Wesson44 Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 GILL STANDS OUT AT NORTHWESTERN PRO DAY Posted by Aaron Wilson on March 13, 2009, 2:03 p.m. Northwestern defensive tackle John Gill wasn’t invited to the NFL scouting combine, but topped many players’ workout numbers during his Pro Day workout this week. That showing would have ranked him among the top 10 defensive tackles at the combine. Weighing in at 302 pounds, Gill clocked a 4.91 in the 40-yard dash, registered 29 repetitions of 225 pounds in the bench press test and turned in a 31.5-inch vertical leap. His shuttle run was 4.44 seconds and his three-cone drill was 7.1 seconds, which were better than any of the defensive tackle numbers at the Scouting Combine, according to a league source. Gill’s 10-yard split in the 40-yard dash was 1.70 seconds. Gill has already had a private visit with the Chicago Bears, according to Brad Biggs of the Chicago Sun-Times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 How's that a smokescreen? Sorry, but that word gets thrown around a lot, and it just annoys me. Agreed like hell we could look to target him in the 3rd round. JA LOVES drafting DT's. Harris is gimpy, and Dvoracek may be done with the Bears after this season. Although I'm not certain how much the workout has to do with it. If I remember correctly, NFL teams are able to work out as many players as they want to went to school in close proximity to the team. I think I remember last year we were able to work out Notre Dame guys also. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that. The only problem I see is the Bears seem to have a ton of needs that IMO take precedent over DT (WR, QB, DE, Safety, OT, WR) GILL STANDS OUT AT NORTHWESTERN PRO DAY Posted by Aaron Wilson on March 13, 2009, 2:03 p.m. Northwestern defensive tackle John Gill wasn’t invited to the NFL scouting combine, but topped many players’ workout numbers during his Pro Day workout this week. That showing would have ranked him among the top 10 defensive tackles at the combine. Weighing in at 302 pounds, Gill clocked a 4.91 in the 40-yard dash, registered 29 repetitions of 225 pounds in the bench press test and turned in a 31.5-inch vertical leap. His shuttle run was 4.44 seconds and his three-cone drill was 7.1 seconds, which were better than any of the defensive tackle numbers at the Scouting Combine, according to a league source. Gill’s 10-yard split in the 40-yard dash was 1.70 seconds. Gill has already had a private visit with the Chicago Bears, according to Brad Biggs of the Chicago Sun-Times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 How's that a smokescreen? Sorry, but that word gets thrown around a lot, and it just annoys me. Agreed like hell we could look to target him in the 3rd round. JA LOVES drafting DT's. Harris is gimpy, and Dvoracek may be done with the Bears after this season. Although I'm not certain how much the workout has to do with it. If I remember correctly, NFL teams are able to work out as many players as they want to went to school in close proximity to the team. I think I remember last year we were able to work out Notre Dame guys also. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that. The only problem I see is the Bears seem to have a ton of needs that IMO take precedent over DT (WR, QB, DE, Safety, OT, WR) He was originially looked at as a undrafted free agent, I think he now will fall to maybe a 5th or 6th round pick. I think as a later draft pick, he makes sense, but as you said we have to many needs to fill and our first 4 or 5 picks has to be in those areas. I think we will still pick up another OT in free agency SC or someone else, which would mean we only need one more tackle in the draft. With Bullocks, we will probably only draft one FS, but we need 2 WRs unless we pick up a nobody in FA and they deem that not necessary. We will still need a QB prospect, DE, and I think maybe a CB wouldnt hurt, give us the option of moving someone on the roster to FS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawhizz Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 He was originially looked at as a undrafted free agent, I think he now will fall to maybe a 5th or 6th round pick. I think as a later draft pick, he makes sense, but as you said we have to many needs to fill and our first 4 or 5 picks has to be in those areas. I think we will still pick up another OT in free agency SC or someone else, which would mean we only need one more tackle in the draft. With Bullocks, we will probably only draft one FS, but we need 2 WRs unless we pick up a nobody in FA and they deem that not necessary. We will still need a QB prospect, DE, and I think maybe a CB wouldnt hurt, give us the option of moving someone on the roster to FS. I keep hearing people say we need a CB, to the point that some mocks I've seen have had the Bears targeting one in the first round, and I just don't understand where there is even room on this roster for another CB. It doesn't seem like anyone is being traded. Lovie has already spoken out about not moving Tillman to FS, and it seems like the staff is committed to keeping Manning at CB. Therefore, your present roster has Tillman, Vasher, Graham, McBride, Hamilton, and Bowman. Unless you can convince me you're ready to cut several of those guys outright, I don't see any place on this team for a pure CB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 I keep hearing people say we need a CB, to the point that some mocks I've seen have had the Bears targeting one in the first round, and I just don't understand where there is even room on this roster for another CB. It doesn't seem like anyone is being traded. Lovie has already spoken out about not moving Tillman to FS, and it seems like the staff is committed to keeping Manning at CB. Therefore, your present roster has Tillman, Vasher, Graham, McBride, Hamilton, and Bowman. Unless you can convince me you're ready to cut several of those guys outright, I don't see any place on this team for a pure CB. My thought on CB is one we could move to FS. Jenkins/OS and Davis/Ill have both been mentioned as possilbe playing FS. Also Byrd/ Oregon has been mentioned as a possible draft pick. They all could play FS or CB. I think Tillman and Graham are the only frontliners on the team. I hope Vasher comes back as who he was 2 years ago, but he hasnt played well since they gave him a good contract. He has been hurt but that is not good either.I think it would add flexablity to our backfield if we could get someone that could play both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 I keep hearing people say we need a CB, to the point that some mocks I've seen have had the Bears targeting one in the first round, and I just don't understand where there is even room on this roster for another CB. It doesn't seem like anyone is being traded. Lovie has already spoken out about not moving Tillman to FS, and it seems like the staff is committed to keeping Manning at CB. Therefore, your present roster has Tillman, Vasher, Graham, McBride, Hamilton, and Bowman. Unless you can convince me you're ready to cut several of those guys outright, I don't see any place on this team for a pure CB. I don't think that's true anymore about the cb position. Have you seen any current mocks that have us taking a cb in round 1? The early mocks had that a lot, but since the combine & free agency, everyone I've seen has had us taking an o-lineman or WR. Good point about us having a lot of depth at cb. My guess is we'll try to draft a safety in rounds 2,3, or 4, and if not, we may see another Dannieal Manning experiment. Don't forget that Lovie REALLY likes DM, and he's had a more active role in coaching him. I know DM has sucked at free safety, but let me ask you this: Is Bullocks better? My guess is no. More importantly, we seem to be happy with Corey Graham, and we've made it clear that Vasher will be in the mix. I could easily see Vasher moving back to nickel, and DM back to fs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 I think the early CB selection depends a lot on how the staff feels about Bowman. If they think he can step up to be our #3 CB along with an improvement from Graham then they will likely wait until Rd 4 or 5 to grab a CB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 I know DM has sucked at free safety, but let me ask you this: Is Bullocks better? My guess is no. I give Bullocks the benefit of the doubt. When he first came into the league and was under Haslet, he looked pretty good. After Haslet left, the whole D totally fell apart and the CB's were awful. They were so bad, they played a soft zone against us this year. Bullocks may be a surprise if our D line steps up under Marinelli, the CB's improve b/c the QB has less time with the pressure, then a guy like Bullocks can look to play center field and pick off QB's. I'm not saying Bullocks is a stud, thus a one year contract, but his play may not be as bad as it looked in NO. I'm willing to give him a chance and think it was a good FA pick up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 I give Bullocks the benefit of the doubt. When he first came into the league and was under Haslet, he looked pretty good. After Haslet left, the whole D totally fell apart and the CB's were awful. They were so bad, they played a soft zone against us this year. Bullocks may be a surprise if our D line steps up under Marinelli, the CB's improve b/c the QB has less time with the pressure, then a guy like Bullocks can look to play center field and pick off QB's. I'm not saying Bullocks is a stud, thus a one year contract, but his play may not be as bad as it looked in NO. I'm willing to give him a chance and think it was a good FA pick up. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining about signing Bullocks like others have. Sure, I'd have liked more of a "top-tier" signing, but you won't here me complaining. My point was, Dannieal Manning physically is just a freak. Supposedly, he's the faster player on the Bear's roster, faster then even Hester. Physically, he looks just cut. On kick returns he flat out runs people over, which is impressive. As a FS, as far as I'm aware, tackling has not been an issue. It's purely a matter of him having a difficult time of reading the defense and being out of position. We have a ton of depth at cornerback, and apparantly we have no interest in moving any of them. With Peanut & Nate it's a health issue. Although with Graham & Bowman, I'm not sure why we wouldn't consider it. That being said, if D Manning is better then Bullocks, it would make sense that we move him back to the FS spot. One other thing is that Lovie & Angelo seemed to contradict one another. Immediately after the season, Lovie announced that DM would remain at FS. A month or so later, JA announces that DM would stay at the nickel spot & Craig Steltz was our immediate #1 FS. Ultimately I think it's Lovie's decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Not in the 3rd or 4th!! We're so deep at DT!! He's a solid player but he's probably a 6th rounder, not a 3rd or 4th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Not in the 3rd or 4th!! We're so deep at DT!! He's a solid player but he's probably a 6th rounder, not a 3rd or 4th. The article says he was one of the top 10 defense tackles at the combine . . . if that is correct (and I have no idea if it is) how does that equate to a 6th rounder? I do think that first & formost it's important to take the "best player available" route as often as possible. We consider DT to be the most important defensive position. We have ever since Lovie arrived (and we drafted Tank & Tommie the same year). While Adams is good, the coaches don't seem to think he fits out scheme. We've lost faith in Dvoracek. If we really believe this guy can get it done, then we should spend that 2nd round pick on him. It's much better doing that then reaching for a position of need on a player who sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 The article says he was one of the top 10 defense tackles at the combine . . . if that is correct (and I have no idea if it is) how does that equate to a 6th rounder? I do think that first & formost it's important to take the "best player available" route as often as possible. We consider DT to be the most important defensive position. We have ever since Lovie arrived (and we drafted Tank & Tommie the same year). While Adams is good, the coaches don't seem to think he fits out scheme. We've lost faith in Dvoracek. If we really believe this guy can get it done, then we should spend that 2nd round pick on him. It's much better doing that then reaching for a position of need on a player who sucks. The article says he wasn't invited to the combine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 The article says he wasn't invited to the combine. I just glanced at the line that read, "That showing would have ranked him among the top 10 defensive tackles at the combine." Heck, for all I know, he may not even get drafted. But if he's that gifted physically, then the Bears should take a look at him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.