Astrobot Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 ---Cushing is the strongest, most physical and explosive of the three. ---Cushing was captain of USC's defense. ---Cushing displayed impressive quickness and explosiveness but showed tightness in his hips during coverage drills. ---Cushing came off the field a lot on third down in college; Cushing may not be a three-down linebacker. ---Cushing could make an impact right away. ---Cushing is more effective at the point of attack. ---Ken Norton Jr said Cushing was the best linebacker he ever coached. ---Cushing and Matthews have the versatility to rush the passer. ---Matthews is clearly the better of the two (Matthews and Cushing) when dropping. ---Matthews has tremendous bloodlines: father Clay played linebacker in the NFL (including for Bill Belichick when he was coaching the Browns). ---Matthews' uncle Bruce, an offensive lineman, was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2007. Newsome and Matthews were co-first round draft picks of the Browns in 1978. The older Matthews holds the Browns' franchise record with 232 games played. ---Matthews has had just 10 career starts. ---Matthews, on Pro Day, was very smooth and showed good ball skills during coverage drills. ---Matthews is a natural pass-rusher with good speed upfield, has good balance and burst, and is instinctive. ---Matthews is the quickest of them all. ---Matthews' size is more suited to inside in a 3-4 system
stuckincincy Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 ---Cushing and Matthews Toss in Rey Maualega. It's hard to figure out how much each of them added to the others' performance, and if you pick one, do you get a player who shone in a nice LB core but won't, after? Hard to work it out beforehand, IMO.
PushthePile Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 I like Mathews and I have no clue what I'm talking about. As strange as it sounds Cushing makes me think steroids and overly muscular. He doesn't seem overly athletic to me either. I just get the feeling he will be hurt alot and never reach his potential. He is also going to cost a higher pick than Mathews. I think Mathews is a more natural athlete who developed into his body later than most. He comes to the table with a hardworking mentality and has earned everything he's been given. I know we aren't allowed to like high motor guys anymore but I could be talked into this kid. He was a walk on at USC!
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Toss in Rey Maualega. It's hard to figure out how much each of them added to the others' performance, and if you pick one, do you get a player who shone in a nice LB core but won't, after? Hard to work it out beforehand, IMO. Yep. I didn't watch too much SC this year...I hate them as much as I hate Notre Dame. Anyways it's hard for me to evaluate their defense. They had so much talent and it's hard to break down each individual as a result. They simply out-talented a lot of their opponents. Anyways, like Astrobot stated, Cushing might be more accomplished than Matthews but Matthews might have the higher ceiling. Should be interesting.
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Toss in Rey Maualega. It's hard to figure out how much each of them added to the others' performance, and if you pick one, do you get a player who shone in a nice LB core but won't, after? Hard to work it out beforehand, IMO. He's sinking like a stone, and there have been several articles just this week about his immaturity. Matthews, to me, would be a rock solid pick for the Bills. The bust factor is minimal.
Magox Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Matthews all the way. I've been saying this for months now. One thing Astro, I agree with your assessment, except the explosiveness. Matthews has better shuttle, vertical and broad jump measurables, which is a sign of explosion.
stuckincincy Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 He's sinking like a stone, and there have been several articles just this week about his immaturity. Matthews, to me, would be a rock solid pick for the Bills. The bust factor is minimal. That might be more due to his hamstring tweak early on at the Combine. AFAIK, Matthews is a 1-year starter. No?
TheBuffaloBills Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 I like Matthews alot more than Cushing right now. If we trade down to the 20's, Matthews will most likely still be on the board. He is physical, and a great coverage guy. I believe it was Mike Mayock who said Matthews covers like a Safety and catches the ball like a WR.
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 That might be more due to his hamstring tweak early on at the Combine. AFAIK, Matthews is a 1-year starter. No? Agreed. I don't like players like that. He may be a really good player but not at 11. Especially when teams were game planning on Rey M and Cushing. You never want the 3rd best LB that high.
atlbillsfan1975 Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 ---Cushing is the strongest, most physical and explosive of the three. ---Cushing was captain of USC's defense. ---Cushing displayed impressive quickness and explosiveness but showed tightness in his hips during coverage drills. ---Cushing came off the field a lot on third down in college; Cushing may not be a three-down linebacker. ---Cushing could make an impact right away. ---Cushing is more effective at the point of attack. ---Ken Norton Jr said Cushing was the best linebacker he ever coached. ---Cushing and Matthews have the versatility to rush the passer. ---Matthews is clearly the better of the two (Matthews and Cushing) when dropping. ---Matthews has tremendous bloodlines: father Clay played linebacker in the NFL (including for Bill Belichick when he was coaching the Browns). ---Matthews' uncle Bruce, an offensive lineman, was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2007. Newsome and Matthews were co-first round draft picks of the Browns in 1978. The older Matthews holds the Browns' franchise record with 232 games played. ---Matthews has had just 10 career starts. ---Matthews, on Pro Day, was very smooth and showed good ball skills during coverage drills. ---Matthews is a natural pass-rusher with good speed upfield, has good balance and burst, and is instinctive. ---Matthews is the quickest of them all. ---Matthews' size is more suited to inside in a 3-4 system Wouldn't Mathews also be perfect for OLB in the 4-3? Good in coverage, can rush the passer, and can play all three downs. This totally a question, not being a smart ass. But from the way you describe him, and what little i have seen, he would be a great WLB in our scheme.
stuckincincy Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Agreed. I don't like players like that. He may be a really good player but not at 11. Especially when teams were game planning on Rey M and Cushing. You never want the 3rd best LB that high. I'm guessing that Maualuga won't slip far at all. If his hammie isn't serious - and I've seen nothing to imply that it is - he's a 3-year starter that shoves blockers aside and nails his man.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Wouldn't Mathews also be perfect for OLB in the 4-3? Good in coverage, can rush the passer, and can play all three downs. This totally a question, not being a smart ass. But from the way you describe him, and what little i have seen, he would be a great WLB in our scheme. Yes he's considered a guy who would be a perfect fit in either scheme. Raji and Ayers are the other players who are considered a good fit for either scheme. To a degree so is Orakpo.
Astrobot Posted April 2, 2009 Author Posted April 2, 2009 Wouldn't Mathews also be perfect for OLB in the 4-3? Good in coverage, can rush the passer, and can play all three downs. This totally a question, not being a smart ass. But from the way you describe him, and what little i have seen, he would be a great WLB in our scheme. Matthews thinks he could be a 4-3 OLB or an up DE, so he's the more likely 3-down LB. He'd be a good WLB. Your city of Atlanta would also like him, I'm told.
atlbillsfan1975 Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Matthews thinks he could be a 4-3 OLB or an up DE, so he's the more likely 3-down LB. He'd be a good WLB. Your city of Atlanta would also like him, I'm told. Atl definetly has a need at linebacker. After loosing Brooking and Boley and haveing replaced them with Mike Peterson. And i guess Coy Wire. But i think you will see them go after a Dlineman in the first. Then maybe Lb in the second. I have heard they are seriously going D in the first three rounds. Where they also have to replace Malloy.
Astrobot Posted April 2, 2009 Author Posted April 2, 2009 Atl definetly has a need at linebacker. After loosing Brooking and Boley and haveing replaced them with Mike Peterson. And i guess Coy Wire. But i think you will see them go after a Dlineman in the first. Then maybe Lb in the second. I have heard they are seriously going D in the first three rounds. Where they also have to replace Malloy. I wonder what they'd do if their choice is Ziggy Hood DT or Michael Johnson OLB...Go Hood?
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted April 3, 2009 Posted April 3, 2009 That might be more due to his hamstring tweak early on at the Combine. AFAIK, Matthews is a 1-year starter. No? Rey's behavioral issues have nothing to do with a hamstring, and started well before the combine
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 3, 2009 Posted April 3, 2009 I wonder what they'd do if their choice is Ziggy Hood DT or Michael Johnson OLB...Go Hood? I can only speak personal preference Astro...I like Hood a lot. And he has been rising. I just heard a podcast of Kiper and McShay yesterday and they were unanimous that they don't like Johnson, nor do I. Incredible talent and very questionable desire. But you're Astrobot, you already knew this.
Recommended Posts