http://www.nfl.com/draft/2012/mock-drafts/chad-reuter/130101?module=HP11_cp Andre Branch at #16? Over Couples, Upshaw, Merclilus and others is a joke. He's late first/early 2nd IMO. I love the commentary too..."In nearly every draft, a surprise pass-rush prospect jumps into the middle of the first round." Implying we're the team to make the reach...Fuck him
It's a plausible reach. The Jets are looking for a pass rushing ROLB with the pick. The pecking order in this draft for that potential is basically Ingram, Upshaw, Mercilus, Branch, Perry. So Ingram is gone by the Jets pick. They don't like Upshaw for some reason. They think Mercilus is a one year wonder who will get shut down by NFL tackles, which is probably true. That leaves Branch and Perry. The logical choice at that point is to trade down to mid 20's and get the guy that falls to you. However if the personnel department is all hot and bothered by somebody then the Jets pull the trigger on them at 16 instead. The Jets are not known for their patience in the draft. They tend to give up value all over the place to get the one guy, the winner the world awaited, who is going to suddenly make them great. Or maybe make the personnel department look great. As if that's what really matters in winning a Super Bowl.
Ive seen mocks on here and on other sites that have us going other positions rd 1, and that's fine. What's disgusting is that those mocks have shea mcclellin getting picked by teams after us in rd 2.
I've not seen much of Couples or Branch but the more I hear about this class of OLB, the more I think we should avoid them in Round 1. No-one sounds elite. Sure, if DeCastro, Floyd and the others are off the board but I'd hate to see a #16 pick spent on a player that should/could realistically be 10 places lower.
Another example of sensational "mock drafting"-- gives you an excuse to read it because of the absurd unique "perspective".
Ith w mock has us either taking Ingram, Upshaw or Coples so why not throw Branch in there too. The Jets nowadays seem to address needs a year later. We double tapped last year on the DL with Mo and Ellis I can see getting two OLB this year. Myself I think they need to and dress the offense get Sanchez a receiver to grow with.
Well said, however, if we skip on a terrific all around backer like Hightower because they air all hot and bothered over an OLB no matter what then it is time to relook at our personnel department
I've seen a half dozen where Branch is picked in the top 14 and in some before Ingram (which I agree with). Branch is the superior athlete to Ingram, but hasn't had consistant coaching. Clemson has had three different DE coaches over the last four seasons and two different the last two years. Unlike Ingram, Branch seperates well from OT's.
It all depends how the players turn out. Ideally, you would match draft day value with talent. But the idea is to get talent in the draft. If they think Branch is the best OLB, I'm not totally opposed to him at 16. Would I rather trade back and pick up a couple extra picks first? Of course. But who is to say someone else won't take Branch at 17-21? Trading back isn't always a possibility. It's hard to separate these OLBs. In a case like that, usually I prefer to wait and grab the last at a given tear, picking up extra assets along the way. But if they decide to stay put at 16 and grab someone, they better be right.
Branch has not impressed me at all in the film I've seen, he seems weak and doesn't play violently enough for a passrusher.
Interesting. I didn't know that DL coach tidbit. He really fits the part of a northeast 3-4 OLB. Right in that Parcells mold.He can run fit, set the edge & get after the QB with burst/extension.
IMO, I believe it speaks volumes that Branch wasn't invited to RCMH. People are looking at Rex working out Branch at Clemson as if it's a no brainer.
