We don't really have one of these yet, so figured we could use this as a place to discuss potential free agent acquisitions and what we would like to look for them to bring in.
If any of you guys are interested, heres a good place to do some research.
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
If Brian Burns is up for consideration than they really should have just kept Dee Ford.
That's my way of saying I don't think Burns is on the radar.
Burns is 6-5 and runs a 4.5. He was also highly productive in college, I don't see much similarity with Dee Ford like...at all.
Burns was highly productive during his three seasons at Florida State, totaling 124 tackles, 39.5 tackles for loss and 24 sacks. He also had three forced fumbles and three blocked kicks. Burns led all freshmen nationally with 9.5 sacks in 2016 [Reply]
Originally Posted by Kiimosabi:
Burns is 6-5 and runs a 4.5. He was also highly productive in college, I don't see much similarity with Dee Ford like...at all.
Burns was highly productive during his three seasons at Florida State, totaling 124 tackles, 39.5 tackles for loss and 24 sacks. He also had three forced fumbles and three blocked kicks. Burns led all freshmen nationally with 9.5 sacks in 2016
There's more to it than sacks, right? They both really aren't great at setting the edge and defending the run.
I'd bet that's why Dee Ford isn't here anymore, so why would they want that again? I swear you guys bury your heads in the sand sometimes. [Reply]
Basically the emphasis for this Defense is to stop being ranked in the bottom 3 in stopping the run and I'd expect the emphasis to be getting edge guys that can do both. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
A couple martinis is good for the imagination :-)
Basically the emphasis for this Defense is to stop being ranked in the bottom 3 in stopping the run and I'd expect the emphasis to be getting edge guys that can do both.
Originally Posted by The Bad Guy:
They didn't want Dee Ford because they don't trust his back to hold up and they didn't want to give a guy a monster contract when that was the case.
You really think if Dee Ford was on a rookie contract they wouldn't love to have him? The reality is, you can learn how to set an edge.
Originally Posted by The Bad Guy:
They didn't want Dee Ford because they don't trust his back to hold up and they didn't want to give a guy a monster contract when that was the case.
You really think if Dee Ford was on a rookie contract they wouldn't love to have him? The reality is, you can learn how to set an edge.
Sure you can learn, but it doesn't mean you're going to. Why not just get a guy that already knows?
He played all year and did fine after getting it worked on so I really don't think it was a concern. Certainly wasn't to the 49ers, who paid a pick a shit load of money for him.
If the back was the issue for KC, they would have just rented him for another year on the tag with no future complications. He was moved direly because he just did not fit. [Reply]
