I think he'd be a solid pick at #4 and a good NFL player. But I'm not sold on him as another Anthony Munoz, Johnathan Ogden, or Orlando Pace: (1) He dominated against much lesser talent. He'll be going up against quality DE's and LB's every week in the NFL. (2) He isn't big: about 300 pounds. Pace went about 335 lbs and struggled his first 2 years. Not sure how much Ogden weighs but Munoz weighed 295 at a time when the average DL man weighed about 260, so he was comparatively bigger. (3) Ferguson is a technique person. Good to know, but again, the competition in the NFL will be like him going up against the best group in college every single week. His skills and size won't allow him to cover up his mistakes. (4) Long arms: I wonder if he'll get "Chris Ward-itis" -- holding penalties. Long arms get entangled, he could get tagged as a holder early and then be stuck with the label in refs eyes down the line. Bottom Line: Ferguson will be a solid starter but he probably won't be the killer tackle for the next 5-10 years that the other 3 were (and I'm not sure Pace is in that group. Thanks for trading the pick, Bill !!!!)
thats because he isnt.. guys like pace and ogdon had no real questions coming out . you knew they where gonna be good.
I'll be happy with him. I'm not gonna be a bitch like 90% of the people on this board if we draft him.
Agreed....only thing that would cause me to go nuts Saturday would be (1) Jets draft Young or Leinart (I could live with Cutler IF the Jets believe he is hidden gold) or (2) trade down. Stay at #4...don't trade up or down....get the best player at the spot.
you crazy pace was a beast from the start.he was at a pro bowl level in his 2nd year. I hope the saints take him . so he wont even be a option.
I never said I want them to stay at 4. I want Mario Williams or trade down. But if the Jets decide to take D'Brick at 4, I will support it, because I'm a Jets fan.
pretty much eventaully everyone will. and ethier way in 3 years theres gonna be "i told you so's" if he does bad or good.
He was benched a bunch his first 2 years. I read the St. Louis papers all the time...he took time to adjust. Plus, he thought he got screwed in contract negotiations and let it affect him on the field.
1998: Started 16 games at left tackle for Rams ? participated in 96.6% of total offensive plays (964 of 998 plays) ? named alternate for 1998 Pro Bowl ? helped Rams rush for season high 181 yards on the ground against Buffalo 9/20. thats his second year.
What's the scuttlebut from N.O. regarding #2 -- do they want a tackle to protect Brees or are they going to Williams? I presume Tennessee is definitely taking a QB.
At this point im tired of all the different rumors and will be happy with any pick except Ferguson. I dont feel its necessary to draft an O-linemen this high in the draft when u can get players that are potentially almost as good if not better then ferguson. Any of the following players im fine with (in order) 1.Williams 2.Bush 3.young 4.davis 5.hawk 6.leinart 7.cutler 8.ngata
Interesting....I remember more benchings in 1997. I'm not saying Pace was just OK -- hell, I wanted him on the Jets before Parcells made that horrible trade -- but he didn't really dominate until Year 3.
Some of the so called "experts" on ESPN say his hand work is poor & he is extremely weak vs a speed rusher. I am just the messenger if you do not agree dial up ESPN.
I wrote the following on another website regarding the Wischusen article that said we should avoid taking a QB in round 1 because 1/3 of them taken in the first 10 picks since 82 have been failures. I'm reposting it again not to disparage Ferguson, because I think he can be good, rather to show that the draft is a crapshoot no matter what position you draft. I want a QB on day 1, but I am at this point giving the FO the benefit of the doubt that they know more than I do and will do the right thing. I hope they don't prove me wrong.... =================================== The thing I don't like about these kinds of articles is that the basic premise is that the draft is a crap shoot. You can use statistics to make any selection you desire (or in this case do not desire) look better or worse. For example, Wischusen says we should draft a tackle in the first round and let him start for at least the next ten years. Well that's just great; I guess we are to assume that Ferguson is a sure thing while the QBs are not. Not so fast. Let's follow Bob's line of thinking. In the last 10 years 28 tackles were taking in the first 10 picks of each draft. Think some of the GMs would like to take some of these picks back? Now, not everyone made mistakes as we have some possible Hall of Famers in here; Lomas Brown, Willie Roaf, Jonathan Ogden, Orlando Pace and Walter Jones. On the next tier we have some solid to very good, probowl caliber guys; Chris Hinton, Jim Covert, Ken Ruettgers, Paul Gruber, Richmond Webb, Bob Whitfield, Ray Roberts, Lincoln Kennedy, Tony Bosselli and Willie Anderson. And of course there are some recent picks where the jury is still out; Chris Samuals, Jordan Gross, Bryant Mckinnie, Levi Jones and Robert Gallery. That leaves 8 names which must be considered monumental busts for where they were drafted; Dean Steinkuhler, Kevin Allen, Tony Mandarich, Charles McRae, Antone Davis, Leonard Davis, Mike Williams and Kyle Turley. Almost a third of the Tackles drafted in the top ten since 1982 haven't lived up to their draft spot. You could make these numbers look even more lopsided if you did more than just the top 10 of each draft but I was following Bob's logic. Oh and by the way, out of all of these players I just mentioned that have at least 10 years in the league only 7 have played for at least 10 years with the team that has drafted them. If you don't want a QB in round 1 so be it, but massaging the stats to booster ones argument is kind of shallow.....
Excellant which is why I am not a draftnik & do not fall in love with any player until they prove they are productive. Liking someone & producing is like nite & day at least IMHO.
The brick is the real deal. I don't care what any of you dorks say to the contrary. There's no question that this guy will be a lynchpin for at least 10 years. What's the problem? I think we see a lot of criticism because it isn't a sexy pick, nor is it exciting in any way shape or form. Ultimately, he represents the best value if he's still available. End of story.
lol - I have to agree with you. I think a lot of people think you can just get some big fat strong guys and teach them how to play o-line and everything is gonna be fine.
