Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Defensive Linemen Taken in the 1st Round of the NFL Draft over past two years


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#1 Cat'sGrowl

Cat'sGrowl

    The Beast Lurks Once More

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,113 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:35 PM

So there seems to be this delusional myth by this certain segment of awkward people whom are overly obsessed with the term "BPA."
They seem to think, contrary to the evidence, that a DT takes 9 years to finally be able to contribute to a team. So I figured I'd post this here, and every time they say something to you like that in the future, you can point your finger and laugh and stuff.


Disclaimer: Frankly, I wanted to do a five year span, but began to wonder why I'm even bothering argue what is so apparent to everyone else, so this will have to do for now.


2011
Marcel Dareus
Aldon Smith
JJ Watt
Nick Fairley
Robert Quinn
Ryan Kerrigan
Cory Liuget
Adrian Clayborn
Phil Taylor
Cameron Jordan
Muhammad Wilkerson
Cameron Heyward

That's 12 linemen out of 32 picks (or perhaps 31, since the Ravens were skipped)

12 Defensive linemen. Literally all of which saw immediate success in their first year. You may be wondering how many LB's were taken in the first round of last year's draft. One. The answer to that, is one. Let's keep moving.


2010

Ndamukong Suh
Gerald McCoy
Tyson Alualu
Jason Pierre Paul
Derrick Morgan
Jared Odrick
Jerry Hughes

That's 7 there. There were 2 LB's taken in that round, and once again, the defensive linemen had a very high success rate and most all performed well their first season. I know someone will make the stupid argument but but but there isn't a Suh in this draft so let me stick this in before someone who thinks their witty comes in, jots it down, and then runs off back to the Lounge to show us more pictures of their cat.

There isn't a Calvin Johnson in this class either. That isn't going to keep a team in the top 10 from taking Justin Blackmon. There isn't a Jake Long in this class either, that isn't going to stop some team from taking Matt Kalil. There isn't an Ndamukong Suh in this class, but it isn't going to stop some defense needy team from taking a nice DT prospect. So take that argument, poop it out, so it can go to New Orleans with the rest of the feces.


Good Defensive Linemen can contribute immediately.

If the guys in the NFL offices feel there are good DLmen (which they obviously do..no e-nerd screaming zomg but he isn't Suh is going to sway the opinion of a fanbase who saw what the entire world saw last year-that our DT's arent good. (:eek6:)

Edit: For those who may be curious, the 2007 and 2009 drafts were also good for DLmen. '08 was poor but also saw like only four guys taken, so what does that tell you? I won't be bothered to write all it down...this is where you must became and man and type "Google" into your browser all by your lonesome.

Edited by Cat'sGrowl, 04 March 2012 - 04:42 PM.


#2 beastson

beastson

    Cam

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,054 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:39 PM

Yeah and we still need a CB, OLB, WR, S and a new kicker lol

#3 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,282 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:39 PM

Difference between saying Carolina should go BPA and BPA on D. They should go BPA on D.

#4 Urrymonster

Urrymonster

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:42 PM

A lot of those players did not play well... in addition you are basing their ability on one year...

Regardless, I don't think this team is going to gamble in 'picking the final piece of the puzzle' and ignore the chance to get a position of need. So what if someone doesn't perform right out the bat, a lot of rookies don't. I have a sneaky suspicion that if we pick a DT then they will be supplemented by veterans.

For the record I think the main issue for picking DLine is that the majority of these players are physically superior to their college opponents and therefore appear more dominating than they actually are. Also, with the increased popularity and desire for media limelight, more young players aren't interested in discipline and would much rather go for the highlight play.

#5 philw5289

philw5289

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,300 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:42 PM

i remember watching the draft with a jags fan when they picked alualu. he was so pissed lmao

#6 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,282 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:43 PM

Also, no need to lump the DEs in this if you are talking DTs primarily...DE is somewhere right after QB in terms of sought after studs

#7 Cat'sGrowl

Cat'sGrowl

    The Beast Lurks Once More

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,113 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:47 PM

A lot of those players did not play well... in addition you are basing their ability on one year...


There is literally like two or three players on that list who either were behind talented starters or were actually just not good. Of course I'm basing it off one year, that's the point.

Regardless, I don't think this team is going to gamble in 'picking the final piece of the puzzle' and ignore the chance to get a position of need. So what if someone doesn't perform right out the bat, a lot of rookies don't. I have a sneaky suspicion that if we pick a DT then they will be supplemented by veterans.


This literally makes no sense. DT is the biggest need, and you make no mention of just what "veterans" you plan on replacing them. Edwards? lol Is that it?

For the record I think the main issue for picking DLine is that the majority of these players are physically superior to their college opponents and therefore appear more dominating than they actually are
Also, with the increased popularity and desire for media limelight, more young players aren't interested in discipline and would much rather go for the highlight play.


Cool theory we should talk world politics sometime over some Cappa Joe's.

#8 Cat'sGrowl

Cat'sGrowl

    The Beast Lurks Once More

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,113 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:49 PM

Also, no need to lump the DEs in this if you are talking DTs primarily...DE is somewhere right after QB in terms of sought after studs


And here's the part where CRA is like "Pftt DTs? Those aren't even important! Everyone knows linebackers are where it's at!"

Then I'm just like...yeeeahhh, we're done here

#9 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,282 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:50 PM

If Beason isnt the same guy...LB will be the biggest need. We won't have anything and LBs are the key in the scheme

#10 Cat'sGrowl

Cat'sGrowl

    The Beast Lurks Once More

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,113 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:53 PM

If Beason isnt the same guy...LB will be the biggest need. We won't have anything and LBs are the key in the scheme


Except LB success is directly correlated to DT success. Perhaps you missed this entire season?

#11 bleys

bleys

    Simple and Plain

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,312 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:54 PM

so what is the point here, calling out a certain few that seem to think we have a bigger need at LB than DT? or that the DT position is either learned in the 1st year or bust?

#12 Cat'sGrowl

Cat'sGrowl

    The Beast Lurks Once More

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,113 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:57 PM

so what is the point here, distinguishing that DT is more important than LB? or that the DT position is either learned in the 1st year or bust?


DT is more important, DT can be played well in a player's first season, and while that last thing you said has no relevance to this thread, it sure looks that way at least on the surface, though I'd have to do some more digging.

If a DT is good his first year, chances are he will be a good player. If he isn't, the chances of him turning it around seem slim. That appears to be the trend.

Which obviously doesn't bode well for the whole "Sione Fua will be a magical Samoan powerhouse next season" theory.

#13 Sloth

Sloth

    idk

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,598 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 04:58 PM

If Beason isnt the same guy...LB will be the biggest need. We won't have anything and LBs are the key in the scheme


If Beason comes back at even 80%, and we have no reason whatsoever to believe he won't, we will have drafted a SLB top ten.

Maybe we can go Punter in the second.

#14 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,951 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 05:18 PM

I hope you realize that these awkward people you speak of don't actually make the draft selections for the Panthers. So you really don't need to worry that people who aren't as enlightened as you have an alternative opinion.

If the draft was directed by popular vote then you could be really concerned though.

So there seems to be this delusional myth by this certain segment of awkward people whom are overly obsessed with the term "BPA."
They seem to think, contrary to the evidence, that a DT takes 9 years to finally be able to contribute to a team. So I figured I'd post this here, and every time they say something to you like that in the future, you can point your finger and laugh and stuff.


Disclaimer: Frankly, I wanted to do a five year span, but began to wonder why I'm even bothering argue what is so apparent to everyone else, so this will have to do for now.


2011
Marcel Dareus
Aldon Smith
JJ Watt
Nick Fairley
Robert Quinn
Ryan Kerrigan
Cory Liuget
Adrian Clayborn
Phil Taylor
Cameron Jordan
Muhammad Wilkerson
Cameron Heyward

That's 12 linemen out of 32 picks (or perhaps 31, since the Ravens were skipped)

12 Defensive linemen. Literally all of which saw immediate success in their first year. You may be wondering how many LB's were taken in the first round of last year's draft. One. The answer to that, is one. Let's keep moving.


2010

Ndamukong Suh
Gerald McCoy
Tyson Alualu
Jason Pierre Paul
Derrick Morgan
Jared Odrick
Jerry Hughes

That's 7 there. There were 2 LB's taken in that round, and once again, the defensive linemen had a very high success rate and most all performed well their first season. I know someone will make the stupid argument but but but there isn't a Suh in this draft so let me stick this in before someone who thinks their witty comes in, jots it down, and then runs off back to the Lounge to show us more pictures of their cat.

There isn't a Calvin Johnson in this class either. That isn't going to keep a team in the top 10 from taking Justin Blackmon. There isn't a Jake Long in this class either, that isn't going to stop some team from taking Matt Kalil. There isn't an Ndamukong Suh in this class, but it isn't going to stop some defense needy team from taking a nice DT prospect. So take that argument, poop it out, so it can go to New Orleans with the rest of the feces.


Good Defensive Linemen can contribute immediately.

If the guys in the NFL offices feel there are good DLmen (which they obviously do..no e-nerd screaming zomg but he isn't Suh is going to sway the opinion of a fanbase who saw what the entire world saw last year-that our DT's arent good. (:eek6:)

Edit: For those who may be curious, the 2007 and 2009 drafts were also good for DLmen. '08 was poor but also saw like only four guys taken, so what does that tell you? I won't be bothered to write all it down...this is where you must became and man and type "Google" into your browser all by your lonesome.



#15 cookinbrak

cookinbrak

    tastes like chicken...

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,966 posts

Posted 04 March 2012 - 05:19 PM

So, no matter what players are available, we take a DT?


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.