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

[Cat'sGrowl]

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.

[beastson]

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

[CRA]

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

[Urrymonster]

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.

[philw5289]

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

[CRA]

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

[Cat'sGrowl]

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.

[Cat'sGrowl]

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

[CRA]

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

[Cat'sGrowl]

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?

[bleys]

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?

[Cat'sGrowl]

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.

[Sloth]

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.

[csx]

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.