Idea up for debate:watson
 

Ok-

Watson last year was our most productive linebacker, however some here feel that he wasn't that great in his production.

Here is my question: do you think watson should stay at MLB or should he be moved oustide?

I believe, based on how intensly the saints want dat-that they feel that he would be better served outside with a new MLB.

Thoughts?

Idea up for debate:watson
 

A bonus with Watson is that he has the skills to play both. Someone said he played OLB before but I couldn\'t find any proof other than as a reserve his fresman year at Notre Dame.

I\'d be OK with sliding him over if the BPA we pick is an ILB, and I\'d be OK leaving him at MLB where he\'s played his whole career and pick an OLB.

SLB-Allen
MLB-Dat Nguyen
WLB-Watson

Doesn\'t look so bad to me.

SLB-Merriman
MLB-Watson
WLB-Bockwoldt

Doesn\'t look too bad either.

As long as we\'re discussing how to address the LB unit I\'m on cloud 9.

Idea up for debate:watson
 

why would you leave allen in and take colby out?

Idea up for debate:watson
 

I believe that Colby is better suited for the WLB. i.e. he\'d get overpowered at SLB. Allen is much stronger (as of now) and is the perfect physical specimen for SLB.
Everything I\'ve heard is that Watson would also make a good WLB as well as MLB. But I haven\'t heard many suggest or even comment on him playing SLB.

Bockwoldt would get destroyed at SLB, unless he gets MUCH stronger.

Some of the \"students of the game\" can correct me but I believ in a 4-3 defense the WLB plays in space. Meaning speed and instinct are most crucial.

The SLB plays in a crowd. Often has to fight thru multiple blockers and must have decent coverage skills. Typically he\'s a bit bigger/stronger and more physical than the WLB.
Its been said if you could combine Hodges cover skills with Allens physicalness you\'d have a decent LB.

Much depends on schemes but I think in general the above applies. But with all that said I am curious, can Watson play SLB?

SLB-Watson
MLB-Dat
WLB-Bockwoldt

That looks pretty good too.

Idea up for debate:watson
 

You, sir, are correct. ;)

At any rate, I too have been wondering if Watson can play SLB. It might be a bit of a waste of his speed, but since his coverage looked ok to me (and he\'d be primarily in charge ot the TE), I don\'t see why he couldn\'t play SLB. I remember reading that his stack and shed was a bit of a problem - so while his size wouldn\'t be an issue, his ability to get off blockers might be an issue. Also, wasn\'t one of the claims about him that he doesn\'t stick guys - he wraps and pulls down? If that is so, it also better suits him for WLB (or a protected MLB).

Danno, since you\'re among the most likely to remember, does that sound right to you?

Idea up for debate:watson
 

im for anything that gives us another look at bockwoldt for a whole season. i want to see if the kid can play strong through a whole season. as long as he doesnt make it to the bench im ok with it. i just think the kid has potential. i dont want to see him on the sideline until we know whether he can do this or not. i think he can

Idea up for debate:watson
 

It\'s definitely an issue. Watson will either stay at MLB or move to the weak side.
I don\'t want to move too far away from the topic, but want to pose another question: A few members are on the Thomas Davis bandwagon. Where would you play him if the Saints indeed draft him? SS, WLB, SLB? He played the strong side in college, but may have to get a little stronger after playing the safety position for the last almost 2 years. It\'s rather tricky where to put him.

There\'s a chance - and not even an outside chance - that the starting linebackers in week 1 will be: Allen-Watson-Bockwoldt. Kinda scary.

Idea up for debate:watson
 

If we were to draft Davis, I\'d like to see him play SS or WLB.

I don\'t think we\'ll draft him though, since at 16 there should be a number of \"equally\" good players available - making him not clearly BP - and we don\'t have a lot of need for a SS/LB tweener. Being a \'tweener makes him a bit of a project (as you point out), and I think we\'re looking for impact now, not a year or two from now - a project probably just won\'t cut it. Just my opinion on that though.

Idea up for debate:watson
 

I think the ongoing debate regarding Watson may add legitimacy to those who said we \"reached\" drafting him when we did. Sure, he was a rookie - and he performed well enough in that regard - but it sure doesn\'t seem like anyone\'s all that excited about him.

I like Bockwoldt, too, but must admit he\'s simply a pleasant surprise. He could be a reliable LB with a good career, but I seriously doubt he\'ll ever be a star. Definately worth the 7th round pick, though...

I don\'t think we\'ll draft Davis now, either. He really doesn\'t fit a need unless he\'s to be developed to take over for Bellamy. I think he\'s a bit small to play LB in the NFL.

Idea up for debate:watson
 

Not exactly. He wasn\'t an explosive knock your head off Ray Lewis typr. But he was always considered a sure tackler. Never heard the drag-down comment on him before. Finesse tacklers don\'t end up 2 time Butkis Award finalist.

And no Mute, he wasn\'t a reach in the 2nd at all. There\'s an ongoing debate about Deuce and his lack of off-season committments also, was he a reach in the 1st? We drafted a rookie starter at MLB, who also has the talent to play OLB. He\'s smart, fast, and has great instincs, how can that be a reach? Donterrious Thomas (who I liked a lot) was picked much earlier in the 2nd, he had 1 tackle all year. If anything I\'d say he\'s closer to a steal than a reach. Probably went where he was supposed to.