Bowser is the type of player that the packers need in this year's NFL Draft

[Dantés]

I did that in hopes that you two wouldn't debate about it

Well I like the handle with or without the accent, but Brandon is a straight "no accent" guy. He has no patience for superfluous stuff like that, or for people who are OK with it. He's often pointed out how I'm subliminally critical of forum handles that don't have accents. He sees right through my smarmy compliments for non-accented handles.

 

[Dantés]

I guess what it is that when you evaluate Harris and his tape he just jumps out so much. You see how fluid he is in his hips and his footwork (which I don't believe can always be taught). He has the bend at hips and his first step is one of the quickest I've ever seen along with the motor to go with it. He already has multiple pass rushing moves coming into the league which is huge. I just see a talent that translates into a special type pass rusher in the NFL. This is 10-14 sack guy all the way. This is what the Packers need! For you to call him a "below average athlete" is so disrespectful.

Then you wanna come at me with Tyus Bowser and his 3 cone drill. He has some nice athleticism but we're still talking about an undersized guy that played at the University of Houston. I understand some people like to look for the diamond in the ruff but the Packers are in no position to be doing this with the immediate needs they have and spending a 1st round pick on that. If Bowser is sitting there in round 3 then sure grab him. I just think with Bowser were gonna get a guy that's is going to be difficult to find a way to use and another guy that gets moved around a lot looking for the right spot for him. I'm tired of experiments.

Give me Harris and let's Roll.

Please don't cry about disrespect after the way you post about me or prospects that you don't particularly care for. It's weak and hypocritical.

I've mentioned a lot more than his three cone time. You're just fixated on it because you're out to make me look like a fool. It's weird that you think he's undersized at 6'3" 247, but that Harris has great size at 6'3" 253.

If you want to just keep rehashing your same point that you want Harris, you can stop wasting your time. We all understand and no one is telling you it's a bad idea.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Well I like the handle with or without the accent, but Brandon is a straight "no accent" guy. He has no patience for superfluous stuff like that, or for people who are OK with it. He's often pointed out how I'm subliminally critical of forum handles that don't have accents. He sees right through my smarmy compliments for non-accented handles.

ĹŐĹ

 

[brandon2348]

Please don't cry about disrespect after the way you post about me or prospects that you don't particularly care for. It's weak and hypocritical.

I've mentioned a lot more than his three cone time. You're just fixated on it because you're out to make me look like a fool. It's weird that you think he's undersized at 6'3" 247, but that Harris has great size at 6'3" 253.

If you want to just keep rehashing your same point that you want Harris, you can stop wasting your time. We all understand and no one is telling you it's a bad idea.

I'm not out to make anyone look like a fool. Just want to see the Packers draft the right guy that gives them the best chance to win now.

Thompson is gonna screw the whole thing up anyways so it probably doesn't matter.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm starting to think the term "Mock" has been used concerning pre draft predictions not as an adjective: "not authentic or real, but without the intention to deceive."

But as a verb: "tease or laugh at in a scornful or contemptuous manner"

 

[Arthur Squires]

Willis is actually closer to Harris then Bowser. I still take Harris's SEC production over Willis but it's much closer.

Well the Bengals ended up with 2 pass rushers in my top 5 in Willis and Lawson.

 

[brandon2348]

Well the Bengals ended up with 2 pass rushers in my top 5 in Willis and Lawson.

I thought Lawson was the pick in 4th but they went Biegel as we all know. Lawson does have his own concerns with "bend" and injury concerns so I can see why they passed. Biegel had the foot injury too so who knows.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I thought Lawson was the pick in 4th but they went Biegel as we all know. Lawson does have his own concerns with "bend" and injury concerns so I can see why they passed. Biegel had the foot injury too so who knows.

In my opinion Lawson would have been a steal in the fourth round. While I like the Packers drafting Biegel I would have preferred the team to select Lawson.

 

[brandon2348]

In my opinion Lawson would have been a steal in the fourth round. While I like the Packers drafting Biegel I would have preferred the team to select Lawson.

This is probably the one pick where I wish Thompson would of gone with a different player in Lawson. Gotta believe that Lawson concerned them more then Biegel as far as injury concern.

 

[Dantés]

I would not have balked at Lawson at #108, but I certainly preferred Biegel.

That likely has a lot to do with what I value and view as predictive in pass rushers. Not that measurables are all that matter, but when considering them I always look at 3 Cone and Broad Jump for EDGE players. Biegel jumped 118" and his three cone was a sterling 6.92. Lawson came in with a 114" jump and a 7.46 3 Cone.

That doesn't doom Lawson by any means, but it does place him in a a category of athletes that has proven much more volatile when it comes to NFL success.

While Biegel struggled through an injury last year, Lawson has a much longer track record when it comes to durability concerns. He missed all of 2014 and most of 2015. Apparently his medicals moving forward looked a little scary?

I also like that Biegel isn't making a scheme transition. There's nothing wrong with converting 43DE's to 34OLB's. Teams do it all the time. But it helps when guys have experience in your scheme.

Personally, I think the Packers lucked out that Biegel was slowed by an injury last year. Had he been healthy and therefore more productive, I don't think he gets very close to #108. His sacks had gone from 2 to 7.5 to 8 from 2013-2015, and his hurries from 1 to 4 to 8. We will never know, but I think he was poised for a 10-12 sack season in Wisconsin last year if he wasn't dealing with that foot.

He may prove me wrong, but I think Lawson's ceiling is as a poor man's Nick Perry.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I would not have balked at Lawson at #108, but I certainly preferred Biegel.

That likely has a lot to do with what I value and view as predictive in pass rushers. Not that measurables are all that matter, but when considering them I always look at 3 Cone and Broad Jump for EDGE players. Biegel jumped 118" and his three cone was a sterling 6.92. Lawson came in with a 114" jump and a 7.46 3 Cone.

That doesn't doom Lawson by any means, but it does place him in a a category of athletes that has proven much more volatile when it comes to NFL success.

While Biegel struggled through an injury last year, Lawson has a much longer track record when it comes to durability concerns. He missed all of 2014 and most of 2015. Apparently his medicals moving forward looked a little scary?

I also like that Biegel isn't making a scheme transition. There's nothing wrong with converting 43DE's to 34OLB's. Teams do it all the time. But it helps when guys have experience in your scheme.

Personally, I think the Packers lucked out that Biegel was slowed by an injury last year. Had he been healthy and therefore more productive, I don't think he gets very close to #108. His sacks had gone from 2 to 7.5 to 8 from 2013-2015, and his hurries from 1 to 4 to 8. We will never know, but I think he was poised for a 10-12 sack season in Wisconsin last year if he wasn't dealing with that foot.

He may prove me wrong, but I think Lawson's ceiling is as a poor man's Nick Perry.

While Lawson struggles defending the run I expect him to be a productive pass rusher at the pro level. It's possible the Packers took him off their draft board because of injury concerns though.