+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: Luke Kuechly

  1. #11

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    I dont see it. I love Kuechly as a prospect, but we have too many needs this year, and we do too well with our picks under Reese to trade them away.

    I also think you have to be careful not to "fall in love" with any 1 prospect, even if Luke is a stud prospect.

  2. #12

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    I dont see the Giants picking Kuechly but he wont be there anyway. I still think he is more of a WLB in the NFL. He isnt the most physical guy. I dont care what his tackle numbers say. Thin wast , doesnt have enough girth in the lower half.

  3. #13
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    9,071

    Re: Luke Kuechly



    [quote user="Redeyejedi"]I dont see the Giants picking Kuechly but he wont be there anyway. I still think he is more of a WLB in the NFL. He isnt the most physical guy. I dont care what his tackle numbers say. Thin wast , doesnt have enough girth in the lower half.[/quote]</P>


    I love people that ignore what a player did on the field and look at measurements. Its funny. Isnt physical? How did you get that? Because he looks like a nerd?</P>


    </P>


    This kid is going to be a stud LB in the NFL. </P>


    And if you want measureables:</P>


    6'3''1/4 242lbs 4.58 40 time (3rd fastest for LB) 38" vert</P>


    532 Tackles in 3 years at BC, he knows where to be and how to bring down a player. </P>

  4. #14

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    [quote user="TuckYou"]

    [quote user="Redeyejedi"]I dont see the Giants picking Kuechly but he wont be there anyway. I still think he is more of a WLB in the NFL. He isnt the most physical guy. I dont care what his tackle numbers say. Thin wast , doesnt have enough girth in the lower half.[/quote]</p>


    I love people that ignore what a player did on the field and look at measurements. Its funny. Isnt physical? How did you get that? Because he looks like a nerd?</p>


    </p>


    This kid is going to be a stud LB in the NFL. </p>


    And if you want measureables:</p>


    6'3''1/4 242lbs 4.58 40 time (3rd fastest for LB) 38" vert</p>


    532 Tackles in 3 years at BC, he knows where to be and how to bring down a player. </p>[/quote]

    You're assuming he is ignoring what he saw of Kuechly on the field. When you're going to be playing MLB in the NFL, not the ACC, your size can have an impact. Longer seasons and bigger guys hitting you. Biggers guys can get hurt just as likely, and playing with more physicality than form can also hurt you long term. So who is to say what would happen with Kuechly.

  5. #15
    All-Pro slipknottin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    34,041

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    Reese has said multiple times that he has always learned to respect production

  6. #16

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    [quote user="BlueSanta"]I dont see it. I love Kuechly as a prospect, but we have too many needs this year, and we do too well with our picks under Reese to trade them away.

    I also think you have to be careful not to "fall in love" with any 1 prospect, even if Luke is a stud* prospect.**
    [/quote]

    With Goff visiting other teams, if Kuechly drops to us he might very well be our pick.

    I just don't see him dropping that far. Great productioin, great college career, solid school, no character issues, great Combine .... he's like the model of what to do as a draft prospect.

    His only knock is that he plays a position that's disappearing in the NFL.
    I have met you. You dont even look good in a winter coat let alone a wet t-shirt... -GameTime

  7. #17

    Re: Luke Kuechly



    PFW's first mock has Kuechly dropping to us.</P>


    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...raft-take-one/</P>


    </P>

  8. #18

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    [quote user="GMENAGAIN"]

    PFW's first mock has Kuechly dropping to us.</P>


    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...raft-take-one/</P>


    *</P>[/quote]

    They also have the Colts taking RG3, Richardson going ahead of Blackmon, Fleener and Mike Adams in the first round.

    Meh.

    I have met you. You dont even look good in a winter coat let alone a wet t-shirt... -GameTime

  9. #19

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    [quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="GMENAGAIN"]


    PFW's first mock has Kuechly dropping to us.</P>


    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...raft-take-one/</P>


    </P>


    [/quote] They also have the Colts taking RG3, Richardson going ahead of Blackmon, Fleener and Mike Adams in the first round. Meh.[/quote]</P>


    Ha ha . . . yeah, they went out on a limb on a few picks, huh?</P>


    I don't think that it is inconceivable that Kuechly could drop to us, just given the undervaluing of 4-3 MLB's over the last few years. Unlikley but not inconceivable. </P>

  10. #20

    Re: Luke Kuechly

    [quote user="GMENAGAIN"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="GMENAGAIN"]


    PFW's first mock has Kuechly dropping to us.</P>


    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...raft-take-one/</P>


    *</P>


    [/quote] They also have the Colts taking RG3, Richardson going ahead of Blackmon, Fleener and Mike Adams in the first round. Meh.[/quote]</P>


    Ha ha . . . yeah, they went out on a limb on a few picks, huh?</P>


    I don't think that it is inconceivable that Kuechly could drop to us, just given the undervaluing of 4-3 MLB's over the last few years.* Unlikley but not inconceivable.* </P>[/quote]

    Well Kuechly could play the ILB in either 3-4 or 4-3.

    Before the Combine he was a dark horse pick for us ... since then his draft stock has only climbed.

    I wouldn't mind if that happened though [b]
    I have met you. You dont even look good in a winter coat let alone a wet t-shirt... -GameTime

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts