Thread: Walter Mock
View Single Post
Old 03-07-2009   #18
painekiller
Hall of Fame
 
painekiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: On the West Belt
Age: 52
Posts: 2,063
Rep Power: 4466 painekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respectedpainekiller is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Walter Mock

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf6151 View Post
I don't like Matthews in the 1st, he's not a 4-3 SLB, he's a 3-4 pass rushing LB or maybe a 4-3 WLB, he just doesn't fit at 4-3 SLB, he's never played in pass coverage. I'd much rather have Cushing in the 1st, I'm not totally sold on him either but at least he fits our system. I love the Unger and Hamlin picks, but I also think there's no way Greene last to the 4th round.
You do realize the WILL LB is higher on the food chain then the SAM LB? So saying that Matthews is a WILL is actually saying his position is the higher desired position.

Now why is the WILL higher desired than the SAM? Because the SAM does not play in the nickle package, and teams play the nickle almost 50% of the defensive plays. An offense can scheme a SAM off the field, by going 3 wide and then your 1st round pick is on the bench watching.

So I say Matthews being able to play the WILL is a good thing. Also this team has not had a true WILL LB since we have gone to the 4-3, so it's time to draft one.
painekiller is offline   Reply With Quote