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

[HardRightEdge]

Huh? Thats ridiculous. Since when is not getting to your goal a failure. By your definition, Lombardi was a failure. His goal was pefection. By chasing perfection he knew he would achieve excellence.

Do you think there is a single OLB in the NFL whos goal is to not sack the QB on every pass play?

Enough. You are just trying to be ridiculous.

You're getting awfully abstract now. A sack is not "perfection", so there is no pursuit of such in the act. It is a single well executed play, maybe.

The goal of the edge rusher is to beat the blocker in the context of his assignment. Out of that something good might happen. If he's going to ad lib, he d*mn well better make the play. But there's no stat to tell you when he doesn't.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Any idea what Gary's numbers in above are?

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

One thing I will be interested in watching play out are the 3 NFL careers of former Michigan players and teammates on defense, Gary, Devin Bush and Chase Winovich. I watched quite a few Michigan games in the last 2 years and really liked all 3, but especially Winovich. Admittedly, maybe it was the Clay Matthews man-locks?

Anyway, the 3 of them had the following career sacks playing together for 3 years:

Gary: 9.5 (picked #12 in draft)
Bush: 10 (picked #10 in draft)
CW: 18.5 (picked #77 in draft)

Bush obviously played a different position, so not comparing him directly to the 2. CW played on the opposite side of Gary, but if you watch film of the 3, you will notice something and it backs up what Michigan coaches have said. Gary often is taking on blockers and plugging everything up and forcing the play over to the other side or the offense is just running away from him. Meanwhile Chase is often left untouched or barely blocked and comes in for the clean sack or TFL. Bush often took advantage of the guys in front of him and picked his clean holes to get his sacks and TFL's.

I think the point I am trying to make is that the Michigan coaches saw how teams were playing Gary and took advantage of getting other guys free as a result of it. Sacks are nice, but I think they really did see Gary as the guy that made everyone else's job a little easier. CW had almost twice as many career sacks as Gary, yet he was taken in the 3rd round. Who was the leader in sacks for Michigan last season? None of those 3 guys, it was Junior ILB Josh Uche with 7 sacks.

How will the way that Gary was used at Michigan translate in the NFL and on the Packer defense? I guess we will see, but the stunt that he ran with Lowery towards the end of the game was perfectly executed and he and Smith converged on Turdbiscuit at the exact same moment to cause a bad pass.

 

[greengold]

Agree HRE.

No offense to anyone here, but who cares about all of this at the moment? Really, lets just see how he does. Thinking Gary will get more reps as the weeks progress, and let the chips fall where they may. I think we will be winning with Rashan helping our D. Let the guy play and show his worth. We just finished Game 1 and he fared alright. Let’s just see what happens. Hopefully, we’re stacking chips before too long.

 

[greengold]

One thing I will be interested in watching play out are the 3 NFL careers of former Michigan players and teammates on defense, Gary, Devin Bush and Chase Winovich. I watched quite a few Michigan games in the last 2 years and really liked all 3, but especially Winovich. Admittedly, maybe it was the Clay Matthews man-locks?

Anyway, the 3 of them had the following career sacks playing together for 3 years:

Gary: 9.5 (picked #12 in draft)
Bush: 10 (picked #10 in draft)
CW: 18.5 (picked #77 in draft)

Bush obviously played a different position, so not comparing him directly to the 2. CW played on the opposite side of Gary, but if you watch film of the 3, you will notice something and it backs up what Michigan coaches have said. Gary often is taking on blockers and plugging everything up and forcing the play over to the other side or the offense is just running away from him. Meanwhile Chase is often left untouched or barely blocked and comes in for the clean sack or TFL. Bush often took advantage of the guys in front of him and picked his clean holes to get his sacks and TFL's.

I think the point I am trying to make is that the Michigan coaches saw how teams were playing Gary and took advantage of getting other guys free as a result of it. Sacks are nice, but I think they really did see Gary as the guy that made everyone else's job a little easier. CW had almost twice as many career sacks as Gary, yet he was taken in the 3rd round. Who was the leader in sacks for Michigan last season? None of those 3 guys, it was Junior ILB Josh Uche with 7 sacks.

How will the way that Gary was used at Michigan translate in the NFL and on the Packer defense? I guess we will see, but the stunt that he ran with Lowery towards the end of the game was perfectly executed and he and Smith converged on Turdbiscuit at the exact same moment to cause a bad pass.

Superstar post.

 

[OldSchool101]

One thing I will be interested in watching play out are the 3 NFL careers of former Michigan players and teammates on defense, Gary, Devin Bush and Chase Winovich. I watched quite a few Michigan games in the last 2 years and really liked all 3, but especially Winovich. Admittedly, maybe it was the Clay Matthews man-locks?

Anyway, the 3 of them had the following career sacks playing together for 3 years:

Gary: 9.5 (picked #12 in draft)
Bush: 10 (picked #10 in draft)
CW: 18.5 (picked #77 in draft)

Bush obviously played a different position, so not comparing him directly to the 2. CW played on the opposite side of Gary, but if you watch film of the 3, you will notice something and it backs up what Michigan coaches have said. Gary often is taking on blockers and plugging everything up and forcing the play over to the other side or the offense is just running away from him. Meanwhile Chase is often left untouched or barely blocked and comes in for the clean sack or TFL. Bush often took advantage of the guys in front of him and picked his clean holes to get his sacks and TFL's.

I think the point I am trying to make is that the Michigan coaches saw how teams were playing Gary and took advantage of getting other guys free as a result of it. Sacks are nice, but I think they really did see Gary as the guy that made everyone else's job a little easier. CW had almost twice as many career sacks as Gary, yet he was taken in the 3rd round. Who was the leader in sacks for Michigan last season? None of those 3 guys, it was Junior ILB Josh Uche with 7 sacks.

How will the way that Gary was used at Michigan translate in the NFL and on the Packer defense? I guess we will see, but the stunt that he ran with Lowery towards the end of the game was perfectly executed and he and Smith converged on Turdbiscuit at the exact same moment to cause a bad pass.

A see him as a guy that once he has a breakout performance? He’ll never look back.

I think some folks are a little gun shy after higher draft picks like Datone Jones and Mike Neal fizzled. But Gary is a far better raw athlete than either. Also we’re starting to see how Pettine is far more equipped at getting production in the pass rush arena. I think they’ll use him more in a role as a 5T where he can use his nice balance of speed and strength to engage players and disrupt the pocket, slice through holes made by Clark (who’s presence is demanding a Double team) and forcing plays to stay inside the Edge he sets with his speed.
That sideline will eat a Defense up, but when you force plays back inside? Sure it limits the big gains. but it also allows the quicker LB/DBs to engage a player in the middle of the field or sometimes even behind the LOS.
Sacks are valuable. But so is getting off the field after stopping 3rd n Long with consistency.

Rashan came around the Corner on that stunt with the closing speed of a bullet. Sooner or later. Sooner or later. It’s not IF in my mind... it’s WHEN

 

[greengold]

Savage almost had one too. The GB secondary is going to turn into an insane Pick Party this season, and possibly for many more.

Much of that begins with QB pressures.

 

[OldSchool101]

Savage almost had one too. The GB secondary is going to turn into an insane Pick Party this season, and possibly for many more.

Much of that begins with QB pressures.

As a DB.. If you knew you only had to cover a guy for 3 sec before the ball is launched... it makes it far less field and you don’t need to play off their WR 10 yards like the old days. Plus you got a couple of Safeties with instincts and closing speed to back you up if you want to get physical inside 5 yards and slow them down. we didn’t have that as much last year.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Superstar post.

Thanks, I was going to give you a "winner", but that would probably appear to look a bit like self-flatulation

 

[OldSchool101]

Thanks, I was going to give you a "winner", but that would probably appear to look a bit like self-flatulation

I’ve done it for you.. doesn’t look so vain that way

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I’ve done it for you.. doesn’t look so vain that way

Now I see the work around and loop-hole....well played!

 

[XPack]

Thanks, I was going to give you a "winner", but that would probably appear to look a bit like self-flatulation

Look who's building up poster stats now!

 

[sschind]

Look who's building up poster stats now!

Helped you out...Feel better?

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Reminds me of a joke I just heard.

Woman to her blond friend "I just slept with a Brazilian"
Blond Friend "You ****...how many is a Brazilian.

 

[Mondio]

Look who's building up poster stats now!

Last night, I sat at 6,666 for the number of ratings and thought it was fitting. this morning I sit at 6,671 which isn't nearly as interesting. I'm going to need some of you to go undo your ratings please. I'd say how many, but i'd probably screw up the math.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Last night, I sat at 6,666 for the number of ratings and thought it was fitting. this morning I sit at 6,671 which isn't nearly as interesting. I'm going to need some of you to go undo your ratings please. I'd say how many, but i'd probably screw up the math.

Hey, stop making us do all the heavy lifting, just go delete 5 posts with a rating and you will be back down to 6.666

Of course, if I see that, I am going to be giving you a "creative rating"!

 

[sschind]

Upon further reflection i understand some confusion. I am discussing if sack totals should be considered in college scouting which i still feel is relevant.

I am not saying Gary is a bust because of a lack of sacks.

I think he will suceed in the NFL and i was encouraged by his performance on Thursday.

However, at the time of the pick i was very down on the pick.

Sack totals are ONE relevant statistic. The issue people have with your argument is that you seem to think it is the most important one while others, myself included, don't feel that way. Personally, I think sacks are over rated. We have already talked about pressures and hurries and hits etc. HRE mentioned forced holding calls and then there are tackles for losses against players other than the QB. Essentially what you could call negative outcome plays for the offense. All are helpful and I can think of times when a sack would be less desirable than one of the other outcomes.

Take this scenario: You are down 1 point in the game. You are on defense and the opposing team has a third and 5 at their own 35 yard line. There is a minute 30 seconds left and you have no timeouts left. Instead of running the ball to run more time of the clock the offense decides to go for the kill and calls a pass play. You sack the QB for a 6 yard loss and they run off 35 seconds before they punt the ball. Or, you pressure the QB and he throws a bad pass an the ball falls incomplete stopping the clock and they have to punt. You just saved your offense 30 seconds by not sacking the QB.

I don't think anyone is claiming you are calling him a bust. I've never heard it. All I hear is you keep mentioning his college sack totals.

A lot of people were down on the pick and I understand why. They were falling into the same trap you did. Focusing on college sack totals.

After playing 1400 snaps (I don't know if that is accurate or you just made the number up but it doesn't matter we all know he played a lot of snaps so the actual number doesn't matter) I will admit that on the surface I would expect that a player with Gary's abilities to have more sacks. That is on the surface looking at the equation snaps + ability = sacks. However, it goes a lot deeper than that. Many people including former coaches and team mates have discounted his lack of sacks stating that the disruption he caused was far more valuable. Simply put if Gary's effort on a particular play resulted in another player getting the sack what difference does it make who gets the sack.

 

[XPack]

Last night, I sat at 6,666 for the number of ratings and thought it was fitting. this morning I sit at 6,671 which isn't nearly as interesting. I'm going to need some of you to go undo your ratings please. I'd say how many, but i'd probably screw up the math.

Come on ratings aren't be all and end all.

You help others get ratings too and make the whole forum better.

Forget stats. You should delete all rated posts (except 9) and become the the Forum Gary

 

[Mondio]

Come on ratings aren't be all and end all.

You help others get ratings too and make the whole forum better.

Forget stats. You should delete all rated posts (except 9) and become the the Forum Gary

I do serve up some lob balls for others to smash don't I

 

[RRyder]

Gary often is taking on blockers

Can this excuse just die allready for Gary?

Its an acceptable excuse for late 1st or 2nd round and later pick. For a guy taken mid to high in the first it's just silly to use it as an excuse. EVERY Dline/Edge prospect that gets projected high gets double teamed constantly. They all still ended up being disruptive while eating up blockers(It's why they ended up as high 1st round picks).

This excuse is just mind boggeling silly for a guy taken high in the draft.

Say he's raw. Say he's got potential. Say hopefully he just wasn't a good fit at Michigan.

Saying he couldn't be disruptive (note: I said disruptive not even sacks because somehow people seem to think he was being disruptive and just not getting sacks... He wasn't) because he had to take on double teams doesnt fly for a high round pick

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Can this excuse just die allready for Gary?

Its an acceptable excuse for 2nd round and later pick. For a guy taken mid to high in the first it's just silly to use it as an excuse. EVERY Dline/Edge prospect that gets projected high gets double teamed constantly. They all still ended up being disruptive while eating up blockers(It's why they ended up as high 1st round picks).

This excuse is just mind boggeling silly for a guy taken high in the draft.

Say he's raw. Say he's got potential. Say hopefully he just wasn't a good fit at Michigan.

Saying he couldn't be disruptive (note: I said disruptive not even sacks because somehow people seem to think he was being disruptive and just not getting sacks... He wasn't) because he had to take on double teams doesnt fly for a high round pick

I guess you say what you want, but I will keeping saying what I want.

If all you were looking for with that pick was a guy that got a ton of sacks in college, then you are 100% correct in thinking the Packers whiffed on the pick. Gary doesn't even have to play a single snap in the NFL, he already was a failure for you, based on what you saw him not do in college, case dismissed.

 

[RRyder]

I guess you say what you want, but I will keeping saying what I want.

If all you were looking for with that pick was a guy that got a ton of sacks in college, then you are 100% correct in thinking the Packers whiffed on the pick. Gary doesn't even have to play a single snap in the NFL, he already was a failure for you, based on what you saw him not do in college, case dismissed.

I specifically even said I wasnt talking about just sacks.

I also never said he was a failure as a prospect. (after he was drafted I legit said he was a project)

What I said was your excuse for him (that he wasnt disruptive in college because he was taking on blockers) is a horrible one for a top prospect that plays in the trenches....... Because it is

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I specifically even said I wasnt talking about just sacks.

I also never said he was a failure as a prospect. (after he was drafted I legit said he was a project)

What I said was your excuse for him (that he wasnt disruptive in college because he was taking on blockers) is a horrible one for a top prospect that plays in the trenches....... Because it is

The difference is, you view this as an excuse, I view it as just a part of the explanation, an explanation that many like yourself do not want to believe, because it seems "sacks" are the be-all and end-all. So while many of us have tried to explain what the Packers were most likely thinking when drafting Gary, it all still seems to fall on deaf ears.

Again, I'm going to wait and see how he does over the next year or two.

 

[greengold]

Whatever. Who cares? Just see what he does, and we can debate the merits or lack thereof in a couple of years.

 

[RRyder]

The difference is, you view this as an excuse, I view it as just a part of the explanation, an explanation that many like yourself do not want to believe, because it seems "sacks" are the be-all and end-all. So while many of us have tried to explain what the Packers were most likely thinking when drafting Gary, it all still seems to fall on deaf ears.

Again, I'm going to wait and see how he does over the next year or two.

You keep comming back to this point despite the fact I never said that, implied it and actively said that wasnt what I was talking about

As for your last statement sure that's a fair thing to say. But if we arent going to talk about what we think of prospects until they've been in the league a few years then pretty much every draft and training camp thread should be locked in the offseason.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You keep comming back to this point despite the fact I never said that, implied it and actively said that wasnt what I was talking about

As for your last statement sure that's a fair thing to say. But if we arent going to talk about what we think of prospects until they've been in the league a few years then pretty much every draft and training camp thread should be locked in the offseason.

I apologize if I have misinterpreted what you have said in the past, I honestly don't keep track of each individual poster as well as I should. I also think you have done the same for me. It's easy to lump all of us together and think we all share the exact same viewpoint of each side of a "debate", when in reality, we all have differing and varying opinions of each aspect of it.

Anyway, yes I get what you are saying, if we can't talk about prospects, why be here right? However, I think if we take the approach of digging up the same thing after each and every game that Gary plays in, some of us are going to get tired of writing and or reading it. I haven't really said anything new, nor has anyone else that I am aware of. So guilty as charged. I think we are all hoping for the same outcome, but until there really is an outcome or at least data, all most of us are doing is just trying to hedge our bets on our predictions of which direction we think Gary is heading.

My prediction and then I will jump out (if I can ) is that he is going to be a guy that keeps getting better and better. He may not be a 15 sack/year guy, but he will be a solid player, one who makes his share of tackles, sacks, forced fumbles and best of all, a team player that overall turns out to be a great addition to the defense. If he doesn't end up being that player, then both the Packers and I were wrong.