PDA

View Full Version : Vernon Gholston


Oaktown1981
11-30-2007, 11:06 PM
Is he a better for for the 4-3 playing DE or 3-4 playing OLB.

Thanks

619
11-30-2007, 11:22 PM
undersized lineman so logic leads me to believe hes a better fit as a 3-4 OLB

BuddyCHRIST
12-01-2007, 01:33 AM
probably better for the 3-4 but he still could play in a 4-3. As he probably could add some weight

keylime_5
12-01-2007, 09:37 AM
He is very good against the run for his size. Could be a good LDE in a 4-3 or a LOLB in a 3-4. Of course he could definitely excel at RDE and ROLB too, but the fact that he can play the elephant position in a 34 and the weakside rush end in a 4-3 helps his value. Very similar to Shawne Merriman. I think his abilities as a pass rusher would be unleashed in a 3-4. I mean, if you have the ability to play standing up like Merriman or Ware (which he does), then you have more freedom to rush the passer and less responsibilities as a run defender, and your sack total potentially goes up since you can blitz from all 4 LB spots instead of just off the edge.

At 6-4/265-270 he has good size, and if you look at him and see how strong he is (I mean, he bullrushed Jake Long over in 2006) then it is clear that he doesn't need to bulk up any more, he is already at NFL size. I think he'll be a good Will Smith-esque player in the pros no matter what system. The best thing about him is that he can get you 14+ sacks and is great against the run.

BufFan71
12-01-2007, 09:42 AM
i think he could play DE in a 4-3
hes got enough strength, he could add some weight

keylime_5
12-01-2007, 09:46 AM
Like I said, they guy's about as maxed out as he can get. Any extra weight would certainly slow down his quickness a bit. I mean, he could play at about 280 just like Will Smith, but if he's in a cover 2 or in Philly or Baltimore then that's not necessary. It really depends on the system.

genom
12-01-2007, 10:19 AM
I love his ability to rush the passer but I really think he can improve at shedding blockers and stopping the run. I've also noticed he has a tendency to kind of give up so to speak on run plays that go the other way. With that said, I still want him with the Jets first round pick.

sodar21
12-01-2007, 12:23 PM
undersized lineman so logic leads me to believe hes a better fit as a 3-4 OLB

He is 6'4 265? There are plenty of 4-3 DEs of that size in the NFL.

BuddyCHRIST
12-01-2007, 01:15 PM
i didnt realize he was 265, i thought he was more like 250

JT Jag
12-01-2007, 08:45 PM
He would fit well in a Tampa Two as a DE at either side, and I think any team would love a guy like him blitzing off the right side as a defensive end. He may be a bit undersized to play left defensive end, traditionally the bigger everydown position... but Freeney plays LDE. (Though, by comparison, Mathis plays RDE)

Smokey Joe
12-01-2007, 09:10 PM
he would be a great fit for the steelers, IMO. He could play OLB for them when they are in 3-4, but with their gradual transition to the 4-3 cover 2, he would fit perfectly in at the DE spot, either side. But, the Steelers will not even be able to sniff him from where they will be picking.

I think Gholston's best fit is in the 4-3 as well. Just because a guy is a great pass rusher doesn't mean he has to be in the 3-4.

BufFan71
12-01-2007, 09:22 PM
Aaron Schobel is only 240lbs this year.... and he is nowhere near as strong or as athletic is gholston, so he can play DE in a 4-3

BroadwayJoe10
12-02-2007, 12:42 AM
Aaron Schobel is only 240lbs this year.... and he is nowhere near as strong or as athletic is gholston, so he can play DE in a 4-3

wow i didn't know he had cut down that much. I always thought of him as a solid 260 or high 250's. He is just so powerful and strong; im impressed.

DeathbyStat
12-02-2007, 09:13 AM
he would be a great fit for the steelers, IMO. He could play OLB for them when they are in 3-4, but with their gradual transition to the 4-3 cover 2, he would fit perfectly in at the DE spot, either side. But, the Steelers will not even be able to sniff him from where they will be picking.

I think Gholston's best fit is in the 4-3 as well. Just because a guy is a great pass rusher doesn't mean he has to be in the 3-4.

I would love him for the steelers but i think he will be gone.

ironman4579
12-02-2007, 09:49 AM
He would fit well in a Tampa Two as a DE at either side, and I think any team would love a guy like him blitzing off the right side as a defensive end. He may be a bit undersized to play left defensive end, traditionally the bigger everydown position... but Freeney plays LDE. (Though, by comparison, Mathis plays RDE)

Freeney is also listed at 6'1" 268. And I'm pretty sure he at least did play RDE, not LDE. He was certainly playing RDE in that big game against Ogden a couple years ago.

Young Legend
12-10-2007, 10:30 AM
i would love for Oakland to take this guy..i think he will be perfect guy to put on the other side of Burgess and take over for Burgess when his contract is up..

Babylon
12-10-2007, 12:15 PM
Would be more than happy to see Gholston or Lauranaitis in New England. Come on they need all the help they can get there.:)

keylime_5
12-10-2007, 12:24 PM
Size doesn't matter as much as strength and run defending technique, two things that Gholston is very gifted at. He'll probably be a LDE depending where he goes and the defense he plays in. He was a LE here, but played MLB, SLB, DT, and RE a lot too.

Mr. Stiller
12-10-2007, 12:44 PM
he would be a great fit for the steelers, IMO. He could play OLB for them when they are in 3-4, but with their gradual transition to the 4-3 cover 2, he would fit perfectly in at the DE spot, either side. But, the Steelers will not even be able to sniff him from where they will be picking.

I think Gholston's best fit is in the 4-3 as well. Just because a guy is a great pass rusher doesn't mean he has to be in the 3-4.

I love Gholston and if he's there in round 1, I take him.

However, we're not going to a 4-3 Cover 2 scheme.

I think if we did he and Woodley would make terrific bookends in there, but the fact remains, we're sticking a 3-4.. I don't know why everyone assumes that we're going 4-3.

foozball
12-10-2007, 01:17 PM
4-3 or 3-4...how bout both? he'd be best utilized in a defense that confuses offenses by switching between 4-3 and 3-4 during games. he's similar to guys like adalius thomas or terrell suggs in that he can rush from the DE or LB position, and you have to take advantage of that versatility. like i said before, if you just use him as a 4-3 or just a 3-4, you're not taking advantage of his wide array of skills/abilities.

ATLDirtyBirds
12-10-2007, 02:49 PM
I like him as a 4-3 RE.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 03:04 PM
First Hybrid DE/OLB selected in the draft.

draftguru151
12-10-2007, 03:37 PM
First Hybrid DE/OLB selected in the draft.

What happened to Crable?

foozball
12-10-2007, 03:52 PM
What happened to Crable?

he goes in the 2nd round?

ironman4579
12-10-2007, 04:33 PM
First Hybrid DE/OLB selected in the draft.

You've let me down D.

HoopsDemon12
12-10-2007, 04:44 PM
I think he is great 4-3 DE prospect, He has great strength and is girfted at shedding blockers and getting to the passer... i think he would thrive there

Smokey Joe
12-10-2007, 06:12 PM
I love Gholston and if he's there in round 1, I take him.

However, we're not going to a 4-3 Cover 2 scheme.

I think if we did he and Woodley would make terrific bookends in there, but the fact remains, we're sticking a 3-4.. I don't know why everyone assumes that we're going 4-3.
Because Tomlin is a cover 2 guy...

mpindo3
12-11-2007, 01:52 PM
vernon gholston is an animal, i don't particularly like ohio state, but just watching him scares me. i want to see him in jacksonville where he can wreak havoc along with their beastly line. I mean the guy bench presses in excess of 450 pounds and eats whole humans. if you don't like this guy you must be jake long.

BamaFalcon59
12-11-2007, 02:27 PM
http://menofthescarletandgray.com/wp-content/uploads/gholston.jpg

http://menofthescarletandgray.com/wp-content/uploads/gholston1.jpg

More athletic and swole looking than undersized.

benjamink15
12-11-2007, 02:48 PM
HOLY ****!!!!

BamaFalcon59
12-11-2007, 02:57 PM
Hehe

(10 characters)

mpindo3
12-11-2007, 03:14 PM
thank you for posting those pictures, i was tryin to figure out how to do it, i mean if that doesn't frighten your family for the next 5 generations something is wrong.

BroadwayJoe10
12-11-2007, 03:49 PM
thank you for posting those pictures, i was tryin to figure out how to do it, i mean if that doesn't frighten your family for the next 5 generations something is wrong.

you wanna talk about frightening and intimidating ya gotta check out this kid...An absolute specimen

http://www.hrcapitalist.com/images/2007/09/10/fatfootball.jpg

gholston ain't got nothing on him...

mpindo3
12-11-2007, 04:11 PM
ill give Vernon points for intimidation, but that guy definitely takes the cake for being an athletic specimen and a workout warrior

TACKLE
12-11-2007, 04:59 PM
The thing that bothers me is he is so spotty in his play. He is an absolute beast at times but then dissapears. He has 13 sacks but did not have a sack in 7 games this year. His athletic potentially is off the charts but his consistency is a big question mark in my mind.

Big_Pete
12-11-2007, 05:00 PM
could Gholston play SLB in a 4-3??

DChess
12-11-2007, 08:02 PM
i could see him playing 4-3 DE, i really dont understand why, had a sack against jake long last year, and it wasnt just any sack he had three michigan guys on his back. he may be undersized but hes pretty strong.

http://menofthescarletandgray.com/wp-content/uploads/gholston1.jpg

TACKLE
12-11-2007, 09:41 PM
i could see him playing 4-3 DE, i really dont understand why, had a sack against jake long last year, and it wasnt just any sack he had three michigan guys on his back. he may be undersized but hes pretty strong.

http://menofthescarletandgray.com/wp-content/uploads/gholston1.jpg

He's strong??? That picture is very missleading. He looks too thin and too weak to be playing DE in the NFL. lol.

gdamac
12-11-2007, 10:41 PM
I think he could help my Raiders shore up their run d, depends on where they end up picking. When he goes to the combine and sets the record for reps on the bench press his stock will continue to rise.

gdamac
12-11-2007, 10:48 PM
He's strong??? That picture is very missleading. He looks too thin and too weak to be playing DE in the NFL. lol.

He benches 475, he is strong. I think he can make a great OLB to go with Kirk Morrison and Thomas Howard.

Bench Press Source:
http://www.news-herald.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19025445&BRD=1698&PAG=461&dept_id=21848&rfi=6

aNYtitan
12-12-2007, 12:18 AM
The guy just looks he was made to be a defensive football player. Its like God hand picked his body parts to try and make the best physical specimen. I mean he looks like he would be able to take on top flight left tackles right now. I'm really starting to hope that the Titans can somehow find a way to latch onto this guy, even if it means trading. Him on the line with KVB, Haynesworth, and a DT clogging the lanes would make possibly one of the most intimidating front four in the league

gstock05
12-12-2007, 12:19 AM
The thing that bothers me is he is so spotty in his play. He is an absolute beast at times but then dissapears. He has 13 sacks but did not have a sack in 7 games this year. His athletic potentially is off the charts but his consistency is a big question mark in my mind.

I agree, but some of this is scheme oriented. He isn't strictly a defensive end. He plays the same position Bobby Carpenter played in 2005 known at OSU as the LEO position.

In short terms, it means he is responsible for dropping into coverage off the line a lot more often than people realize. He isn't always simply turned loose to attack the qb.

FWIW, Shawne Merriman only had in the ballpark of 9 sacks his senior year and he played a very similar position in college.

TACKLE
12-12-2007, 12:23 AM
He benches 475, he is strong. I think he can make a great OLB to go with Kirk Morrison and Thomas Howard.

Bench Press Source:
http://www.news-herald.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19025445&BRD=1698&PAG=461&dept_id=21848&rfi=6

It was a joke. Obviously he has freak strength. If Oakland picked him I think he would be more valuable at DE than OLB in a 4-3.

gdamac
12-12-2007, 01:44 AM
It was a joke. Obviously he has freak strength. If Oakland picked him I think he would be more valuable at DE than OLB in a 4-3.

Ahhh, a duhh! I get it now. Was it the "lol" that gave it away? My bad, thanks. You say better at DE in the 4-3, makes sense I was just throwing the LB thing out there. All I know is Oakland gives up 150 ypg, if he can help change that we should take him. We probably need a DT or OLB first though. But Gholston and Dre Moore might be a nice combo.

OzTitan
12-12-2007, 02:07 AM
Would be a very welcome fit on the Titans DL if we're picking in the right spot - I think he'll end up probably too early though.

Young Legend
12-12-2007, 08:34 AM
Ahhh, a duhh! I get it now. Was it the "lol" that gave it away? My bad, thanks. You say better at DE in the 4-3, makes sense I was just throwing the LB thing out there. All I know is Oakland gives up 150 ypg, if he can help change that we should take him. We probably need a DT or OLB first though. But Gholston and Dre Moore might be a nice combo.

put Gholston with Burgess damn!

Mr. Stiller
12-12-2007, 08:49 AM
Because Tomlin is a cover 2 guy...

And LeBeau is a 3-4 guy with... the #1 defense in the league...

OzTitan
12-12-2007, 09:41 AM
put Gholston with Burgess damn!

Not sure a traditional 4-3 D like Oakland run would suit two pass rushing DE's across from one another. The ideal partner for Burgess IMO is Chris Long.

Mr. Stiller
12-12-2007, 09:48 AM
Not sure a traditional 4-3 D like Oakland run would suit two pass rushing DE's across from one another. The ideal partner for Burgess IMO is Chris Long.

Burgess is playing SDE, why would they draft a kid suited to play SDE for WDE?

Gholston would probably be perfect across from him.

Or have they moved Burgess to the Weakside?

OzTitan
12-12-2007, 09:50 AM
I meant Long as SDE, Burgess as WDE. Not sure if he's there already but I like that configuration best personally.

mpindo3
12-12-2007, 11:54 AM
as much as i love the guy i just wanna say vernon davis.

derza222
12-12-2007, 12:06 PM
I meant Long as SDE, Burgess as WDE. Not sure if he's there already but I like that configuration best personally.

I think Long is way off the board by the time the Raiders pick, Gholston is still a nice fit and a much more realistic option for them IMO.

jetsfan0099
12-12-2007, 02:06 PM
I would love for the Jets to draft this guy, we really need a OLB, that is our biggest weakness, we dont have a pass rusher, Gholston would be perfect for us, he gives us some beef on our defense, and would add to a defense that already has a few young studs on it, like David Harris, Kerry Rhodes, Darrelle Revis, Jonathan Vilma. Either him or Chris Long I would take, if McFadden isnt on the board.

Young Legend
12-12-2007, 04:09 PM
Not sure a traditional 4-3 D like Oakland run would suit two pass rushing DE's across from one another. The ideal partner for Burgess IMO is Chris Long.

the raiders are not gonna be in position to draft.. long and rob ryan is on the hot seat seat right now..so there defense could change..

2 Pass rushing DE would work in Oakland cause getting pressure on the QB without blizting is big in oakland and its missing this year..and its not like Gholston is bad at run support

Bobo
12-12-2007, 05:42 PM
I agree, but some of this is scheme oriented. He isn't strictly a defensive end. He plays the same position Bobby Carpenter played in 2005 known at OSU as the LEO position.

In short terms, it means he is responsible for dropping into coverage off the line a lot more often than people realize. He isn't always simply turned loose to attack the qb.

FWIW, Shawne Merriman only had in the ballpark of 9 sacks his senior year and he played a very similar position in college.

I'm no OSU fan, I don't see every game. But I watched them this year for Gholston and Wells. I noticed Gholston not rushing the QB a lot. That fact leads me to believe his sacks starts are a little more impressive.