1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by dead_poet »

His athletic profile is better than Elflein, FWIW
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9241
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 1117

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by Pondering Her Percy »

PurpleMustReign wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:37 pm
StpViking wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:43 pm I guess I'll be the Debbie Downer of this group. It really worries me that "The Experts" have already labeled this guy as a 10 starter before he's even played 1 down in the NFL.

Knowing the history of this organization, this may be another massive disappointment like Matt Khalil. Also most of those same experts had the Vikings drafting him, just like Laquon Treadwell. Another bad sign.

Anyway, the game tapes of him on youtube. He definitely has the quick feet and movement in space everyone talks about. He also lunges a lot which NFL 1 and 3 techniques can exploit and swim over or just Ole him. An interior linemen's job is to set the depth, I see him getting bull rushed back the QB on 5 and 7 step drops a lot.

He is a Vikings now so I hope he and Gary Kubiak makes me eat crow.
You are right, that worries me too. But he's much quicker than Kalil ever was, and Kalil was good for his first few seasons. I think most of his struggles were mental and eventually he just stopped caring.
Yes that was exactly what happened to Kalil. It was a great pick but Matt kalil was Matt kalils own problem
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
PsyDanny
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2003 9:24 am
Location: south minneapolis
x 20

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by PsyDanny »

PurpleMustReign wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:37 pm
StpViking wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:43 pm I guess I'll be the Debbie Downer of this group. It really worries me that "The Experts" have already labeled this guy as a 10 starter before he's even played 1 down in the NFL.

Knowing the history of this organization, this may be another massive disappointment like Matt Khalil. Also most of those same experts had the Vikings drafting him, just like Laquon Treadwell. Another bad sign.

Anyway, the game tapes of him on youtube. He definitely has the quick feet and movement in space everyone talks about. He also lunges a lot which NFL 1 and 3 techniques can exploit and swim over or just Ole him. An interior linemen's job is to set the depth, I see him getting bull rushed back the QB on 5 and 7 step drops a lot.

He is a Vikings now so I hope he and Gary Kubiak makes me eat crow.
You are right, that worries me too. But he's much quicker than Kalil ever was, and Kalil was good for his first few seasons. I think most of his struggles were mental and eventually he just stopped caring.
However, I do recall that Kalil's mom was hot. So he had that going for me.
"My anterior orifice is forever causing me extreme difficulty;
therefore, I shall endeavor to acquire some self-control."
PurpleMustReign
Starting Wide Receiver
Posts: 19150
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Crystal, MN
x 114
Contact:

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by PurpleMustReign »

PsyDanny wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:15 pm
PurpleMustReign wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:37 pm

You are right, that worries me too. But he's much quicker than Kalil ever was, and Kalil was good for his first few seasons. I think most of his struggles were mental and eventually he just stopped caring.
However, I do recall that Kalil's mom was hot. So he had that going for me.
Bradbury's gf is pretty. At least I assume the girl he kissed was his gf.
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2018
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8227
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 930

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by VikingLord »

StpViking wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:43 pm I guess I'll be the Debbie Downer of this group. It really worries me that "The Experts" have already labeled this guy as a 10 starter before he's even played 1 down in the NFL.
IIRC, Bradbury was a late riser in the draft. I didn't hear much about him on most mocks until around the Combine when he knocked it out of the park, and even then I think a lot of mock sites were grudgingly moving him up boards. I think some of that is positional in that centers aren't highly hyped very often, but also he's not ideal on the measureables front.

But the more you look at him, the more you watch his tape, the more you look at his Combine performance, and the more you know about how he prepared for game days in college, the harder it is to discount him.

I don't know much about Khalil's college performances, but Khalil always struck me as a physically gifted player who got by on those physical gifts more than hard work and prep. Treadwell, who you also mentioned, was similar to that as well.

Bradbury, OTOH, seems like a hard worker who loves the game and wants to improve himself and everyone around him. He's a real leader on the field, and if given some time to adjust to the pro game, I think will show himself to merit where the Vikings took him in the 1st.
Vikings CrucifiXS
Rookie
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:44 pm
x 25

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by Vikings CrucifiXS »

The more I look into Bradbury the more I like this pick. SKOL Vikings!
Image
CharVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3446
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 679

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by CharVike »

VikingLord wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:02 pm
CharVike wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2019 10:56 am
I'm not arguing against the pick because everything I have read it was a great pick and the best player at that position. It also filled a major need. I just like bigger players. I tend to lean more for the size power guys. But that's not our scheme.
Yeah, I know what you're saying when it comes to the dominant rushing OLs over the years, and it definitely is a big asset to be able to just starting pushing smaller DLs around late in games to drain clock, but I wonder if the modern NFL game is just too athletic for that strategy to consistently work anymore. I mean, look at a defender like Khalil Mack. He's a LB and not all that heavy, but he comes at the ball with such force and speed that he's really hard for blockers to lock on to, much less neutralize. In fact, it seems the bigger they are, the easier it is for Mack to get them leaning one way and then use their momentum against them to shed and attack. And while Mack is a unique talent, he's sort of typical for the type of defensive front 7 exterior player who is there to just blow the OL up regardless of run or pass. Big, super strong defensive tackles are still valuable, but most teams are looking for guys who can disrupt the line of scrimmage and still make plays against the run.

I guess for me, it's about effectiveness more than anything else. Can the player make the plays he needs to make in the scheme and against the defensive talent he's facing? Size is really secondary when it comes to that. A big guy who lacks the movement skills and recognition skills to make the play isn't worth nearly as much as a smaller guy who has those skills and makes the play. I think this is one reason guys like Bradbury and Lindstrom went before guys like Ford and Little.
A big guy that lacks talent is worthless same as the small guy. LT was a very quick, fast and powerful LB. Much better than this Mack guy. Gibbs used a monster OL and H Back to slow him down. Gibbs was the first or one of the first to use an H back. This was done for one thing and that was trying to contain LT(56). I'd still take a monster against Mack with a big guy H back to help out. With the bigger man it takes time to get around him unless Mack is just able to push the monster into the back field. But Mack isn't that he's a movement guy. I'd hammer with a monster and then have a huge H Back waiting for the pickup if he gets loose. Attack him with a big guy straight up. I'm making it sound easy but to me a lighter guy will just get pushed out of the way. Can't do anything with the lack of mass. Try and shove a monster that is stuck in the ground. He won't be moved.
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8227
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 930

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by VikingLord »

CharVike wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:30 am A big guy that lacks talent is worthless same as the small guy. LT was a very quick, fast and powerful LB. Much better than this Mack guy. Gibbs used a monster OL and H Back to slow him down. Gibbs was the first or one of the first to use an H back. This was done for one thing and that was trying to contain LT(56). I'd still take a monster against Mack with a big guy H back to help out. With the bigger man it takes time to get around him unless Mack is just able to push the monster into the back field. But Mack isn't that he's a movement guy. I'd hammer with a monster and then have a huge H Back waiting for the pickup if he gets loose. Attack him with a big guy straight up. I'm making it sound easy but to me a lighter guy will just get pushed out of the way. Can't do anything with the lack of mass. Try and shove a monster that is stuck in the ground. He won't be moved.
You are claiming that LT was "much better" than Mack? What are you basing that on?

I'm not saying you're wrong because I don't know the basis for the claim, but in terms of overall effectiveness, did you watch Mack play last season? He was almost a one man wrecking ball on the Bears defense, and his ability to disrupt and become the focal point for every offensive coordinator enabled the rest of the Bears defenders to outperform as well. He may not have played at that level long enough as a pro to be in the same conversation at LT in terms of overall impact on his team, but if he keeps up his current pace, rest assured he will be.

As far as what opposing coaches like Gibbs might have been able to do to neutralize a guy like LT, well sure, dedicating two players to deal with one is usually going to result in the one being limited. The problem with that approach is that you have one less guy to use on the other defenders. And it wasn't like Mack didn't consistently beat the double teams that were attempted against him, either. He did, plenty of times. The NFL of 2018 is generally bigger, faster, and stronger on both sides of the ball than LT's NFL of the 80's and early 90's. LT was 6'3" and weighed like 240. Mack is 6'3" and weighs around 255. Not a huge difference, but that mass increase is reflected in players across the board in the modern NFL. So to pull off your strategy, you need an even bigger offensive lineman "monster" and a bigger blocking back too, and you need both of them to be technically more sound to control that greater mass and momentum and apply it effectively to road grade out that defensive dynamo. More than likely, a guy like Mack is just going to let the OL monster come to him, then he's going to get him leaning or lunging, and rip him to the side or pull him forward and past, using his mass and momentum against him, and taking him out of the play. There are lots of examples of Mack doing just that throughout last season, which is one reason he put so much pressure on opposing QBs and disrupted so many running plays to his side. And he was consistently taking on guys who had 50+ pounds on him and beating doubles.

Old school football just isn't played that much anymore at the pro level. It's just not realistic. The defenders are too big, too strong, and too athletic on average. You might be able to get away with a version of old school "hog" football on offense if you have a really strong, dynamic runner like a young AP or Lynch who can hit the seam hard and fast and get to the second level quickly, but the days of slogging it down the field with power running have been over for a long time. And that is true even against defenses that lack a Mack or LT.

Now, if you can find a monster OL who has superior balance and coordination and footwork and couple him with an equally good H, you could probably go back to the future and bring back some semblance of the power run game. But in my view, offensive guys like that are even rarer than defensive guys like Mack.
CharVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3446
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 679

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by CharVike »

VikingLord wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:08 pm
CharVike wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:30 am A big guy that lacks talent is worthless same as the small guy. LT was a very quick, fast and powerful LB. Much better than this Mack guy. Gibbs used a monster OL and H Back to slow him down. Gibbs was the first or one of the first to use an H back. This was done for one thing and that was trying to contain LT(56). I'd still take a monster against Mack with a big guy H back to help out. With the bigger man it takes time to get around him unless Mack is just able to push the monster into the back field. But Mack isn't that he's a movement guy. I'd hammer with a monster and then have a huge H Back waiting for the pickup if he gets loose. Attack him with a big guy straight up. I'm making it sound easy but to me a lighter guy will just get pushed out of the way. Can't do anything with the lack of mass. Try and shove a monster that is stuck in the ground. He won't be moved.
You are claiming that LT was "much better" than Mack? What are you basing that on?

I'm not saying you're wrong because I don't know the basis for the claim, but in terms of overall effectiveness, did you watch Mack play last season? He was almost a one man wrecking ball on the Bears defense, and his ability to disrupt and become the focal point for every offensive coordinator enabled the rest of the Bears defenders to outperform as well. He may not have played at that level long enough as a pro to be in the same conversation at LT in terms of overall impact on his team, but if he keeps up his current pace, rest assured he will be.

As far as what opposing coaches like Gibbs might have been able to do to neutralize a guy like LT, well sure, dedicating two players to deal with one is usually going to result in the one being limited. The problem with that approach is that you have one less guy to use on the other defenders. And it wasn't like Mack didn't consistently beat the double teams that were attempted against him, either. He did, plenty of times. The NFL of 2018 is generally bigger, faster, and stronger on both sides of the ball than LT's NFL of the 80's and early 90's. LT was 6'3" and weighed like 240. Mack is 6'3" and weighs around 255. Not a huge difference, but that mass increase is reflected in players across the board in the modern NFL. So to pull off your strategy, you need an even bigger offensive lineman "monster" and a bigger blocking back too, and you need both of them to be technically more sound to control that greater mass and momentum and apply it effectively to road grade out that defensive dynamo. More than likely, a guy like Mack is just going to let the OL monster come to him, then he's going to get him leaning or lunging, and rip him to the side or pull him forward and past, using his mass and momentum against him, and taking him out of the play. There are lots of examples of Mack doing just that throughout last season, which is one reason he put so much pressure on opposing QBs and disrupted so many running plays to his side. And he was consistently taking on guys who had 50+ pounds on him and beating doubles.

Old school football just isn't played that much anymore at the pro level. It's just not realistic. The defenders are too big, too strong, and too athletic on average. You might be able to get away with a version of old school "hog" football on offense if you have a really strong, dynamic runner like a young AP or Lynch who can hit the seam hard and fast and get to the second level quickly, but the days of slogging it down the field with power running have been over for a long time. And that is true even against defenses that lack a Mack or LT.

Now, if you can find a monster OL who has superior balance and coordination and footwork and couple him with an equally good H, you could probably go back to the future and bring back some semblance of the power run game. But in my view, offensive guys like that are even rarer than defensive guys like Mack.
The bigger man usually wins the battle. That's why Gibbs liked size. Did it always work? Nope. LT ended Theisman's career as an example. I like bigger players some don't. Kubiak likes smaller athletic guys. I'm not a fan of that type of football. We'll see how it works this year.
CharVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3446
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 679

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by CharVike »

VikingLord wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:08 pm
CharVike wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:30 am A big guy that lacks talent is worthless same as the small guy. LT was a very quick, fast and powerful LB. Much better than this Mack guy. Gibbs used a monster OL and H Back to slow him down. Gibbs was the first or one of the first to use an H back. This was done for one thing and that was trying to contain LT(56). I'd still take a monster against Mack with a big guy H back to help out. With the bigger man it takes time to get around him unless Mack is just able to push the monster into the back field. But Mack isn't that he's a movement guy. I'd hammer with a monster and then have a huge H Back waiting for the pickup if he gets loose. Attack him with a big guy straight up. I'm making it sound easy but to me a lighter guy will just get pushed out of the way. Can't do anything with the lack of mass. Try and shove a monster that is stuck in the ground. He won't be moved.
You are claiming that LT was "much better" than Mack? What are you basing that on?

I'm not saying you're wrong because I don't know the basis for the claim, but in terms of overall effectiveness, did you watch Mack play last season? He was almost a one man wrecking ball on the Bears defense, and his ability to disrupt and become the focal point for every offensive coordinator enabled the rest of the Bears defenders to outperform as well. He may not have played at that level long enough as a pro to be in the same conversation at LT in terms of overall impact on his team, but if he keeps up his current pace, rest assured he will be.

As far as what opposing coaches like Gibbs might have been able to do to neutralize a guy like LT, well sure, dedicating two players to deal with one is usually going to result in the one being limited. The problem with that approach is that you have one less guy to use on the other defenders. And it wasn't like Mack didn't consistently beat the double teams that were attempted against him, either. He did, plenty of times. The NFL of 2018 is generally bigger, faster, and stronger on both sides of the ball than LT's NFL of the 80's and early 90's. LT was 6'3" and weighed like 240. Mack is 6'3" and weighs around 255. Not a huge difference, but that mass increase is reflected in players across the board in the modern NFL. So to pull off your strategy, you need an even bigger offensive lineman "monster" and a bigger blocking back too, and you need both of them to be technically more sound to control that greater mass and momentum and apply it effectively to road grade out that defensive dynamo. More than likely, a guy like Mack is just going to let the OL monster come to him, then he's going to get him leaning or lunging, and rip him to the side or pull him forward and past, using his mass and momentum against him, and taking him out of the play. There are lots of examples of Mack doing just that throughout last season, which is one reason he put so much pressure on opposing QBs and disrupted so many running plays to his side. And he was consistently taking on guys who had 50+ pounds on him and beating doubles.

Old school football just isn't played that much anymore at the pro level. It's just not realistic. The defenders are too big, too strong, and too athletic on average. You might be able to get away with a version of old school "hog" football on offense if you have a really strong, dynamic runner like a young AP or Lynch who can hit the seam hard and fast and get to the second level quickly, but the days of slogging it down the field with power running have been over for a long time. And that is true even against defenses that lack a Mack or LT.

Now, if you can find a monster OL who has superior balance and coordination and footwork and couple him with an equally good H, you could probably go back to the future and bring back some semblance of the power run game. But in my view, offensive guys like that are even rarer than defensive guys like Mack.
The bigger man usually wins the battle. That's why Gibbs liked size. Did it always work? Nope. LT ended Theisman's career as an example. I like bigger players some don't. Kubiak likes smaller athletic guys. I'm not a fan of that type of football. We'll see how it works this year.
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by fiestavike »

CharVike wrote: Fri May 03, 2019 7:22 am
VikingLord wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:08 pm

You are claiming that LT was "much better" than Mack? What are you basing that on?

I'm not saying you're wrong because I don't know the basis for the claim, but in terms of overall effectiveness, did you watch Mack play last season? He was almost a one man wrecking ball on the Bears defense, and his ability to disrupt and become the focal point for every offensive coordinator enabled the rest of the Bears defenders to outperform as well. He may not have played at that level long enough as a pro to be in the same conversation at LT in terms of overall impact on his team, but if he keeps up his current pace, rest assured he will be.

As far as what opposing coaches like Gibbs might have been able to do to neutralize a guy like LT, well sure, dedicating two players to deal with one is usually going to result in the one being limited. The problem with that approach is that you have one less guy to use on the other defenders. And it wasn't like Mack didn't consistently beat the double teams that were attempted against him, either. He did, plenty of times. The NFL of 2018 is generally bigger, faster, and stronger on both sides of the ball than LT's NFL of the 80's and early 90's. LT was 6'3" and weighed like 240. Mack is 6'3" and weighs around 255. Not a huge difference, but that mass increase is reflected in players across the board in the modern NFL. So to pull off your strategy, you need an even bigger offensive lineman "monster" and a bigger blocking back too, and you need both of them to be technically more sound to control that greater mass and momentum and apply it effectively to road grade out that defensive dynamo. More than likely, a guy like Mack is just going to let the OL monster come to him, then he's going to get him leaning or lunging, and rip him to the side or pull him forward and past, using his mass and momentum against him, and taking him out of the play. There are lots of examples of Mack doing just that throughout last season, which is one reason he put so much pressure on opposing QBs and disrupted so many running plays to his side. And he was consistently taking on guys who had 50+ pounds on him and beating doubles.

Old school football just isn't played that much anymore at the pro level. It's just not realistic. The defenders are too big, too strong, and too athletic on average. You might be able to get away with a version of old school "hog" football on offense if you have a really strong, dynamic runner like a young AP or Lynch who can hit the seam hard and fast and get to the second level quickly, but the days of slogging it down the field with power running have been over for a long time. And that is true even against defenses that lack a Mack or LT.

Now, if you can find a monster OL who has superior balance and coordination and footwork and couple him with an equally good H, you could probably go back to the future and bring back some semblance of the power run game. But in my view, offensive guys like that are even rarer than defensive guys like Mack.
The bigger man usually wins the battle. That's why Gibbs liked size. Did it always work? Nope. LT ended Theisman's career as an example. I like bigger players some don't. Kubiak likes smaller athletic guys. I'm not a fan of that type of football. We'll see how it works this year.
I tend to prefer that sort of offensive line as well, but I can see the merits to trying to get Akeem Hicks moving sideways.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8227
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 930

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by VikingLord »

CharVike wrote: Fri May 03, 2019 7:22 am The bigger man usually wins the battle. That's why Gibbs liked size. Did it always work? Nope. LT ended Theisman's career as an example. I like bigger players some don't. Kubiak likes smaller athletic guys. I'm not a fan of that type of football. We'll see how it works this year.
It's not like Bradbury is exactly small. Even at 305, he's still got 50 pounds easy on Mack and most LBs. The average DT these days probably isn't clocking in north of 315-320, and the DTs that are bigger than that are usually situational guys, have little positional flexibility, and are going to get doubled when they are on the field. Bradbury, for a "smaller" guy, put up 34 reps on the bench at the Combine which tied him for 3rd most among all players. That would compare favorably to almost any DT prospect in this year's draft and probably in almost any draft before this year's draft.

You can check out the peer rankings for the 2019 combine at https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... ombine.htm for comparison. It's not fair to rank Bradbury against established NFL guys as he's likely to get bigger and stronger, but relative to his 2019 rookie peers, he stacks up favorably in any meaningful measure IMHO.

To sum, Bradbury really isn't that small, he's very strong already, he's able to move well in space, he works hard and studies up on his opposition, and he's an on-field leader who makes all the calls you need your center to make pre-snap.

Sounds like an ideal OL to me.
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9771
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1857

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

CharVike wrote: Fri May 03, 2019 7:22 am
VikingLord wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:08 pm

You are claiming that LT was "much better" than Mack? What are you basing that on?

I'm not saying you're wrong because I don't know the basis for the claim, but in terms of overall effectiveness, did you watch Mack play last season? He was almost a one man wrecking ball on the Bears defense, and his ability to disrupt and become the focal point for every offensive coordinator enabled the rest of the Bears defenders to outperform as well. He may not have played at that level long enough as a pro to be in the same conversation at LT in terms of overall impact on his team, but if he keeps up his current pace, rest assured he will be.

As far as what opposing coaches like Gibbs might have been able to do to neutralize a guy like LT, well sure, dedicating two players to deal with one is usually going to result in the one being limited. The problem with that approach is that you have one less guy to use on the other defenders. And it wasn't like Mack didn't consistently beat the double teams that were attempted against him, either. He did, plenty of times. The NFL of 2018 is generally bigger, faster, and stronger on both sides of the ball than LT's NFL of the 80's and early 90's. LT was 6'3" and weighed like 240. Mack is 6'3" and weighs around 255. Not a huge difference, but that mass increase is reflected in players across the board in the modern NFL. So to pull off your strategy, you need an even bigger offensive lineman "monster" and a bigger blocking back too, and you need both of them to be technically more sound to control that greater mass and momentum and apply it effectively to road grade out that defensive dynamo. More than likely, a guy like Mack is just going to let the OL monster come to him, then he's going to get him leaning or lunging, and rip him to the side or pull him forward and past, using his mass and momentum against him, and taking him out of the play. There are lots of examples of Mack doing just that throughout last season, which is one reason he put so much pressure on opposing QBs and disrupted so many running plays to his side. And he was consistently taking on guys who had 50+ pounds on him and beating doubles.

Old school football just isn't played that much anymore at the pro level. It's just not realistic. The defenders are too big, too strong, and too athletic on average. You might be able to get away with a version of old school "hog" football on offense if you have a really strong, dynamic runner like a young AP or Lynch who can hit the seam hard and fast and get to the second level quickly, but the days of slogging it down the field with power running have been over for a long time. And that is true even against defenses that lack a Mack or LT.

Now, if you can find a monster OL who has superior balance and coordination and footwork and couple him with an equally good H, you could probably go back to the future and bring back some semblance of the power run game. But in my view, offensive guys like that are even rarer than defensive guys like Mack.
The bigger man usually wins the battle. That's why Gibbs liked size. Did it always work? Nope. LT ended Theisman's career as an example. I like bigger players some don't. Kubiak likes smaller athletic guys. I'm not a fan of that type of football. We'll see how it works this year.
What?

Even in short yardage situations, where it's a mass pile of humanity, LOW MAN wins the battle, not the biggest man.

This game is about leverage, not size.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
CharVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3446
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 679

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by CharVike »

VikingLord wrote: Fri May 03, 2019 2:02 pm
CharVike wrote: Fri May 03, 2019 7:22 am The bigger man usually wins the battle. That's why Gibbs liked size. Did it always work? Nope. LT ended Theisman's career as an example. I like bigger players some don't. Kubiak likes smaller athletic guys. I'm not a fan of that type of football. We'll see how it works this year.
It's not like Bradbury is exactly small. Even at 305, he's still got 50 pounds easy on Mack and most LBs. The average DT these days probably isn't clocking in north of 315-320, and the DTs that are bigger than that are usually situational guys, have little positional flexibility, and are going to get doubled when they are on the field. Bradbury, for a "smaller" guy, put up 34 reps on the bench at the Combine which tied him for 3rd most among all players. That would compare favorably to almost any DT prospect in this year's draft and probably in almost any draft before this year's draft.

You can check out the peer rankings for the 2019 combine at https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... ombine.htm for comparison. It's not fair to rank Bradbury against established NFL guys as he's likely to get bigger and stronger, but relative to his 2019 rookie peers, he stacks up favorably in any meaningful measure IMHO.

To sum, Bradbury really isn't that small, he's very strong already, he's able to move well in space, he works hard and studies up on his opposition, and he's an on-field leader who makes all the calls you need your center to make pre-snap.

Sounds like an ideal OL to me.
I already stated that he is the best center in the draft and a very good pick for us. Is that clear. To me 305 is not a huge player. I can't find the report again but they gave us an A for the pick which I agree with. The biggest negative was his base. He can be pushed backwards which is something I hate. This causes major problems. Will it be every play? No. But it shouldn't be any plays. And I don't care about getting off and moving to the second level. Good backs like Cook can handle the second level. Take care of that 1st level. Blow it up. This was a very good and maybe excellent pick for this scheme we will use. And this scheme has had success I won't deny that. It's been proven. Perhaps I'm to stuck on size and it's not that important.
CharVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3446
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 679

Re: 1st round pick- Vikings select C- Garrett Bradbury NC State

Post by CharVike »

VikingLord wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:08 pm
CharVike wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:30 am A big guy that lacks talent is worthless same as the small guy. LT was a very quick, fast and powerful LB. Much better than this Mack guy. Gibbs used a monster OL and H Back to slow him down. Gibbs was the first or one of the first to use an H back. This was done for one thing and that was trying to contain LT(56). I'd still take a monster against Mack with a big guy H back to help out. With the bigger man it takes time to get around him unless Mack is just able to push the monster into the back field. But Mack isn't that he's a movement guy. I'd hammer with a monster and then have a huge H Back waiting for the pickup if he gets loose. Attack him with a big guy straight up. I'm making it sound easy but to me a lighter guy will just get pushed out of the way. Can't do anything with the lack of mass. Try and shove a monster that is stuck in the ground. He won't be moved.
You are claiming that LT was "much better" than Mack? What are you basing that on?

I'm not saying you're wrong because I don't know the basis for the claim, but in terms of overall effectiveness, did you watch Mack play last season? He was almost a one man wrecking ball on the Bears defense, and his ability to disrupt and become the focal point for every offensive coordinator enabled the rest of the Bears defenders to outperform as well. He may not have played at that level long enough as a pro to be in the same conversation at LT in terms of overall impact on his team, but if he keeps up his current pace, rest assured he will be.

As far as what opposing coaches like Gibbs might have been able to do to neutralize a guy like LT, well sure, dedicating two players to deal with one is usually going to result in the one being limited. The problem with that approach is that you have one less guy to use on the other defenders. And it wasn't like Mack didn't consistently beat the double teams that were attempted against him, either. He did, plenty of times. The NFL of 2018 is generally bigger, faster, and stronger on both sides of the ball than LT's NFL of the 80's and early 90's. LT was 6'3" and weighed like 240. Mack is 6'3" and weighs around 255. Not a huge difference, but that mass increase is reflected in players across the board in the modern NFL. So to pull off your strategy, you need an even bigger offensive lineman "monster" and a bigger blocking back too, and you need both of them to be technically more sound to control that greater mass and momentum and apply it effectively to road grade out that defensive dynamo. More than likely, a guy like Mack is just going to let the OL monster come to him, then he's going to get him leaning or lunging, and rip him to the side or pull him forward and past, using his mass and momentum against him, and taking him out of the play. There are lots of examples of Mack doing just that throughout last season, which is one reason he put so much pressure on opposing QBs and disrupted so many running plays to his side. And he was consistently taking on guys who had 50+ pounds on him and beating doubles.

Old school football just isn't played that much anymore at the pro level. It's just not realistic. The defenders are too big, too strong, and too athletic on average. You might be able to get away with a version of old school "hog" football on offense if you have a really strong, dynamic runner like a young AP or Lynch who can hit the seam hard and fast and get to the second level quickly, but the days of slogging it down the field with power running have been over for a long time. And that is true even against defenses that lack a Mack or LT.

Now, if you can find a monster OL who has superior balance and coordination and footwork and couple him with an equally good H, you could probably go back to the future and bring back some semblance of the power run game. But in my view, offensive guys like that are even rarer than defensive guys like Mack.
I'm basing it on Belicheck. He stated that LT was the best he has ever seen. And he mentioned that he didn't mean any disrespect for current players. But no player comes close. That was his view and perhaps there will be some that say Mack was the best ever. So I guess it doesn't mean that much. But I've seen both and IMO LT was the biggest game changer from the D side I have ever witnessed. And I go back to the early 70s. Teams had to change there offense, as Gibbs did, to help contain him. No team is doing that for Mack. You don't need to go back to the future for a power run game. The Steelers come to mind. And calling it "old school" is a little off. The Skins passed very well with the Hogs. They just didn't chuck it up 50 times. Tommy K is old school and was a dink and dunk thrower and attempted a #### load of passes and that was "old school." You think I'm going back to the 40s. Or perhaps the early 70s like when the Phins attempted 7 passes against us. They didn't need to pass. Our smaller D line was getting blown off the ball. The holes were as big as a house. No need to throw. And the back took care of the 2nd level. IMO I'd rather have the bigger player. That's all.
Post Reply