Clelin Ferrell

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, shaqattaq said:

Dang, that's harsh.

You should see the full scene.

[mcsmoak]

Reminds me of the Daeshon Hall pick a couple of years back.  He was a good college player , but it’s because he had Myles Garrett on the other side taking double teams.  That DL for Clemson was stacked and teams couldn’t afford to focus on any certain guy, so who knows if Ferrell is round 1 worthy or not.  Too risky with our needs IMO

[Dex]

49 minutes ago, shaqattaq said:

Dang, that's harsh.

Don't bully kids.

[LinvilleGorge]

I'd love to have Ferrell but I just don't know what to make out of this 3-4 talk. I think he's a much better fit as a 4-3 DE than he is a 3-4 OLB. If we're serious about this 3-4 stuff then Ferrell honestly may not even be on our radar. But if we're so hell-bent on 3-4 to try to maximize our young edge rushers who haven't even proven to be NFL caliner football players that we pass up on the best available edge rusher when we're on the clock then we're every bit as dumb as I fear we are.

[Mr. Scot]

I've heard more than one person suggest that his teammates make him look better than he actually is.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

I've heard more than one person suggest that his teammates make him look better than he actually is.

Lawrence was out for the title game and he still looked very strong against Jonah Williams. I do think Wilkins is a stud though. Bryant is the guy on that DL who I wouldn't touch and honestly how good that Clemson DL looked against Bama without Lawrence makes me question him a little too. They didn't seem to miss him a bit.

[Sub Zero]

I'd take him.. He has years of production against good competition.. He was rated high before the tearing down of prospects that always happens this time of the year.. At 1 point consider a top 5 pick.. Yes give me that at 16 at our biggest need spot all day...

[LinvilleGorge]

23 minutes ago, Sub Zero said:

I'd take him.. He has years of production against good competition.. He was rated high before the tearing down of prospects that always happens this time of the year.. At 1 point consider a top 5 pick.. Yes give me that at 16 at our biggest need spot all day...

This. It's a tough year for DL and edge rusher prospects simply because there are so many good ones in this draft, but that's a very good thing for us.

This really could be the DL/edge equivalent of the '96 WR draft.

[t96]

5 minutes ago, black-panthers said:

Still think 49ers will take a pass rusher due to BPA. Raiders, Bucs, Giants, Bills, Bengals, Dolphins, Falcons and Redskins could still take a DE. Packers is the only team that needed pass rushers that may not need it anymore.

Lions won’t be drafting one and that was a huge need for them 

[AU-panther]

47 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I'd love to have Ferrell but I just don't know what to make out of this 3-4 talk. I think he's a much better fit as a 4-3 DE than he is a 3-4 OLB. If we're serious about this 3-4 stuff then Ferrell honestly may not even be on our radar. But if we're so hell-bent on 3-4 to try to maximize our young edge rushers who haven't even proven to be NFL caliner football players that we pass up on the best available edge rusher when we're on the clock then we're every bit as dumb as I fear we are.

Thank you.  That is exactly what I've been wondering.  I haven't watch him much but he seems more of a 4-3 guy.  He might be a better prospect than someone like Burns but on our board Burns might be higher.

This place is going to go crazy when he is on the board and we pass.  

Maybe part of the thinking for going 3-4 is that we don't have to invest as much draft capital into running it, or free agent dollars.  That would free us up to take someone like Ford.  I'm not saying that is the best approach but its you never know what are front office is thinking.

Some people feel like you can "manufacture pressure" easier with the 3-4 and play calling, whereas the 4-3 is more dependent on individual talent.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, AU-panther said:

Thank you.  That is exactly what I've been wondering.  I haven't watch him much but he seems more of a 4-3 guy.  He might be a better prospect than someone like Burns but on our board Burns might be higher.

This place is going to go crazy when he is on the board and we pass.  

Maybe part of the thinking for going 3-4 is that we don't have to invest as much draft capital into running it, or free agent dollars.  That would free us up to take someone like Ford.  I'm not saying that is the best approach but its you never know what are front office is thinking.

Some people feel like you can "manufacture pressure" easier with the 3-4 and play calling, whereas the 4-3 is more dependent on individual talent.

I won't necessarily go nuts if we pass on him depending on who we draft.

[AU-panther]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I won't necessarily go nuts if we pass on him depending on who we draft.

If we really are going to a 3-4 could you see us picking Burns over Ferrell.

[LinvilleGorge]

2 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

If we really are going to a 3-4 could you see us picking Burns over Ferrell.

Absolutely.

[micnificent28]

3 hours ago, mcsmoak said:

Reminds me of the Daeshon Hall pick a couple of years back.  He was a good college player , but it’s because he had Myles Garrett on the other side taking double teams.  That DL for Clemson was stacked and teams couldn’t afford to focus on any certain guy, so who knows if Ferrell is round 1 worthy or not.  Too risky with our needs IMO

I literally said this on a previous thread and most of the huddle laughed at me. Farrell is fools gold. Do not want( in the first).