If there are no offensive players worth that high a pick then don't reach. Idzik is doing what he was hired to do. It could be his decision to play more 4-3. We really don't know. Why don't we let him do his work? The assumption that Rex picked the players is silly. This is a weak offensive draft so take great talent at any position and look for need down the line.
Neither Coples, Wilkerson, Ellis, OR Richardson are 4-3 DEs. Not ONE of them would be optimal in that position. For the people who clearly don't get it: A 3-4 OLB = a 4-3 DE A 3-4 DE = a 4-3 DT Obviously there are exceptions. The point is that Coples and Wilkerson basically lose their value as 4-3 DE. They aren't quick enough off the edge to be effective, particularly at generating pass rush. We now have three first round draft picks for two spots. Genius organization. Meanwhile the team with 5 titles picks up Jarvis Jones and hums along.
If we're not moving to 4-3, this pick makes no sense. But if we are, this pick makes sense. That's why I think we MUST be going to 4-3. Sheldon doesn't fit in a 3-4. Sheldon is a freaking beast though. Love his game. Didn't do a ton of research on him entering the draft because I didn't see the fit, but I loved everything about him when I saw him at Missouri. This allows us to use multiple fronts more, too.
Moving to more of a 43 would make sense. Coples at d-end. Wilk inside with Richardson and perhaps Pace or whomever else at the other d-end spot.
Complete nonsense. As a junior he played DT, and was a top 5 pick. His senior year due to depth issues he slid outside, where his play suffered as did his draft stock. He is an elite talent inside, and nothing special at 4-3 DE.
His natural position, and the one he was best at in UNC, is DT in a 43. Yea he can be an end in a 43, but its not his best fit. Coolest does his most disruptive work when lined up over a guard, not a tackle. His quickness is elite inside, where as he is not a speed rusher off the edge by any means.
Having a rotation of Wilk/Coples/Richardson at 34 DE will be good. U need more than two capable 34 DEs, they will wear down. Then on passing downs we have Barnes-Wilk-Richardson-Coples. Very versatile.
I see us running: Pace/Sapp-Coples-Richardson-Wilkerson as our D-line with something like Davis-Harris-Barnes as our LB corps It would be awesome if we could swap Ellis for a similar player at either 4-3 OLB or 4-3 RDE (i.e. high potential who's been banged up recently). After thinking about the pick for a bit, I'm okay with it. Need a strong few rounds tomorrow night though.
I think its you that clearly has a lot to learn. Those positions do not at all equate to one another.
Posted this in another thread but.... Anybody else realize in a 46 front, having Ellis at NT, Wilkerson and Richardson at DT, and Coples at DE is DIRTY (in the good sense)? Rex might be trying to rebuild his pop's D. Just a thought.
Barnes is a converted DE. He wont be playing 43 OLB. Hes a situational passrusher. We have a hole at 34 OLB opposite Pace. Barnes isnt a 3 down backer.
in terms of size, yes they do. Obviously it's not that simple bc of the gap and coverage and technique etc. But I wrote this bc people seem to get confused bc of the names and think that bc in our defense Wilk is called a DE that he's the same thing as Dwight Freeney. That's why they make stupid suggestions such as "we'll go 4-3 with Coples and Mo on the outside!!! Moar DEs!" It's also like when people say things like Barnes should be a 4-3 OLB when he really is a DE.
