Saints' linebackers (all of 'em)

JKool · 03-01-2005, 10:14 AM

(1) On many defenses (including ours) in the NFL the SS calls the defensive plays (and, in turn, might well be considered the \"QB of the defense\"). This makes sense since, Safeties are more likely to be on the field every play than LBs.

(2) I\'ll quote myself:

Here is something that may be of interest. Brooking has been moved to OLB, where he had 101 tackles. Draft, who played the MLB had 56 tackles. That doesn\'t sound to me like a team that thinks there playmaker should be in the middle. In fact, Stewart, who played the other OLB had 71 tackles (and only played in two more games than Draft - which puts them at about the same). Note: Brooking played inside in the 3-4, but when they switched to a 4-3, Brooking (their leading tackler) was moved to the outside.

The WLB is uniquely suited, as Billy even points out, to be the playmaker. While there was a trend toward rangy, playmaking, MLBs, that trend has been dying off, since there are few players who can manage to be that way - Urlacher and Lewis are examples of these types of players. Many other teams tried it, but there has been limited success.

(3) Funneling means crashing blockers to force the runner back toward the middle. There are two main reasons for this: (a) it shatters the blocking scheme, reducing the number of possible blockers at the point of attack, and (b) more defensive players have shorter distances to go to make the tackle (as the middle of the field is closer to them). At the point of attack, you want there to be as little room for the RB to make moves as possible, so forcing him between the tackles is a goal. Guess who should be the first guy there? The MLB. Thus, funneling is NOT intended to force plays to the MLB because the MLB is so important/skilled/super-awesome, it is because that is the best place to shut down a runner and make it easier for more defensive players to reach the ball carrier.

(4) Perhaps the disagreement is about what constitutes the \"importance\" of the position. The point that I believe Danno and I are making is this: the WLB (or at least a stud OLB) is more important than the MLB for the following reasons - (a) WLBs are required to be more versatile blitzing, tackling, in coverage, and read and react, they are asked to think more, (b) LBs who are freed to make plays, must make plays, and the MLB is rarely freed to make plays outside the tackles, and (c) WLBs usually have further to go to make plays, and many teams\' stats show that they do.

Billy seems to disagree, but his notion of \"importance\" seems to be this: (d) MLBs are asked to make plays against the run first and most often, (e) if a MLB fails to do his job a RB make shake into the secondary and that usually ends poorly, (f) teams design defenses to set the MLB up to make plays.

I believe that (c) and (d) are a wash. (f) versus (b) appears to me to not a sign of importance, but a sign of which job you need to do. Finally, (e) appears to me to be important, but then again so does (a). I guess, I\'m at a loss to decided which is more important in these ways.

I suppose, it is my general view that if you got two equally good (whatever that means) LBs, one at the OLB and one at the MLB, the OLB would have a greater skill set, as he is required to do a greater variety of things over a greater distance. Of course, I acknoweldge that the job description for all the LBs is getting closer together, but it is my view you can get by with a big, strong tackler at MLB (mostly because the MLB has the advantage of funneling that, say, a WLB does not), but at at least one OLB position you need a guy who can cover, read, fly to the ball, and make plays when he is freed to do so.

(5) Who started talking about AB? When I find him, I\'m gonna kick him in the nutz.

saintswhodi · 03-01-2005, 10:15 AM

I was just poking fun.
Lighten up dude! Having AB withdrawals?
Maybe I shoulda

I know Danno, that\'s why I was doing the same to you. I remember how you used to get your shots in during the AB wars. :P Just getting a little payback, maybe I missed my window.

BNB, you know I know VERY well how those debates went, that\'s why I excused myself from them, and see many others have done the same. It\'s all good. I was just getting Danno back for his shots at us. IT was nothing personal or anything. Just clowning around. Maybe I do have AB withdrawal. :seeingstars: I\'ll go now. :sulkoff:

JKool · 03-01-2005, 10:26 AM

Billy, I think I accounted for that idea in my post above.

I\'m going to quote myself again:

I think that there have been some very great MLBs, but I think historically speaking that this has not been the as dominant as you make out.

Think back on the Dome Patrol: do you really think that Sam Mills was a bigger play maker than Swilling and Jackson? I\'m not sure I buy that; I\'m not saying you\'re wrong, but, for me, the jury is out on that one.

Historic Impact OLBs:
Lawrence Taylor (changed the way OLB is played)
Derrik Brooks
Bryce Paup
Kevin Greene
Derrek Thomas
(And there are more)

Current Impact OLBs:
LaVar Arrinington
Boss Bailey
Peter Boulware
Keith Brooking
Willie McGinest
Julian Petersen
Junior Seau (well maybe not anymore)
Takeo Spikes
Terrell Suggs
DJ Williams
Will Witherspoon

Surely, you\'ll agree that even if these guys\' job is \"easier\", which I\'m not agreeing with - stopping the run is NOT as hard as being asked to make different kinds of plays in almost every situation - they have excelled and been difference makers. That is, taking on blockers and stopping funneled plays is NOT as hard as having to make quick decisions, cover the field, make a tackle in the open field, switch to pass coverage, and so on. I don\'t see why we should believe that it is harder to be a MLB, just because he may get blocked more often - on that reasoning, the SLB is the most important position.

GumboBC · 03-01-2005, 10:31 AM

Surely, you\'ll agree that even if these guys\' job is \"easier\", which I\'m not agreeing with - stopping the run is NOT as hard as being asked to make different kinds of plays in almost every situation - they have excelled and been difference makers. That is, taking on blockers and stopping funneled plays is NOT as hard as having to make quick decisions, cover the field, make a tackle in the open field, switch to pass coverage, and so on. I don\'t see why we should believe that it is harder to be a MLB, just because he may get blocked more often - on that reasoning, the SLB is the most important position.

JKool --

Which one of these statements do you disagree with?

1. He has a little further to go at times to make plays but is often left unaccounted for in the blocking scheme. Many big play linebackers come from this position because they are allowed to freelance more and flow to the play with less traffic to fight through.

2. The WLB generally has fewer responsibilities than other front 7 positions.

PS -- I\'m not the one saying this. Though, I totally agree with it. I got this from an article on the net.

Do you disagree with those 2 statements?

JKool · 03-01-2005, 10:33 AM

2, is the statement I disagree with.

[Edited on 1/3/2005 by JKool]

GumboBC · 03-01-2005, 10:36 AM

2, is the statement I disagree with.

[Edited on 1/3/2005 by JKool]

Okay, I want you to do something for me if you will.

Go read this article and tell me if your opinion is still the same.

I think this is very interesting.

Here\'s the link...

http://www.redeyesports.com/Breakingdownadefense.htm

JKool · 03-01-2005, 10:45 AM

Billy, that is just the article you quoted from, and I read what you wrote above.

I\'ve made two arguments regarding \"importance\" of the MLB - one where I said that he didn\'t have as many responsibilities (and while that may depend on what the MLB is asked to do in the passing game, I have suggested that MLBs are often the first off the field in passing situations - while that may not be true for Urlacher and Lewis, for MOST NFL teams it is true), and one where I tried to decide what you meant by important. I will ask you to respond to one or both of those, now that I\'ve read this whole article for you (which by the way was pretty good).

Here is a quote that I found interesting about the MLB from your article:

Pass coverage responsibilities will depend on the cover scheme called but once run is diagnosed, the MLB has a single assignment, get to the ball carrier

Doesn\'t that describe every player who isn\'t disrupting the blocking? Wow, those MLBs sure do have a unique set of responsibilities.

I\'ve made my arguments, and this article has not persuaded me that any of them are wrong.

JKool · 03-01-2005, 10:46 AM

PS - Having fewer responsibilities with respect to blockers on running plays is not the same as having fewer responsibilities, but I made that argument above as well.

Danno · 03-01-2005, 10:46 AM

I was just poking fun.
Lighten up dude! Having AB withdrawals?
Maybe I shoulda

I know Danno, that\'s why I was doing the same to you. I remember how you used to get your shots in during the AB wars. :P Just getting a little payback, maybe I missed my window.

BNB, you know I know VERY well how those debates went, that\'s why I excused myself from them, and see many others have done the same. It\'s all good. I was just getting Danno back for his shots at us. IT was nothing personal or anything. Just clowning around. Maybe I do have AB withdrawal. :seeingstars: I\'ll go now. :sulkoff:

And I went and kicked the cat for nothing?

GumboBC · 03-01-2005, 10:52 AM

Billy, that is just the article you quoted from, and I read what you wrote above.

I\'ve made two arguments regarding \"importance\" of the MLB - one where I said that he didn\'t have as many responsibilities (and while that may depend on what the MLB is asked to do in the passing game, I have suggested that MLBs are often the first off the field in passing situations - while that may not be true for Urlacher and Lewis, for MOST NFL teams it is true), and one where I tried to decide what you meant by important. I will ask you to respond to one or both of those, now that I\'ve read this whole article for you (which by the way was pretty good).

Here is a quote that I found interesting about the MLB from your article:

Pass coverage responsibilities will depend on the cover scheme called but once run is diagnosed, the MLB has a single assignment, get to the ball carrier

Doesn\'t that describe every player who isn\'t disrupting the blocking? Wow, those MLBs sure do have a unique set of responsibilities.

I\'ve made my arguments, and this article has not persuaded me that any of them are wrong.

The middle linebacker does have only ONE responsibility once the ball is snapped. And that\'s to get to the ball carrier. But, it\'s WHAT he has to do to get to the ball carrier as opposed to what an outside linebacker has to do.

The OLB doesn\'t have to take on blocks like a MLB does. You already said you agree the OLB is free to roam the field. And the author of the article said the samething. So, in essence, the MLBs job is the harder of the two.

Keep this in mind. The OLB has to support the run and the pass. But, because he is left unaccounted for as compared to the SLB and MLB, it\'s much easier for him to do that.

And for the last time.... Most MLB do not come off the field on 3rd down. Unless a team has someone like Orlando Ruff who is too slow to cover a runningback or a TE. It\'s a moot point, JKool.

03-01-2005, 10:14 AM	#1
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) (1) On many defenses (including ours) in the NFL the SS calls the defensive plays (and, in turn, might well be considered the \"QB of the defense\"). This makes sense since, Safeties are more likely to be on the field every play than LBs. (2) I\'ll quote myself: Here is something that may be of interest. Brooking has been moved to OLB, where he had 101 tackles. Draft, who played the MLB had 56 tackles. That doesn\'t sound to me like a team that thinks there playmaker should be in the middle. In fact, Stewart, who played the other OLB had 71 tackles (and only played in two more games than Draft - which puts them at about the same). Note: Brooking played inside in the 3-4, but when they switched to a 4-3, Brooking (their leading tackler) was moved to the outside. The WLB is uniquely suited, as Billy even points out, to be the playmaker. While there was a trend toward rangy, playmaking, MLBs, that trend has been dying off, since there are few players who can manage to be that way - Urlacher and Lewis are examples of these types of players. Many other teams tried it, but there has been limited success. (3) Funneling means crashing blockers to force the runner back toward the middle. There are two main reasons for this: (a) it shatters the blocking scheme, reducing the number of possible blockers at the point of attack, and (b) more defensive players have shorter distances to go to make the tackle (as the middle of the field is closer to them). At the point of attack, you want there to be as little room for the RB to make moves as possible, so forcing him between the tackles is a goal. Guess who should be the first guy there? The MLB. Thus, funneling is NOT intended to force plays to the MLB because the MLB is so important/skilled/super-awesome, it is because that is the best place to shut down a runner and make it easier for more defensive players to reach the ball carrier. (4) Perhaps the disagreement is about what constitutes the \"importance\" of the position. The point that I believe Danno and I are making is this: the WLB (or at least a stud OLB) is more important than the MLB for the following reasons - (a) WLBs are required to be more versatile blitzing, tackling, in coverage, and read and react, they are asked to think more, (b) LBs who are freed to make plays, must make plays, and the MLB is rarely freed to make plays outside the tackles, and (c) WLBs usually have further to go to make plays, and many teams\' stats show that they do. Billy seems to disagree, but his notion of \"importance\" seems to be this: (d) MLBs are asked to make plays against the run first and most often, (e) if a MLB fails to do his job a RB make shake into the secondary and that usually ends poorly, (f) teams design defenses to set the MLB up to make plays. I believe that (c) and (d) are a wash. (f) versus (b) appears to me to not a sign of importance, but a sign of which job you need to do. Finally, (e) appears to me to be important, but then again so does (a). I guess, I\'m at a loss to decided which is more important in these ways. I suppose, it is my general view that if you got two equally good (whatever that means) LBs, one at the OLB and one at the MLB, the OLB would have a greater skill set, as he is required to do a greater variety of things over a greater distance. Of course, I acknoweldge that the job description for all the LBs is getting closer together, but it is my view you can get by with a big, strong tackler at MLB (mostly because the MLB has the advantage of funneling that, say, a WLB does not), but at at least one OLB position you need a guy who can cover, read, fly to the ball, and make plays when he is freed to do so. (5) Who started talking about AB? When I find him, I\'m gonna kick him in the nutz.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

03-01-2005, 10:15 AM	#2
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) I was just poking fun. Lighten up dude! Having AB withdrawals? Maybe I shoulda I know Danno, that\'s why I was doing the same to you. I remember how you used to get your shots in during the AB wars. :P Just getting a little payback, maybe I missed my window. BNB, you know I know VERY well how those debates went, that\'s why I excused myself from them, and see many others have done the same. It\'s all good. I was just getting Danno back for his shots at us. IT was nothing personal or anything. Just clowning around. Maybe I do have AB withdrawal. :seeingstars: I\'ll go now. :sulkoff:

03-01-2005, 10:26 AM	#3
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) Billy, I think I accounted for that idea in my post above. I\'m going to quote myself again: I think that there have been some very great MLBs, but I think historically speaking that this has not been the as dominant as you make out. Think back on the Dome Patrol: do you really think that Sam Mills was a bigger play maker than Swilling and Jackson? I\'m not sure I buy that; I\'m not saying you\'re wrong, but, for me, the jury is out on that one. Historic Impact OLBs: Lawrence Taylor (changed the way OLB is played) Derrik Brooks Bryce Paup Kevin Greene Derrek Thomas (And there are more) Current Impact OLBs: LaVar Arrinington Boss Bailey Peter Boulware Keith Brooking Willie McGinest Julian Petersen Junior Seau (well maybe not anymore) Takeo Spikes Terrell Suggs DJ Williams Will Witherspoon Surely, you\'ll agree that even if these guys\' job is \"easier\", which I\'m not agreeing with - stopping the run is NOT as hard as being asked to make different kinds of plays in almost every situation - they have excelled and been difference makers. That is, taking on blockers and stopping funneled plays is NOT as hard as having to make quick decisions, cover the field, make a tackle in the open field, switch to pass coverage, and so on. I don\'t see why we should believe that it is harder to be a MLB, just because he may get blocked more often - on that reasoning, the SLB is the most important position.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

03-01-2005, 10:31 AM	#4
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) Surely, you\'ll agree that even if these guys\' job is \"easier\", which I\'m not agreeing with - stopping the run is NOT as hard as being asked to make different kinds of plays in almost every situation - they have excelled and been difference makers. That is, taking on blockers and stopping funneled plays is NOT as hard as having to make quick decisions, cover the field, make a tackle in the open field, switch to pass coverage, and so on. I don\'t see why we should believe that it is harder to be a MLB, just because he may get blocked more often - on that reasoning, the SLB is the most important position. JKool -- Which one of these statements do you disagree with? 1. He has a little further to go at times to make plays but is often left unaccounted for in the blocking scheme. Many big play linebackers come from this position because they are allowed to freelance more and flow to the play with less traffic to fight through. 2. The WLB generally has fewer responsibilities than other front 7 positions. PS -- I\'m not the one saying this. Though, I totally agree with it. I got this from an article on the net. Do you disagree with those 2 statements?
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

03-01-2005, 10:33 AM	#5
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) 2, is the statement I disagree with. [Edited on 1/3/2005 by JKool]

03-01-2005, 10:36 AM	#6
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) 2, is the statement I disagree with. [Edited on 1/3/2005 by JKool] Okay, I want you to do something for me if you will. Go read this article and tell me if your opinion is still the same. I think this is very interesting. Here\'s the link... http://www.redeyesports.com/Breakingdownadefense.htm
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

03-01-2005, 10:45 AM	#7
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) Billy, that is just the article you quoted from, and I read what you wrote above. I\'ve made two arguments regarding \"importance\" of the MLB - one where I said that he didn\'t have as many responsibilities (and while that may depend on what the MLB is asked to do in the passing game, I have suggested that MLBs are often the first off the field in passing situations - while that may not be true for Urlacher and Lewis, for MOST NFL teams it is true), and one where I tried to decide what you meant by important. I will ask you to respond to one or both of those, now that I\'ve read this whole article for you (which by the way was pretty good). Here is a quote that I found interesting about the MLB from your article: Pass coverage responsibilities will depend on the cover scheme called but once run is diagnosed, the MLB has a single assignment, get to the ball carrier Doesn\'t that describe every player who isn\'t disrupting the blocking? Wow, those MLBs sure do have a unique set of responsibilities. I\'ve made my arguments, and this article has not persuaded me that any of them are wrong.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

03-01-2005, 10:46 AM	#8
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) PS - Having fewer responsibilities with respect to blockers on running plays is not the same as having fewer responsibilities, but I made that argument above as well.

03-01-2005, 10:46 AM	#9
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,758	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) I was just poking fun. Lighten up dude! Having AB withdrawals? Maybe I shoulda I know Danno, that\'s why I was doing the same to you. I remember how you used to get your shots in during the AB wars. :P Just getting a little payback, maybe I missed my window. BNB, you know I know VERY well how those debates went, that\'s why I excused myself from them, and see many others have done the same. It\'s all good. I was just getting Danno back for his shots at us. IT was nothing personal or anything. Just clowning around. Maybe I do have AB withdrawal. :seeingstars: I\'ll go now. :sulkoff: And I went and kicked the cat for nothing?

03-01-2005, 10:52 AM	#10
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Saints' linebackers (all of 'em) Billy, that is just the article you quoted from, and I read what you wrote above. I\'ve made two arguments regarding \"importance\" of the MLB - one where I said that he didn\'t have as many responsibilities (and while that may depend on what the MLB is asked to do in the passing game, I have suggested that MLBs are often the first off the field in passing situations - while that may not be true for Urlacher and Lewis, for MOST NFL teams it is true), and one where I tried to decide what you meant by important. I will ask you to respond to one or both of those, now that I\'ve read this whole article for you (which by the way was pretty good). Here is a quote that I found interesting about the MLB from your article: Pass coverage responsibilities will depend on the cover scheme called but once run is diagnosed, the MLB has a single assignment, get to the ball carrier Doesn\'t that describe every player who isn\'t disrupting the blocking? Wow, those MLBs sure do have a unique set of responsibilities. I\'ve made my arguments, and this article has not persuaded me that any of them are wrong. The middle linebacker does have only ONE responsibility once the ball is snapped. And that\'s to get to the ball carrier. But, it\'s WHAT he has to do to get to the ball carrier as opposed to what an outside linebacker has to do. The OLB doesn\'t have to take on blocks like a MLB does. You already said you agree the OLB is free to roam the field. And the author of the article said the samething. So, in essence, the MLBs job is the harder of the two. Keep this in mind. The OLB has to support the run and the pass. But, because he is left unaccounted for as compared to the SLB and MLB, it\'s much easier for him to do that. And for the last time.... Most MLB do not come off the field on 3rd down. Unless a team has someone like Orlando Ruff who is too slow to cover a runningback or a TE. It\'s a moot point, JKool.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616