Is Ahmad Brooks worth a look?

Harry

ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Posts
16,653
Reaction score
38,761
Location
Orlando, FL
After watching the Falcons game, Brooks should be signed immediately. Wheeler was horrible. Bynes looks inept in pass coverage. Brooks is the best option available.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
37,485
Reaction score
36,982
Location
Charlotte, NC
After watching the Falcons game, Brooks should be signed immediately. Wheeler was horrible. Bynes looks inept in pass coverage. Brooks is the best option available.

Brook is an OLB; and you have to consider that neither Byrnes nor Wheeler will likely play much.
 

Adrian

Ronin forever
Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Posts
175,133
Reaction score
86,342
Location
Crowley, TX
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
 

Harry

ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Posts
16,653
Reaction score
38,761
Location
Orlando, FL
Brook is an OLB; and you have to consider that neither Byrnes nor Wheeler will likely play much.

When Brooks was with Cincy he play inside for 5 games and looked fine. At 259 he should be able to hold up. His flexibility to play in and out is a major asset.
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,681
Location
London UK
After watching the Falcons game, Brooks should be signed immediately. Wheeler was horrible. Bynes looks inept in pass coverage. Brooks is the best option available.

And why are we confusing inside and outside linebackers?
 

WindCardinal

All Star
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Posts
929
Reaction score
754
Location
Abilene TX
When Brooks was with Cincy he play inside for 5 games and looked fine. At 259 he should be able to hold up. His flexibility to play in and out is a major asset.

I don't ever remember seeing him play inside with SF and His cincy days were a long time ago
 

Harry

ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Posts
16,653
Reaction score
38,761
Location
Orlando, FL
You're right he didn't play inside at SF. With his size and quickness he's fine shedding blockers, filling the holes and dropping back in coverage. He would also be fine blitzing in the Cards' scheme. Most outside guys, if big enough, can play inside. You just need a bigger guy alongside Buc.
 

Mitch

Crawled Through 5 FB Fields
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Posts
13,405
Reaction score
2,982
Location
Wrentham, MA
I wonder Harry whether Brooks would want to play inside. At this point in his career he may just want to be an edge pass rush specialist. Looks like the Packers are going to sign him for that role.

Brooks is a quirky guy. He hasn't always endeared himself to his coaches. I wonder what Phll Dawson, Antoine Bethea and Blaine Gabbert would say about him.
 

Adrian

Ronin forever
Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Posts
175,133
Reaction score
86,342
Location
Crowley, TX
@mlombardiNFL

I like the Packers signing of Brooks--now that have three outside rushers for the two spots. Brooks can still power weak tackles back
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,440,693
Posts
6,675,605
Members
6,435
Latest member
taylor_fancav
Top