent great, i noticed alot of checking down or dumping off, and when he did go deep he consistantly misfired. most big plays where made by the wr after the catch. i did notice that he always seemed calm and collected in the pocket or even when scrambling. i wanted so bad for him to light it up, and own the ducks, the bills find there franchise guy. he played well, not a no 3 pick. somebody will grab him in the 1st but not the bills. he just didnt make the throws. in chans quick decision offense i am not sure he would perform well. i would have liked to see him make some throws behind center, some 3-5 step drops and release 10 yards over the middle. he could be good, but i was in no way blown away or overly impressed with all the height. he could however be the answer for stud te the bills need. i have mentioned it before. after seeing how strong and athletic the kid is. maybe you just toss him the ball and let him make plays rather than win the game? he is big fast and powerful. hell antonio gates played basketball at ucla Kent St isn't exactly UCLA, but either way Cam could be a great TE. Honestly though, the kid could play TE, QB. OLB, DE, WR in the league. He needs some time to develop no matter what position they put him at. Not advocating for Newton at this point, but Chan's kind of offense is the kind Newton would be best suited for.
greenmohawk Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Neither, the only big plays (2) Fairly made he was unblocked, the rest he was getting handled one on one. # 45 Antoine Carter DE 6-4 256 and 49 Michael Goggans DE 6-3 261 looked real good rushing the passer wouldn't mind them latter on in the draft. Ditto. neither for us. I saw Cam diferently tonight and Fairley doesn't fit the new 3-4. But 45 Carter at olb, guys always around the ball making plays.
truth on hold Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Fairley looks ready to step in and make a difference day 1. Cam looks more like a project that may not pay off until yr 3. I dont believe in paying a guy $10MM/yr, when the first 2 years are unproductive. So Im going with Fairley. Low odds hes there when we pick imo. Hes clearly the best player in the draft
KRT88 Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 I know Fairly is a good player but really he has been left unblocked so many times this game. I want to see him actually shed some blockers. PTR Was it just me, I loved how Fairly blew the game up but exactly how many times did Oregon decide to not block a DL. Not sure about that skeme, but I'd be rethinking blocking patterns if that's a common play! Lots of players could look completely dominate if they went unblocked play after play!
Chimp Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Fairley looks good but he hasn't done enough to surpass Dareus on my board. Are you basing this opinion on one game? Did you watch Fairley all year long? Was it just me, I loved how Fairly blew the game up but exactly how many times did Oregon decide to not block a DL. Not sure about that skeme, but I'd be rethinking blocking patterns if that's a common play! Lots of players could look completely dominate if they went unblocked play after play! Go back and watch the game again. Splitting a double team because you are that much quicker than the O lineman doesn't mean you were left unblocked. I think PTR must have been watching the screen game and watching something else the rest of the time. Go back and watch the game again and you will see that the comment about him being left unblocked and not shedding blockers is simply unfounded and misguided.
Billy in 4C Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Fairley was nasty. He destroyed. That 15 yard penalty and constant jawing at the oregon players worries me that he might be hanesworth but this kid can play. No on Newton. He's not ready. Missed wide open guys. Poor decisions under pressure. All their yards came on the ground. He shows flashes, but that's not enough unless you can sit him for 2 years
The Rev.Mattb74 ESQ. Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Are you basing this opinion on one game? Did you watch Fairley all year long? Go back and watch the game again. Splitting a double team because you are that much quicker than the O lineman doesn't mean you were left unblocked. I think PTR must have been watching the screen game and watching something else the rest of the time. Go back and watch the game again and you will see that the comment about him being left unblocked and not shedding blockers is simply unfounded and misguided. Totally Disagree he was left unblocked or blocked with a small interior lineman the whole game. Whenhe left the field his backup Blanc was making big plays(the safety). Not trying to take anything away from the kid as he had a big game, but I wouldn't pick him with my number one pick based on that performance simply because Oregon just played them bad. I did love how Carter played and how Matthews played on the other side.
Bob in STL Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) I don't know. I watched him pretty close every play. Looked to me like he took some plays off. He looked good to me, but not a dominatrix monster a la Bruce or Randy White. Still, I'd take him if available at #3. Then I'd put Kyle and him in the middle and play a 4-3. We're not married to the 3-4. I did not see that. Both teams had not played for over 30 days and it showed in the execution. People tend to over-analyze college players. They are players that have not perfected their craft yet. You need to focus on the talent. Comparing him to Bruce Smith and Randy White at this point is unfair. Can you remember Bruce Smith at Va Tech? He was a fatty who took plays off too. But he was dominant in college when he wanted to be. It took Bruce Smith 3 years to emerge as a force in the NFL. Fairley looked like the best player on the field whenever he was on the field. If he is there I sure hope we take him. Edited January 11, 2011 by Bob in STL
Beerball Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 I don't know. I watched him pretty close every play. Looked to me like he took some plays off. He looked good to me, but not a dominatrix monster a la Bruce or Randy White. I don't think that word means what you think it means.
H2o Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 Fairley was a monster last night. He plays the run well and he gets to the QB. The guy is just flat out disruptive. He would look great in a Bills' uni.
Recommended Posts