PDA

View Full Version : Could Jake Long be the 2nd OT taken?????


SuperKevin
10-10-2007, 01:29 AM
There are very heavy rumors flying out of Norman that junior LT Phil Loadholt is considering declaring for the NFL Draft after only one season at Oklahoma. The two time JUCO All-American(and likely All American this year) is a monster at 6'7" 350 and has much better athleticism than Long. Scouts have already claimed Loadholt carries a first round grade and with strong workouts I feel he may become a top 5 pick. In my opinion he's a better pass blocker than Long and only slightly weaker in run blocking. The fact that he completely neutralized Calais Campbell earlier this year is huge.

What do you all think? Do you think Loadholt can skyrocket up the draft boards and get drafted ahead of Long based on potential rather than proven ability?

Don Vito
10-10-2007, 01:53 AM
Long would have to do a lot to not be the first OL taken between his performance, size, and strength. Loadholt is an absloute mammoth and a freak for his size who has been dominant, but Long has been dominating for a lot longer than Loadholt. But crazier things have happened when the combine rolls around.

toonsterwu
10-10-2007, 01:53 AM
Short answer, I think there's a decent chance that Long isn't the first OT off the board. He seems a very trendy pick right now, but I don't think Long is in the same class as a Ferguson or THomas of recent vintage. Not that he isn't more polished, but just that his pass protection skills are what they are, and they don't seem to be that of an elite LT. That said, I do think he could work as a LT in some schemes.

Admittedly, I haven't seen much of Loadholt this year. I'm excited and wary. When you have that size/athleticism combination, it is always quite tempting. But I really haven't seen enough to make a fair judgement so I won't. That said, talent wise, I think I like Clady and Oher better than Jake Long as well, but the former has been inconsistent this year, and last I checked the rumors, it seemed that the latter was supposedly leaning towards staying.

As of now, I've got Jake Long as a 6-10 big board. He could stay in that range, but it wouldn't surprise me if he slid down to the 10-15 range if other guys emerge down the stretch. I try to mock on projection, but that said, as of now, it's hard to see someone emerging to nab that top spot, but the season's only half done, so a lot can happen down the stretch, and during the combine season.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-10-2007, 03:15 AM
I don't think that it will even take Loadholt to open up the possibility of Long not being the first offensive lineman taken. I'm not sure how many teams are going to be so sure that Long is a future LT that they're going to be willing to invest that top 5 cash in him.

A strong finish of the season by Clady and possibly Oher would open the possibility wide open.

WMD
10-10-2007, 04:13 AM
Yeah, I don't think it's much of a stretch to think Jake Long won't be the first OT taken.. My guess would be Oher.. and if Loadholt came out, he could sneak ahead of Long too.. he's just a monster.

Smokey Joe
10-10-2007, 07:56 AM
right now the only big knock I can see on Loadholt is that he isn't as polished and would have only 1 year vs. top competition.

doingthisinsteadofwork
10-10-2007, 10:02 AM
The draft is so far away anything can happen.Its very possible he wont be the 1st OT taken.

Mr. Stiller
10-10-2007, 10:25 AM
Short answer, I think there's a decent chance that Long isn't the first OT off the board. He seems a very trendy pick right now, but I don't think Long is in the same class as a Ferguson or THomas of recent vintage. Not that he isn't more polished, but just that his pass protection skills are what they are, and they don't seem to be that of an elite LT. That said, I do think he could work as a LT in some schemes.

Admittedly, I haven't seen much of Loadholt this year. I'm excited and wary. When you have that size/athleticism combination, it is always quite tempting. But I really haven't seen enough to make a fair judgement so I won't. That said, talent wise, I think I like Clady and Oher better than Jake Long as well, but the former has been inconsistent this year, and last I checked the rumors, it seemed that the latter was supposedly leaning towards staying.

As of now, I've got Jake Long as a 6-10 big board. He could stay in that range, but it wouldn't surprise me if he slid down to the 10-15 range if other guys emerge down the stretch. I try to mock on projection, but that said, as of now, it's hard to see someone emerging to nab that top spot, but the season's only half done, so a lot can happen down the stretch, and during the combine season.

I love Loadholt's athleticism, but then again, everyone thought Leonard Davis would be the end-all be all at LT when he came out of Texas that big.

Took until he moved to LG to be very effective.

Turtlepower
10-10-2007, 10:39 AM
I still think Sam Baker is better than Long. Baker might not have the same measurements, but I bet you that if they both choose to go to the Senior Bowl, Baker will outshine Long.

Geo
10-10-2007, 10:43 AM
Long is still the top tackle in my eyes, we'll see who comes out and what becomes of it.

Iamcanadian
10-10-2007, 10:54 AM
Anybody who thinks the current ranking mean anything just hasn't watched the draft long enough. Even pro scouts don't have much written in stone until the combine or personnel workouts. Long could be drafted anywhere after pro teams work him out to gage his abilities. He could drop, he could remain where he is or he could move up but none of that will be settled by watching him play against inferior college players. He'll have to show in the post season just how good he is.
As for Phil Loadholt, he hasn't played enough to get serious top 10 consideration. Is he too fat, can he handle small speedy pass rushers at 360lbs, does he have real quick feet. He's played against 1 decent pro prospect who may not go as high as people were projecting. People are just in love with Loadholt because of his size but size alone won't make you a pro.
We'll need to see a lot more of him before we can determine how good he can be.

keylime_5
10-10-2007, 10:57 AM
If we had Long, Loadholt, Clady, Baker, Oher, and Cherilus in the same draft then someone would get a heck of a value in a franchise left tackle in late round 1 or early round 2.

Long should definitely be the first tackle taken. Heck, I got him going #1 overall to Miami in my last mock.

Turtlepower
10-10-2007, 10:59 AM
If we had Long, Loadholt, Clady, Baker, Oher, and Cherilus in the same draft then someone would get a heck of a value in a franchise left tackle in late round 1 or early round 2.

Long should definitely be the first tackle taken. Heck, I got him going #1 overall to Miami in my last mock.

I think that Chris Williams, will end up being the valued OT in the 2nd.

toonsterwu
10-10-2007, 02:24 PM
I love Loadholt's athleticism, but then again, everyone thought Leonard Davis would be the end-all be all at LT when he came out of Texas that big.

Took until he moved to LG to be very effective.

I was thinking of, at least at similar points, of another big boy in Mike Williams.

CARDIAC CAT 7
10-10-2007, 03:59 PM
I still think Sam Baker is better than Long. Baker might not have the same measurements, but I bet you that if they both choose to go to the Senior Bowl, Baker will outshine Long.

Agreed Baker is a much better Pass Blocker than Long , everyone is looking for that great weakside pass blocker not the big clear a path run blocker. Just ask Palmer and Leinart why they love USC, they got all day to throw to all those weapons.(not saying hes the only good blocker from USC but hes defintly the best in the past decade for USC).

PACKmanN
10-10-2007, 04:42 PM
Sam Barker doesn't have the height to play OT. He listed at 6'5 and a lot of Colleges love to make there players look taller on sites but really are shorter.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-10-2007, 04:51 PM
Sam Barker doesn't have the height to play OT. He listed at 6'5 and a lot of Colleges love to make there players look taller on sites but really are shorter.

http://www.trojanwire.com/images/sam_baker_playboy_2007.jpg

He looks plenty tall enough here.

Windy
10-10-2007, 04:52 PM
Sam Barker doesn't have the height to play OT. He listed at 6'5 and a lot of Colleges love to make there players look taller on sites but really are shorter.

what are you talking about? do you think he's 6'2 or something?

Turtlepower
10-10-2007, 04:54 PM
Sam Barker doesn't have the height to play OT. He listed at 6'5 and a lot of Colleges love to make there players look taller on sites but really are shorter.

I guess Walter Jones who is listed as 6'5 doesn't have the height either...

Sniper
10-10-2007, 04:59 PM
Could be, depends on what team has the pick. It's not like Jake is exactly a crappy pass blocker. He's very good, but he's unreal in run blocking.

etk
10-10-2007, 06:02 PM
http://www.trojanwire.com/images/sam_baker_playboy_2007.jpg

He looks plenty tall enough here.

That's Corey Clark on the left right? He's supposed to be taller than Baker...

Anyway, the immediate answer to this question is an emphatic yes. Long could end up as the 5th OT taken, behind Loadholt, Clady, Baker & Oher. I think he's slightly behind Loadholt and slightly ahead of the other 3, but if all the Juniors declare expect some shuffling to happen. One thing to consider is that Long will have the opportunity to showcase himself at the Senior Bowl. That will be huge as he will not be able to hide his pass blocking, and a good showing will likely guarantee him a top-10 spot.

Edit: Another thing...look how athletic Clady's legs are. That's unbelievable for an offensive lineman.

Michigan
10-10-2007, 06:31 PM
Edit: Another thing...look how athletic Clady's legs are. That's unbelievable for an offensive lineman.

Athletic? How about wiry? I'd want a lineman with tree trunk lower body strength.

Also, Jake Long has been superb in pass-blocking this year...

P-L
10-10-2007, 06:37 PM
Why do people make it seem like Long is a bad pass blocker? Certainly he isn't an elite pass blocker, like D'Brickashaw Ferguson was, but he isn't a liability like people make it sound. As a Michigan fan I've felt completely comfortable with him in pass protection. He may not be an elite pass blocker, but he's much more than adequate.

With that said, I don't think he's a lock for the #1 OT off the board, he could potentially be as low as the thirs OT off the board. It will all depend on how the three top juniors play from now until the end of the year, and how well they perform at the combine.

Green Bay Scat
10-10-2007, 06:45 PM
Athletic? How about wiry? I'd want a lineman with tree trunk lower body strength.

Also, Jake Long has been superb in pass-blocking this year...

legs dont really matter, now a big ass, thats what u look for, its great for balancing, and helps keep ur Center of Gravity lower, all great Lineman have HUGE asses......no **** X 10

darnik44two
10-10-2007, 07:00 PM
If Loadholt goes ahead of Long, Long will be the 3rd OT taken. Sam Baker will be the first OT off the board.

Sniper
10-10-2007, 07:00 PM
If Loadholt goes ahead of Long, Long will be the 3rd OT taken. Sam Baker will be the first OT off the board.

Depending on who has the pick.

P-L
10-10-2007, 07:10 PM
Everything I've seen and read has Sam Baker's stock falling a little bit. Scott called Sam Baker "a reach" at #9 in his latest mock and just everywhere around it seems like Baker isn't being rated as highly as he was before the season. I'll admit that Baker has looked fine when I've watched him this season, but after seeing him in the top 8, with many places putting him in the top 5, I'm starting to see him in the 10-15 range more and more.

DoWnThEfiElD
10-10-2007, 07:17 PM
If both do the Senior Bowl their performance there will probably end up deciding the seeding between Long and Baker.

619
10-10-2007, 07:28 PM
loadholt is gonna make the same push around this time of year til draft day that J-Roc did last year..in the end top 5 pick

darnik44two
10-10-2007, 07:50 PM
With a few underclassmen the OT class could be terrific. I see 10-12 very solid OT's out there. Sam Baker, Jake Long, Phil Loadholt, Tony Hills, Gosder Cheriolus, Ryan Clady, Barry Richardson, Jeff Otah, Chris Williams, Kirk Barton...

toonsterwu
10-10-2007, 08:03 PM
Everything I've seen and read has Sam Baker's stock falling a little bit. Scott called Sam Baker "a reach" at #9 in his latest mock and just everywhere around it seems like Baker isn't being rated as highly as he was before the season. I'll admit that Baker has looked fine when I've watched him this season, but after seeing him in the top 8, with many places putting him in the top 5, I'm starting to see him in the 10-15 range more and more.

I'm a huge fan of Baker's, and at the end of last season, I tentatively put him ahead of Long. but, while he's been good, he hasn't been dominant in many respects, and I've got Long ahead of him. I could see a team going with Baker ahead of Long, though, depending on the circumstances.

marks01234
10-10-2007, 10:05 PM
I'm a huge fan of Baker's, and at the end of last season, I tentatively put him ahead of Long. but, while he's been good, he hasn't been dominant in many respects, and I've got Long ahead of him. I could see a team going with Baker ahead of Long, though, depending on the circumstances.

I'm still waiting for Baker to dominated a college game. I haven't seen it yet. He had some trouble handling Standford's DL. I think he ends up a mid-first rounder after a marginal combine.

Toons, What is your thoughts on Tony Hill? He's my early pick to slide into the late first round. He's still developing but man his athleticism is tempting.

Overall, I love this OT draft class. A lot of teams should have the chance to get a quality starter in the late first, early second.

draftguru151
10-10-2007, 10:09 PM
I've been disappointed in Baker this year. He's still great vs speed guys and he moves great, but he's been playing way to high in both the run and pass game. He certainly isn't the dominant pass blocker that he is supposed to be, and the gap isn't big enough between Long in that aspect of their games to have Long below him anymore IMO. I've never liked either as a dominant OT prospect but I thought Baker would be a very good LT, and I'm not even seeing that from him. Before the season is over Baker can definitely be back on top, but he needs to play at the level people were expecting.

toonsterwu
10-11-2007, 01:48 AM
I'm still waiting for Baker to dominated a college game. I haven't seen it yet. He had some trouble handling Standford's DL. I think he ends up a mid-first rounder after a marginal combine.

Toons, What is your thoughts on Tony Hill? He's my early pick to slide into the late first round. He's still developing but man his athleticism is tempting.

Overall, I love this OT draft class. A lot of teams should have the chance to get a quality starter in the late first, early second.

I like what I've seen out of Hills in regards to his development. Still a ways to go, but short of it, yeah I could see him late first (had him late first in a recent mock). The athletic tools are there, although the consistency comes and goes in some respects. In the sense that both are unfinished products, he somewhat reminds me of Mihkel Roos (not that they are similar in playing style or build, as they aren't), which is the issue on draft value in some respects. Considering the money, I could see teams deciding that Hills needs more time, and as a result, back off of him and see him be basically where he is now, 2nd/3rd round.

That said, only time will tell.

Shiver
10-11-2007, 02:02 AM
I've been disappointed in Baker this year. He's still great vs speed guys and he moves great, but he's been playing way to high in both the run and pass game. He certainly isn't the dominant pass blocker that he is supposed to be, and the gap isn't big enough between Long in that aspect of their games to have Long below him anymore IMO. I've never liked either as a dominant OT prospect but I thought Baker would be a very good LT, and I'm not even seeing that from him. Before the season is over Baker can definitely be back on top, but he needs to play at the level people were expecting.


I remember when UCLA's ends dominated him last year. That kind of scared me off of him.

draftguru151
10-11-2007, 09:16 AM
Not sure but I think he only gave up one sack that game, and it was on an inside move, so while he did struggle that game, it was more of technique than talent. He still has a great kick step and doesn't get beat upfield, but right now almost anyone can just bullrush him so it doesn't really matter.

Sniper
10-11-2007, 09:51 AM
Not sure but I think he only gave up one sack that game, and it was on an inside move, so while he did struggle that game, it was more of technique than talent. He still has a great kick step and doesn't get beat upfield, but right now almost anyone can just bullrush him so it doesn't really matter.

Yeah I think you're right about the one sack, but I remember him being quoted saying they also caused him to false start a couple times and he just looked brutal in general.

bigbluedefense
10-12-2007, 01:42 PM
There are very heavy rumors flying out of Norman that junior LT Phil Loadholt is considering declaring for the NFL Draft after only one season at Oklahoma. The two time JUCO All-American(and likely All American this year) is a monster at 6'7" 350 and has much better athleticism than Long. Scouts have already claimed Loadholt carries a first round grade and with strong workouts I feel he may become a top 5 pick. In my opinion he's a better pass blocker than Long and only slightly weaker in run blocking. The fact that he completely neutralized Calais Campbell earlier this year is huge.

What do you all think? Do you think Loadholt can skyrocket up the draft boards and get drafted ahead of Long based on potential rather than proven ability?

Yes absolutely. Most of us on the Giants board have Loadholt as the #1 LT in college football.

Id take him over Long and not think twice about it.

villagewarrior
10-12-2007, 04:13 PM
legs dont really matter, now a big ass, thats what u look for, its great for balancing, and helps keep ur Center of Gravity lower, all great Lineman have HUGE asses......no **** X 10

I both agree and disagree with this statement. The posterior is important, but the legs are as well. An O-Lineman's legs should be thick if for no other reason than to protect against being rolled up. I'm afraid that Clady's leg will snap if a running back falls on him. Not to mention it's hard to see how much functional lower body strength he could have.