Undersized Defensive Linemen

[EKmane]

I wanted to raise the topic about if they can be effective. With the draft looming and our need to stay strong on the d line I've become really interested in this topic.

Two players I have in mind when I ask this Dominique Easley [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMhd__Dkoh0]Dominique Easley (DT Florida) vs Tennessee 2013 - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCDlbWHqjFA]Dominique Easley vs Louisville 2013 Sugar Bowl - YouTube[/ame]
(who has an acl tear right now)

and my favorite d lineman Aaron Donald [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C25r8eN44yA]Did You See That? | Aaron Donald vs Georgia Tech | PittLiveWire - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3YKvx6LcBs]Aaron Donald Highlights | 2013 Regular Season | PittLiveWire - YouTube[/ame]

I'm not sure if Donald would be there for us in the 2nd, how much of a mistake do any of you think it would be to spend our late 1st on him? He's going to shoot up draft boards during the draft process and will be a border 1/2 based on size (6'0 290).

To me, he could add weight and dominate at nose, plus move to the 3 tech when we run 4 man fronts.

What are some reasons people think/say that an undersized d lineman can't be effective, especially when they put up a monster tape?

I'm curious

 

[Smalls]

Another one to consider in this discussion is ASU's Will Sutton.

 

[BINGO]

None of those guys have anything on Nikita Whitlock. He embarrassed my Noles this year. The dude is a one man wrecking crew - simply...unblock-able:

Nikita Whitlock Bio - The Official Site of Wake Forest Demon Deacon Athletics

[YOUTUBE]_hiF-JRD-5A[/YOUTUBE]


[YOUTUBE]eZmYdg-NAF4[/YOUTUBE]

 

[supreme_clientele81]

I think it depends on what you mean by under sized. If you mean short I think it is an advantage since it would be hard for OLs to get leverage against them and as the football adage goes the low man wins. If you mean under weight that IMO is a disadvantage to a player since it could be hard for the player to keep the weight on during the season

 

[EKmane]

I think it depends on what you mean by under sized. If you mean short I think it is an advantage since it would be hard for OLs to get leverage against them and as the football adage goes the low man wins. If you mean under weight that IMO is a disadvantage to a player since it could be hard for the player to keep the weight on during the season

II mean in terms of what the "experts" call undersized. That is a term that is used when describing these guys. Donald has the best stats in NCAA for a d lineman, he's however pretty unknown because he's "undersized".

 

[Smalls]

Whitlock is only 250 lbs or so, right?

He looks awfully athletic (and undersized) for a DT. Could be a heck of a special teams player.

 

[EKmane]

Whitlock is only 250 lbs or so, right?

5'11 250. I think he's being projected more as a fb for the NFL.

 

[BINGO]

5'11 250. I think he's being projected more as a fb for the NFL.

I'd play him at end in our scheme as a reserve player. I would even slide him inside in occasions during our 4-men fronts. I think if we give him between 10-12 snaps on D and of course on special teams it would serve us well.

 

[Chamoanlad]

The main problem with being undersized is when they run into guys just as quick/atheletic as they are. Undersized guys can do great in college, but not so much in the NFL since the average quickness/athleticism is much better. Smaller guys also wear down quicker as they have to put in more effort on the lines to move or beat bigger guys on the line. The smaller guys better have a high motor. It also will depend on what role, defense, and type of technique they are expected to play.

In the 90's the 5"8-5"9 corner was pretty prevalent as well as the smaller (260-280), quicker lineman the 49ers used during their west coast days. There's always the exception to the rule (Steve Smith WR), but it's no coincidence that the bigger and more physical teams in the NFL (SF, Sea, Car) are becoming more and more dominant. It's the same template Alabama used when putting their championship teams together where they won't even bother recruiting certain guys if they don't fit the physical profile they have for each position.

For early rounds you want to draft impact players and starters, but there's nothing wrong with drafting guys in the later rounds that are big, strong, athletic, and dedicated to coach up.

 

[EKmane]

The main problem with being undersized is when they run into guys just as quick/atheletic as they are. Undersized guys can do great in college, but not so much in the NFL since the average quickness/athleticism is much better. Smaller guys also wear down quicker as they have to put in more effort on the lines to move or beat bigger guys on the line. The smaller guys better have a high motor. It also will depend on what role, defense, and type of technique they are expected to play.

In the 90's the 5"8-5"9 corner was pretty prevalent as well as the smaller (260-280), quicker lineman the 49ers used during their west coast days. There's always the exception to the rule (Steve Smith WR), but it's no coincidence that the bigger and more physical teams in the NFL (SF, Sea, Car) are becoming more and more dominant. It's the same template Alabama used when putting their championship teams together where they won't even bother recruiting certain guys if they don't fit the physical profile they have for each position.

For early rounds you want to draft impact players and starters, but there's nothing wrong with drafting guys in the later rounds that are big, strong, athletic, and dedicated to coach up.

My thoughts exactly. I like to see he BPA drafted early.

 

[Brasky]

I just remember LOL'ing extremely hard when the official PITT twitter account tried to compare Donald to Suh. Almost fell out of my chair.

 

[deep9er]

The main problem with being undersized is when they run into guys just as quick/atheletic as they are. Undersized guys can do great in college, but not so much in the NFL since the average quickness/athleticism is much better. Smaller guys also wear down quicker as they have to put in more effort on the lines to move or beat bigger guys on the line. The smaller guys better have a high motor. It also will depend on what role, defense, and type of technique they are expected to play.

In the 90's the 5"8-5"9 corner was pretty prevalent as well as the smaller (260-280), quicker lineman the 49ers used during their west coast days. There's always the exception to the rule (Steve Smith WR), but it's no coincidence that the bigger and more physical teams in the NFL (SF, Sea, Car) are becoming more and more dominant. It's the same template Alabama used when putting their championship teams together where they won't even bother recruiting certain guys if they don't fit the physical profile they have for each position.

For early rounds you want to draft impact players and starters, but there's nothing wrong with drafting guys in the later rounds that are big, strong, athletic, and dedicated to coach up.

Agree

 

[RobertPhD01]

Quinn going for 20 sacks next week! Go 49ers!!

 

[supreme_clientele81]

Quinn going for 20 sacks next week! Go 49ers!!

Wrong thread?

 

[RobertPhD01]

I thought he was an undersized lineman or linebackr in our scheme.

 

[deep9er]

Quinn going for 20 sacks next week! Go 49ers!!

well for next week only, break the sack record for all I care.

 

[Chamoanlad]

well for next week only, break the sack record for all I care.

He might. The Rams had 7 sacks the last time they played and the Seahawks oline is banged up. Russel Okung had to leave during the 2nd half of the Cards game because the same toe that caused him to miss games earlier in the year is flaring up again. Even if he plays he's not going to be able to push off that great for his run blocking.

The Seahawks as a team are banged up and would have loved to rest their guys for this game, but now they are all in and the Rams have a real chance to win this game. Patrick Peterson mentioned they studied the 49er and Ram games against the Seahawks to figure out a way to contain the Hawk offense so the Rams obviously have a really good feel for the Hawks.

We're not too far off from having the same problem against the Cards if we don't take care of business against the Falcons.

 

[deep9er]

He might. The Rams had 7 sacks the last time they played and the Seahawks oline is banged up. Russel Okung had to leave during the 2nd half of the Cards game because the same toe that caused him to miss games earlier in the year is flaring up again. Even if he plays he's not going to be able to push off that great for his run blocking.

The Seahawks as a team are banged up and would have loved to rest their guys for this game, but now they are all in and the Rams have a real chance to win this game. Patrick Peterson mentioned they studied the 49er and Ram games against the Seahawks to figure out a way to contain the Hawk offense so the Rams obviously have a really good feel for the Hawks.

We're not too far off from having the same problem against the Cards if we don't take care of business against the Falcons.

yep, everyone is focused on the Rams beating Seattle, but we have our own games to win. we should be fine tonight, but next week is another matter.

next week is a short week, a travel week, and against a good Cardinal team. the Cards are in play-off contention because they're "play-off good", it'll be a tough game no doubt.

 

[TobyTyler]

I want a big boy that you can't move out of there like Vince Wilfork.