Brodney Pool

daintrain28 · Joined: 04 Feb 2005 Posts: 19161 Location: Bettendorf, Iowa

Okay, I know there are a ton of people who will flog me on this one, since a lot of people are convinced that Brodney Pool will be the next to wear the Green 'n Gold, but...

I don't think the cat is that good. He has decent size, but he's not that fast. He's an okay tackler, but he's not a physical player, and frankly, I think he benefited from a good system.

I just think there are better players out there. Thomas Davis for one, but also this kid from Albany, Kurt Campbell. Seems to me like he's a poor man's Thomas Davis. I'm not suggesting Campbell is a first round pick, I do think it is possible that in time he'll be better than Pool.

Okay I know I just invited a lightning storm upon myself. Let's keep it clean.

Halfback007 · Joined: 03 Jan 2005 Posts: 2302 Location: ZA WARUDO

I agree with you a 100%. Poole is a good player, but the system he plays for shows him to be a much better player.

Jason White is a Product of the system, also any Running Back who plays for Denver is a product.

If no other good Defensive player is their, take him... But don't force it.

hauschild · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 14492

I agree. I'd like to get him, but not in the first round.

MultiSync · Joined: 04 Feb 2005 Posts: 1817

personally i dont think either Thomas Davis or Brodney Pool are worth first rounders

mr.knowitall · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:59 am Post subject:

msmre · Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Posts: 20329 Location: Chicago, IL

A couple of things
1) Pool is a good player, but he is not great. Davis is great. Pool is better than Sharper was in college. Much better.
2) Has anyone here watched Albany College play? Didn't think so, so how do we know about a poor man's Davis other than looking at the size and 40 times.
3) Safeties can rarely be a product of their system unless they blitz like crazy and show in highlight films or have fantastic pressure on the QB. Other wise we are talking about the same 12 coverages that you see in the pros. OU did not have great DL and did not blitz more than average.
4) That being said. Unless there is a star, good safeties, like Guards, can usually be found in later rounds (also in the form of slow college corners or small college LB).
5) Mediocre safeties are easy to cover up with good defenses, so it would be better to find a stud DL to pressure the QB or a good LB to stop the run and let some 4th rounder cut his teeth with Carroll (who will be as good as Mackenzie), Harris, Thomas, and the other DBs.

duxrule · Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 3111

I agree....get more pressure on the QB and you get 1)errant passes
2) more sacks = FEWER passes.

hauschild · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 14492

MSMRE,

So, what made the 96 and 97 Packer defense? You'd say Reggie White, I'd say LeRoy Butler(based on a special I watched with Mike Shanahan talking about Butler being the number one target to neutralize). It was probably a combination in all actuality.

However, I've never seen such a dramatic drop in the performance of our defense the day LeRoy hung up his cleats. I just can't get the visions outta my head!

I did enjoy your analysis about college safeties. If what you are saying is fairly accurate, then Thomas Davis will definitely be there at 24. I would take a shot on him. He can't be any less productive than Ahmad Carrol, right?

msmre · Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Posts: 20329 Location: Chicago, IL

Haus,
In 96 and 97 there are a number of things that made the defense.

1) DL - Jones, Dotson, Brown, and White are all above average players and had ability to, save Brown, get to the QB. Additionally all could play the run as well as anyone.
2) This allowed mediocre linebackers to get to the ball on run plays. Butler too.
3) Strong DBs including a 3rd corner (newsome) that had youth mixed with Williams, Robinson, Evans, and Butler.

The one thing that you should notice is that the DL were the stars of the defense. Shanahan targets Butler because he is the one that could be "got". You don't "get" anyone on the DL.

Additionally, a great offense and the top punter sure do help. The 96 and 97 years were special due to some great pickups at low prices by Wolf.

nickelpete · Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 5:25 pm Post subject:

byzr · Joined: 31 Jan 2005 Posts: 2762 Location: Kentucky

i think most packer fans would like to take Davis at the 24 spot but thats the problem he isn't going to be there with the combine numbers he put up. is he worth giving up a second round pick for to move up in the draft? that's the million dollar question.

it doesn't look to me like TT likes to gamble so i would doubt that he's even entertaining that idea.

bottom line yeah we'd all like to take him first round but if Poole is the best player available snatch him up.
_________________

stallyns · Joined: 02 Dec 2004 Posts: 21499 Location: 414

i overheard on espnradio earlier today that there is a rumor the packers might trade down to the colts pick + 2nd rounder

byzr · Joined: 31 Jan 2005 Posts: 2762 Location: Kentucky

what's the #? i mean can it really hurt us that bad we're only seven picks from last. if it means 3 second round picks i wouldn't mind it. might be able to use one of those to trade for a LB or S.

where's the info coming from?
_________________

stallyns · Joined: 02 Dec 2004 Posts: 21499 Location: 414

i want to say that it was brought up either during colin cowherd talking with mel kiper, or local milwaukee dj's talking to kiper, but they mentioned the rumor when talking bout packer needs

KiwiFan94 · Joined: 30 Dec 2004 Posts: 9261 Location: Texas

I see it like this Brodney Pool is going to be good but with the first would should get Thomas Davis he is just like Sean Taylor.
_________________

~kinetic~