12-22-2016, 04:24 PM
(12-22-2016, 02:30 PM)c12schleyer Wrote: This is exactly why I took Cunningham instead of McMillan. McMillan is more of a traditional MLB. Doesn't have the speed/coverage ability of Cunningham.
I disagree. On one hand u have a 243 pound line backer who is elite at play recognition and covers tight ends and rbs bettter than anyone ive seen for quite some time. He also runs 4.6 40 in mcmillan. On the other hand u have a 230 pound linebacker who can get pushed back in run support runs a 4.75 40 but is also very good at covering tight ends and rbs in cunningham. I prefer mcmillan over cunningham.
