Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

KY is in the SEC? no wai

97 posts in this topic

Posted

If you haven't noticed yet, this years offensive guard class is very deep. Obviously the hot name is Chance Warmack, and deservingly so, but if Warmack wasn't in this years draft, Larry Warford of Kentucky would be the most coveted guard of them all.

There are a lot of similarities between the two, other than the first 3 letters of their last names. Both are extremely solid in pass protection. Both get to the next level and lay linebackers out to open up running lanes, both are ridiculously athletic. Maybe give the athleticism edge to Warmack and the fact that he plays in the SEC, but other than that I see two pretty identical prospects.

In conclusion, you get way more value out of your pick by taking Warford in the second than drafting Warmack in the first. Warford is an absolute mauler and would be a great addition at RG.

Anyone else care to compare the two?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I see that as well. And Warford matched up against some pretty good DLineman and excelled. I would take him in the second. And focus on Wide Reciver/Dlineman in the first. This is actually the ideal scenario since I guess it's kind of wierd to take a gaurd in the top 15. I also thought I was watching identical players when I watched the two of them.

What would be crazy is if Fisher fell to us. We got him and Warford in the second. Our line would be stacked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you haven't noticed yet, this years offensive guard class is very deep. Obviously the hot name is Chance Warmack, and deservingly so, but if Warmack wasn't in this years draft, Larry Warford of Kentucky would be the most coveted guard of them all.

There are a lot of similarities between the two, other than the first 3 letters of their last names. Both are extremely solid in pass protection. Both get to the next level and lay linebackers out to open up running lanes, both are ridiculously athletic. Maybe give the athleticism edge to Warmack and the fact that he plays in the SEC, but other than that I see two pretty identical prospects.

In conclusion, you get way more value out of your pick by taking Warford in the second than drafting Warmack in the first. Warford is an absolute mauler and would be a great addition at RG.

Anyone else care to compare the two?

Kentucky is not in the SEC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Kentucky is not in the SEC?

It is. Warford has gone up against some great competition. Florida, Missouri, Mississippi State, Georgia, Tennessee, Louisville. Essentially the same competition as Warmack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Warford got beaten badly on a stunt play and that worried me. He sometimes looks lost when he's pulling. He's a bit clumsy at times. I don't think he's as quick as Warmack off the snap, nor is he as good at pass blocking. I think he's a great run blocker overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think that between Warford, Cooper, and Fluker, we can find much better value in the second round than taking Warmack in the first.

As far as Warford v. Warmack, Warmack's got better feet in space, and is a better pass protector. They're both nasty maulers though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

the problem is OG is much deeper with quality players than OT.

if we want an OT we will have to take him in the 1st imo.

Fluker and Johnson will not be around in the 2nd imo.

Go OT first then OG 2nd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Warford got beaten badly on a stunt play and that worried me. He sometimes looks lost when he's pulling. He's a bit clumsy at times. I don't think he's as quick as Warmack off the snap, nor is he as good at pass blocking. I think he's a great run blocker overall.

Warmack moves effortlessly for his size. Warford can be kinda clumsy and end up on the ground but he is certainly no slouch. I think he is an excellent pass blocker too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Kentucky is not in the SEC?

I didn't say he played in the SEC. Warmack of Bama does.

But yeah, Warford has played most of the big names from the SEC and dominates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I didn't say he played in the SEC. Warmack of Bama does.

But yeah, Warford has played most of the big names from the SEC and dominates.

I can't tell if the second part of your post is an attempt to backtrack giving Warmack sole credit for SEC experience, but Warford of Kentucky has it as well. It doesn't make sense to list it as an advantage for Warmack considering they both play in the SEC.

As for being the most coveted guard if Warmack weren't in the draft, that's not true. That'd still be Jonathan Cooper. That being said, I can see your point about the value of Warford in the second versus Warmack in the first. That being said, I don't really want to take Warford in the second. The entire point of taking Warmack wouldn't be that guard is our top need, but simply that it is a need and Warmack is a very rare caliber prospect. Warford is a good prospect, but not rare, so I'd rather take an offensive tackle(presuming there hasn't been a run on them) in the second than Warford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I can't tell if the second part of your post is an attempt to backtrack giving Warmack sole credit for SEC experience, but Warford of Kentucky has it as well. It doesn't make sense to list it as an advantage for Warmack considering they both play in the SEC.

As for being the most coveted guard if Warmack weren't in the draft, that's not true. That'd still be Jonathan Cooper. That being said, I can see your point about the value of Warford in the second versus Warmack in the first. That being said, I don't really want to take Warford in the second. The entire point of taking Warmack wouldn't be that guard is our top need, but simply that it is a need and Warmack is a very rare caliber prospect. Warford is a good prospect, but not rare, so I'd rather take an offensive tackle(presuming there hasn't been a run on them) in the second than Warford.

I've watched a lot of tape on both Warford and Cooper, and I prefer Warford. There's still a lot left to the draft process though which could ultimately determine who the better prospect is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Warford is a mauler type/power who has started at RG while Cooper is more of a zone blocking LG. he would be switching positions and playing a scheme that would not be ideal for him. i would much rather go WR/DT/ Fisher than OG/OT/ WR/DT in the 2nd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites