PDA

View Full Version : A good take on why Denver should pick Fairley over Dareus


BMarsh615
04-02-2011, 04:09 AM
I will post the conclusion but you really need to click the link to hear the bulk of the argument.

http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/denvers-2-pick-dilemma-prime-or-choice

Conclusion

When you look at the issue historically, itís generally been easier to find top nose tackle material than it is to find elite undertackles. When people talk about the question of Dareus vs. Fairley, the conversation often lacks a recognition that the two players are likely to play different positions. Fairleyís play reminds me of Warren Sapp - Sapp also tended to play high, especially later in his career. He was nearly unstoppable when he kept his pad level low, and thatís about what I see in Fairley. Fairley isnít at Sappís level yet, and I donít think that heís ďthis yearís ÖĒ, but there are similarities in their play. Sapp had some maturity issues when he came out, but it didnít stop Tampa Bay from taking him, and it shouldnít stop Denver from taking Fairley.

For those of you who prefer Dareus to Fairley, youíll be getting equal time shortly, since Iím putting togeter Talegating pieces on both players and Iíll post one on Dareus soon. I think that Fairley is the better pick and Iíve said why, but Iíve also been a fan of Dareus for the past several months. Head to head, and taking Denverís specific needs into account, Iíd take Fairley, but theyíre both solid players who would contribute quickly to the Broncos' defense. Ranked in order, Iíd put it as a tie between Fairley and Miller at the top - both are elite players in their own right, but Miller is probably more NFL-ready. Dareus will be a solid player, even a top player, but he doesnít have the kind of upside that Fairley or Miller does. Peterson isnít the right player at the right time - itís as easy as that. Heís also an elite talent, but the other two at that level fill roles that Denver needs more immediately.After reading the entire article is anybody rethinking their stance on the whole Fairley-Dareus-Miller-Peterson debate?

Jesterhole
04-02-2011, 06:49 AM
At this point, I'd almost rather trade out of the #2 and get more picks. There is no sure fire prospect at the top of this draft. In fact, this seems like one of the worst years ever to be in the top 5. There are big questions on everyone, and no stand outs. Why give any of these guys 50-60 million?

RhymesayersDU
04-02-2011, 07:25 AM
At this point, I'd almost rather trade out of the #2 and get more picks. There is no sure fire prospect at the top of this draft. In fact, this seems like one of the worst years ever to be in the top 5. There are big questions on everyone, and no stand outs. Why give any of these guys 50-60 million?

Well hopefully the new CBA will save us from giving those guys that amount of money.

Jay3
04-02-2011, 07:33 AM
After reading the entire article is anybody rethinking their stance on the whole Fairley-Dareus-Miller-Peterson debate?

No, but I would if I didn't already rank them Fairley-Dareus-Peterson.

I think there's some poor-mouthing of Fairley going on hopes that he falls.

Start with the guys who dominated in college against good competition, then look at size and measurables. Fairley has it all.

Dedhed
04-02-2011, 08:03 AM
I had a dream last night that the Broncos traded back to #5 and took Von Miller.

Requiem
04-02-2011, 08:05 AM
It isn't a good argument at all. I've read and heard numerous places that Fairley isn't even registering in the top ten on team boards. Dareus is the better player. Anybody who watched college football this season knows that. Anybody who respects versatility and what a player can do for a defense knows that too.

theAPAOps5
04-02-2011, 09:17 AM
Nope didn't change my mind that this team should stay away from the one year wonder Farely

Play2win
04-02-2011, 09:27 AM
Dareus is the cornerstone that we could the future of the Denver Bronco's defense upon.

Broncos4Life
04-02-2011, 10:03 AM
This place is gonna crash if Denver can't trade out of #2 and takes Fairley with the pick. I'll be fine with the pick by the way.

OBF1
04-02-2011, 11:48 AM
Gabbert or Newton is who Denver is picking

mhgaffney
04-02-2011, 12:10 PM
Holy shyte.
This place will melt down worse then ***ishma if Denver pick a QB.

Taco John
04-02-2011, 12:21 PM
I agree with the article. I think Fairley is the closest thing to Sapp we've seen since Sapp himself. I like his raw potential much more than Dareus. I like Dareus too, but of the two, I think Fairley has the highest ceiling.

rugbythug
04-02-2011, 12:49 PM
I agree with the article. I think Fairley is the closest thing to Sapp we've seen since Sapp himself. I like his raw potential much more than Dareus. I like Dareus too, but of the two, I think Fairley has the highest ceiling.

Fairly has the highest ceiling of the defensive tackles von miller has a high ceiling in general. Marcell has the highest floor.

HAT
04-02-2011, 12:59 PM
Fairly has the highest ceiling of the defensive tackles

Liuget will be better than both.

Requiem
04-02-2011, 01:11 PM
I like Liuget better better than Fairley as well, especially from a value standpoint.

My DL list goes as follows: Dareus, Jordan, Liuget, Watt and then Fairley.

I'll be stoked if we can get Dareus or Peterson at #2.

I truly think that Denver's best plan of action is to do that and then trade back up into the first round to get another one of their top DL players. Either way, they are in position to address every phase of defense with their first four selections. If a trade down happens, they are in even better position.

There is almost zero chance this draft sucks. We'd have to blow it.

oubronco
04-02-2011, 02:30 PM
I agree with the article. I think Fairley is the closest thing to Sapp we've seen since Sapp himself. I like his raw potential much more than Dareus. I like Dareus too, but of the two, I think Fairley has the highest ceiling.

And the highest bust potential of the top 5-6 guys imo

meangene
04-02-2011, 02:41 PM
I like Liuget better better than Fairley as well, especially from a value standpoint.

My DL list goes as follows: Dareus, Jordan, Liuget, Watt and then Fairley.

I'll be stoked if we can get Dareus or Peterson at #2.

I truly think that Denver's best plan of action is to do that and then trade back up into the first round to get another one of their top DL players. Either way, they are in position to address every phase of defense with their first four selections. If a trade down happens, they are in even better position.

There is almost zero chance this draft sucks. We'd have to blow it.

We have too many needs and too few picks to trade up, particularly to get back into the first.

HAT
04-02-2011, 03:27 PM
We have too many needs and too few picks to trade up, particularly to get back into the first.

I don't agree with this at all.

My preference would be to first trade back, and then back in ala last year but even if they keep the #2 pick it's shortsighted to rule out a trade back into the first scenario.

Let's keep using Liuget as an example.....If the Rams don't take him 14 there's a very real possibility he could slip to the late 20's because the other logical 4-3 teams have other pressing needs.

If a guy like that is on the board when NE is on the clock at #28, I'd have no problem whatsoever offering NE #46 & #67. If the top tier OL are gone, Liuget won't make it past the Bears at #29.

Depending on how things fall.....

#2 / #28 / #36 > #2 / #36 / #46 / #67

At the end of the day, you are still getting 3 players out of 3 rounds, just like most teams, most years. But you are getting 3 players out of the first 36 taken.

meangene
04-02-2011, 04:33 PM
I don't agree with this at all.

My preference would be to first trade back, and then back in ala last year but even if they keep the #2 pick it's shortsighted to rule out a trade back into the first scenario.

Let's keep using Liuget as an example.....If the Rams don't take him 14 there's a very real possibility he could slip to the late 20's because the other logical 4-3 teams have other pressing needs.

If a guy like that is on the board when NE is on the clock at #28, I'd have no problem whatsoever offering NE #46 & #67. If the top tier OL are gone, Liuget won't make it past the Bears at #29.

Depending on how things fall.....

#2 / #28 / #36 > #2 / #36 / #46 / #67

At the end of the day, you are still getting 3 players out of 3 rounds, just like most teams, most years. But you are getting 3 players out of the first 36 taken.

If we had fewer needs, or more picks, I could buy your reasoning. But, we simply do not have the picks in the later rounds this year and too many holes in our roster. Last year, we had more picks to work with and accumulated more by moving back a couple times. I do agree with moving back some in this draft to accumulate more picks but my preference would not be to then use those picks to move back up. I would also prefer we stay in the top 5 if we move back to assure we get an elite defensive player. If you really wanted to target a guy like Liuget, you could move back out of the top 10 and accumulate a couple of premium picks in exchange. I don't see him getting out of the teens in this draft. In short, I believe we should move back to accumulate more picks and not defeat that purpose by trading back up.

eddie mac
04-02-2011, 07:30 PM
If (and it's a big if) the owners dont agree to player movement prior to the draft I can see someone trading up with us to take the QB that the Panthers dont select to get ahead of Buffalo, Cincy and Arizona.

Mediator12
04-02-2011, 07:37 PM
This article represents way too many scouting fallacies for me:

1. A Speed penetrating UT has more "potential" , "talent", or "upside" than a more complete UT. What that player really has, is the ability to gain the third step in the one on one dual with OG's. Consistently winning that third step will give a player great leverage on the Gap he is playing in both the run and in the pass games. A player who can consistently earn that advantage will change the blocking scheme of teams playing against him and create opportunities for the other talent around him to make plays. And, he will capitalize on one on one opportunities when he does get the chance.

2. However, if that player lacks the ability to take the speed to power on the inside and have counter moves to that speed move, he will be limited in his affectiveness at the next level no matter how quick and explosive he is. If he can not hold the POA on running plays where they double or combination block him, he loses the ability to be an every down DT and is relegated to a specialist pass rusher role.

3. That is exactly where a player like Fairley is right now. He has poor lower body power and if he does not win the third step battle with a OG or OT he gets washed out of plays completely on film. The article makes a huge assumption on this kind of player being able to be "coached up" to play the run and have the ability to be diverse in his pass rush eventually. Never Assume a player will be able to be coached up into anything when you are drafting "Elite Level Talent".

4. The projected position he has for Dareus is simply an asssumption. There is no doubt that Fairley is a pure one gap pentrating UT. However, he classifies Dareus as a NT in Fox's 4-3 front. I am assuming he never saw a player named Kris Jenkins play UT for Fox. Jenkins was not a speed and penetration only DT, like Fairley is coming out. He was a complete DT. That is the comparison I have on Dareus as I watch him play. He can beat you with speed or power and destroyed one on one matchups inside.

The only reason he may not appear to be as explosive as Fairley on tape this year was the totally different assignments they drew in college. When Dareus was given the go to penetrate on passing downs inside in the nickel he was just as dominant as Fairley when he saw a one on one situation. The problem is Dareus was doubled twice as much as Fairley and was playing on a bad ankle for over half the season. He also had half his snaps in a two gap read assignment versus a single gap attack assignment. Dareus is explosive with both speed and power and Fairley is only speed at this point.

5. The Complete player Lacks the upside of the Quickness Under Tackle. Flat out hogwash. The complete player has less to get to Elite overall than the one trick pony player. The NFL does not have many complete DT's, but it has a bunch of specialty players who are not able to impact more than one facet of a game. The upside is that a complete player has no holes to exploit, no gaps in his game to gameplan, and can just as easily beat you with penetration or power. In most circumstances, the complete player will become an Elite player more often than the "Potential" prospect.

6. Finally, the mentality of one gap penetrating players is not the same as a complete player. The complete player will do whatever role is required to win, including playing the run every snap. The one gap player will not be able to do more than what they want to do which is penetrate and cause havoc. In most cases, they never develop mentally past their unique quickness skill. They may be able to make something special out of it, or they may be the next Tommie Harris, Gerard Warren, Amobi Okoye, or Johnathon Sullivan. However, their track record is not good at becoming the next Warren Sapp.

In short, I agree with a lot of what they say, but I think the article misses on the real nuances of the DT in today's NFL. I think their analysis is way off for the above reasons. Fairley versus Dareus is a lot more than what they try and isolate it to be.

Lestat
04-02-2011, 08:01 PM
you can't really justify Fairley at #2. so if Miller or Fairley is the guy you want then you need to trade back, grab more picks and take them at #5 or lower.

teknic
04-02-2011, 08:30 PM
I had a dream last night that the Broncos traded back to #5 and took Von Miller.

This.

But all this pre draft hype has Miller as the second best talent in the draft now though, so he may not make it to 5. Newton and Gabbert are both likely to be gone in the top 3, but Miller could still be taken before 5. I'm okay with Miller at 2.

ZONA
04-02-2011, 09:18 PM
This.

But all this pre draft hype has Miller as the second best talent in the draft now though, so he may not make it to 5. Newton and Gabbert are both likely to be gone in the top 3, but Miller could still be taken before 5. I'm okay with Miller at 2.

Would never take Miller over Peterson or Darues or Fairley at #2. Never.

Ray Finkle
04-02-2011, 09:39 PM
This article represents way too many scouting fallacies for me:

1. A Speed penetrating UT has more "potential" , "talent", or "upside" than a more complete UT. What that player really has, is the ability to gain the third step in the one on one dual with OG's. Consistently winning that third step will give a player great leverage on the Gap he is playing in both the run and in the pass games. A player who can consistently earn that advantage will change the blocking scheme of teams playing against him and create opportunities for the other talent around him to make plays. And, he will capitalize on one on one opportunities when he does get the chance.

2. However, if that player lacks the ability to take the speed to power on the inside and have counter moves to that speed move, he will be limited in his affectiveness at the next level no matter how quick and explosive he is. If he can not hold the POA on running plays where they double or combination block him, he loses the ability to be an every down DT and is relegated to a specialist pass rusher role.

3. That is exactly where a player like Fairley is right now. He has poor lower body power and if he does not win the third step battle with a OG or OT he gets washed out of plays completely on film. The article makes a huge assumption on this kind of player being able to be "coached up" to play the run and have the ability to be diverse in his pass rush eventually. Never Assume a player will be able to be coached up into anything when you are drafting "Elite Level Talent".

4. The projected position he has for Dareus is simply an asssumption. There is no doubt that Fairley is a pure one gap pentrating UT. However, he classifies Dareus as a NT in Fox's 4-3 front. I am assuming he never saw a player named Kris Jenkins play UT for Fox. Jenkins was not a speed and penetration only DT, like Fairley is coming out. He was a complete DT. That is the comparison I have on Dareus as I watch him play. He can beat you with speed or power and destroyed one on one matchups inside.

The only reason he may not appear to be as explosive as Fairley on tape this year was the totally different assignments they drew in college. When Dareus was given the go to penetrate on passing downs inside in the nickel he was just as dominant as Fairley when he saw a one on one situation. The problem is Dareus was doubled twice as much as Fairley and was playing on a bad ankle for over half the season. He also had half his snaps in a two gap read assignment versus a single gap attack assignment. Dareus is explosive with both speed and power and Fairley is only speed at this point.

5. The Complete player Lacks the upside of the Quickness Under Tackle. Flat out hogwash. The complete player has less to get to Elite overall than the one trick pony player. The NFL does not have many complete DT's, but it has a bunch of specialty players who are not able to impact more than one facet of a game. The upside is that a complete player has no holes to exploit, no gaps in his game to gameplan, and can just as easily beat you with penetration or power. In most circumstances, the complete player will become an Elite player more often than the "Potential" prospect.

6. Finally, the mentality of one gap penetrating players is not the same as a complete player. The complete player will do whatever role is required to win, including playing the run every snap. The one gap player will not be able to do more than what they want to do which is penetrate and cause havoc. In most cases, they never develop mentally past their unique quickness skill. They may be able to make something special out of it, or they may be the next Tommie Harris, Gerard Warren, Amobi Okoye, or Johnathon Sullivan. However, their track record is not good at becoming the next Warren Sapp.

In short, I agree with a lot of what they say, but I think the article misses on the real nuances of the DT in today's NFL. I think their analysis is way off for the above reasons. Fairley versus Dareus is a lot more than what they try and isolate it to be.

this is why I love your posts.....

pricejj
04-02-2011, 10:00 PM
I like Von Miller, but he kinda gets owned against the run.

Bronco Yoda
04-02-2011, 11:46 PM
I'm Fairley certain we should pick Dareus.

KevinJames
04-03-2011, 01:11 AM
If we weren't interested in Peterson and we could trade down to say 7 so SF can grab Peterson or a QB. I wouldn't mind taking the BPA at #7 and if thats Fairley so be it but not worth it at #2.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 09:00 AM
We have too many needs and too few picks to trade up, particularly to get back into the first.

Well, if Denver were to take Peterson at #2, they could possibly trade next year's #1 to move back into the later first round if a Liuget or whomever fell down the board.

That way they could keep both current 2nd-rounders. It might be worth the gamble.

misturanderson
04-03-2011, 09:13 AM
Well, if Denver were to take Peterson at #2, they could possibly trade next year's #1 to move back into the later first round if a Liuget or whomever fell down the board.

That way they could keep both current 2nd-rounders. It might be worth the gamble.

Not when we have no idea how Tebow will do and have a staff that doesn't trust him. I think it's pretty safe to say the 2012 1st rounder will be safe this year to hedge bets and have an opportunity at next year's top QBs if necessary.

Beantown Bronco
04-03-2011, 09:19 AM
Well, if Denver were to take Peterson at #2, they could possibly trade next year's #1 to move back into the later first round if a Liuget or whomever fell down the board.

That way they could keep both current 2nd-rounders. It might be worth the gamble.

Can't trade future pics unless a new CBA is agreed to pre-draft.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 09:33 AM
Can't trade future pics unless a new CBA is agreed to pre-draft.

I doubt a new CBA will happen prior to the draft, so that ends that idea.

RhymesayersDU
04-03-2011, 09:34 AM
Trading next year's #1 would be a death sentence. Would screw this franchise for years.

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 09:38 AM
Can't trade future pics unless a new CBA is agreed to pre-draft.

and like i said in the other thread, thats not true. you can trade future picks for picks in this years draft, you cannot trade future picks for a player.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 09:51 AM
Trading next year's #1 would be a death sentence. Would screw this franchise for years.

Maybe, maybe not. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I'm not saying it's the greatest idea in the history of drafting, I'm saying it might be worth the gamble.

IF:
A) The team should draft at least one of the top DT's
B) Peterson or Miller won't be available after pick 5
C) A top DT will be available later in Round One
D) Denver should keep both 2nd rounders

THEN:
Denver should consider trading next year's #1 in order to draft Peterson or Miller, AND get one of the top DT's, AND keep both 2nd rounders

Requiem
04-03-2011, 09:51 AM
Trading next year's #1 would be a death sentence. Would screw this franchise for years.

Why?

Fox has done this numerous amounts of times to get players he wants, so it is no surprise that it may happen this year.

I'd rather trade our first next year in a weak draft, (if we do take Peterson) to move back up and get a top DL guy in this draft.

Requiem
04-03-2011, 09:54 AM
<object width="480" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/l2hqzEKbaIQ?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/l2hqzEKbaIQ?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="390"></embed></object>

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 10:02 AM
Why?

Fox has done this numerous amounts of times to get players he wants, so it is no surprise that it may happen this year.

I'd rather trade our first next year in a weak draft, (if we do take Peterson) to move back up and get a top DL guy in this draft.

It's certainly a gamble, but it might be worth the gamble.

misturanderson
04-03-2011, 10:08 AM
Why?

Fox has done this numerous amounts of times to get players he wants, so it is no surprise that it may happen this year.

I'd rather trade our first next year in a weak draft, (if we do take Peterson) to move back up and get a top DL guy in this draft.

This would require the new staff to believe in Tebow a lot more than they do (from all indications that we've had). You can't trade away the pick that you might need to get a top QB next year if you fail with Tebow at the helm this year.

Next year's draft isn't necessarily weaker overall, just weaker in terms of DL. It's looking to be a hell of a lot stronger in terms of QBs (assuming Luck and Barkley both come out) and we may have a real need to get one of those guys and the staff knows it.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 10:42 AM
This would require the new staff to believe in Tebow a lot more than they do (from all indications that we've had). You can't trade away the pick that you might need to get a top QB next year if you fail with Tebow at the helm this year.

Next year's draft isn't necessarily weaker overall, just weaker in terms of DL. It's looking to be a hell of a lot stronger in terms of QBs (assuming Luck and Barkley both come out) and we may have a real need to get one of those guys and the staff knows it.

Hedging their bets vis-a-vis Tebow is a good point, saving next year's first-rounder for a potential QB. That would be the safe position. New VP, new coaching staff, they might go the safe route. OTOH, Elway said during the HC search they wanted an HC that was willing to work with Tebow, and Fox was.

It's gonna be interesting, because they might not go the safe route. Elway has talked up Peterson, so if they draft him at #2 that sort of opens up possibilities for more gambling to get a DT. Well, we'll see.

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 10:47 AM
marcell dareus is reportedly not in the mix for #1 overall anymore, so its looking very, very likely that he is our pick at 2 unless they trade back, which is unlikely.

Cito Pelon
04-03-2011, 11:29 AM
marcell dareus is reportedly not in the mix for #1 overall anymore, so its looking very, very likely that he is our pick at 2 unless they trade back, which is unlikely.

I'm ok with Dareus at #2, but I like to explore some more possibilities as most of us do. Dareus to go with Elvis, a five-year vet with plenty of sacks in his future, and Ayers a solid DE on the other side would be a pretty good young DL combo.

I like Peterson or Miller also at #2, because those two seem to be players that will bring a lot to a defense (and ST's). If passing on Dareus to get Peterson or Miller, then I think gambling by trading up to get Liuget might be worth the gamble, even if it costs the 2012 #1. By doing so, they keep both 2011 2nd-rounders.

We'll see, you never know how it will pan out no matter if you stand pat or deal like crazy.

Play2win
04-03-2011, 11:36 AM
Elway is a businessman and he know it is always good to keep your options open.

Play2win
04-03-2011, 11:38 AM
marcell dareus is reportedly not in the mix for #1 overall anymore, so its looking very, very likely that he is our pick at 2 unless they trade back, which is unlikely.

One can only hope!!

Play2win
04-03-2011, 11:40 AM
Sometimes the easy solutions is easy. Don't overcomplicate it. Get Dareus and be done with it.

Tombstone RJ
04-03-2011, 12:22 PM
the gist of the article is that yes, Dareus is the safer pick, however, Fairly has the more upside, especially in the 43 defense. The article also says that there's no proof Fairley takes plays off. He's young and somewhat immature, but put him around vets, coach him up, get his technique refined where he plays lower, and his overall UPside is better than Dareus. That is what the article is trying to say.

Best case scenario IMHO, trade down and pick Fairley. If the Broncos can't trade down, the take Dareus at the #2. If Dareus is gone at #2 and the Broncos can't trade down, then take Miller at #2.

What I'd like to see is the Broncos trade down from #2, still get Fairley, while at the same time picking up as much defensive talent as possible. An absolute bomb of a draft would be for the Broncos to somehow trade back a few spots, get Miller and still get Fairley. That would be a great draft, IMHO.

CEH
04-03-2011, 12:40 PM
Regardless of position, you can never have too much talent on D. Especially this D as it's constructed right now

You want a high risk high reward guy that would be Austin from NC.
Skip Fairley. Draft Darius or Miller or Peterson and take Austin in round two or in a slight trade up.


It's up to the coaches to coach the talent to the highest degree

RhymesayersDU
04-03-2011, 12:51 PM
Why I don't like trading next year's pick:

1) It's going to be Top 10, if not Top 5
2) There are QBs that can be taken if Tebow doesn't pan out. I know it's not fair to give a guy 1 season & 3 games, but if Elway & Co. don't think he can play, they can be in the mix for a guy like Andrew Luck with a very high pick.

Jetmeck
04-03-2011, 05:02 PM
At this point, I'd almost rather trade out of the #2 and get more picks. There is no sure fire prospect at the top of this draft. In fact, this seems like one of the worst years ever to be in the top 5. There are big questions on everyone, and no stand outs. Why give any of these guys 50-60 million?

Trading down and getting late round lineman and other teamsw castoffs have worked so well for us in the past.

It is TIME TO ROLL THE DICE.................Put on our BIGBOY pants and pay the big guys.........................

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 05:07 PM
Why I don't like trading next year's pick:

1) It's going to be Top 10, if not Top 5


damn, do you play lotto too?

oubronco
04-03-2011, 05:27 PM
Trading down and getting late round lineman and other teamsw castoffs have worked so well for us in the past.

It is TIME TO ROLL THE DICE.................Put on our BIGBOY pants and pay the big guys.........................

Exactly someone gets it

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 05:34 PM
Sometimes the easy solutions is easy. Don't overcomplicate it. Get Dareus and be done with it.

absolutely, no reason to make this harder than it is. dareus will by most accounts be there, he is the best DT in the draft, and DT is the teams worst position. answer is obvious.

RhymesayersDU
04-03-2011, 05:37 PM
damn, do you play lotto too?

So you're saying that we're magically going to be better next year?

HAT
04-03-2011, 05:42 PM
absolutely, no reason to make this harder than it is. dareus will by most accounts be there, he is the best DT in the draft, and DT is the teams worst position. answer is obvious.


damn, do you play lotto too?

???

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 06:18 PM
???

cant really find anyone who disagrees that dareus is the #1 tackle in this draft. is he going to have the best NFL career? who knows, but all you know is what hes done so far and how he projects, and its pretty much unanimous that he right now is the best DT available. hence the recent reports that denver loves him and hes the guy.

HAT
04-03-2011, 06:48 PM
cant really find anyone who disagrees that dareus is the #1 tackle in this draft. is he going to have the best NFL career? who knows, but all you know is what hes done so far and how he projects, and its pretty much unanimous that he right now is the best DT available. hence the recent reports that denver loves him and hes the guy.

Than call him the consensus best DT prospect and not the best DT.

Gerrard Warren was the 1st DT taken in 2001 at #3
Casey Hampton was the 5th DT taken at #19

The next 5 guys in line have every shot at being as good or better than Fairley & Dareus......Liuget, Wilkerson, Paea, Austin, Taylor, etc.

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 06:50 PM
Than call him the consensus best DT prospect and not the best DT.

Gerrard Warren was the 1st DT taken in 2001 at #3
Casey Hampton was the 5th DT taken at #19

The next 5 guys in line have every shot at being as good or better than Fairley & Dareus......Liuget, Wilkerson, Paea, Austin, Taylor, etc.

excuse me, prospect. symantics really, but going into the draft he has the best outlook, and given denvers need at the position for the last decade, you cant really just pass on him.

CEH
04-03-2011, 07:16 PM
excuse me, prospect. symantics really, but going into the draft he has the best outlook, and given denvers need at the position for the last decade, you cant really just pass on him.

I don't think the selection is a slam dunk. Logical pick sure. Can't pass on him not so sure

Gerrard Warren, Johnathan SUllivan, Glen Dorsey and many more

Daruis is a great college player but does that translate to anymore than another DT in the NFL who might not be able to beat the NFL Olineman at the next level. That is the real evaluation and after watching him on NFLTA get totally schoolled by Sapp and ex-Olineman Jon Jansen it raises question about DTs and do they have it to succeed at the next level. I truly believe there are way more top notch OLineman than there are top notch DTs in the NFL

I wouldn't mind Miller or Peterson with a Luigit or Austin later.

tsiguy96
04-03-2011, 07:20 PM
I don't think the selection is a slam dunk. Logical pick sure. Can't pass on him not so sure

Gerrard Warren, Johnathan SUllivan, Glen Dorsey and many more

Daruis is a great college player but does that translate to anymore than another DT in the NFL who might not be able to beat the NFL Olineman at the next level. That is the real evaluation and after watching him on NFLTA get totally schoolled by Sapp and ex-Olineman Jon Jansen it raises question about DTs and do they have it to succeed at the next level. I truly believe there are way more top notch OLineman than there are top notch DTs in the NFL

I wouldn't mind Miller or Peterson with a Luigit or Austin later.

thats what the evaluation period is for, to determine who is likely to be the best player at the next level, and they are usually selected accordingly. i know thats completely obvious, but throwing statements out like him being in college doesnt translate is silly, there is a ton of evidence out there that lead the evaluators to determine, based on that same college experience, how he might project into the NFL....

Dedhed
04-03-2011, 07:37 PM
It is TIME TO ROLL THE DICE.................Put on our BIGBOY pants and pay the big guys.........................
I've been coming around on this thinking more and more.

A month ago I was as Anti-Fairley as they come, but if you take a "BIGBOY" stance, and want to go DL, he's the DL with the greatest potential to be a real BIGBOY in the league.

Peterson is the best player in the draft. People will call you crazy for taking a CB at #2, but F them. This is our chance at a stud, don't lolly-gag around trying to find "value", etc. Take your shot at the guy you think will be an absolute beast in this league, and live with the consequences.

There's a consensus around Dareus as of late because he's the "safe" pick. "Safety" is for pansies like the Chiefs, and you end up with players like Tyson Jackson because he was a safe, solid, DL prospect.

I had a buddy who used to say "balls first,figure the rest out later".

Arkie
04-03-2011, 08:27 PM
Would never take Miller over Peterson or Darues or Fairley at #2. Never.

This.

Razorback fans are relieved those three are leaving the SEC West. I hope we take Dareus or Fairly at #2, or trade back to #5 where one of those three may still be available. I've heard all these names mentioned as top 5: Bowers, Newton, Gabbert, Miller, Quinn, and Green. That's six players that could push back the elite 3, IMO. I would also be happy with Miller at #5.

Mediator12
04-03-2011, 10:11 PM
I don't think the selection is a slam dunk. Logical pick sure. Can't pass on him not so sure

Gerrard Warren, Johnathan SUllivan, Glen Dorsey and many more

Daruis is a great college player but does that translate to anymore than another DT in the NFL who might not be able to beat the NFL Olineman at the next level. That is the real evaluation and after watching him on NFLTA get totally schoolled by Sapp and ex-Olineman Jon Jansen it raises question about DTs and do they have it to succeed at the next level. I truly believe there are way more top notch OLineman than there are top notch DTs in the NFL

I wouldn't mind Miller or Peterson with a Luigit or Austin later.

Warren, Sullivan, and Dorsey were one gap penetrators, not complete DT coming out. They never had the mentality or skillset to be the next Warren Sapp.

Dareus has both quickness AND power to his game. He not only blows by OL, he ragdolls them. The Fallacy that he has less "upside" is simply another mindless media hype gone wrong. DT's are not High ceiling players because they LACK a skillset. How dumb is that. DT's are high Ceiling players because they can do everything that is asked of them in a potential gameplan. This attitude that only the Superquick, penetrating DT has a high ceiling is ridiculous. They have a longer way to go to being average at the next level, let alone elite. The players at the next level know how to neutralize the one trick pony players like Dorsey, Warren, Liuget, and Austin and turn them into average NFL players. Over drafted DT's usually fit this category.

However, OL struggled immensely with Kris Jenkins size, speed, and power. That is who Dareus is like, not a one trick pony UT like Warren or Liuget. Those guys never liked to do the dirty work to make plays, they just liked to get up field fast or they cry like babies. Kris Jenkins was immensely successful in Fox's system and was an All-pro. He did not use a lightweight speed UT, he used a complete UT who could disrupt with speed or power and play the run and pass.

Fairley is NOT that guy. He is the guy who would dominate in the Colts 4-3 front, but not Fox's 4 man front. Fairley is a scheme dependent talent, that does not make him an easy top 5 pick. In fact, he should be outside the top 10 IMHO unless he goes to TEN where he would fit perfectly.

Dareus is going to step in and contribute right away AND he is going to be better long term! He has less to master and He knows more than one skill to play DT. The Kid played the whole regular season on a bad Ankle and then destroyed MSU when he was healthy again.

The argument that NFL OL are a lot better is a good one however. They are a lot Better than DT's coming out of college. The OL schemes every individual on the DL for every game too. College DT's struggle because they rely on their Athletic ability too much and not their Brains. That is another reason to like Dareus. Nick Saban uses one of the most pro ready Defensive schemes in College. Dareus already prepares like A pro, Fairley does not. Auburn runs a very simple defensive front. I mean no one in the NFL even comes close to being that simple anymore.

With Time, Dareus will learn how to beat the OL in the NFL because he will not be predictable and can attack the OL and his gap with speed and power. He will not be Double teamed nearly as much as he was in college. He will learn the tricks of the trade quickly at the next level, because he learned them quickly in college and applied them. Fairley took 2 years of Junior College and a lackluster first year in the SEC before he was able to utlilize his one skill of quickness effectively. He never became a complete DT in college even after 4 years of work.

I think its a no brainer. I would take Dareus over Fairley in Fox's system all day long. I would take Dareus over any DT in this draft or any other Defensive player as well. Peterson may end up being a better player, but I highly doubt it. Dareus is underrated by way too many people because of the scheme and role he played in Bama's Defense. Also, he played all year on a bad wheel. I believe he will be the HOF type player in this draft, not any other defensive player.

Mediator12
04-03-2011, 10:22 PM
Than call him the consensus best DT prospect and not the best DT.

Gerrard Warren was the 1st DT taken in 2001 at #3
Casey Hampton was the 5th DT taken at #19

The next 5 guys in line have every shot at being as good or better than Fairley & Dareus......Liuget, Wilkerson, Paea, Austin, Taylor, etc.

Please, Warren was severely overdrafted.

Richard Seymour, Kris Jenkins, Marcus Stroud, and Casey Hampton were all rated higher coming out in that draft. CLE was STUPID taking him that high. Especially with those 4 all on the board. And Yes, hindsight is nice ;D

As for all the DT's having a shot at being better coming out, that is always true. The ability to mentally succeed at the next level is very hard to measure and most fans forget the game is more mental at the NFL level than college. However, that being said none of those other guys even come close to having a complete skillset, outside of Austin who scares the crap out of me. Austin has all the physical tools, but he was never run gap sound at NC. So, while no one knows who will be the best DT to come out of this draft in a career, it is not hard to say who is the best Complete overall player coming out IMHO. That guy is Marcel Dareus. The rest are not complete players and have several more hurdles to clear than Dareus Coming out.

HAT
04-03-2011, 10:33 PM
Please, Warren was severely overdrafted.

Richard Seymour, Kris Jenkins, Marcus Stroud, and Casey Hampton were all rated higher coming out in that draft. CLE was STUPID taking him that high. Especially with those 4 all on the board. And Yes, hindsight is nice ;D



Especially 10 year hindsight. :wiggle:

CEH
04-04-2011, 08:36 AM
Warren, Sullivan, and Dorsey were one gap penetrators, not complete DT coming out. They never had the mentality or skillset to be the next Warren Sapp.

Dareus has both quickness AND power to his game. He not only blows by OL, he ragdolls them. The Fallacy that he has less "upside" is simply another mindless media hype gone wrong. DT's are not High ceiling players because they LACK a skillset. How dumb is that. DT's are high Ceiling players because they can do everything that is asked of them in a potential gameplan. This attitude that only the Superquick, penetrating DT has a high ceiling is ridiculous. They have a longer way to go to being average at the next level, let alone elite. The players at the next level know how to neutralize the one trick pony players like Dorsey, Warren, Liuget, and Austin and turn them into average NFL players. Over drafted DT's usually fit this category.

However, OL struggled immensely with Kris Jenkins size, speed, and power. That is who Dareus is like, not a one trick pony UT like Warren or Liuget. Those guys never liked to do the dirty work to make plays, they just liked to get up field fast or they cry like babies. Kris Jenkins was immensely successful in Fox's system and was an All-pro. He did not use a lightweight speed UT, he used a complete UT who could disrupt with speed or power and play the run and pass.

Fairley is NOT that guy. He is the guy who would dominate in the Colts 4-3 front, but not Fox's 4 man front. Fairley is a scheme dependent talent, that does not make him an easy top 5 pick. In fact, he should be outside the top 10 IMHO unless he goes to TEN where he would fit perfectly.

Dareus is going to step in and contribute right away AND he is going to be better long term! He has less to master and He knows more than one skill to play DT. The Kid played the whole regular season on a bad Ankle and then destroyed MSU when he was healthy again.

The argument that NFL OL are a lot better is a good one however. They are a lot Better than DT's coming out of college. The OL schemes every individual on the DL for every game too. College DT's struggle because they rely on their Athletic ability too much and not their Brains. That is another reason to like Dareus. Nick Saban uses one of the most pro ready Defensive schemes in College. Dareus already prepares like A pro, Fairley does not. Auburn runs a very simple defensive front. I mean no one in the NFL even comes close to being that simple anymore.

With Time, Dareus will learn how to beat the OL in the NFL because he will not be predictable and can attack the OL and his gap with speed and power. He will not be Double teamed nearly as much as he was in college. He will learn the tricks of the trade quickly at the next level, because he learned them quickly in college and applied them. Fairley took 2 years of Junior College and a lackluster first year in the SEC before he was able to utlilize his one skill of quickness effectively. He never became a complete DT in college even after 4 years of work.

I think its a no brainer. I would take Dareus over Fairley in Fox's system all day long. I would take Dareus over any DT in this draft or any other Defensive player as well. Peterson may end up being a better player, but I highly doubt it. Dareus is underrated by way too many people because of the scheme and role he played in Bama's Defense. Also, he played all year on a bad wheel. I believe he will be the HOF type player in this draft, not any other defensive player.


Nice writeup. However, my questions/concerns still stands.

Do you think there was a more in depth detailed write-up from scouts (who are paid for their opinions) on Warren, Sullivan , Dorsey then what you just presented on Darius? I do and still mistakes were made.

I think at the end of the day it comes down to the art of the evaluation something you cannot quantify on paper.

Hopefully Fox who has a good history with DT can make the right decision and has the art to go with the science


BTW, I not that high on Fairley. You don't have to sell me on Dairus over Fairley

TheReverend
04-04-2011, 09:09 AM
Please, Warren was severely overdrafted.

Richard Seymour, Kris Jenkins, Marcus Stroud, and Casey Hampton were all rated higher coming out in that draft. CLE was STUPID taking him that high. Especially with those 4 all on the board. And Yes, hindsight is nice ;D

As for all the DT's having a shot at being better coming out, that is always true. The ability to mentally succeed at the next level is very hard to measure and most fans forget the game is more mental at the NFL level than college. However, that being said none of those other guys even come close to having a complete skillset, outside of Austin who scares the crap out of me. Austin has all the physical tools, but he was never run gap sound at NC. So, while no one knows who will be the best DT to come out of this draft in a career, it is not hard to say who is the best Complete overall player coming out IMHO. That guy is Marcel Dareus. The rest are not complete players and have several more hurdles to clear than Dareus Coming out.

Your posts on the subject in this thread have been terribly inaccurate.

Show me ONE example where "Richard Seymour, Kris Jenkins, Marcus Stroud, and Casey Hampton were all rated higher coming out in that draft"?

FFS Jenkins wasn't even rated as a first round pick by anywhere, and it showed on draft day!

Here's 3 of the most mainstream examples RIGHT before the draft showing him going #2 overall in each of them and in only ONE does another player sneak into the top 10 (Seymour AT ten):

USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/2001draft/mock.htm

SI:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/2001/draft/news/2001/04/19/mockdraft_final/

Kiper:

http://espn.go.com/melkiper/s/2001/0305/1130313.html

Also, what you've said is a scouting report on his pro game. In college the guy was an absolute machine against the run and his only "issue" was an occasional tendency to over-pursue.

Dorsey was another complete player at the position and if he weren't wasted in KC could potentially be having a Suh-esque career at the moment.

You like Dareus. I get it. There's a LOT to like and he SHOULD be a very good player in the NFL with his skill set. That being said, there have been WAY better prospects that have crashed and burned in the NFL at that position on a regular basis and that's just a fact no matter what type of revisionist history spin you'd like to put on it.