Michael Brockers!

[koolkatluke]

But his upside maybe more limited long term. He isn't going to get much better than what you see today. Brockers is going to get much better with time. Reminds me of the Gabbert-Newton debate last year.

I'm still at a lost right now as why Brockers has so much upside and Cox doesn't can you please tell me why?

[Herbert The Love Bug]

wouldn't mind him. On a side note, I get irritated when people say "after seeing some tape on him" or "I watched some game tape on him" Youtube videos are not game tape. That grinds my gears

[Mage]

Why do people think Cox doesn't have much upside?

[koolkatluke]

Why do people think Cox doesn't have much upside?

I'm still trying to figure this out myself.

[Dash Global]

I'm still trying to figure this out myself.

Because he is viewed as a DE/DT tweener that wont get much bigger than 315 pounds.

Compared to Brockers who could top out at 6'6 340 pounds

[koolkatluke]

Because he is viewed as a DE/DT tweener that wont get much bigger than 315 pounds.

Compared to Brockers who could top out at 6'6 340 pounds

Suh is only 308-310 pounds. Warren Sapp never reach 300 in playing weight. This weight poo has to stop because you look stupid trying to downgrade player because of weight.

Plus Cox is already 308 now and can get up to 320 with out losing speed. He is already stronger then Brockers and Faster.

What is really the difference between 6'4 - and 6'5-6'6. This isn't basketball. Again Suh is 6'4 308-311 would you not take him?

[Dash Global]

Suh is only 308-310 pounds. Warren Sapp never reach 300 in playing weight. This weight poo has to stop because you look stupid trying to downgrade player because of weight.

Plus Cox is already 308 now and can get up to 320 with out losing speed. He is already stronger then Brockers and Faster.

What is really the difference between 6'4 - and 6'5-6'6. This isn't basketball. Again Suh is 6'4 308-311 would you not take him?

How many Suh's are there in the the league? He is a special player that doesnt come around to often.

Size and speed is important in football as you cant teach it.

Generally speaking you want BIG DT's that command double teams and can anchor the line while also generating a push in passing situations.

[La Pantera]

You want a big NT to take up double team. That leaves the DT (3 tech) 1 on 1 to shoot the gap. Both Cox and Brockers should be 3 techs.

[koolkatluke]

How many Suh's are there in the the league? He is a special player that doesnt come around to often.

Size and speed is important in football as you cant teach it.

Generally speaking you want BIG DT's that command double teams and can anchor the line while also generating a push in passing situations.

We're not talking about a guy who is 6'1 295-302. Cox is 6'4 305 right now. He has size and speed.

[koolkatluke]

You want a big NT to take up double team. That leaves the DT (3 tech) 1 on 1 to shoot the gap. Both Cox and Brockers should be 3 techs.

Both of these player can be NT. Kelly Greg has been a NT for years and he is only 6'0 310. Ron Edwards was a NT with KC and he is 6'3 315. Both of these guys are bigger then him.

[La Pantera]

Let me rephrase, I think both are best suited for 3 tech and 3 techs aren't always the " biggest" D- lineman.

[panthers55]

I'm still at a lost right now as why Brockers has so much upside and Cox doesn't can you please tell me why?

Brockers is still a sophomore while Cox is a junior. Brockers is considered a raw talent while Cox has had longer to show what he can do. It is all an opinion at this point but I think that Brockers has a bigger frame to build muscle on and will continue to fill out and get his NFL body while Cox who is smaller relatively and closer to who is going to be size-wise. Again it reminds me of Pierre-Paul when he came out a few years ago, he was raw and hadn't played as long as other players drafted higher than him. But as he developed he showed why we worth waiting on especially this year. Don't get me wrong I don't think that Cox would be a bad pick either but I think Brockers has more upside physically.

[panthers55]

And your thoughts on Cox?

I think Cox is a good player who is more developed technique wise compared to Brockers and gives you good ability right away. He was only a junior so he has growing to do as well but doesn't have as big a frame as Brockers. He translates to a DE in the NFL more so than a DT and has a good motor right off the bat. Give him an off-season to develop more muscle and he could play 3 technique as well. I don't think you would go wrong picking him either.

[koolkatluke]

I think Cox is a good player who is more developed technique wise compared to Brockers and gives you good ability right away. He was only a junior so he has growing to do as well but doesn't have as big a frame as Brockers. He translates to a DE in the NFL more so than a DT and has a good motor right off the bat. Give him an off-season to develop more muscle and he could play 3 technique as well. I don't think you would go wrong picking him either.

6'4 305 is a pretty big frame and can add 15 more pounds without losing speed. Again Suh is 6'4 310 and he does just fine at DT you think.