PDA

View Full Version : Quinn Pitcock


etk
03-09-2007, 04:06 PM
Many of you have mislabeled him as someone who can't be a UT and only fits as a NT. He is 6'3 299 and runs a 4.9 40, better than Okoye and others. His vertical was 34 inches, which was the 2nd best vertical in his group. Seems like he is pretty explosive and has a lot of potential to be a pass rusher based on those numbers. He struggled to pass rush at the Senior Bowl and his strongest suit is plugging the run, but I think we could easily convert him to be an effective UT. McFarland has played both for us and the Colts, it is not uncommon for a DT to have success at both.

My point is that you guys should keep an open mind about us drafting him. It wouldn't be a perfect fit, but it's not as bad as you may think.

Caddy
03-09-2007, 04:15 PM
He is a NT pure and simple. He is not an effective pass rusher so playing him at UT would be a poor decision for the Buccaneers.

One can argue that UT is the most important position in the Cover 2, and putting Pitcock there would be a poor decision. We need a guy who can rush the passer a lot more effectively than Pitcock, and we may not be able to get one in this years draft unless we somehow end up with Amobi Okoye.

Bucsfan
03-09-2007, 04:37 PM
We dont need him, he doesnt fit, plain and simple

etk
03-09-2007, 05:01 PM
We dont need him, he doesnt fit, plain and simple

You don't make your point well with comments like that. You can try explaining at least one of the several statements you have made with some basis to your arguments. Saying he doesn't fit and saying Weddle fits without any explanation does not cut it.

Caddy
03-09-2007, 05:13 PM
etk, what do you think about moving Chris Hovan back to UT like he used to play back in the day?

etk
03-09-2007, 05:26 PM
etk, what do you think about moving Chris Hovan back to UT like he used to play back in the day?

Ehh...I think we both know that wouldn't be his best fit, because like Pitcock he is much better at plugging and getting dirty. He's not a great pass rusher either so it's just not the best idea. If we drafted Pitcock it would be a tossup as to which one plays out-of-position, and both of them would be decent but unattractive.

Caddy
03-09-2007, 05:35 PM
We need to get an UT somehow. Ellis Wyms is just not going to cut it.

etk
03-09-2007, 05:37 PM
We need to get an UT somehow. Ellis Wyms is just not going to cut it.

He's a great backup, he always has been. We won't stop the run with Wyms playing UT for us. Carter will help in that department though.

TwOne
03-09-2007, 06:09 PM
Many of you have mislabeled him as someone who can't be a UT and only fits as a NT. He is 6'3 299 and runs a 4.9 40, better than Okoye and others. His vertical was 34 inches, which was the 2nd best vertical in his group. Seems like he is pretty explosive and has a lot of potential to be a pass rusher based on those numbers. He struggled to pass rush at the Senior Bowl and his strongest suit is plugging the run, but I think we could easily convert him to be an effective UT. McFarland has played both for us and the Colts, it is not uncommon for a DT to have success at both.

My point is that you guys should keep an open mind about us drafting him. It wouldn't be a perfect fit, but it's not as bad as you may think.the 40 is the most pointless workout for a defensive lineman.

Caddy
03-09-2007, 06:20 PM
the 40 is the most pointless workout for a defensive lineman.

Sure it doesn't mean everything, but a D-Lineman that runs a 5.9 forty isn't going to be very successful in the NFL

Tampa 2 4 life
03-09-2007, 06:46 PM
I think he would be a decent fit. We need all the help we can get.

Caddy
03-09-2007, 06:48 PM
we do need a lot of help, but not at the expense of improving positions of need

Booger
03-09-2007, 06:50 PM
McFarland has played both for us and the Colts, it is not uncommon for a DT to have success at both.


Im sorry, when did McFarland ever have any success playing NT or UT?

Caddy
03-09-2007, 06:55 PM
Im sorry, when did McFarland ever have any success playing NT or UT?

When we had Sapp

etk
03-09-2007, 07:34 PM
Im sorry, when did McFarland ever have any success playing NT or UT?

When we had Sapp, like cadillac said, and he played NT for the Colts after he got traded. I think that worked out pretty well, seeing the improvement in their defense and stopping the run once he was fully integrated.

etk
03-09-2007, 07:37 PM
the 40 is the most pointless workout for a defensive lineman.

It is not pointless, it is just used in combination with other combine numbers to determine the overall athleticism of a lineman. I was just trying to prove that he has the athleticism to be a fine UT, because pass rush skills can be taught.

Caddy
03-10-2007, 12:01 AM
It is not pointless, it is just used in combination with other combine numbers to determine the overall athleticism of a lineman. I was just trying to prove that he has the athleticism to be a fine UT, because pass rush skills can be taught.

After the 1st round DT's like Okoye, Branch and possibly Carriker, there is not really a dominant pass rushing under tackle anyway.

I think the only way we can get a consistent pass rush like we did when we had Sapp is to draft one in the 1st round next year. If guys like Okam and Dorsey show they can be a dominant pass rushing threats we may have a shot at them next year.

Bucsfan
03-10-2007, 03:47 AM
You don't make your point well with comments like that. You can try explaining at least one of the several statements you have made with some basis to your arguments. Saying he doesn't fit and saying Weddle fits without any explanation does not cut it.

I dont really need to explain something that 100 people already explained about pitcock......


Weddle fits cause he is versatile and is good in coverage, the kind of safety we need, and is a sure tackler, lacks in speed which is something somewhat typical of a cover 2 DB, not the fastest but not slow