Who does Suggs compare to?

[Ed B]

Originally posted by AZCB34
Actually while I like Leftwich he isn't my top choice. That has always been Newman and I know his issues (Ed said everyone has warts). I just am convinced that Suggs will never ever come close to what people on this board expect from him. I won;t go into all my reasons again because I sound like a broken record that most are ignoring anyways. I hope I am wrong but I TRULY believe he will bust as an NFL player. Again, my gut reaction is if Suggs is there at #6, run away...run far away.

Let's remember that Terrell is 20. Newman is 25. That in and of itself is an issue (how long each guy will be useful) but also, Suggs has room to get better whereas Newman is Newman.

That said, I won't be sad at all if we take Newman.

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by Ed B
Well, Tango, you are definitely entitled to the opinion that a DT is the best player to draft, but why not just say that? If you think a DT will help most, then the specifics of Suggs and his position and skills/etc are not relevant to your argument.

For the record, I'd flip Jimmy Kennedy and Dewayne Robertson. Robertson is a very intense player whereas Kennedy has shown every personnel and draft man in the NFL that he promises to be a fat, lazy tease who never realizes his potential.

I would prefer a DT over Suggs (my top choice is Newman who also has bust potential just like anybody). I believe if you make the middle of your defense strong, then the outsides become stronger by association. Pressure up the middle makes it easier for the DEs to do their jobs...JMHO.

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by Ed B
Let's remember that Terrell is 20. Newman is 25. That in and of itself is an issue (how long each guy will be useful) but also, Suggs has room to get better whereas Newman is Newman.

That said, I won't be sad at all if we take Newman.

Couldn;t we say, though, that a DBs "life span" is generally longer than a DEs due to the lack of pounding the DB takes? Thus the age difference may not be as huge a deal? Just curious on your thoughts.

 

[Ed B]

Originally posted by AZCB34
Couldn;t we say, though, that a DBs "life span" is generally longer than a DEs due to the lack of pounding the DB takes? Thus the age difference may not be as huge a deal? Just curious on your thoughts.

I dunno, we're getting into extreme subjectives now. Generally, I think DEs play into their late 30s as specialists much more often than DBs, who are useless when the speed goes. There are more Richard Dents and Reggie Whites and Bruce Smiths playing till age 40 than there are Darrell Greens.

But I guess the age issue is really anyone's guess. I'm just saying that Suggs has a <b>ton</b> of room to get better.

 

[kerouac9]

Originally posted by AZCB34
Couldn;t we say, though, that a DBs "life span" is generally longer than a DEs due to the lack of pounding the DB takes? Thus the age difference may not be as huge a deal? Just curious on your thoughts.

I don't know. I bet it's easier for a DB to get a career-ending injury (ACL/MCL or serious neck injury) than a DE. Also, a flop DB is far worse, in my opinion, than a flop DL, because you're stuck with a Tommy Knight for years getting burned against bad WRs, but a KVB just kind of fills a hole and lets you build elsewhere. Also, DBs tend to be prima donnas and go down with ticky-tack injuries (Charles Woodson, Deion Sanders), but, for the most part, D-Linemen suit up regardless of whether or not they have turf toe.

For every Deion there's a Bruce Smith.