Cleveland Browns: Da'Quan Bowers' Stock Dropping as Health Concerns Continue
The Cleveland Browns have been a hot topic of interest when it comes to the NFL Draft at the end of April, but one potential prospect may be falling off the Browns radar completely. Da'Quan Bowers has reportedly failed two physicals so far this spring and injury concerns are beginning to cause the former top 10 prospects' draft stock to fall considerably.
Cleveland was once mocked by several different experts to select Bowers with the sixth overall pick in the first round. Bowers tore his lateral meniscus in his right knee and required surgery after the 2010 season but since many analysts have been quick to write off any lingering effects.
According to Peter King of Sports Illustrated and Todd McShay of ESPN, Bowers is completely off of two different NFL teams' boards as he failed two physicals and failed to show adequate progress in the healing process.
Cleveland is scheduled to meet with Bowers on April 11th and 12th which rules the Browns out of potential teams that Bowers has previously fallen away from. Cleveland has a significant need for a pass rusher as the team will move to a 4-3 defense and currently does not employ a true defensive end on the roster.
Injury concerns have to play a role in Cleveland's decision to take a look at Bowers. Considering the draft history of Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert, it is hard to predict how the Browns may approach Bowers and even how much of an impact his injury will really have on the front office.
Cleveland took a significant gamble on former Tennessee Volunteers running back Monterio Hardesty in the 2010 NFL Draft even though many scouts worried about his durability on the football field. Hardesty would later tear his ACL in the pre-season and miss the entire year.
Bowers was obviously a force when he was healthy which is why his name will not fall far from the top ten even if his draft stock does begin to plummet. Last season, Bowers recorded 67 tackles and 16 sacks while helping Clemson advance to the Meineke Car Care Bowl.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?