Eagles showing a lot of interest in Brockers

[iggles nut]

They had him in for a pre-draft visit at the Novacare complex. The Eagles also had a private workout with him(has to be away from the team facility, although not necessarily at the player's college) that Reid, Castillo, and Washburn all attended. Doing both of those either indicates a lot of interest or a serious smokescreen. I've thought that Brockers wasn't a fit because everything I've read said he was a better fit for two-gap. LSU didn't have him on the field in nickel situations. Maybe the Eagles think the talent is there and if he slimmed down a little he has pass rush potential.

[Rey]

Brockers will be a force against the run for many years to come and while he likely will never be more than a 5 or 6 sack per year guy he can certainly get into the backfield. The Eagles run D up the middle would greatly improve with Brockers.

[bridgecoach]

Brockers is clearly a NT and we are looking for an UT. That is my only reservation with him as a prospect. All this looks like a smokescreen to me.

[Rey]

Brockers is quick enough off the snap and has enough athletic ability where he can play Tackle in the 4-3. I don't see him "just" as a Nose.

[Gmaniac]

Brockers is a beast.

If you're worried that Brockers might not fit in with the "Wide 9", there is an easy solution for that: scrap the "Wide 9" nonsense. Problem solved.

The only guy who would suffer from the transition back to a more traditional 4-3 is Babin. But use him as a pass-rushing specialist (as he probably should be used anyways) and again: problem solved.

[Taz]

Brockers will be a force against the run for many years to come and while he likely will never be more than a 5 or 6 sack per year guy he can certainly get into the backfield. The Eagles run D up the middle would greatly improve with Brockers.

I'll take that every day of the week and twice on Sunday a DT that is a force against the run and can give you 5-6 sacks per year, I call that a Pro Bowler.

[Deano]

I like Brockers too.

[USAFspeedboy]

Yeah, when was the last time the birds telegraphed who they really wanted pre draft? I consider this a good indication were either looking OT,WR, or DE.

[old duke]

I have Brockers as the pick @ #15, if we don't trade up for Cox.

As Rey said, he is NOT a NT - too tall. He is a classic DT in a 4-3 defense. While I prefer Cox, I would not mind if they stand pat ansd take Brockers. After all, most of us thought after the season ended, that we needa big DT to help plug the middle, and that is what Brockers does best.

So, either Cox as another "Jenkins type", or Brockers as the middle run stopper, either one will be a big upgrade.

[swat]

Don't see us drafting this kid. I think he might be a option at 15, so they wanna make sure they DON'T want him.

Most likely scenarios IMO are trading up for Tannehill, Claiborne or F.Cox....or a trade down for who knows.

[eaglesnut]

Brockers is clearly a NT and we are looking for an UT. That is my only reservation with him as a prospect. All this looks like a smokescreen to me.

I think you've talked yourself into that proposition. We need a top young tackle prospect period. Doesn't necessarily have to be right now nor in the 1st round and Brockers could be the wrong guy, but the whole position is on the short list.

Either way he's a guy to take a close look at because of his size and the defense he was a part of.

[iggles nut]

At 15, you don't want to shoehorn yourself into one position. In this case, 4-3 NT versus 4-3 UT. If you can find a guy you think can be a dominant 4-3 NT you don't ignore him. Long-term, we really need both positions. UT because Jenkins is older and NT because Patterson is getting up there, coming off of brain surgery and has an ascending cap number. Dixon and Landri are only signed for 1 year each. As far as next year goes, although Landri played mostly at NT last year, he did begin to steal from snaps from Laws at UT at the end of the year. He could conceivably be Jenkins' primary backup next year. You could always grab another UT type later.

[swat]

Problem is that he isn't great at pass rushing and at that ht., he may not be a force vs. the run.
Similar problem I have with Thompson, I don't think he is great at anything. Neither are very athletic. Something the Eagles want. Especially early.

If you want a run stopper..they can be had later.

[Rey]

Brockers imo plays with a great base (very hard to move) and even though he may not burn a 40, he's quick off the ball. Cox on the other hand is more athletic and projects as the better pass rusher, but tends to get blown off the ball quite a bit when he doesn't get that initial penetration.

[swat]

It's not just the 40. Their cone times were horrendous. Our DL plays in space. They have to be athletic....especially if you are going to pick them top 15 or top 45.