I think Cushing's injury history and possibly very questionable past with steroids will throw him out of our equation.
He would certainly fit that James Farrior/Bobby Carpenter mold. I don't think he fits the Willie McGinest/Demarcus Ware mold. I'm just not sure that he's really an End/OLB hybrid. I think he's a straight up OLB with great cover skills in the mold of an Aaron Curry. When you're evaluating for the position that Miami would ask the player to play, Clint Sintim is the more complete player football player with the more impressive pass rush credentials and the experience level in a similar role, plus he has been the more durable football player. Cushing has superior cover skills and athleticism.
I find Cushing overrated but that's just my UCLA-bias. Likewise though, he didn't impress me much in the U$C-UCLA game. The UCLA OL really bottled him up and the pass rush was nonexistent. Granted Craft couldn't take advantage of it but still.
We have too many needs to take Cushing at #19-#24.. AFAIK, Parcells has a bias against players who had injuries in College, I can't recall him taking a guy like Cushing. And comparisons to Bobby Carpenter are not what one would call a ringing endorsement of Cushing.
Earlier in the season, Clint Sintim seemed to be a minor reach which is surely folly to evaluate things early in the season etc etc... Point to be made however is that with his consistent play and our rise record-wise we will probably be in just about the right range to draft him, go him with a player who signs quickly knock on wood, and a guy who will be able to play ROLB and LOLB consistently from day one. It's a match made-in-heaven essentially. Cushing would basically be Bobby Carpenter for us if we picked him as CK said earlier. He'd be better though as he's far more instinctual than Carpenter. If we can nail down the NT spot after that and maybe add in a safety I'd call it a fantastic day one.
I dont think thats a bad mock, our pick is agueably the worst of the bunch (either of the 2 guys after our pick id rather have, or sintim). But overall, I think its pretty solid.
I think Curry's weak point is his coverage ability. Agree that Cushing is the best of the three in coverage although none are Mark Herzlich.
I think coverage is one of Curry's strong suits, personally. He's got 6 career interceptions (with 278 return yards and 3 TDs, an average of 46 yards and 0.5 TDs per interception) and 15 pass breakups. He seems to me like he has pretty good instincts in coverage, reading the QB's eyes, etc. I wouldn't grade Brandon Spikes better in coverage than Aaron Curry, personally. It's rushing the passer that I'm not sure Curry does well enough with to be an OLB in our scheme.
Interesting how he's got the fat boy from Boston College going right after we pick. He's the guy I want, but my opinion is purely from a layman's perspective.
I don't think he can turn and run particularly well. When the play is in front of him, zone coverage, fine. But in man, turning and running......for me it's not a strong suit. As for Spikes, I like his instincts in coverage and as John Parker Wilson said, there's not a linebacker in college football who reads the QB's eyes the way Spikes does.
Here is a good story on him, he played at Bergen Catholic against Don Bosco a lot, I saw him play, a good local kid. NorthJersey.com: No bed of roses for Cushing
