Sedrick Ellis

[ragnorok99]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/footbal...,0,348619.story

As the story says, D-line isn't a glaring need, but what do you think about this guy? He's basically a monster, and Trevor Pryce won't be around forever.

Trades to select a CB/QB later in the draft are always possible, so Ellis is pretty intriguing to me.

[Purple and Black Forever]

I would take Ellis for no other reason than to bother the Bengals, who really want him. More likely what will happen is the Bengals will trade with the Patriots prolly a #1 this year and a #1 next year to take Ellis before we could snatch him. up. Ellis would absolutely let us run some crazy blitz packages, but I think we will still probably go with Clady, McKelvin, or Ryan.

[exiledraven]

I could absolutely see this....he's getting talked up a little bit (the whole thing about him being a top 5 in other years, such as last year). Of course that might be to scare the tiggers, but how many times over the years have you heard ozzie talk about the idea of "if you can get a top flight lineman you get them"

I'd not be opposed...but time pass rush from the front 3 or 4 covers up flaws in the rest of the defense like nothing else

[Devastat1on]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/footbal...,0,348619.story

As the story says, D-line isn't a glaring need, but what do you think about this guy? He's basically a monster, and Trevor Pryce won't be around forever.

Trades to select a CB/QB later in the draft are always possible, so Ellis is pretty intriguing to me.

No. We need to address more immediate needs. Pryce wont be here forever, and we can wait until he leaves to take a D-lineman. But as of right now, there are more glaring needs that we have such as CB, OL, and you can make a case for QB and LB. I dont want Ellis, I like McKelvin, Ryan, or Rivers.

[ragnorok99]

No. We need to address more immediate needs. Pryce wont be here forever, and we can wait until he leaves to take a D-lineman. But as of right now, there are more glaring needs that we have such as CB, OL, and you can make a case for QB and LB. I dont want Ellis, I like McKelvin, Ryan, or Rivers.

I agree somewhat, but the article makes the case that Ellis could be far ahead skill-wise of whatever CBs and QBs and OL are available at the time. I think he could be, too, but I'd be fine if they went another direction. Just really like the idea of a guy whose school needed to buy him 200-lb dumbbells.

Plus, as previously mentioned, it would annoy the Bengals.

[MKdave]

If both the longs are gone (which is looking like a dead cert), and so is Vernon Gholston, then I would think of ellis as a definite possibility.

I think you could make the argument that defensive line is just as pressing a need as Cornerback is, but I feel O-line is even more pressing than that.

[PuppyPuncher]

HE CAN ONLY PLAY NT IN THE 3-4

[ragnorok99]

HE CAN ONLY PLAY NT IN THE 3-4

What is your reasoning behind that?

[neepo13]

I would take Ellis for no other reason than to bother the Bengals, who really want him. More likely what will happen is the Bengals will trade with the Patriots prolly a #1 this year and a #1 next year to take Ellis before we could snatch him. up. Ellis would absolutely let us run some crazy blitz packages, but I think we will still probably go with Clady, McKelvin, or Ryan.

I would not want us to take him. I'd rather we let New Orleans jump up in our spot to take him.

[neepo13]

HE CAN ONLY PLAY NT IN THE 3-4

Dont we run a 3-4?

[PuppyPuncher]

What is your reasoning behind that?

He projects to either a 1 technique or a zero technique. He's even admitted this himself at the combine.

What's the point in wasting all this guaranteed money on Kelly Gregg's backup?

[ragnorok99]

He projects to either a 1 technique or a zero technique. He's even admitted this himself at the combine.

What's the point in wasting all this guaranteed money on Kelly Gregg's backup?

I haven't heard him projected as a 1 or 0 only--all the draft coverage I've heard on Ellis seemed to say he was quite versatile, or at least as versatile as a defensive tackle can be.

I was thinking he could play a similar role to Ngata or Pryce on the line. Seems like making him play NT in the NFL would be a waste. He's a very good penetrator like Pryce, and is strong enough to hold up against the run like Ngata.

And yes, I know Ngata and Pryce are both "ends," but they're built exactly like tackles and do a lot of the same things.

But again, who knows.

[PuppyPuncher]

I haven't heard him projected as a 1 or 0 only--all the draft coverage I've heard on Ellis seemed to say he was quite versatile, or at least as versatile as a defensive tackle can be.

I was thinking he could play a similar role to Ngata or Pryce on the line. Seems like making him play NT in the NFL would be a waste. He's a very good penetrator like Pryce, and is strong enough to hold up against the run like Ngata.

And yes, I know Ngata and Pryce are both "ends," but they're built exactly like tackles and do a lot of the same things.

But again, who knows.

What? Trevor Pryce has never played DT.

You've never heard of him as a 1 or 0? He played 1 at USC and occasionally 0. He's more of a run stuffer than a pass rusher.

[ragnorok99]

What? Trevor Pryce has never played DT.

You've never heard of him as a 1 or 0? He played 1 at USC and occasionally 0. He's more of a run stuffer than a pass rusher.

Don't get sarcastic--Trevor Pryce was a DT in Denver for many years. He has a lot of the same job responsibilities in Baltimore, he's just called an end now because it's a 3-4.

I think we're getting stuck on the "tackle" label--my point is that our "ends" seem to have many similarities to defensive tackles, like Ellis.

I didn't say I had never heard of Ellis as a 1 or a 0; I said I had heard he could play just about any technique, not just the nose. And I'm not saying it wouldn't take some adjustment for him to start playing in a 3-4, but I think he has the skillset to do it.

[PuppyPuncher]

Don't get sarcastic--Trevor Pryce was a DT in Denver for many years. He has a lot of the same job responsibilities in Baltimore, he's just called an end now because it's a 3-4.

I think we're getting stuck on the "tackle" label--my point is that our "ends" seem to have many similarities to defensive tackles, like Ellis.

I didn't say I had never heard of Ellis as a 1 or a 0; I said I had heard he could play just about any technique, not just the nose. And I'm not saying it wouldn't take some adjustment for him to start playing in a 3-4, but I think he has the skillset to do it.

It's not uncommon for 3 techniques to play ends in 3-4s. But Ellis is a 1 technique or 0 that isn't heralded for his pass-rushing moves. We're better off looking at a developmental guy like Kendall Langford in the 3rd round who a lot of people are high on as a 3-4 end.

[ragnorok99]

It's not uncommon for 3 techniques to play ends in 3-4s. But Ellis is a 1 technique or 0 that isn't heralded for his pass-rushing moves. We're better off looking at a developmental guy like Kendall Langford in the 3rd round who a lot of people are high on as a 3-4 end.

Agree to disagree then.

Any other thoughts on this?