Packers 1st round selection, #12 overall: Rashan Gary, DE

[Pokerbrat2000]

I mean look at Kahlil Mack. He is an extraordinary player that teams run away from and he gets double teamed. Yet he gets his sacks.

Mack had 4 sacks his rookie season. I think its way too early in Gary's career to try and hold him up to Mack's standards. As a matter of fact, probably not fare to try and compare anyone to Mack, maybe even Mack himself as his curve begins to swing downward.

 

[AmishMafia]

Mack had 4 sacks his rookie season. I think its way too early in Gary's career to try and hold him up to Mack's standards. As a matter of fact, probably not fare to try and compare anyone to Mack, maybe even Mack himself as his curve begins to swing downward.

Only comparing him to Mack because of physical vrs production. Mack had 3x as many sacks in college despite playing for a horrible team in buffalo which made it easier to game plan around.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Only comparing him to Mack because of physical vrs production. Mack had 3x as many sacks in college despite playing for a horrible team in buffalo which made it easier to game plan around.

Yeah I get it, but Mack was also the 5th player chosen in the 2014 draft, I think the expectations of him were much higher than those of Gary.

It's pretty obvious Mack has exceeded those expectations, I guess we will just have to wait to see what Gary does.

Sorry, I get testy when people want to compare him to Mack.

 

[AmishMafia]

Yeah I get it, but Mack was also the 5th player chosen in the 2014 draft, I think the expectations of him were much higher than those of Gary.

It's pretty obvious Mack has exceeded those expectations, I guess we will just have to wait to see what Gary does.

Sorry, I get testy when people want to compare him to Mack.

Its all good.

But how do you excuse the lack of production in college? The supporters line that he wasnt suppose to sack the QB just doesnt make much sense. At a minimum, he would probably get 3 or 4 shots per game of blown OLine calls or broken plays. Let alone plays where you catch an OL flat-footed and blow him away.

He should have been able to do better.

 

[RRyder]

Yeah I get it, but Mack was also the 5th player chosen in the 2014 draft, I think the expectations of him were much higher than those of Gary.

It's pretty obvious Mack has exceeded those expectations, I guess we will just have to wait to see what Gary does.

Sorry, I get testy when people want to compare him to Mack.

I wont compare him to Mack but pretty much every dline/edge prospect that has been drafted in the 1st round the last 20 years faced countless double teams in college and yet still manage to make plays. Gary somehow gets a pass for it

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

But how do you excuse the lack of production in college

yet still manage to make plays. Gary somehow gets a pass for it

I think a lot of people have talked about this and if you only equate Sacks=Production, then both of you are spot on correct, Gary only had what 9.5 sacks in 3 years at Michigan?

However, if you equate production to what he did for the entire defense, as well the fact that he missed several games his final year, you see a different picture. It was pretty obvious that the Packers drafted Gary for more than just how many sacks he had in college. They also know they have an unfinished guy in Gary. So the gamble is/was, do they have a guy that can be an outstanding defensive player after being coached up? Way too early to tell, but so far, I like what I saw in the first game, despite Gary having zero sacks.

How many players do you see get drafted because they had a ton of sacks in College and then they get to the NFL and can't do a thing? Josh Allen who was picked #7 by the Jags played 20 snaps on Sunday, 1 tackle. Guessing, nobody in Jacksonville is too worried.

 

[Mondio]

college is over, they can bring him along with time because of the Smith Bros. If he gets 2 handfuls of snaps and 4 pressures this week, i'll call it a win. I'm excited to see what he can do.

 

[bigbubbatd]

I can see Gary taking a developmental path similar to Danielle Hunter at Minnesota. Solid numbers in limited usage then continues to get better and better

 

[AmishMafia]

I think a lot of people have talked about this and if you only equate Sacks=Production, then both of you are spot on correct, Gary only had what 9.5 sacks in 3 years at Michigan?

However, if you equate production to what he did for the entire defense, as well the fact that he missed several games his final year, you see a different picture. It was pretty obvious that the Packers drafted Gary for more than just how many sacks he had in college. They also know they have an unfinished guy in Gary. So the gamble is/was, do they have a guy that can be an outstanding defensive player after being coached up? Way too early to tell, but so far, I like what I saw in the first game, despite Gary having zero sacks.

How many players do you see get drafted because they had a ton of sacks in College and then they get to the NFL and can't do a thing? Josh Allen who was picked #7 by the Jags played 20 snaps on Sunday, 1 tackle. Guessing, nobody in Jacksonville is too worried.

Pressures are good. But don't fool yourself, the objective is too sack the QB. And he isnt getting it done.

 

[RRyder]

I think a lot of people have talked about this and if you only equate Sacks=Production, then both of you are spot on correct, Gary only had what 9.5 sacks in 3 years at Michigan?

However, if you equate production to what he did for the entire defense, as well the fact that he missed several games his final year, you see a different picture. It was pretty obvious that the Packers drafted Gary for more than just how many sacks he had in college. They also know they have an unfinished guy in Gary. So the gamble is/was, do they have a guy that can be an outstanding defensive player after being coached up? Way too early to tell, but so far, I like what I saw in the first game, despite Gary having zero sacks.

How many players do you see get drafted because they had a ton of sacks in College and then they get to the NFL and can't do a thing? Josh Allen who was picked #7 by the Jags played 20 snaps on Sunday, 1 tackle. Guessing, nobody in Jacksonville is too worried.

I mean he also wasnt getting pressures at Michigan...(no the eating up blockers for the rest of the D excuse doesnt fly as, once again, every dline/edge prospect the last 20 years has eaten up blockers AND been disruptive)

Yes hes a project though. (Said it after the draft and people here jumped down my throat)

 

[GleefulGary]

Pressures are good. But don't fool yourself, the objective is too sack the QB. And he isnt getting it done.

He's played 6 snaps. How many sacks should he have?

Fwiw, 2 pressures in 6 snaps is #good. One of them helped prevent a TD in a 7 point game.

 

[AmishMafia]

He's played 6 snaps. How many sacks should he have?

Fwiw, 2 pressures in 6 snaps is #good. One of them helped prevent a TD in a 7 point game.

He played 1400 snaps in college (what the conversation is about) and got 9.5 sacks. Do you think that is great production?

If he was a punter, i would be very impressed. I would think thats great production for a punter.

But he played DL and is far more gifted than most matchups he faced on the offense.

 

[GleefulGary]

He played 1400 snaps in college (what the conversation is about) and got 9.5 sacks. Do you think that is great production?

If he was a punter, i would be very impressed. I would think thats great production for a punter.

But he played DL and is far more gifted than most matchups he faced on the offense.

You said the objective is to get sacks, and that he isn't getting it done. Present tense, indicating the college discussion is done, as it should be.

Let's just, ya know, focus on his actual NFL snaps?

 

[GleefulGary]

I mean he also wasnt getting pressures at Michigan...(no the eating up blockers for the rest of the D excuse doesnt fly as, once again, every dline/edge prospect the last 20 years has eaten up blockers AND been disruptive)

Yes hes a project though. (Said it after the draft and people here jumped down my throat)

Genuine question for you here.

Which NFL prospects have had the primary role of 6T (C gap) while in college?

There's a difference between being an edge and seeing a double, than playing the 6T and seeing a double. The alignments, and role, are different. Heck, Don Brown's chief concern for his defense was to stop the run, which is why Gary played the anchor end for Brown. Context matters.

Should his stats have been better considering his talent? Yeah, absolutely. That's why he has a ways to improve as a player. He's not polished like a Boss. But did his role in college effect his stats? Yeah, absolutely. It's absolutely undeniable.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I had to dig this pre-draft article up again on Gary, just to remind myself of what his coaches said about the guy. Yeah, I know, what else are his coaches suppose to say right? But if you read it, it makes sense. Coupled with the guys work ethic, love of the game and team player, I still see why the Packers invested in the pick.

While I get what some of you are saying, he didn't have the big **** sack numbers in college. However, had he had 30 sacks in college, he would have been a top 5 pick, but you know what, he still would have had to prove himself in the NFL. So until he does or doesn't prove himself, I think we should all just sit back, watch and ****! *group hug*.

https://www.maizenbrew.com/2019/4/2...critics-its-comical-to-me-michigan-wolverines

 

[PackAttack12]

The notion that it’s “all about sacks”, and that “pressures” don’t matter isn’t exactly an accurate conclusion to come to. Pressures from player ‘x’ lead to sacks from player ‘y’. Does it matter who got the sack from an easy straight line path to the quarterback? Or does it matter who created the mismatch, double team, etc. that allowed for the sack in the first place?

To me, this was the point the Packers were making in selecting Gary. He makes a difference regardless of whether or not it results in the box score under his name. Me personally? I’ll take a guy who effects the game with very little box score “flare” stats, over a guy who lucks into 2-3 sacks.

Now...whether or not the Packers will ultimately be correct in their analysis remains to be seen. But I most certainly understand their line of thinking.

 

[PackerDNA]

Gary look pretty darned good in his 6 snaps. He's going to be fine.

 

[AmishMafia]

Look guys, lets not make this so difficult.

Im not saying he is a bust. The fact is he only got 9.5 sacks in 3 years despite being far more athletically gifted than the guys he played against. Dont you see the red flag? There are lots of excuses but 1 sack every 145 snaps is still low production.

Maybe next year we draft a WR who is 6' 20" and runs a 4.2 40. But only caught 12 passes in 3 years. Well, he usually drew safety help. He wasnt used to catch passes. Why wasnt he? Catches would have helped. He should be open every play!

Arent sacks a good thing? Didnt michgan coaches want sacks? Wouldnt, at least occassionally the DC would use such a dominant player to get to the QB?

Or is it as some MI fans say, that he just lacks a killer instinct and plays down to his competition.

Fortunately he has been getting close to ZSmith. A fantastic role model. I think that will help him tremendously to develop and i think he will do well.

But im not ignorant to the red flags his lack of performance in college bring.

 

[AmishMafia]

Gary look pretty darned good in his 6 snaps. He's going to be fine.

Look at 6 snaps and ignore the first 1400.

He looked great at times in college. Then against Notre Dame he gets ragdolled all day by a freshman OT.

 

[PackerDNA]

That's exactly what I'm going to do Amish. Dollars to donuts this kid ends up being an impact player it's all there.

 

[Mondio]

By all accounts, watching him play in limited action you can see all the tools are there to be very good. and there is nothing but reports that he showed up to camp obviously working hard all offseason and continued that right thru TC and preseason so I have no reason to question his work ethic.

He has stuff to learn, but with the physical tools, 2 ascending vets who are true pros around him, and the will to put in the work I have a good feeling he's going to end up a pretty good player for us.

 

[GleefulGary]

Look guys, lets not make this so difficult.

Im not saying he is a bust. The fact is he only got 9.5 sacks in 3 years despite being far more athletically gifted than the guys he played against. Dont you see the red flag? There are lots of excuses but 1 sack every 145 snaps is still low production.

Maybe next year we draft a WR who is 6' 20" and runs a 4.2 40. But only caught 12 passes in 3 years. Well, he usually drew safety help. He wasnt used to catch passes. Why wasnt he? Catches would have helped. He should be open every play!

Arent sacks a good thing? Didnt michgan coaches want sacks? Wouldnt, at least occassionally the DC would use such a dominant player to get to the QB?

Or is it as some MI fans say, that he just lacks a killer instinct and plays down to his competition.

Fortunately he has been getting close to ZSmith. A fantastic role model. I think that will help him tremendously to develop and i think he will do well.

But im not ignorant to the red flags his lack of performance in college bring.

Nobody is making this difficult except maybe you.

Nobody is ignoring his college production. Nobody is saying they're pleased with the stats he put up, and that they translate well.

You are, however, ignoring the context of his stats within his role, plus injuries.

I think we all realize that if his production was as good as his athletic traits, he would've gone top 5. He's a gamble. Now luckily, we've heard glowing things about his work ethic and effort. He's a high caliber project, if that makes sense.

 

[GleefulGary]

Look at 6 snaps and ignore the first 1400.

He looked great at times in college. Then against Notre Dame he gets ragdolled all day by a freshman OT.

A 6 snap sample is far too small to extrapolate anything, but once somebody gets to the league, I stop caring what they did in college. We don't need to project his college tape/stats to the NFL anymore, he's already in the NFL! Just use those at the end of the year.

 

[Dantés]

Gary look pretty darned good in his 6 snaps. He's going to be fine.

Disclaimer before I respond to AM: by disagreeing with him, I am not saying that I think we can know that Gary will be fine based on 6 snaps in relief.

Look at 6 snaps and ignore the first 1400.

He looked great at times in college. Then against Notre Dame he gets ragdolled all day by a freshman OT.

I can only speak for myself, but I certainly didn't ignore Gary's college tape. I would actually guess that I watched more of it than most people on this forum. And it's public on here that I was impressed with him months before the Packers ever spent a 1st round pick on him, despite the lack of production. Just based on traits, I thought he was one of the best prospects in this last year's class. Now I also thought having his own agency and whatnot was concerning, and thus I didn't stump for him come draft time. But evidently the Packers didn't think that was an issue.

I can't tell you exactly why he failed to produce more in college. I can give you the theories, some of which I think have more credence than others, but you've heard all of them by now. But I do think it's bogus to cite a bad game and draw a conclusion. You could discount virtually 100% of draft prospects that way.

So no, I'm not ignoring the "first 1400" in noticing the 6. But, for what a mere 6 snaps are worth, Gary showed positives on Sunday. He hit the QB and he created disruption, and in so doing he probably earned himself more than 6 snaps next time around. So now all I can say is that we will see what he does with the additional playing time.

 

[AmishMafia]

Nobody is ignoring his college production.

. . . but once somebody gets to the league, I stop caring what they did in college.

Disclaimer before I respond to AM: by disagreeing with him, I am not saying that I think we can know that Gary will be fine based on 6 snaps in relief.



I can only speak for myself, but I certainly didn't ignore Gary's college tape. I would actually guess that I watched more of it than most people on this forum. And it's public on here that I was impressed with him months before the Packers ever spent a 1st round pick on him, despite the lack of production. Just based on traits, I thought he was one of the best prospects in this last year's class. Now I also thought having his own agency and whatnot was concerning, and thus I didn't stump for him come draft time. But evidently the Packers didn't think that was an issue.

I can't tell you exactly why he failed to produce more in college. I can give you the theories, some of which I think have more credence than others, but you've heard all of them by now. But I do think it's bogus to cite a bad game and draw a conclusion. You could discount virtually 100% of draft prospects that way.

So no, I'm not ignoring the "first 1400" in noticing the 6. But, for what a mere 6 snaps are worth, Gary showed positives on Sunday. He hit the QB and he created disruption, and in so doing he probably earned himself more than 6 snaps next time around. So now all I can say is that we will see what he does with the additional playing time.

well said. I am of similar thought but leaning more pessimistically. I just dont understand folks who ignore (aka dont care) about the lack of college production and cant even bring themselves to admit its a red flag.