Defending the Bruce Irvin Pick

After coolly trading down to snatch up extra late-round picks (a mid-4th and a mid-6th), the Seattle Seahawks have sent the league into an incredulous tizzy by selecting DE Bruce Irvin out of West Virginia - a guy that, in defiance of the talking-head community, was projected as a Top 15 pick by at least seven teams, according to a PFT source.

Though I haven't done any scouting of the guy myself (although Kip Earlywine has, even if he didn't anticipate first-round interest - but who did?), I've been as able as anyone to pick up on the basic motifs of why people think this is an enormous reach:

1. He's not Melvin Ingram.

2. He's a pure pass rusher, and won't play three downs.

3. He's not Quinton Coples.

4. His production dropped off last year.

5. He's not Courtney Upshaw.

6. He's got off-the-field issues.

If your response is an odd number, please slap yourself in the face with a large trout. Fair discussion involves Irvin on his own merit, not why you didn't get your guy.

The most sensical worry for me is #2. Some have called Bruce Irvin "the best pure pass rusher in the draft", and that title carries both excitement and doubt. The paradigm for the first round is to look for complete players, guys who can rush the passer without sacrificing rush stoutness. Bruce Irvin is not such a three-down player. Pete has already tagged him a Leo. His role is to bring down quarterbacks, plain and simple.

However, if you're calling this a reach because Irvin is a pure pass rusher, you're ignoring recent draft history. Paradigms change and the NFL has become a pass-happy glut of passing passfests, with unprepared QB's going in the top 12 picks and pass rushers gaining more and more value. Jason Pierre-Paul and Aldon Smith, both guys that relied on athleticism and were tagged as pure pass rushers (or sure busts), also went higher than draftniks expected.

Neither team is regretting their picks right now. Their teams schemed them into success, found ways to get them into the backfield. The result has been double-digit sacks and a balancing of power in their respective divisions. A move like Irvin is surprising, but not without recent precedent. As the league shifts toward the pass, expect defensive priorities to shift with it.

Another team that's shown savvy with scheming pass rushers is the Seahawks, who in 2010 traded a more complete defensive end in Darryl Tapp in order to pick up Chris Clemons. The latter has been immensely productive for Seattle over two years despite being the line's only major source of pass rush. He has not compromised the defense by being terrible against the run, nor has he struggled by being somewhat underweight (both red flags against Irvin, who produced in college despite similar size). That speaks to Seattle's scheming on the defensive line.

Now, if Seattle can coax around 20 sacks from a late-20s defensive end without elite speed, what could they coax from a rookie who ran a 4.4 at the Combine?

Pete and John are throwing around some pretty distinguished names in comparison to Irvin. They've talked about his uniqueness, compared his speed to Jevon Kearse, evoked the burst of Von Miller, and announced a desire to deploy Irvin like Clay Matthews. Those are easy things to say from a podium, but they give us a framework and a hint of (surprise, surprise) an evil plan. They also don't have the same definitions for "3-down player" that you or I do, and for good reason. With defense rapidly becoming a mental game of chess against quarterbacks, pre-snap motion and confusing looks are becoming the name of the game. Mike Mayock rightly called our defense an "amoeba", similar to how Rex Ryan twists his defense. Count on Pete to find ways to get Irvin involved in all phases of the defense, including 1st and 2nd down. And with Clemons getting up there in age and likely to leave the lineup sooner rather than later, Irvin will find his playing time.

Irvin also deserves recognition for his upside. For those pointing out his lack of 2011 production, from what I've read, his relatively quiet 2011 has been placed on the shoulders of his coaching and scheming. Like Brandon Mebane or Jason Jones, Irvin was used last year in ways that don't fit his gifts, such as 3-4 defensive end. He hasn't been infused with a wide variety of pass-rush moves, and that's something that can be improved at the pro level. I've seen it argued that his coaches treated him as an instinctive player who would end up thinking too much if his game got too complicated - maybe. I don't know. But I certainly don't see a polished, finished product with only two years of decent football ahead of him, a la Tim Ruskell's picks.

It sounds for all the world like Bruce Irvin perfectly fits Seattle's vision for pass rush, and would very likely be at least a second-rounder if not for the off-the-field red flags. Pete Carroll coveted him for USC, knows him well, and we know he's not dogmatically put off by off-the-field concerns (therefore dealing with motif #6). Also, frankly, I'm relieved to see him NOT wringing his hands over run defense for once - plenty of talent in that area already on this defense. We didn't need our first-round pick to be complete; we needed our defense to be complete. Irvin might do that. The NFL is becoming a specialist's game, and in his singular role, Irvin could excel.

For those who were fine with taking Irvin in a later round - you have to remember that we aren't privy to teams' big boards. Michael Lombardi of the NFL Network has said that Irvin wasn't going to get past San Francisco's first round pick, and they know a thing or two about defense. There was the PFT source saying that at least seven teams were expecting Irvin to go in the Top 15. Teams rate players differently than draftniks - James Carpenter was bound to be taken within three picks of where Seattle got him - and that's a big factor in how teams decide their picks. Seattle got their guy when he was available, and even had the cool-headedness to slip down the board a bit and pile on the late-round picks while waiting.

And once again, in this day and age of football, being able to consistently get to the QB has a tendency to boost your draft stock almost automatically, regardless of what else you can do. This pick has to be viewed through that filter.

Besides...if this front office can coax Pro Bowlers out of 5th rounders and CFL imports, is anyone really THAT worried?

The Effect of the Draft on a CBA

Fan angst will ramp up as the CBA deadline looms, as will player uncertainty. I remain convinced that all of this is absolutely necessary from the owners' perspectives; their demands are big and across the board for a reason. I don't fear a long-term lockout, but a lockout of some length is mandatory if the two sides are going to see just how entrenched the other really is.

So, what if the draft comes and goes and no CBA has been reached? I personally see that as unlikely, because just as the March 3rd lockout date puts players and free agents in particular over the proverbial barrel, the draft date puts front offices over a barrel all their own. Other than the few big-name free agents every year who get top dollar, most free agent signings or re-signings are of the role player variety, thus eliminating or postponing a team need that HAS to be addressed in the draft. Since teams will be without the ability to re-sign even their own free agents, all 32 teams would go into the draft with more needs than picks. Postponing free agent signings until after the draft would leave agents and players with too much leverage over front offices desperate to fill roster talent deficiencies they were unable to fill during the draft.

So think of it this way: A lockout lasting until roughly Combine time or thereabouts is good for the owners, as that time period will evaluate the real cohesiveness of the players union.

A lockout lasting until after the draft would leave free agents with substantially more monetary leverage when a labor agreement is actually reached. Not to mention that the NFL likely does not want the prime time draft to be dominated by talk of the lockout and the inevitable millionaire vs. billionaire talk, and the always audible average joe complaints about spoiled athletes not being grateful for what they have got, etc, etc, etc.

One other factor: The excitement following the draft is often used to drive season ticket sales in places where fan interest has been flagging due to poor results. No labor agreement will effectively kill those ticket sales.

Tracing the Ryan Mallett Anti-Hype

The segment below is taken from a PFT article describing why QB Ryan Mallett is bound to fall out of the first round on draft day.

One month ago, we passed along a report from NFL Network’s Albert Breer stating that Arkansas quarterback Ryan Mallett’s draft stock would be adversely affected by “off-field issues.”

Though we’ve yet to uncover any damning specifics aside from Mallett’s seemingly harmless 2009 arrest for public intoxication, Breer’s report appears to be backed up by Adam Caplan of FOXSports.com.

Caplan wrote on Twitter Tuesday night that Mallett is “almost certain” to drop out of the first round of April’s draft, even going so far as to say it “wouldn’t shock (Caplan) to see Mallett fall to the third (round).”  Similar to Breer, Caplan cites “baggage, and not the kind you carry” as the main reason for Mallett’s projected draft-day slip.

Read that first sentence and notice its psychological impact. One would look at that and naturally think, "Hmmm, for all this buzz to be going on, there must have been something big behind that original Breer report. That 'off-field issues' snatch must be part of a more comprehensive, descriptive piece. I'll click on it and see what's generating all this buzz."

So you click on it and find...another PFT article referencing the same original report. The article admits that Breer doesn't go into detail about Mallett, but you're still thinking, "OK but come on, there must be more to it than the words 'off-field' and 'issues'." So after a brief grunt of annoyance and strange flashes of the movie "Inception", you click down another level and finally arrive at the original source expecting to see at least some elaboration, some insight into this great big hullabaloo. It can't be all coming from just one two-word phrase...right?

Here's what you find in the original NFL.com piece:

Guessing Seattle's Offseason Strategy

February 7th is the date that NFL teams will be able to cut players under contract. March 3rd is the date free agency would normally begin, but it's pre-empted this year by the lapse of the league's Collective Bargaining Arrangement. No business can be conducted after that date - signing free agents, trading players, or any kind of negotiations.

In other words, teams have only three weeks to tweak their roster this year unless the NFL gets a new CBA in place - which, depending on whom you listen to, could be tomorrow or sometime in 2012.

This deadline has teams scrambling to sign players to futures contracts, stocking up on spare parts like my family loading the basement with canned green beans before Y2K. Futures contracts are given to players for 2011 who weren't on a team in 2010 and usually involve the kind of fringe talent that Seattle saw a lot of in 2010.

How will the situation affect the Seahawks' strategies of finding players? Will Seattle keep up its usual frenzy of wheeling-and-dealing in the three weeks that NFL business can still be conducted? Or will they stay relatively quiet in order to make the most out of the draft? There could be a way for us to predict their strategy by looking back on last year and getting a feel for GM John Schneider's modus operandi.

Senior Bowl Quarterback Notes

Christian Ponder: NFL brain. Training bra arm. The deep ball he threw to Hankerson was caught, yes, but still exposed his arm as weak. His deep outs were equally weak. There is no questioning his intelligence, but the 18 yard deep out is an NFL staple, and he simply doesn't have it in his bag. His brains make him intriguing, but his arm says backup.

Jake Locker is still an athlete playing quarterback. He has moments, like his rollout left, where he squares his hips and makes a PERFECT pass, and you know only a few NFL quarterbacks can do that. But his seam routes on the hash are WR death throws. High and wide exposes a lot of ribs. I thought Mayock did a great job of exposing his baseball stride in the pocket. More hips, less legs, Jake. Can that be taught? Absolutely. The fumbling issue is a concern, part of his unsettled pocket presence could be due to poor ball protection. His time in Washington certainly didn't teach him that the pocket is a place to feel secure. I still think he goes in the top ten.

Greg McElroy, I just don't know about. He looks OK at everything, and great at nothing. His arm is not much better than Ponder's, though.

Andy Dalton didn't show much. Practice showed a better arm than Ponder and McElroy; his smarts are beyond question. After he got just absolutely SMOKED on what should have been an offsides penalty at minimum, I don't think it would be fair to evaluate what you saw anyway. And therein lies the rub with Dalton. Can he thicken up a bit so he can take an NFL pounding for 16 (or 18) games?

Colin Kaepernick. Maybe even more than Locker, he is an athlete playing at quarterback. The arm motion can only be described as Tebow lite. He does telegraph throws with his windup. He doesn't have Locker's deep stride issue in the pocket, however. I question his ability to make a 2nd or 3rd read, and his instinct to tuck and run is strong. He LIKES being a running quarterback.

His sideline interview during the game was enlightening. Media savvy players know that the Senior Bowl is an interview for a job, but don't emphasize that aspect, rather talking about "team". Kaepernick made no bones about measuring himself against the other 5 quarterbacks on the field that he thought were getting talked about more than him. Not sure how I feel about that.

Has straight line speed. He will wow them at the combine, he might even make Locker and Newton look slow. He will be selected later than Newton, but I'm not so sure Newton isn't the bigger project. Both are projects, however.

Ricky Stanzi has tools that fit the NFL, but almost appears afraid to make a mistake. He reeks of checkdown Charlie. Good pocket presence, makes two reads, throws all the passes with adequate zip, but somehow always leaves you wanting more. I think he reads short to deep, not deep to short. He looks like a clipboard will fit his hands for quite a few years into the future.

Caveat on these notes: North quarterbacks suffered from a poor pocket all day. South quarterbacks enjoyed a pristine pocket on most plays. Which is why using stats to break down this game is damn near useless.

A Little Story about Potential and Patience

One of the favorite tales to tell at the Super Bowl this week is Aaron Rodgers' rise to fame. His story has it all: College success, a precipitous drop in the draft, years of anonymity behind Mr. Madden's love child A.K.A. Brett Favre, the behind-the-scenes soap opera that played out with Mr. Favre and Ted Thompson with Rodgers stuck in the middle trying to say the right things, and Rodgers' meteoric success when he finally got his chance.

Now, the rest of the story. My apologies, Paul Harvey.

Aaron Rodgers fell in the draft because he had lots of potential, but during the draft process didn't show extremely well. His 6'2" stature didn't help, and he had very real mechanical issues in his delivery. His personality was off-putting to some. The 49ers, who had been watching his career from across the bay, reportedly passed on him because Mike Nolan thought the two of them would not get along.

It gets even more interesting.

Looking Back on 2010, Part 2: Daft Drafting

Continuing a series of posts re-capturing the moods, debates, and plot twists of Pete Carroll's first year in Seattle. You can find Part 1 here.


On draft day of 2010, Seattle fans turned on their televisions without any real idea of what to expect.

New head coach Pete Carroll had dashed onto the scene and made it clear at once that Seattle was moving into a new mentality, and that nobody's job was safe. He had followed his words with action by mowing a blazing personnel path through the tall dead grass that made up the Seattle Seahawks. Nate Burleson, Seneca Wallace, Darryl Tapp, Deon Grant, and Rob Sims were all gone. None of these were significantly responsible for Seattle's decline, but neither had they done much to stem that decline. Fans saw the radical changes in different ways - some called it moving forward and being willing to take risks, others saw a confidence in Carroll's plan, others called it "change for the sake of change" and observed that Seattle had obtained only mediocre free agents in return.