Zach Brown Our Next Strong Safety

Discussion in 'Draft' started by legler82, Jan 28, 2012.

  1. legler82

    legler82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,079
    Likes Received:
    3,625
    Posted this in another thread but got no response. Thought I'd create a separate thread to see if I could get some to bite.

    The more I think about the more and more intrigued I get about drafting Zach Brown and converting him to a strong safety. Sounds silly but hear me out.

    Our issue with the safety position is one part attrition due to free agency and the other part, Eric Smith, more specifically Eric Smith's speed, or lack thereof. Zach Brown would address the latter. IMO Brown is an ideal replacement for Eric Smith; he has all his strengths and none of his weaknesses. Like Smith he would would provide in the box play as the 8th man, intelligence (the kid is really smart) and special teams impact (he was a stud on teams early in his collegiate career). Unlike Smith he is crazy fast and not be a liability in coverage. At 230+ dude would still be the close 3rd fastest guy on defense behind our 2 CBs. When the Pats go double TEs in pass/run situations, we can stay in our base defense cause Brown can outrun either Gronk or Gonz. No longer would he have conundrum of being susceptible to the run because we go nickel, pass because we stay in base or penalty because Brady catches us substituting to match the down and distance.

    Another argument is that it should be a relatively easy transition for him. If you watch NC play, he was use very much like an in the box safety. They lined him just close enough to the LOS to be considered in the box and far enough for him to avoid the trash. You read any of his scouting reports and they all pretty much say that he is a glorified safety because he is so fluid in coverage.

    My last argument is the freakish athlete angle, call the JPP effect. Sometimes you gamble on speed and athleticism and get rewarded big. My best friend always tells me when it comes to evaluating basketball players, you start with speed and hops and you can teach the rest. There are no better teachers than our defensive coaching staff IMO.

    So am I crazy?
     
  2. Zach

    Zach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Messages:
    9,131
    Likes Received:
    2,005
    If he can be had at mid to low picks (like 4th and below) why the hell not?

    NOT WITH TOP 3 PICKS THOUGH!
     
  3. dcm1602

    dcm1602 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    4,895
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lets see, you want to draft a linebacker projected to go in the first 2 rounds and have him play safety even tho hes never played safety before.

    Yep, id say youre crazy
     
  4. laxin

    laxin Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,248
    Likes Received:
    23
    We would be lucky if he made it to our 2nd round pick.

    And one thing that I dont like about Zach Brown is that he isnt the greatest tackler. For someone that would be converting from LB, you would expect his tackling to be above average for someone on defense, but it’s not.
     
  5. Zach

    Zach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Messages:
    9,131
    Likes Received:
    2,005
    A safety that cannot tackle.

    He is as good as a quarterback that cannot throw. Tebow made a real nice transition into NFL, I heard.
     
  6. legler82

    legler82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,079
    Likes Received:
    3,625
    Yeah he does on occasion allow his speed to get the best of him and run himself out of tackles. That can be fixed with good coaching. That's one of the reasons why I would convert him. Tackling for a safety is not like 90% of the job as it is at LB. At LB he'll have to play WS in a Cover 2 with a team loaded with space eaters up front to be successful. That's why many think Detroit will pick him up.
     
  7. CodeGreen

    CodeGreen Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    We dont need another strong safety...we need a free safety. No thanks on Zach Brown as a safety
     
  8. KurtTheJetsFan

    KurtTheJetsFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2002
    Messages:
    17,854
    Likes Received:
    6,192
    Hey, Urlacher played safety in college.

    I actually think the position change is a good idea.He never impressed me as a linebacker, but he display great speed & hitting ability when around the ball. His size/speed combo would make him deadly at safety.

    In that scenario, his combine would be extremely important. He would have to display good short burst,hips, & jumping ability to justify the physical skills to make the move.

    With that said, he's gonna go round 1, and that's too big of a gamble for the Jets in round 1 or 2.
     
  9. laxin

    laxin Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,248
    Likes Received:
    23
    Thats it, we cant risk another high draft pick on someone that has never even played the position before. If he was about a 3rd round draft pick then I would say take the gamble, but I dont think he’ll even be there for our 2nd round pick.
     
  10. Lon Chaney

    Lon Chaney Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2009
    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    269
    Brown is not even going to be there at #48 so this is a moot point.

    I would rather the Jets draft a guy like Keith Tandy in the 4th round and convert him to FS.
     
  11. legler82

    legler82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,079
    Likes Received:
    3,625
    This is a good argument as to why we shouldn't.

    This example kinds of punches a whole in your good arguement though.

    I wrote the OP so obviously agree with this since . If he doesn't get drafted by the right team (i.e. a team that's not Cover 2 and /or does not have big DLinemen to protect him), I can see a scenario where the team makes the conversion closer to the end if his rookie contract in an effort to salvage the pick after exhausting every opportunity to keep him at LB, like AZ did with Antrel Rolle. It was pretty clear early he was more suited at safety than at CB. However, making the switch would mean some kind of admission by the FO they made a mistake.

    I'd be shocked if he disappoints in any of the areas you mentioned. Don't forget the pass defense drills as well where he can show off his back pedal, hip turn and change of direction.
     
    #11 legler82, Jan 29, 2012
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2012
  12. gsulli5861

    gsulli5861 New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2005
    Messages:
    717
    Likes Received:
    0
    Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane. Can't tackle
     
  13. Mambo9

    Mambo9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8,906
    Likes Received:
    41
    Thank you for talking some sense...
     
  14. Zach

    Zach Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Messages:
    9,131
    Likes Received:
    2,005
    You made me laugh with this line... :rofl:
     
  15. xjets2002x

    xjets2002x Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,814
    Likes Received:
    17
    This thread is LOLZ....you don't spend high picks on guys and then make a project out of them.

    Typically, you go the other way with these guys, the point being it's easier to gain weight and play linebacker than it is to learn how to cover, assuming they have the hips, closing speed, and recognition that comes with the position. Most don't.

    -X-
     
  16. NDmick

    NDmick Revis Christ

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    22,417
    Likes Received:
    3
    Just MHO, this is an absolutely horrible idea.
     
  17. legler82

    legler82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,079
    Likes Received:
    3,625
    I don't disagree; just thinking out of the box. Also I would be more incline to do it in a trade down scenario where we had more picks to play with.

    Again I agree but this guy seems to be the exception. His coverage ability and his lack of physicality at the POA suggest that maybe SS might be a more ideal fit.

    http://www.profootballweekly.com/prospects/player/zach-brown-47/

    http://www.mockingthedraft.com/2011/6/23/2240372/zach-brown-2012-nfl-draft-prospect-notes

    http://draftace.com/blog/2011/11/18/zach-brown-scouting-report/

    http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/college_player_scouting_report.html&player=36656

     
  18. Jetfanmack

    Jetfanmack haz chilens?

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    21,413
    Likes Received:
    112
    Maybe he can be a Gronkowski stopper?

    If we trade down and pick up extra picks, and ended up with Brown, I wouldn't be too upset. Rex loves freak athletic guys, and Brown is one of them. I haven't seen a whole lot of Brown; it's possible he's not big enough to fit in the system. But he's an interesting guy.
     
  19. BamaZeus

    BamaZeus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    927
    Likes Received:
    9
    Please don't read this as an attack, because it's not. I'm just completely against this idea as a generalization.

    I know very little about Brown, but I'm not enthused about drafting someone, changing his position, and hoping that he is the solution. Maybe you take a late round flier on someone like that and hope you can convert him, or that he's athletic enough like Urlacher where he could play anywhere you tell him to and succeed.

    But to me, you can't go in and draft in an area of weakness and hope and pray it works out that way. If you have depth and can wait and see if someone develops that way, then fine, but I don't want our playoff hopes resting on someone playing out of position.

    example: it would be ok to try Joe McKnight at nickel back, knowing he's not the starter, and he could potentially make plays back there. However, you're not throwing him to the wolves, nor are you forcing him to go back there like Edelman and pray he doesn't screw up.

    My other issue is that I don't think any team should draft based on 2 games per year. If your whole point of drafting someone is to stop one player, then to me it's a failure. We all know certain guys struggle against certain teams and other guys do well against certain teams for some cosmic reason, but what about the other 14 games of the year? What if your whole game plan is to stop Gronkowski and Brady decides to make a star out of Kevin Faulk that game?

    I'm just saying that I don't think we should approach it from that narrow a perspective. You draft someone who can play well against all 31 other teams, not just one.
     
  20. laxin

    laxin Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,248
    Likes Received:
    23
    Well said, I completely agree.

    And as Jets fans, one thing we all know is that Brady can make anyone look like an All Pro during any game, so if Gronk was taken out, someother player would just take up his production.

    To stop Brady, we need to hit him constantly and rush the passer really well.
     

Share This Page