Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: i know cox is supposed to be very, very good, but...
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
xsv
With Cullen Jenkins, M. Patterson and Dixon, I feel like this was already a position of strength.

And I know you're supposed to draft the best available, and not for need, but I would have liked to see a stud linebacker or safety there.
mcnabbulous
Neither of those positions existed at that point. It was a great selection, given that we didn't have to give up a 2 or 3 to get him.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (xsv @ Apr 27 2012, 09:33 AM) *
With Cullen Jenkins, M. Patterson and Dixon, I feel like this was already a position of strength.

And I know you're supposed to draft the best available, and not for need, but I would have liked to see a stud linebacker or safety there.


Perhaps a safety would've been good, but I was pleasantly surprised we got a stud DT. There's no such thing as 'too many good d-linemen.'
GQSmooth
Look at Jenkins age, would the position be a strength without Jenkins?
HobbEs
Had Baron been available he might've been the pick...but since he was off the board at this point Cox was the next best option.

I'm happy with the pick. Now get me a Linebacker.
GQSmooth
I'm not impressed with Barron, I'm glad he wasn't available. He was the best FS in the draft but it is a weak draft at the safety position. You look for safeties to be good at tackling and looking at the highlights for Barron I saw he was always getting an assist from someone else. Honestly Jarrett's videos were more impressive as he getting guys down in the open field and giving some punishment. That's not to say Jarrett will be better in the NFL because they played different levels of competition. If the Eagles had a top 10 pick Cox should still be the choice as he is perfect for the wide 9.
D Rock
QUOTE (GQSmooth @ Apr 27 2012, 02:50 PM) *
Look at Jenkins age, would the position be a strength without Jenkins?

And injury history. He rarely plays 16 games and that's why the Packers let him go. He's good when he's on the field. Not so much when in the trainer's room. Cox is an upgrade over Patterson.
Eyrie
Kuechly was my long time preference until we signed Ryans, at which point it was either Kuechly for SAM or Cox.

Given the low cost of the trade and that Kuechly had already gone, I'm delighted.
TGryn
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 27 2012, 08:32 AM) *
And injury history. He rarely plays 16 games and that's why the Packers let him go. He's good when he's on the field. Not so much when in the trainer's room. Cox is an upgrade over Patterson.

This. Getting 16 starts out of him last year was abnormal given his history, we shouldn't rely on that to happen every year. Washburn's rotational system really fits his durability well.

If I recall correctly, Jenkins and Landri(?) play the "under tackle" position, which is more designed for penetration/ pass-rushing, while Patterson/Dixon/Thornton play a more typical DT with more run responsibility, so Cox isn't a threat to Patterson there. The big problem before they drafted Cox is that if something happened to Jenkins, Landri isn't really built to handle being the full-time starter.

In response to one of the questions last night, Reid mentioned that Cox could probably play DE in a three-man front. Hmmm. Washburn also said that while he felt he could teach Brockers how to pass rush, that it would take some time to get there, while Cox was already further along that road.

When Kuechly went, I thought "whew, thank goodness we made the trade for Ryans, otherwise we've been sitting there wondering what the heck we were going to do at MLB now." Trading up to 8 or higher to get him would have been more expensive; as it is right now, we got Cox and still have our three selections tonight.
Jerome Brown Experience
Yeah, I'm not sure I can see this as anything other than a great pick. While all of the players named are good none are great, and Cox has the potential to be truly great. We were not strong up the middle last year and while people blamed the wide 9 and the linebackers, stud DTs make the wide 9 hum.

Cox is a beast. I would never instruct someone to go back and watch a Mississippi State game, it would be a cruel assignment, but he really created havoc against some high quality offenses. A lot of havoc.

Another few facts for fans of statistics:

- DTs chosen in the first half of the first round have a lower likelihood of being busts than most any other position (bust can be a subjective term though, if I remember correctly the study looked at players who were not starters within 3 years of being drafted).
- DTs get to "steady state production" for their NFL career faster than any other position on the field. So within 2 years you pretty much know what you have and the guy is productive quickly.

Dreagon
Guys, i think ya'll got a fantastic pick. He's a beast and you didn't have to sell the farm to get him.

Heck, you guys get to enjoy more draft day goodness today if you want to. I'm just going to be sitting on my couch, still wondering how I really feel about what my team did yesterday.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.