Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor
grunt, you have got be kidding me, I have read some articles making a case for Gholston as a better prospect than Long as Long has been coached his whole life and is a top player, but gholston's ceiling is so much higher. Dorsey's stock has been slipping and I will go as far as giving a 100% on Oakland taking either Chris Long or Gholston as gholston could even be picked by the Rams. I really honestly don't think the Raiders would draft mcfadden with 7 backs on the team right now. Ellis is not ahead of gholston. They Raiders have built up their secondary in order to blitz more and try to pressure the QB more frequently. I think Long or Gholston would give them what they are looking for
|
You dont need a DE to blitz, and they have a pretty good pass rusher already in Burgess. Gholston's cieling may or may not be higher than Long's, but Long is better, lain and simple. Plus long has the ability to play DT in a 4-3, DE in a 4-3, DE in a 3-4, and OLB in a 3-4. Golston can play too. There is absoluty no way Gholston is a better prospect then Long. If Davis picks Gholston over Long, then thats officially it. But that point is moot as DT is much bigger need than DE. This is a team that struggles with the run and needs to fortifie the middle before anything else. They have Kelly and then a gaping hole at DT. I dont buy Dorsey slipping on bit, he is sliping in alot of mocks that mean absolutly nothing. He is probobly the second best player in the draft (after Long). Eliss is the consolation prize if Dorsey is gone. IMO the Raiders would be dumb to take an edge rusher who does little to help there real issue of run D