LB

JKool · 04-29-2008, 12:32 PM

Mitchell is an interesting option. I hadn't considered that.

Can someone tell me what happened to Fincher? I take it we let him go?

andersen · 04-29-2008, 01:23 PM

Fincher's gone. We still have Troy Evans, but if he couldn't see playing time last year, he has no hope this year.

iceshack149 · 04-29-2008, 02:35 PM

Rugged middle linebacker led the Volunteers in tackles last season with 104 tackles while adding 10 tackles for losses, three pass defenses and a pair of forced fumbles. Mitchell, a team captain in 2006, played in 40 games (15 starts) during his career and finished with 154 stops. 2006 – Started all 13 contests and voted a permanent team captain for the final eight games…

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/Team...0Mitchell.aspx

This is who I'm pulling for this pre-season to get the Saints WLB job.

Supersaint19 · 04-29-2008, 03:09 PM

I think Pressely will come and play 3 tech and ellis NG

thesaintsfan · 04-29-2008, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by JKool

The distinction between a MLB and WLB isn't as strong as it once was.

People have become used to the Urlacher style system, where your MLB is the one who is freed up to make plays all around the field. He has to be tough, but his primary role is no longer run stuffing. This requires DTs that are primarily run-stuffers

My feeling is that if you can get DTs that can penetrate and make plays on the QB, you want a system where your WLB plays the role that MLBs tend to play today. If Ellis is truly more like a LaRoi Glover, then I want my MLB to play run support, be a bruiser and focus on the interior run and hook zone. I want my WLB to be the play maker. This is the only reason I'm suggesting that Vilma be moved outside. I think that makes some sense.

As for Simoneau, I think whether he's on the field regularly should depend on his play (as does everyone else, I take it). Looking at the LBs we have, I think he's a good option at WLB (if we're going to use Vilma in an Urlacher-style MLB role). He got speed and some coverage skills; I certainly agree that he should never play MLB for us again.

JKool I feel you on this one. I miss the days of the true MLB. The guy that would stuff the run on first and second and then go get a shot of gatorade. Levon Kirkland comes to mind. It's a shame but guys like Nitchskie and Bednaric probably wouldn't start these days. Todays MLBs aren't the bone crushers they used to be.

JKool · 04-29-2008, 10:20 PM

TSF,

That's what I'm talkin' about!

Schemes can still be built to handle this style of MLB, and wouldn't have to ask so much of the SLB and free up the WLB a lot more!

A lot of defenses have gone to a Right-Left configuration (like the CBs) and away from the Strong-Weak configurations of the the past. This adds an element of surprise and allows for greater concealment of defenses; however, it does this at the cost of specialization for some players - which can hurt a player's ability to be a real game changer.

I'm not sure which system I prefer. They both have costs and benefits. I suppose it depends on what players you have. This is one reason for my thinking it would benefit a Vilma to have more freedom to make plays at a WLB in a Strong-Weak configuration where the MLB plays a greater role in run stuffing. It might also benefit a DT like Ellis - freeing him to free-style a bit on the inside, rather than primarily run stop.

thesaintsfan · 04-29-2008, 11:31 PM

JKool you know your defense and I like it! I remember you on this board from way back, like '05. I had a different handle back then but anyway. About a month ago I made a post about a possible swith to 3-4 or maybe throwing a 3-4 look out there from time to time. Of course I got blasted and one guy told me I needed therapy. My point was that I'd like to see us run a more modern, complex D to confuse offenses. I know we don't have the pieces in place to go to a 3-4 but by God we need to throw some kinda curveball at offenses because the bend and then break defense just didn't work last year. I know the influx of talent will make us better by default but wouldn't you like to see us go with a more complex scheme?

JKool · 04-29-2008, 11:41 PM

TSF,

Now I wish I could guess who you were...

I guess, I don't think we're set for a 3-4, and probably we don't have the right coaches for it. Different coaches have different "feels" for defenses, and I like it when (unless there are very good personnel reasons) they stick with what they "feel" good with. I am also not sure we have the right players for it (who do you think would play the second ILB and do you think that Ellis is a good NT, just out of curiosity?).

My current feeling is that we may have the right players for a Strong-Weak configuration for our LBs. I'd like to see Vilma get some room to make plays, and I'd like us to free Ellis and Will Smith as often as possible. This seems to me to favor a run stuffer at MLB (and Vilma at WLB). It is hard to say though, since that would require Grant to play more of a run stopping role and play the weak side. Also, it would require Vilma to move from his more natural spot at MLB.

We'll see what happens, but those are my two cents given the players I think we'll have available at the start of the season.

I'd be happy with a more complex scheme, but I my opinion (though it is changing with discussion here) is that we aren't really that great at stopping the run right now and we clearly have trouble with some of the intermediate and deep passing routes (especially over and through the middle). This favors a basic left-right configuration for LBs and the secondary (giving us more coverage options).

I'm torn, really.

It'll be interesting to see what gets decided (especially with the LB positions). I feel good that we have some options - maybe we will get something more complicated this year.

SaintPauly · 04-30-2008, 12:56 AM

I have to say, that I don't think enough is being said about Pressley here, at a possible starting spot. I watched the tape on this guy, and he is a freaking beast. Paired with Ellis, I honestly think we could have the best DT tandem in the NFL very quickly, if Ellis lives up to the hype.

LBs, that don't have to worry about backing up their d-line, are freed up to do alot more damage in the secondary, as are the safeties, and cbs. With the front four possibilities we have going on, the rest of that defense has got to be licking it's chops right now. Hell, even Jason David could look good behind these guys! Well, maybe..... : )

thesaintsfan · 04-30-2008, 12:58 AM

If I had to force our current front seven into a 3-4 it would look like this: DE Smith, NT Ellis, DE Grant, OLB Fujita ILB Vilma, ILB Morgan, OLB Sim or Shanle and at times McCray or Smith. Or DE Ellis, NT Hollis, DE Grant, OLB Smith, ILB Vilma, ILB Morgan, OLB Fuji. I know it's a reach but heck, it's just an idea.

No I don't see Ellis as a NT due to bulk issues. He's a perfect fit for our current scheme. After looking at our roster now I feel like we'll be alot better even if we stay with this vanilla D. Reason being, WE WILL BE BRINGING HEAT with our front four. I think McCray has kinda got overlooked in the whole FA and draft hoopla but I think that guy will give us alot of options and will be a steal. If we get anything out of Hollis or Young we might have the best front four in the NFL. NFC South...Beware.

04-29-2008, 12:32 PM	#31
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: LB Mitchell is an interesting option. I hadn't considered that. Can someone tell me what happened to Fincher? I take it we let him go?

04-29-2008, 01:23 PM	#32
andersen With an "E" Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Madisonville, LA Posts: 429	Re: LB Fincher's gone. We still have Troy Evans, but if he couldn't see playing time last year, he has no hope this year.

04-29-2008, 02:35 PM	#33
iceshack149 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Fairbanks, AK Posts: 4,258 Blog Entries: 1	Re: LB Rugged middle linebacker led the Volunteers in tackles last season with 104 tackles while adding 10 tackles for losses, three pass defenses and a pair of forced fumbles. Mitchell, a team captain in 2006, played in 40 games (15 starts) during his career and finished with 154 stops. 2006 – Started all 13 contests and voted a permanent team captain for the final eight games… http://www.neworleanssaints.com/Team...0Mitchell.aspx This is who I'm pulling for this pre-season to get the Saints WLB job.

04-29-2008, 03:09 PM	#34
Supersaint19 Registered Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 59	Re: LB I think Pressely will come and play 3 tech and ellis NG
Supersaint19 Registered Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 59

04-29-2008, 09:21 PM	#35
thesaintsfan The Real Deal Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 174	Re: LB Originally Posted by JKool The distinction between a MLB and WLB isn't as strong as it once was. People have become used to the Urlacher style system, where your MLB is the one who is freed up to make plays all around the field. He has to be tough, but his primary role is no longer run stuffing. This requires DTs that are primarily run-stuffers My feeling is that if you can get DTs that can penetrate and make plays on the QB, you want a system where your WLB plays the role that MLBs tend to play today. If Ellis is truly more like a LaRoi Glover, then I want my MLB to play run support, be a bruiser and focus on the interior run and hook zone. I want my WLB to be the play maker. This is the only reason I'm suggesting that Vilma be moved outside. I think that makes some sense. As for Simoneau, I think whether he's on the field regularly should depend on his play (as does everyone else, I take it). Looking at the LBs we have, I think he's a good option at WLB (if we're going to use Vilma in an Urlacher-style MLB role). He got speed and some coverage skills; I certainly agree that he should never play MLB for us again. JKool I feel you on this one. I miss the days of the true MLB. The guy that would stuff the run on first and second and then go get a shot of gatorade. Levon Kirkland comes to mind. It's a shame but guys like Nitchskie and Bednaric probably wouldn't start these days. Todays MLBs aren't the bone crushers they used to be.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

04-29-2008, 10:20 PM	#36
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: LB TSF, That's what I'm talkin' about! Schemes can still be built to handle this style of MLB, and wouldn't have to ask so much of the SLB and free up the WLB a lot more! A lot of defenses have gone to a Right-Left configuration (like the CBs) and away from the Strong-Weak configurations of the the past. This adds an element of surprise and allows for greater concealment of defenses; however, it does this at the cost of specialization for some players - which can hurt a player's ability to be a real game changer. I'm not sure which system I prefer. They both have costs and benefits. I suppose it depends on what players you have. This is one reason for my thinking it would benefit a Vilma to have more freedom to make plays at a WLB in a Strong-Weak configuration where the MLB plays a greater role in run stuffing. It might also benefit a DT like Ellis - freeing him to free-style a bit on the inside, rather than primarily run stop.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

04-29-2008, 11:31 PM	#37
thesaintsfan The Real Deal Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 174	Re: LB JKool you know your defense and I like it! I remember you on this board from way back, like '05. I had a different handle back then but anyway. About a month ago I made a post about a possible swith to 3-4 or maybe throwing a 3-4 look out there from time to time. Of course I got blasted and one guy told me I needed therapy. My point was that I'd like to see us run a more modern, complex D to confuse offenses. I know we don't have the pieces in place to go to a 3-4 but by God we need to throw some kinda curveball at offenses because the bend and then break defense just didn't work last year. I know the influx of talent will make us better by default but wouldn't you like to see us go with a more complex scheme?
	We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams.

04-29-2008, 11:41 PM	#38
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: LB TSF, Now I wish I could guess who you were... I guess, I don't think we're set for a 3-4, and probably we don't have the right coaches for it. Different coaches have different "feels" for defenses, and I like it when (unless there are very good personnel reasons) they stick with what they "feel" good with. I am also not sure we have the right players for it (who do you think would play the second ILB and do you think that Ellis is a good NT, just out of curiosity?). My current feeling is that we may have the right players for a Strong-Weak configuration for our LBs. I'd like to see Vilma get some room to make plays, and I'd like us to free Ellis and Will Smith as often as possible. This seems to me to favor a run stuffer at MLB (and Vilma at WLB). It is hard to say though, since that would require Grant to play more of a run stopping role and play the weak side. Also, it would require Vilma to move from his more natural spot at MLB. We'll see what happens, but those are my two cents given the players I think we'll have available at the start of the season. I'd be happy with a more complex scheme, but I my opinion (though it is changing with discussion here) is that we aren't really that great at stopping the run right now and we clearly have trouble with some of the intermediate and deep passing routes (especially over and through the middle). This favors a basic left-right configuration for LBs and the secondary (giving us more coverage options). I'm torn, really. It'll be interesting to see what gets decided (especially with the LB positions). I feel good that we have some options - maybe we will get something more complicated this year.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

04-30-2008, 12:56 AM	#39
SaintPauly Senior Citizen Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Gulfport, MS Posts: 3,180 Blog Entries: 1	Re: LB I have to say, that I don't think enough is being said about Pressley here, at a possible starting spot. I watched the tape on this guy, and he is a freaking beast. Paired with Ellis, I honestly think we could have the best DT tandem in the NFL very quickly, if Ellis lives up to the hype. LBs, that don't have to worry about backing up their d-line, are freed up to do alot more damage in the secondary, as are the safeties, and cbs. With the front four possibilities we have going on, the rest of that defense has got to be licking it's chops right now. Hell, even Jason David could look good behind these guys! Well, maybe..... : )
	What's popular is not always right, and what's right is not always popular.....

04-30-2008, 12:58 AM	#40
thesaintsfan The Real Deal Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 174	Re: LB If I had to force our current front seven into a 3-4 it would look like this: DE Smith, NT Ellis, DE Grant, OLB Fujita ILB Vilma, ILB Morgan, OLB Sim or Shanle and at times McCray or Smith. Or DE Ellis, NT Hollis, DE Grant, OLB Smith, ILB Vilma, ILB Morgan, OLB Fuji. I know it's a reach but heck, it's just an idea. No I don't see Ellis as a NT due to bulk issues. He's a perfect fit for our current scheme. After looking at our roster now I feel like we'll be alot better even if we stay with this vanilla D. Reason being, WE WILL BE BRINGING HEAT with our front four. I think McCray has kinda got overlooked in the whole FA and draft hoopla but I think that guy will give us alot of options and will be a steal. If we get anything out of Hollis or Young we might have the best front four in the NFL. NFC South...Beware.
	We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams.