Which USC linebacker would you like the most and why?

I think their (Kiper and McCay) analysis is accurate. Cushing's fundamentals are highly questionable IMO. He often loses his feet and the point of contact and ends up dragging the RB down using his mass. In the NFL, especially the NFC east, bigger stronger opponents will shed him or run over him. I think he is the worst USC prospect and would be just floored if we take him at all.
Agreed, after seeing the USC pro day workout, these were my thoughts exactly..

Gary Fitzgerald of Redskins.com on which USC LB he would choose at #13. "I can see Maualuga as the next Brian Urlacher or Ray Lewis. The Redskins could play him at outside linebacker until London Fletcher is ready to retire or move on. Maualuga is also a fiery, intense leader and he is the kind of linebacker who can set the tone for a defense."

Gary Fitzgerald of Redskins.com on which USC LB he would choose at #13. "I can see Maualuga as the next Brian Urlacher or Ray Lewis. The Redskins could play him at outside linebacker until London Fletcher is ready to retire or move on. Maualuga is also a fiery, intense leader and he is the kind of linebacker who can set the tone for a defense."

A lot of people say this but it wouldn't matter what we think it's what the two and a half men that run the skins think of him...BTW if you get cox go to the on demand and go to the free zone the NFL network then go to draft and check out all the USC LBs profiles, it makes me want to get Matthews more judging by some of his picks

A lot of people say this but it wouldn't matter what we think it's what the two and a half men that run the skins think of him...BTW if you get cox go to the on demand and go to the free zone the NFL network then go to draft and check out all the USC LBs profiles, it makes me want to get Matthews more judging by some of his picks

I had on demand taken out because it seemed the local affiliate that carried the Skins games always went out around game time. I don't have a problem with Matthews or Maualuga. I like both better than Cushing. But why should I check it out anyway Nick if it doesn't matter what anyone thinks but the two and a half men that run the Skins? :)

I had on demand taken out because it seemed the local affiliate that carried the Skins games always went out around game time. I don't have a problem with Matthews or Maualuga. I like both better than Cushing. But why should I check it out anyway Nick if it doesn't matter what anyone thinks but the two and a half men that run the Skins? :)

Haha for your own imagination I guess, good point

Looking back on it I think we need to take a moment and see what happened during the 2000 draft. We had two early first round picks with two dominant college players that filled positions of need. The first guy was a dominant linebacker that free lanced a little more then most still he had the potential to dominate the game, some even compared him to Lawrence Taylor. The second guy was a potential franchise LT. Years later the talented Linebacker is gone while the LT continues to make a name for himself.

In light of this history leason I think we need to take the best available Tackle instead of any of a potential game changing LB. The situation just seems all to similar to 2000 minus the two first round picks. So if the pick boils down to Rey vs Oher or Smith then I think we go with whatever leftovers we get from the Big 4.

Looking back on it I think we need to take a moment and see what happened during the 2000 draft. We had two early first round picks with two dominant college players that filled positions of need. The first guy was a dominant linebacker that free lanced a little more then most still he had the potential to dominate the game, some even compared him to Lawrence Taylor. The second guy was a potential franchise LT. Years later the talented Linebacker is gone while the LT continues to make a name for himself.

In light of this history leason I think we need to take the best available Tackle instead of any of a potential game changing LB. The situation just seems all to similar to 2000 minus the two first round picks. So if the pick boils down to Rey vs Oher or Smith then I think we go with whatever leftovers we get from the Big 4.

Ya but lavar did give us a solid good 6 years here so I wouldn't say he was a busted or assume that you couldn't take an LB ever again in the first round

Most truly dominant LBs, especially MLBs are 1st rounders as are dominant LTs. Evaluating talent is the real issue. If teams like NE are seriously considering a trade up to draft Rey, or another player maybe, we ought to be taking a good look at that guy.

...mocks have Rey falling into the 20's. I will be more surprised by that than Vinny taking Sanchez at 13. The top MLB and hardest hitter in the draft, when teams like Denver, Jax, San Diego and a few others are desperate for a monster in the middle and pick early.

Ya but lavar did give us a solid good 6 years here so I wouldn't say he was a busted or assume that you couldn't take an LB ever again in the first round

I'm not saying he busted exactly. Well techincally by the standard a lot of people held him to he did but he was still a great player. My point is we've benefited much more from having Samuals during this time then we did from having LaVar. If we can find another Tackle then he'll probably last longer then a linebacker, especially a headhunter like Rey (not that thats a bad thing being a headhunter).

On top of that Rey has slight durability issues (4 on Scouts inc scale with 1 being the best). The two tackles we're looking at most closely, Oher and Smith, scored 1 and 2 respectively. It really is a similar situation except this time we don't have two picks to get both of them (LB and T).

Another similar situation to ours was the 2005 draft at pick 13. The Saints were choosing between Derick Johnson and Jamaal Brown. In the end they took the Tackle who ended up going to the pro bowl. Derrick Johnson has been good but he's not as good a LB as Brown is a Tackle. And I would have thought coming out of the draft that Johnson clearly would have been viewed as the better player, but you live and you learn.

Of course it doesn't always work this way. You got possibly a tie or win by AJ Hawk over D'Brickashaw Fergusion. And last year Jerod Mayo did better then Ryan Clady, though Clady still did very good. However those haven't gone through the time test that Lavar vs Samuals went through.

So when you Lobby this April, lobby for a tackle. They last longer.

I'm not saying he busted exactly. Well techincally by the standard a lot of people held him to he did but he was still a great player. My point is we've benefited much more from having Samuals during this time then we did from having LaVar. If we can find another Tackle then he'll probably last longer then a linebacker, especially a headhunter like Rey (not that thats a bad thing being a headhunter).

On top of that Rey has slight durability issues (4 on Scouts inc scale with 1 being the best). The two tackles we're looking at most closely, Oher and Smith, scored 1 and 2 respectively. It really is a similar situation except this time we don't have two picks to get both of them (LB and T).

Another similar situation to ours was the 2005 draft at pick 13. The Saints were choosing between Derick Johnson and Jamaal Brown. In the end they took the Tackle who ended up going to the pro bowl. Derrick Johnson has been good but he's not as good a LB as Brown is a Tackle. And I would have thought coming out of the draft that Johnson clearly would have been viewed as the better player, but you live and you learn.

Of course it doesn't always work this way. You got possibly a tie or win by AJ Hawk over D'Brickashaw Fergusion. And last year Jerod Mayo did better then Ryan Clady, though Clady still did very good. However those haven't gone through the time test that Lavar vs Samuals went through.

So when you Lobby this April, lobby for a tackle. They last longer.

Very good point, go LT first