Just about every DE I see in this draft is on the small side. Most are 260 or less. There are only a couple 270 or above, at least that are currently shown in the top of the class. I am not sold on the small DE in the 4-3 the team plays. They are easily moved in the run game. That is why Jenkins was moved to DE in the first place.
Do we really want to draft a DE high in the draft that is going to get a big check and not be an every down player. I am thinking that if there is not a great Olineman at #9, a trade back in the 1st picking up a 2nd in the process and have the ability to pick up a 300 lb DT that has the ability to play DE run also. I am just picturing having two Jenkins playing at the same time with the flexibility to move them around and cause havoc.
Then probably having two early 2nds to fill the Oline with.
"go.pack.go." wrote:
You develop him as an every down player. Even if he doesn't play first down and 10 all the often doesn't mean he's a bad pick. The Packers get beat through the air because of the lack of pass rush and if you add that, you get a much better defense. That's what the No. 9 pick is all about. Adding an impact player and pass rush is as important as any aspect of the game.
As far as two Jenkins' goes. I think we forget he was a big time bust in 2007. Jenkins is a flexible player that creates flexibility in your defense, but he's not worth having if you can't have a player to plug in for him at DT on running downs or DE on passing downs. To use Jenkins properly, the Packers will need to grab that type of player whether it's Brian Orakpo or Everrett Brown or Gerald McCoy the DT from OU.
"porky88" wrote: