Jump to content

Mack Or Barr


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Barr is an athlete as he severely lacks technique. He has no bend around the corner, no pass rush moves, tries to run around OTs instead of engaging them and when he doesn't he tends to go upright into the OT. All of this screams disaster as an edge rusher in the NFL. Sure, you can point to his athleticism, but you don't draft total projects in the 1st round.

Mack is a great athlete but he has very good technique. He plays low at the line of scrimmage to gain better leverage, he has a great dip and rip move, a spin move, and has a pretty good bull rush, and he's more than willing to engage OTs since he has skillsets to beat them. He also has plenty of experience in coverage. Also, he was on a team that severely lacked talent so he was the entire focus of offenses since there weren't any other threats on that defense yet he produced at a high level anyway.

In essence, take Mack at #6 and don't even consider Barr in the 1st.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why exactly do you want your pass rusher going backwards? How often is Von Miller or Clay Matthews covering the flat or deep third???

Vote for Barr and in my mind, the comparison ain't even close.

See:

Barr is an athlete as he severely lacks technique. He has no bend around the corner, no pass rush moves, tries to run around OTs instead of engaging them and when he doesn't he tends to go upright into the OT. All of this screams disaster as an edge rusher in the NFL. Sure, you can point to his athleticism, but you don't draft total projects in the 1st round.

Mack is a great athlete but he has very good technique. He plays low at the line of scrimmage to gain better leverage, he has a great dip and rip move, a spin move, and has a pretty good bull rush, and he's more than willing to engage OTs since he has skillsets to beat them. He also has plenty of experience in coverage. Also, he was on a team that severely lacked talent so he was the entire focus of offenses since there weren't any other threats on that defense yet he produced at a high level anyway.

In essence, take Mack at #6 and don't even consider Barr in the 1st.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barr is an athlete as he severely lacks technique. He has no bend around the corner, no pass rush moves, tries to run around OTs instead of engaging them and when he doesn't he tends to go upright into the OT. All of this screams disaster as an edge rusher in the NFL. Sure, you can point to his athleticism, but you don't draft total projects in the 1st round.

Mack is a great athlete but he has very good technique. He plays low at the line of scrimmage to gain better leverage, he has a great dip and rip move, a spin move, and has a pretty good bull rush, and he's more than willing to engage OTs since he has skillsets to beat them. He also has plenty of experience in coverage. Also, he was on a team that severely lacked talent so he was the entire focus of offenses since there weren't any other threats on that defense yet he produced at a high level anyway.

In essence, take Mack at #6 and don't even consider Barr in the 1st.

The key to what you've said here is "experience". Mack should be better than Barr as he's been an OLB for a few more years (he's also a year older than Barr). If they had the same level of experience, Barr would easily be the better player. Even without the experience, Barr posted similar numbers at a higher level of comp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why exactly do you want your pass rusher going backwards? How often is Von Miller or Clay Matthews covering the flat or deep third???

Vote for Barr and in my mind, the comparison ain't even close.

The ability to stay multiple on any down. When picking as high as we are you hope for a player that can stay on the field for all situations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key to what you've said here is "experience". Mack should be better than Barr as he's been an OLB for a few more years (he's also a year older than Barr). If they had the same level of experience, Barr would easily be the better player. Even without the experience, Barr posted similar numbers at a higher level of comp.

I was on the Barr train after his first year at OLB. I'm emphatically off it after year two. He demonstrated zero growth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barr: 6.82 3 cone

Maybin: 7.58 3 cone

Completely different players. Barr has much greater explosiveness and flexibility, Maybin was a stiff, straight line athlete. Try again...

I will start taking you seriously when you cite game tape and not the combine. The combine is nothing more than a confirmation tool for the athleticism you see on tape, not a measure of how good the player is or will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...