EDGE Prospect Talk: Tremaine Edmunds

[UOK]

If it involves taking Edmunds at 8, I consider it off to a poor start.

[G08]

If it involves taking Edmunds at 8, I consider it off to a poor start.

Prepare to be disappointed, my frent!

[UOK]

If it involves taking Edmunds at 8, I consider it off to a poor start.

Prepare to be disappointed, my frent!

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

Great review of Edmunds.

Tremaine Edmunds

Per this evaluation, if he's coachable, Fangio could turn him into a monster.

[G08]

Great review of Edmunds.

Tremaine Edmunds

Per this evaluation, if he's coachable, Fangio could turn him into a monster.

Yup. Tremaine Edmunds is a 19 year old athletic freak who you will have to project into the NFL. Bring him in on a visit, if Fangio and his staff love him, draft him.

I mean for crying out loud, he made CHRISTIAN JONES(!!!) look like a good player and got him paid.

[wab]

Great review of Edmunds.

Tremaine Edmunds

Per this evaluation, if he's coachable, Fangio could turn him into a monster.

Yup. Tremaine Edmunds is a 19 year old athletic freak who you will have to project into the NFL. Bring him in on a visit, if Fangio and his staff love him, draft him.

I mean for crying out loud, he made CHRISTIAN JONES(!!!) look like a good player and got him paid.

To that end, if he can do that with Christian Jones, then why does he need to take a player in the top 10? Plus, Edmunds is (IMO) too similar to Floyd.

I love Edmunds, I just don't know if he's right for the Bears.

[G08]

Great review of Edmunds.

Tremaine Edmunds

Per this evaluation, if he's coachable, Fangio could turn him into a monster.

Yup. Tremaine Edmunds is a 19 year old athletic freak who you will have to project into the NFL. Bring him in on a visit, if Fangio and his staff love him, draft him.

I mean for crying out loud, he made CHRISTIAN JONES(!!!) look like a good player and got him paid.

To that end, if he can do that with Christian Jones, then why does he need to take a player in the top 10? Plus, Edmunds is (IMO) too similar to Floyd.

I love Edmunds, I just don't know if he's right for the Bears.

Because dudes his height, weight, speed and length do not come around very often. He's explosive on "tape", he can cover slot WRs, he can cover TEs, and he can carry RBs up the seam. That's elite (and rare) versatility.

[wab]

Again. I love Edmunds. If they take him I'll be happy. I'm just saying he's not the only option.

[bearsfaninaz]

Why not go Edmunds in ilb and get someone like Armstrong or Carter in the 4th? Or Sweat it he's there in the 2nd?

[G08]

Again. I love Edmunds. If they take him I'll be happy. I'm just saying he's not the only option.

I get it man, I just think this kid is a rare ball of clay for our coaches to mold. In the past I'd say we could never do that (*cough* Bob Babich *cough*) but I completely trust Vic Fangio in every-single-facet that comes to working with/coaching up linebackers.

[wab]

So honest question...what does he give you that Floyd doesn't? And are you comfortable having two of essentially the same guy? Three if you count Lynch (when in shape).

[UOK]

So honest question...what does he give you that Floyd doesn't? And are you comfortable having two of essentially the same guy? Three if you count Lynch (when in shape).

I'll try to see it from his perspective - adding Edmunds may take a year or two to harness his ability and refine his technique, but if what you get on the other end is Brian Urlacher, that obviously is the optimal outcome. It'd be the more athletic, more sack-savvy version of Urlacher and Briggs.

The downside? He could be Amobi Okoye.

[G08]

So honest question...what does he give you that Floyd doesn't? And are you comfortable having two of essentially the same guy? Three if you count Lynch (when in shape).

They're very similar, which is what I love. When you had Floyd and McPhee on the field you pretty much knew the majority of the time McPhee was coming and if anyone was dropping into coverage with was Floyd. There were times Floyd was in coverage 15-20 yards downfield -- why telegraph something like that when your team is being scouted?

I think that you can do the exact same thing with Edmunds -- versatility is the key to today's NFL, IMO. You don't have to sacrifice size/strength when you go to nickel and you don't have to give up coverage ability when you stay in base. Want to come out in 12 personnel and flex out your athletic TE? No problem -- I don't have to go into nickel and have a 5'10" corner covering a 6'6" TE -- I'll just stick Floyd or Edmunds on him and send the other one screaming at you off the edge.

With two 6'5", long and athletic linebackers on the field at all times, the things Fangio can do schematically is endless. That is a tremendous selling point to me -- and this is all without even taking into account how good of a pass rusher I think this kid can be with more strength and improved technique. I can go on and on and on, if you want to deploy 4-2-5 you have two huge, long, speedy linebackers who can cover the middle of the field for you while you have your pass rushers pin their ears back and gun after the QB. You're not going to have a huge window in the middle of the field with those two dudes roaming around (and this isn't even including someone like Eddie Jackson at safety who does a great job of reading/processing route progressions).

Edmunds is a grand-slam if you hit on him, IMO. He does so much for your defense if you have a coordinator who knows how to use that versatility (and I whole-heartedly believe we do).

[Mikefive]

So honest question...what does he give you that Floyd doesn't? And are you comfortable having two of essentially the same guy? Three if you count Lynch (when in shape).

My answer is... strength and flexibility. He has strength that Floyd just doesn't have and never will have with his skinny body. He would be tremendous in a 4-3 like sub-package at ILB dropping in coverage. Or if a RB was a difficult out of the backfield threat, you'd want Edmunds on him, not Floyd. You could rotate him to 3-4 ILB and rush him from there, which probably wouldn't be as advisable with Floyd. Of course, that's all just more things to learn for him.

That said, he's scary bad at fundamentals right now outside of maybe pass coverage.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

So honest question...what does he give you that Floyd doesn't? And are you comfortable having two of essentially the same guy? Three if you count Lynch (when in shape).

They're very similar, which is what I love. When you had Floyd and McPhee on the field you pretty much knew the majority of the time McPhee was coming and if anyone was dropping into coverage with was Floyd. There were times Floyd was in coverage 15-20 yards downfield -- why telegraph something like that when your team is being scouted?

I think that you can do the exact same thing with Edmunds -- versatility is the key to today's NFL, IMO. You don't have to sacrifice size/strength when you go to nickel and you don't have to give up coverage ability when you stay in base. Want to come out in 12 personnel and flex out your athletic TE? No problem -- I don't have to go into nickel and have a 5'10" corner covering a 6'6" TE -- I'll just stick Floyd or Edmunds on him and send the other one screaming at you off the edge.

With two 6'5", long and athletic linebackers on the field at all times, the things Fangio can do schematically is endless. That is a tremendous selling point to me -- and this is all without even taking into account how good of a pass rusher I think this kid can be with more strength and improved technique. I can go on and on and on, if you want to deploy 4-2-5 you have two huge, long, speedy linebackers who can cover the middle of the field for you while you have your pass rushers pin their ears back and gun after the QB. You're not going to have a huge window in the middle of the field with those two dudes roaming around (and this isn't even including someone like Eddie Jackson at safety who does a great job of reading/processing route progressions).

Edmunds is a grand-slam if you hit on him, IMO. He does so much for your defense if you have a coordinator who knows how to use that versatility (and I whole-heartedly believe we do).

It's a very compelling argument. And you are 100% right. When it was Floyd and McPhee on the field, there was no question who was going to be the one to drop into coverage, and that puts you as a defense, at an immediate disadvantage. Personally I don't think they are as similar as WAB is making them out to be. I don't see Floyd having the upside as a sideline-to-sideline LB that Edmunds has. But I see his point coming off the edge.

[wab]

My thoughts on Edmunds (as an Edmunds fan)

1 - I don't think it's fair to say he's not as raw as Davenport.
2 - I think he's a part time pass rusher and coverage guy for two years
3 - He's my guy if Nelson is gone
4 - I agree with G08 in that it frees up Fangio to do more than he could with McPhee or Houston on the field opposite Floyd
5 - I think he's more talented than Floyd.
6 - I hate taking part time players in the top 10, and if they were to pass on Nelson for him I might be upset
7 - We are making a massive assumption that he can learn how to play football beyond being athletic

[mmmc_35]

I don't have time to address all 7 wab, but

He is athletic enough to not even need to learn how to play football and still be pretty good.

[G08]

I think they're raw in different ways. Sometimes Davenport is rushing the passer and he just looks like a bull in a china shop, other times he looks like he has a solid understanding of what he's doing with his hands and his feet; inconsistency is his game. I don't think he'd be doing anything exotic in coverage so for him it would really just be working on his technique.

Edmunds brings more to the table because he's done a lot more; he's had success playing ILB, reading his run/pass keys, reading linemen (albeit incorrectly at times) and finding the football, spying the QB, covering the slot and RBs out of the flat, etc -- the kid has a football foundation. What he needs to work on is his technique for rushing the passer (just like Davenport). The major difference is if/when Fangio wants to throw in some wrinkles, he'll have a 19 year old kid that has 26 games or so of playing ILB in a 4-2-5 scheme.

[Mikefive]

I think they're raw in different ways. Sometimes Davenport is rushing the passer and he just looks like a bull in a china shop, other times he looks like he has a solid understanding of what he's doing with his hands and his feet; inconsistency is his game. I don't think he'd be doing anything exotic in coverage so for him it would really just be working on his technique.

Edmunds brings more to the table because he's done a lot more; he's had success playing ILB, reading his run/pass keys, reading linemen (albeit incorrectly at times) and finding the football, spying the QB, covering the slot and RBs out of the flat, etc -- the kid has a football foundation. What he needs to work on is his technique for rushing the passer (just like Davenport). The major difference is if/when Fangio wants to throw in some wrinkles, he'll have a 19 year old kid that has 26 games or so of playing ILB in a 4-2-5 scheme.

That's a pretty optimistic view. His play reads are really REALLY rough. That he has experience with it isn't that helpful if he's so poor at it.

[Rusty Trombagent]

My thoughts on Edmunds (as an Edmunds fan)

1 - I don't think it's fair to say he's not as raw as Davenport.
2 - I think he's a part time pass rusher and coverage guy for two years
3 - He's my guy if Nelson is gone
4 - I agree with G08 in that it frees up Fangio to do more than he could with McPhee or Houston on the field opposite Floyd
5 - I think he's more talented than Floyd.
6 - I hate taking part time players in the top 10, and if they were to pass on Nelson for him I might be upset
7 - We are making a massive assumption that he can learn how to play football beyond being athletic

WAB... welcome to the #resistance.

[G08]

I think they're raw in different ways. Sometimes Davenport is rushing the passer and he just looks like a bull in a china shop, other times he looks like he has a solid understanding of what he's doing with his hands and his feet; inconsistency is his game. I don't think he'd be doing anything exotic in coverage so for him it would really just be working on his technique.

Edmunds brings more to the table because he's done a lot more; he's had success playing ILB, reading his run/pass keys, reading linemen (albeit incorrectly at times) and finding the football, spying the QB, covering the slot and RBs out of the flat, etc -- the kid has a football foundation. What he needs to work on is his technique for rushing the passer (just like Davenport). The major difference is if/when Fangio wants to throw in some wrinkles, he'll have a 19 year old kid that has 26 games or so of playing ILB in a 4-2-5 scheme.

That's a pretty optimistic view. His play reads are really REALLY rough. That he has experience with it isn't that helpful if he's so poor at it.

I think it's being overblown, truthfully. You don't accumulate that many TFLs in a season if you don't know what you're doing.

[UOK]

[Mikefive]

I was thinking in the shower this morning...

Consider the matchup you'd have with Edmunds on TEs. The guy can run with any TE in the league and probably better than most. In the pass game, TEs would have no body size, height advantage that they normally have against much smaller, shorter safeties. And in the run game, if a safety is man up with a TE, he's going to lose that battle unless he can win with anticipation, which is difficult to do. But man up with Edmunds, it has to be a 100% solid block or forget it. And if Edmunds gets any advantage at all it's a losing proposition.

Of course early on, Edmunds would have the subtleties of the game disadvantage. But once he picked up the nuances of defending NFL receivers, oh man.

I don't know if a team would ever defend TEs with Edmunds on a TE. But they surely could. How interesting and different would that be? It would radically change the size of your defense, allowing you to put an extra 250# guy in place of a 205# safety in the right package.

[EricTighe]

Hey Mike you were thinking it cause it already has been posted .

Damn I am glad UOK isn't Pace.

Not even if Buffalo calls and offers 12 and 22 for 8?

[Mikefive]

Hey Mike you were thinking it cause it already has been posted .

I don't remember that. But anything's possible at my age.

[G08]

Hey Mike you were thinking it cause it already has been posted .

I don't remember that. But anything's possible at my age.

http://www.bearsfansonline.com/forum/vi ... am#p199785" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mate

[EricTighe]

told ya ole guy

[wab]

More…

[Hema2.0]

This guy will never have more then 5 sacks in a year...Again, I think he can be a very good MLB, but he is not an edge rusher. Look beyond his measurables, look at the tape.

6.5 sacks for his whole career! Good call.

[IE]

Two guys that nailed it, 5 years ago:

I was thinking in the shower this morning...

Consider the matchup you'd have with Edmunds on TEs. The guy can run with any TE in the league and probably better than most. In the pass game, TEs would have no body size, height advantage that they normally have against much smaller, shorter safeties. And in the run game, if a safety is man up with a TE, he's going to lose that battle unless he can win with anticipation, which is difficult to do. But man up with Edmunds, it has to be a 100% solid block or forget it. And if Edmunds gets any advantage at all it's a losing proposition.

Of course early on, Edmunds would have the subtleties of the game disadvantage. But once he picked up the nuances of defending NFL receivers, oh man.

I don't know if a team would ever defend TEs with Edmunds on a TE. But they surely could. How interesting and different would that be? It would radically change the size of your defense, allowing you to put an extra 250# guy in place of a 205# safety in the right package.

Just getting caught up on everything I missed the past few days (New Orleans: 2, G08: 0) but it seems like most of the negativity surrounding Tremaine Edmunds deals with his (at times) poor instincts inside. If we take him at 8, I highly doubt it is because we are planning on playing him inside.

Teaching proper technique isn't rocket science, it's having the proper teacher/teaching approach and just drilling the shit out of the player (phrasing). I see no reason, honestly, why Vic Fangio can't do that with Tremaine Edmunds IF that's the guy he wants over anyone else. Watching the "tape" you can see this kid has the athleticism to play a slot WR and take a RB out of the backfield and up the field on wheel routes. I'm of the opinion that versatility is invaluable to Vic Fangio.

Is there bust potential there? Absolutely -- the kid is 19 years old. If you're sold on maturity, the kid loving football, and him being someone that is open minded and driven to learn? Take him.

My problem with Edmunds is not Edmunds himself, it’s that people are trying to project him into an EDGE rusher. I think he could become the next great MLB.

Ultra elite in coverage, can stick with anybody
Great in persuit, can track down ball carrier from sideline to sideline
The ultimate QB spy in the middle of the field

Struggles getting off blocks
While physically big and strong, plays weaker than his frame.
Not 1 play in his entire tape where he actually beats an OT 1 on 1.

Let’s go ahead and nullify all of his strengths and move him to the EDGE in the NFL.