Cockrell the Free Safety

[Manther]

"I had to learn to walk again," Cockrell said. "Completely learn how to walk again. It was a lot of pain."

If he starts, that would be quite a comeback, since I don't think  he started more than 10 games a season in his short career.

Great admiration for Cockrell.  He's just not at the level of the other secondary.  On paper, this is our weakness and has been for years.   I still wonder if RR baits the long ball to encourage the other team to take longer time to develop their plays, giving his line time to reach the qb.  

Switching back and forth between 3 and 4 man fronts and between man and zone is complicated.  I'm hoping that these changes don't result missed assignments.  Everyone talks about learning a new offense and a growth year when a new OC comes in.  Well this year, we're learning a new D.

 

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Manther said:

"I had to learn to walk again," Cockrell said. "Completely learn how to walk again. It was a lot of pain."

If he starts, that would be quite a comeback, since I don't think  he started more than 10 games a season in his short career.

Great admiration for Cockrell.  He's just not at the level of the other secondary.  On paper, this is our weakness and has been for years.   I still wonder if RR baits the long ball to encourage the other team to take longer time to develop their plays, giving his line time to reach the qb.  

Switching back and forth between 3 and 4 man fronts and between man and zone is complicated.  I'm hoping that these changes don't result missed assignments.  Everyone talks about learning a new offense and a growth year when a new OC comes in.  Well this year, we're learning a new D.

 

Unfortunately, right now it seems as if he's above the level of the other FS options on the roster.

The front honestly doesn't have a huge impact on the responsibilities of the secondary. There's a reason why there isn't much talk about 3-4 vs. 4-3 scheme versatility with DBs.

[Icege]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Athleticism isn't everything, but we draft too many athletic outliers IMO. Funchess ran a 4.7 40 as a WR. Little had a 25" vertical and poor agility drill showings. Gaulden tested as one of if not the poorest athlete among his DB class. I get it, you get a feeling for a particular guy every now and then and take a chance, but IMO we do it too often.

Funchess ran a 4.47 + 4.53 at his pro day and had 100+ SPARQ score.

Previous regime was big on SPARQ from what I had heard. Marty not so much. Would be interesting to see if it becomes more involved in the decision making process with the push towards using more data analytics.

Agreed 100% on us doing it too often over the years.

[Waldo]

Sounds like Gauldin is exactly what many here feared he is but it's a huge positive that we are moving along already instead of week 6. I hope Cockrell kills it. I would much rather have a FS that can cover than a FS that should be playing SS. I know we view the safeties as interchangeable but I just think they haven't produced much good with that philosophy.

[Manther]

50 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Unfortunately, right now it seems as if he's above the level of the other FS options on the roster.

The front honestly doesn't have a huge impact on the responsibilities of the secondary. There's a reason why there isn't much talk about 3-4 vs. 4-3 scheme versatility with DBs.

Depends on the scheme.  In a zone, when an end drops back into coverage, handoffs shift, there's a change in corner responsibility and the o will either flood the zone or work the seams.    I really don't know much about switching from 4-3 to 3-4, but I would imagine, when in zone, there's some effect on the secondary, just as it is affected when you blitz a LB or drop a LB back into coverage.

[Manther]

4 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Sounds like Gauldin is exactly what many here feared he is but it's a huge positive that we are moving along already instead of week 6. I hope Cockrell kills it. I would much rather have a FS that can cover than a FS that should be playing SS. I know we view the safeties as interchangeable but I just think they haven't produced much good with that philosophy.

I get really nervous when Gauldin or Elder are on the field in their respective secondary positions.  I'm less nervous about Cockrell, but he is not an A-lister.

[raleigh-panther]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Athleticism isn't everything, but we draft too many athletic outliers IMO. Funchess ran a 4.7 40 as a WR. Little had a 25" vertical and poor agility drill showings. Gaulden tested as one of if not the poorest athlete among his DB class. I get it, you get a feeling for a particular guy every now and then and take a chance, but IMO we do it too often.

I agree with you in the measureables

However, the Seahawks have had some pretty good seasons drafting hungry players whose measurements athletically aren’t perfect to the position, but their competitiveness is....they are good at it, I agree the Panthers are not

Point being, Panthers might want to learn something about drafting players who want to compete...I didn’t see that in Benjamin or Funchess or now, Elder or Gauldin or Butler

I'm not talking about ‘Rudy’ type of players but smart, competitive players whose measurements may not be perfect 

[LinvilleGorge]

18 minutes ago, Icege said:

Funchess ran a 4.47 + 4.53 at his pro day and had 100+ SPARQ score.

Previous regime was big on SPARQ from what I had heard. Marty not so much. Would be interesting to see if it becomes more involved in the decision making process with the push towards using more data analytics.

Agreed 100% on us doing it too often over the years.

I always put a big asterisk beside guys who perform markedly better at their pro days. The best comparison is when everyone is running in the same conditions and that's at the combine. Funchess definitely seemed to play faster than 4.7, but he also never looked like a sub-4.5 guy either. Split the difference between the two (which honestly might be what a lot of teams do in these situations and you come up with mid-high 4.5. That seems about right from watching him play.

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, raleigh-panther said:

I agree with you in the measureables

However, the Seahawks have had some pretty good seasons drafting hungry players whose measurements athletically aren’t perfect to the position, but their competitiveness is....they are good at it, I agree the Panthers are not

Point being, Panthers might want to learn something about drafting players who want to compete...I didn’t see that in Benjamin or Funchess or now, Elder or Gauldin or Butler

I'm not talking about ‘Rudy’ type of players but smart, competitive players whose measurements may not be perfect 

Yep, we did it with Norman. He tested out as a subpar athlete but he obviously had a drive and the instincts and ball skills to more than make up for it. We also drafted him in the 5th round. That's more in line with where you want to take a shot on guys like that.

Richard Sherman and Kam Chancellor measured as subpar athletes and the Seahawks took both in the 5th. Brandon Browner was a UDFA. The Seahawks aren't risking high picks on these types of guys like we do. I'm sure they've missed on some but no one really remembers because they weren't overdrafted.

 

[Raleigh PF]

If DeAngelo Hall can do it...

Just sayin'

[Daeavorn]

1 hour ago, SetfreexX said:

My guess is that he was a ''bang the table'' pick by a coach -- if memory serves Hoke the former DL coach last season was on TEN staff while Gaulden was there. 

It was an odd pick when it was made, but what was stranger was how average he seemed, tape, combine, scouting reports etc. 

To add on to what you are saying here, was there ANY attribute that Gaulden has that is above average or more? I don't think so. 

I gotta say im really tired of the Scrub Carousel we have at FS.

[Moo Daeng]

Opening days conclusions are over the top this season. 

 

[PantherOnTheProwl1523]

1 hour ago, OldNorthPowell said:

They should just sign Tre Boston and roll with it to be honest. Using Gaulden and Cockrell for backups. Which, to be honest, would be mediocre. However, mediocre in the back-end of the defense is perfectly fine with our front seven.

This is what the result is when Tre Boston is brought up.

[Manther]

10 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

Opening days conclusions are over the top this season. 

 

I think the Gaulden evals have extended way beyond opening day.