I see him also give up on plays if it's not at him. I'm not saying I'm right. But you can't start all three. You want a #2 pick coming off the bench? You're not sitting Long, he just got a nice contract. So when you have potential needs all over the OL and defensive backfield, you want to take a player #2 that isn't starting day 1?
Something tells me that when this guy signs his first NFL contract... he will no longer be motivated to do anything that requires too much work, and football certainly doesn't seem to be his passion.
I would pass on him. I think he'll be there @ 2,,, I may turn into a Clowney fan as a result,,, bout to find out.
Do you want to pick a tackle to have him play guard?
What CB do you see that would be taken at #2?
I'm all for trading out of #2 and addressing a need when the value fits the need. But if we can't do that, then what? I'm sorry, but no tackle is worth the number 2 pick in this draft.
BTW ChrisW- If we don't sign Saffold and Long doesn't come back 100% you'll be thinking about the OL a lot harder. Wells and Dahl may or may not be back. Then that shiny new toy we got at #2 can watch Bradford or Clemens get killed all day with no protection.
I'm taking Clowney at #2.
But I think we trade down.
If Watkins is available, he's my target. Otherwise it's OL all the way.
You'll be wanting the Rams to Draft him when he does his thing at the Pajama Olympics.
That's how you are......lol
To me the problem with these "One in a lifetime" types is that because they show up so often, like every other draft or so, I'm not sure which one to pick.
If he is better than Mario Williams and Peppers, than he isn't an every other draft player (not at that position, anyways), he would be more like a once a decade/generation-type talent. Calvin Johnson was, without a doubt in my mind, the greatest physical specimen and athlete at WR in league history (Randy Moss was pretty good, too, but not as big). Luck was the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning (some would say Elway). I'm not sure about Suh, who got off to a strong start but IMO has disappointed in recent years, but one scout stated Clowney belonged with Johnson, Suh and Luck as the highest graded prospects he had ever evaluated across all positions. If he fulfills his potential, I don't have much doubt he is a rare and special talent.
Do Wells and Dahl have large roster bonuses kicking in before free agency starts (sounds like Finnegan is due $3 million in about a week)? If not, we can wait and see what happens with Saffold before deciding on Wells and Dahl. Very possible not all three leave.
* We could very easily retain most of the OL that looked so dominant against CHI and SEA. Not seeing the worst OL in the league (noted above by Gator, not you)?
Shhhhhhit.
Just as it wouldn't be fair to just look at his 2012 highlights, without also looking at his 2013 highlights (maybe he was hurt?), the converse is also true... Here are his 2012 highlights, to balance out and lend perspective to his evaluation. Stats (40-14, 23.5 TFL, 13 sacks, 3 FFs). One thing I like is that at his best, it looks like he already plays the run better than Long (lucky to break 30 solo tackles) or Quinn. I'm not a scout, but a buzz phrase that comes up a lot is converting speed to power, which he appears to be great at, and this is probably a reason why he is a historically good prospect. I question whether he can really bend around the edge and have the acrobatic, Gumby-like flexibility of elite speed rushers, but Reggie White did it more with power (of course he was almost like a DE/DT-tweener size-wise), so maybe Clowney will be a speed/power hybrid at the next level.
Well Long played in a 3-4 i believe at UVA, and played at a helluva level I'd have to think it would be easier for a 3-4 DE to move inside than a 4-3 DE also be more productive.