Cliff Avril Willing to Switch to 3-4 Now Makes Sense in New Orleans
Defensive end Cliff Avril has played for five seasons in the NFL for the Detroit Lions in their 4-3 defensive scheme. Just because he’s been in the 4-3, don’t pigeon-hole him as someone who can’t be helpful to a 3-4 team.
Avril told Michigan Live that he is willing and believes he could make the switch to a 3-4.
I think I can do it. I thought I was going to be a 3-4 coming out, obviously. I ended up getting drafted to the Lions at the defensive end position. The weird thing is all the guys out of Purdue from the last few drafts who played end became 3-4 ends. I'm the only one out of all of those guys who played linebacker and became a defensive end. Maybe I'll join that club, if it's the case.
Avril has 39.5 sacks over his five seasons in the NFL and has averaged just over 9.5 in his last three seasons. At 6'3" and 260 pounds, Avril is more of a tweener anyway than a pure defensive end.
The first thing general managers should look at in Avril is his ability to get to the quarterback. Take away the definition of position and Avril is simply a pass-rush specialist.
Would you be happy with the Saints spending a large sum of money on Cliff Avril who's never played in a 3-4?
The New Orleans Saints are in dire need of guys who can rush the passer and they are switching to a 3-4 in 2013. He’s not an elite pass-rusher, but he’d be the top option on the Saints roster if Mickey Loomis pulled the trigger.
The Saints might not have enough money to pay Avril the kind of money he wants—he told Sirius/XM NFL Radio he would love to get Mario Williams’ six-year, $100 million deal—but Loomis has a card to play that Detroit, or the Cleveland Browns (a team linked to Avril as interested) don’t.
New Orleans is a playoff-ready team with a chip on its shoulder after last season’s bounty debacle. If Loomis can convince Avril to take less money and play for a championship ring, it could be a win-win situation for both Avril and the Saints.
Unless otherwise noted, all quotes and statements were obtained firsthand.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?