Skip to content

Can Bosa actually play OLB'er?

The Browns Board
164 26 6.3k
  • Hey if Ramsey played up at the line i'd be all about it. But for him to have an impact in the run game he'd be sacrificing other aspects. Bosa is still the best front 7 guy in the draft. He's by far the best run stopper. Am I honking on run stopping........damn fucking right. But hey if y'all cool with fresh nobs jumping into our stands, oh well.

    gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by

    @clevfan4life said:

    Bosa is still the best front 7 guy in the draft. He's by far the best run stopper.

    Or maybe buckner, or jack, depending on who you listen to.

  • @clevfan4life said:

    Bosa is still the best front 7 guy in the draft. He's by far the best run stopper.

    Or maybe buckner, or jack, depending on who you listen to.

    MudflyM Mudfly wrote on last edited by

    @gftchris said:

    Or maybe buckner, or jack, depending on who you listen to.

    Buckner is rising fast.....right there with Bosa.....and, honestly, much better suited for a 3-4 D....

  • @gftchris said:

    Or maybe buckner, or jack, depending on who you listen to.

    Buckner is rising fast.....right there with Bosa.....and, honestly, much better suited for a 3-4 D....

    C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by

    @mudfly said:

    Buckner is rising fast.....right there with Bosa.....and, honestly, much better suited for a 3-4 D....

    I wouldn't be upset with Buckner but he's not as polished as Bosa. He didn't look as explosive as Bosa at combine. But he's also heavier so ur right he's more of a 5 tech guy. Thing is we need edges more than another inside lineman. We need people that can stick a pulling guard or tackle at the point, then get off that block to help in the play. This is what sets Bosa apart from Buckner. Bosa in my eyes plays more like the DE's from Carolina and Cincy. Very strong active guys that do more than just funnel the play towards the LB'ers. It used to be that's all you asked of edges but you can't anymore. They have to rip off of a blocker. We have edges that can't get of TE blocks. So that's why i'm still leaning Bosa. Jack is a good OLB'er no question, but Bosa will produce sooner than Jack for what the Browns need.

    Bosa's gonna have to learn though that in the NFL you have to play with speed and leverage Lots of guys didn't make the transition, like Werner, too well. Werner played like a stone gargoyle at Fl state, but he lost that field leverage making the transition to the pro's.

  • @tour2ma said:

    So #2 is the same as #1 now?

    I said that he was #1 on many or most lists. It was always a back and forth between he and Tunsil for the #1 spot.

    And "the thing" is the Play the Draft board that is primarily based on Mocks... which you have previously said are not BPA lists.

    OK, whatever....it was still a source you cited.

    Kiper just dropped Bosa to 6th on his Big Board IIRC... I believe McShay dropped him as well.

    Links......?

    Draft Scout just dropped him to 3rd...

    http://www.nfldraftscout.com/members/ratings/top750.php?draftyear=2016&sortby=rateall&order=ASC

    Did they drop him....or is that just where they have had him.

    Point ultimately being.....he is still by far considered a better prospect than the QBs....who are far more questionable. And the Browns do need an edge rusher.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @the-gipper said:

    Did they drop him....or is that just where they have had him.

    Point ultimately being.....he is still by far considered a better prospect than the QBs....who are far more questionable. And the Browns do need an edge rusher.

    Dropped... he was #2 behind Tunsil prior to the Combine.

    Point being you are not looking at recent data... check the links Mud supplied.

    @mudfly said:

    Thanks for the assist...

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by

    That analysis of Buckner that said his pad level gets too high and he gets "crushed" by angle blocks, that's exactly what I saw in his tape....so i'm not blowing it out my ass when I said Buckner's got more work ahead of him than Bosa. I can't project years out, I jus know Bosa's fundy's are there "now".

  • That analysis of Buckner that said his pad level gets too high and he gets "crushed" by angle blocks, that's exactly what I saw in his tape....so i'm not blowing it out my ass when I said Buckner's got more work ahead of him than Bosa. I can't project years out, I jus know Bosa's fundy's are there "now".

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @clevfan4life said:

    That analysis of Buckner that said his pad level gets too high and he gets "crushed" by angle blocks, that's exactly what I saw in his tape....so i'm not blowing it out my ass when I said Buckner's got more work ahead of him than Bosa. I can't project years out, I jus know Bosa's fundy's are there "now".

    I may have to sue for royalties. I feel my Goff v Wentz argument has been sullied by DE name substitution.

  • @tiamat63 said:

    For anyone that puts stock into 40 times for defensive line... sure.

    Top 5 broad jump, 1.96 10 yard split, took home tops 3 cone drill and 20 yard shuttle. Indicate he's got some explosiveness to his step.

    Couple things...

    1. Again... Combine numbers are just useful in confirming what the tape showed.
    2. It's not where someone places in their draft class that matters; it's the actual numbers.

    Of Joey's numbers his sub-7 3-cone was most impressive to me. Very nice agility for a man of his length let alone weight. But his shuttle, bench reps and broad were all OK.

    Fortunately for you his 10-yd split was not 1.96., but 1.68 (Semi-dyslexic?) and 1.68 is very good.

    His vertical was a sub-standard 32". It failed to confirm his "burst". Combined with his 40 time it sent his evaluators back to their tape.

    tiamat63T tiamat63 wrote on last edited by

    @tour2ma said:

    Couple things...

    • Again... Combine numbers are just useful in confirming what the tape showed.
    • It's not where someone places in their draft class that matters; it's the actual numbers.
    Of Joey's numbers his sub-7 3-cone was most impressive to me. Very nice agility for a man of his length let alone weight. But his shuttle, bench reps and broad were all OK.

    Fortunately for you his 10-yd split was not 1.96., but 1.68 (Semi-dyslexic?) and 1.68 is very good.

    His vertical was a sub-standard 32". It failed to confirm his "burst". Combined with his 40 time it sent his evaluators back to their tape.

    Thanks for the correction on the split -

    Typing from my phone and I'm not sure how I messed that up. I wish I had more time to sit

    down, better articulate my responses and invest some time in the board again. But it's busy season for me, sadly.

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Once again, this is not true.

    How's that brick wall tasting?

    Tim Couch Pulls OutT Tim Couch Pulls Out wrote on last edited by

    @gftchris said:

    How's that brick wall tasting?

    Tastes like victory.

    I like the united front on this board to make one singular poster realize Bosa isn't the top prospect. Feel like we haven't been this united in a long time...

  • @gftchris said:

    How's that brick wall tasting?

    Tastes like victory.

    I like the united front on this board to make one singular poster realize Bosa isn't the top prospect. Feel like we haven't been this united in a long time...

    gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Tastes like victory.

    I like the united front on this board to make one singular poster realize Bosa isn't the top prospect. Feel like we haven't been this united in a long time...

    If anyone is stubborn enough (outside the political section) to unite everyone against their ignorance it is he.
  • @tour2ma said:

    Couple things...

    • Again... Combine numbers are just useful in confirming what the tape showed.
    • It's not where someone places in their draft class that matters; it's the actual numbers.
    Of Joey's numbers his sub-7 3-cone was most impressive to me. Very nice agility for a man of his length let alone weight. But his shuttle, bench reps and broad were all OK.

    Fortunately for you his 10-yd split was not 1.96., but 1.68 (Semi-dyslexic?) and 1.68 is very good.

    His vertical was a sub-standard 32". It failed to confirm his "burst". Combined with his 40 time it sent his evaluators back to their tape.

    Thanks for the correction on the split -

    Typing from my phone and I'm not sure how I messed that up. I wish I had more time to sit

    down, better articulate my responses and invest some time in the board again. But it's busy season for me, sadly.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @tiamat63 said:

    Thanks for the correction on the split -

    Typing from my phone and I'm not sure how I messed that up. I wish I had more time to sit

    down, better articulate my responses and invest some time in the board again. But it's busy season for me, sadly.

    Life happens... we'll be here all year, my friend...

  • @clevfan4life said:

    That analysis of Buckner that said his pad level gets too high and he gets "crushed" by angle blocks, that's exactly what I saw in his tape....so i'm not blowing it out my ass when I said Buckner's got more work ahead of him than Bosa. I can't project years out, I jus know Bosa's fundy's are there "now".

    I may have to sue for royalties. I feel my Goff v Wentz argument has been sullied by DE name substitution.

    C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by

    @tour2ma said:

    I may have to sue for royalties. I feel my Goff v Wentz argument has been sullied by DE name substitution.

    why would your analysis of goff v wentz include phrasing such as "pad level" and "angle blocks"? You thinkin maybe some next level shit that we draft Goff/Wentz as OLB'er? Mind blown if that's where you're going....gonna have to look at some more pac west games if it is. lols

  • @tour2ma said:

    I may have to sue for royalties. I feel my Goff v Wentz argument has been sullied by DE name substitution.

    why would your analysis of goff v wentz include phrasing such as "pad level" and "angle blocks"? You thinkin maybe some next level shit that we draft Goff/Wentz as OLB'er? Mind blown if that's where you're going....gonna have to look at some more pac west games if it is. lols

    gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by

    @clevfan4life said:

    why would your analysis of goff v wentz include phrasing such as "pad level" and "angle blocks"? You thinkin maybe some next level shit that we draft Goff/Wentz as OLB'er? Mind blown if that's where you're going....gonna have to look at some more pac west games if it is. lols

    While on that subject, if we're keeping JFF on the roster for the year, maybe we can try him at RB? Slot receiver?

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by

    he won't be

  • @tour2ma said:

    I may have to sue for royalties. I feel my Goff v Wentz argument has been sullied by DE name substitution.

    why would your analysis of goff v wentz include phrasing such as "pad level" and "angle blocks"? You thinkin maybe some next level shit that we draft Goff/Wentz as OLB'er? Mind blown if that's where you're going....gonna have to look at some more pac west games if it is. lols

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by

    @clevfan4life said:

    why would your analysis of goff v wentz include phrasing such as "pad level" and "angle blocks"?

    "Arm angle" close enough?

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by

    heh...I suppose.