Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quinn Pitcock

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Quinn Pitcock

    Many of you have mislabeled him as someone who can't be a UT and only fits as a NT. He is 6'3 299 and runs a 4.9 40, better than Okoye and others. His vertical was 34 inches, which was the 2nd best vertical in his group. Seems like he is pretty explosive and has a lot of potential to be a pass rusher based on those numbers. He struggled to pass rush at the Senior Bowl and his strongest suit is plugging the run, but I think we could easily convert him to be an effective UT. McFarland has played both for us and the Colts, it is not uncommon for a DT to have success at both.

    My point is that you guys should keep an open mind about us drafting him. It wouldn't be a perfect fit, but it's not as bad as you may think.

    sig by BoneKrusher

  • #2
    He is a NT pure and simple. He is not an effective pass rusher so playing him at UT would be a poor decision for the Buccaneers.

    One can argue that UT is the most important position in the Cover 2, and putting Pitcock there would be a poor decision. We need a guy who can rush the passer a lot more effectively than Pitcock, and we may not be able to get one in this years draft unless we somehow end up with Amobi Okoye.

    Comment


    • #3
      We dont need him, he doesnt fit, plain and simple

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Bucsfan View Post
        We dont need him, he doesnt fit, plain and simple
        You don't make your point well with comments like that. You can try explaining at least one of the several statements you have made with some basis to your arguments. Saying he doesn't fit and saying Weddle fits without any explanation does not cut it.

        sig by BoneKrusher

        Comment


        • #5
          etk, what do you think about moving Chris Hovan back to UT like he used to play back in the day?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 24cadillac24 View Post
            etk, what do you think about moving Chris Hovan back to UT like he used to play back in the day?
            Ehh...I think we both know that wouldn't be his best fit, because like Pitcock he is much better at plugging and getting dirty. He's not a great pass rusher either so it's just not the best idea. If we drafted Pitcock it would be a tossup as to which one plays out-of-position, and both of them would be decent but unattractive.

            sig by BoneKrusher

            Comment


            • #7
              We need to get an UT somehow. Ellis Wyms is just not going to cut it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 24cadillac24 View Post
                We need to get an UT somehow. Ellis Wyms is just not going to cut it.
                He's a great backup, he always has been. We won't stop the run with Wyms playing UT for us. Carter will help in that department though.

                sig by BoneKrusher

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by etk View Post
                  Many of you have mislabeled him as someone who can't be a UT and only fits as a NT. He is 6'3 299 and runs a 4.9 40, better than Okoye and others. His vertical was 34 inches, which was the 2nd best vertical in his group. Seems like he is pretty explosive and has a lot of potential to be a pass rusher based on those numbers. He struggled to pass rush at the Senior Bowl and his strongest suit is plugging the run, but I think we could easily convert him to be an effective UT. McFarland has played both for us and the Colts, it is not uncommon for a DT to have success at both.

                  My point is that you guys should keep an open mind about us drafting him. It wouldn't be a perfect fit, but it's not as bad as you may think.
                  the 40 is the most pointless workout for a defensive lineman.

                  Angels Record: 6-8

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TwOne View Post
                    the 40 is the most pointless workout for a defensive lineman.
                    Sure it doesn't mean everything, but a D-Lineman that runs a 5.9 forty isn't going to be very successful in the NFL

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think he would be a decent fit. We need all the help we can get.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        we do need a lot of help, but not at the expense of improving positions of need

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by etk View Post
                          McFarland has played both for us and the Colts, it is not uncommon for a DT to have success at both.
                          Im sorry, when did McFarland ever have any success playing NT or UT?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Booger View Post
                            Im sorry, when did McFarland ever have any success playing NT or UT?
                            When we had Sapp

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Booger View Post
                              Im sorry, when did McFarland ever have any success playing NT or UT?
                              When we had Sapp, like cadillac said, and he played NT for the Colts after he got traded. I think that worked out pretty well, seeing the improvement in their defense and stopping the run once he was fully integrated.

                              sig by BoneKrusher

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information