Nothing but linebacker talk!

baronm · 03-31-2005, 03:03 PM

I think the importance is up to the defense..a defense with a good line and athletic OLB can mask a sub par MLB...

JKool · 03-31-2005, 03:06 PM

MLB, I feel, is the more difficult of all the linebacker positions.

???

You mean more difficult in terms of taking on blocks then, not more difficult simpliciter.

Let\'s say that I agree with you; so what? You don\'t feel good about Watson because why? He is big enough and strong enough to take on blockers. He is also fast enough to go sideline to sideline.

JKool · 03-31-2005, 03:08 PM

I think the importance is up to the defense..a defense with a good line and athletic OLB can mask a sub par MLB...

I agree.

In fact, I think that the better the players at the top of my \"impact\" list, the less good the players toward the bottome need to be - in general.

baronm · 03-31-2005, 03:11 PM

Baron,

I might be willing to put OLB and DT as roughly even, but here is an argument:

LBs, being further from the line have less opportunity to disrupt a play that a DT who is right at the line. Furthermore, weak DT play will lead to more trouble than weak LB play, since weak DT play will allow a couple of yards a carry or an additional blocker on the LBs.

Also, in general, I agree that the further from the line you go, the \"less value\" you seem to have - since by the time the play gets to you the damage may already be done - except for one CB. Without one DB who can take away the easy pass, there is less need to stop the run, since they can just keep throwing slants. That is why my first CB is up higher than some LBs and DLs.

but as we saw with our defense..a good LB can play with a bad DT..the Dt\'s Job is to keep the guards busy so the LB can make plays...so in that I will agree the DT is important. but... the linebacker must play the run and drop back in coverage-so the linebacker has more responsiblity imo..

also..the linebackers are usually the playmakers on defence.

GumboBC · 03-31-2005, 03:14 PM

MLB, I feel, is the more difficult of all the linebacker positions.

???

You mean more difficult in terms of taking on blocks then, not more difficult simpliciter.

Let\'s say that I agree with you; so what? You don\'t feel good about Watson because why? He is big enough and strong enough to take on blockers. He is also fast enough to go sideline to sideline.

I think my point is this:

1. The best signal caller for the defense is the MLB because of where he\'s lined up on the field. He\'s in the best position to see the offense and communicate to his teammates.

2. The MLB has to take on \"more\" and \"bigger\" blockers and it makes his job harder than the WLB.

So, while Watson might be more talented than Bockwoldt, he\'s get a tougher go at it playing MLB. I think that\'s just the nature of the positions. I also think Watson is more suited to play the WLB position.

Watson is not very physical and often drags defenders down. Now, that\'s better than missing the tackle but that\'s not really how you want a MLB to play.

Sam Mills and Dat Ngyen are a lot smaller than Watson but both would pop you in the mouth. I don\'t think we\'ll ever see that from Watson.

JKool · 03-31-2005, 03:15 PM

I think we\'re agreeing.

Being a \"playmaker\" is an odd description though. I often think of the star players, whichever position they may play, as the \"playmakers.\" IMO, it is the defensive coordinator\'s job to make use of his best players - and design schemes that put those guys (whatever position they play) in position to make plays.

baronm · 03-31-2005, 03:18 PM

I guess I mean this:

you see a lot less talent guys at DT than you do LB...to me-atleast on teams that win

JKool · 03-31-2005, 03:25 PM

Ok, Billy, I am starting to what you were trying to get at earlier.

Here are some thoughts:
1.

1. The best signal caller for the defense is the MLB because of where he\'s lined up on the field. He\'s in the best position to see the offense and communicate to his teammates.

That sounds roughly right to me, but a SS will do just as well (and does on our team). Also, it really depends on how the calls are distributed. I see no problem with a different LB or even a FS - also a lot of times the call is made as the defense comes out of their huddle, so it will depend on whether or not it needs to be changed by a signal caller.

2.

2. The MLB has to take on \"more\" and \"bigger\" blockers and it makes his job harder than the WLB.

No. That is just one dimension of his job. So, while it may be harder on the MLB in terms of dealing with blockers, it doesn\'t make his job harder than the WLB\'s simplicter.

Didn\'t you just say this?

I\'m suggesting one position is more demanding in terms of strength and being physical.

In general, we agree on that, but that has nothing to do with one job being harder. Consider your top corner\'s job versus your wide-body DT? Who\'s job is harder?

3.

So, while Watson might be more talented than Bockwoldt, he\'s get a tougher go at it playing MLB. I think that\'s just the nature of the positions.

I think I agree with this.

4.

I also think Watson is more suited to play the WLB position.

He is physically and athletically in line with other guys who play MLB. You can ask Danno about that though, since he seems to know more about that point.

5.

Watson is not very physical and often drags defenders down. Sam Mills and Dat Ngyen are a lot smaller than Watson but both would pop you in the mouth. I don\'t think we\'ll ever see that from Watson.

That mostly agrees with what I saw too. However, Watson is built to make a hit; I don\'t see any reason to believe that a little focus in the offseason couldn\'t change this fact. Also, the general view is that he \"sometimes makes arm tackles\", so I\'m not sure that, in general, he drags players down. There is a scouting report on him in a recent thread that says something to that effect.

JKool · 03-31-2005, 03:26 PM

I guess I mean this:

you see a lot less talent guys at DT than you do LB...to me-atleast on teams that win

:thumbsup:

GumboBC · 03-31-2005, 03:34 PM

JKool --

While we agree on some points we disagee on the MAIN points.

Here\'s some thoughts:

1. The WLB might have it tougher than the MLB is SOME ways. But I think when EVERYTHING is taken into consideration that it takes a much more unique person to play MLB rather than OLB.

I think you can take a MLB with speed and he could adjust to WLB just fine. Not always but I believe that statement is much more true than the opposite.

I don\'t think you can take a WLB and convert him into a MLB very easily. Which is my whole point.

It takes a different skill-set for a MLB.

A MLB has to be nearly as fast as a WLB and he really needs to be much more physical.

2. Anyone could call the defensive alignements. But, for my money, I think the MLB is much more suited for the job.

The FS is too far away from the QB and the defensive linemen can hear the MLB much better than a FS. You RARELY ever see a FS or anyone else calling the defensive plays.

03-31-2005, 03:03 PM	#21
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954	Nothing but linebacker talk! I think the importance is up to the defense..a defense with a good line and athletic OLB can mask a sub par MLB...
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954

03-31-2005, 03:06 PM	#22
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Nothing but linebacker talk! MLB, I feel, is the more difficult of all the linebacker positions. ??? You mean more difficult in terms of taking on blocks then, not more difficult simpliciter. Let\'s say that I agree with you; so what? You don\'t feel good about Watson because why? He is big enough and strong enough to take on blockers. He is also fast enough to go sideline to sideline.

03-31-2005, 03:08 PM	#23
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Nothing but linebacker talk! I think the importance is up to the defense..a defense with a good line and athletic OLB can mask a sub par MLB... I agree. In fact, I think that the better the players at the top of my \"impact\" list, the less good the players toward the bottome need to be - in general.

03-31-2005, 03:11 PM	#24
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954	Nothing but linebacker talk! Baron, I might be willing to put OLB and DT as roughly even, but here is an argument: LBs, being further from the line have less opportunity to disrupt a play that a DT who is right at the line. Furthermore, weak DT play will lead to more trouble than weak LB play, since weak DT play will allow a couple of yards a carry or an additional blocker on the LBs. Also, in general, I agree that the further from the line you go, the \"less value\" you seem to have - since by the time the play gets to you the damage may already be done - except for one CB. Without one DB who can take away the easy pass, there is less need to stop the run, since they can just keep throwing slants. That is why my first CB is up higher than some LBs and DLs. but as we saw with our defense..a good LB can play with a bad DT..the Dt\'s Job is to keep the guards busy so the LB can make plays...so in that I will agree the DT is important. but... the linebacker must play the run and drop back in coverage-so the linebacker has more responsiblity imo.. also..the linebackers are usually the playmakers on defence.
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954

03-31-2005, 03:14 PM	#25
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Nothing but linebacker talk! MLB, I feel, is the more difficult of all the linebacker positions. ??? You mean more difficult in terms of taking on blocks then, not more difficult simpliciter. Let\'s say that I agree with you; so what? You don\'t feel good about Watson because why? He is big enough and strong enough to take on blockers. He is also fast enough to go sideline to sideline. I think my point is this: 1. The best signal caller for the defense is the MLB because of where he\'s lined up on the field. He\'s in the best position to see the offense and communicate to his teammates. 2. The MLB has to take on \"more\" and \"bigger\" blockers and it makes his job harder than the WLB. So, while Watson might be more talented than Bockwoldt, he\'s get a tougher go at it playing MLB. I think that\'s just the nature of the positions. I also think Watson is more suited to play the WLB position. Watson is not very physical and often drags defenders down. Now, that\'s better than missing the tackle but that\'s not really how you want a MLB to play. Sam Mills and Dat Ngyen are a lot smaller than Watson but both would pop you in the mouth. I don\'t think we\'ll ever see that from Watson.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

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

03-31-2005, 03:15 PM	#26
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Nothing but linebacker talk! I think we\'re agreeing. Being a \"playmaker\" is an odd description though. I often think of the star players, whichever position they may play, as the \"playmakers.\" IMO, it is the defensive coordinator\'s job to make use of his best players - and design schemes that put those guys (whatever position they play) in position to make plays.

03-31-2005, 03:18 PM	#27
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954	Nothing but linebacker talk! I guess I mean this: you see a lot less talent guys at DT than you do LB...to me-atleast on teams that win
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954

03-31-2005, 03:25 PM	#28
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Nothing but linebacker talk! Ok, Billy, I am starting to what you were trying to get at earlier. Here are some thoughts: 1. 1. The best signal caller for the defense is the MLB because of where he\'s lined up on the field. He\'s in the best position to see the offense and communicate to his teammates. That sounds roughly right to me, but a SS will do just as well (and does on our team). Also, it really depends on how the calls are distributed. I see no problem with a different LB or even a FS - also a lot of times the call is made as the defense comes out of their huddle, so it will depend on whether or not it needs to be changed by a signal caller. 2. 2. The MLB has to take on \"more\" and \"bigger\" blockers and it makes his job harder than the WLB. No. That is just one dimension of his job. So, while it may be harder on the MLB in terms of dealing with blockers, it doesn\'t make his job harder than the WLB\'s simplicter. Didn\'t you just say this? I\'m suggesting one position is more demanding in terms of strength and being physical. In general, we agree on that, but that has nothing to do with one job being harder. Consider your top corner\'s job versus your wide-body DT? Who\'s job is harder? 3. So, while Watson might be more talented than Bockwoldt, he\'s get a tougher go at it playing MLB. I think that\'s just the nature of the positions. I think I agree with this. 4. I also think Watson is more suited to play the WLB position. He is physically and athletically in line with other guys who play MLB. You can ask Danno about that though, since he seems to know more about that point. 5. Watson is not very physical and often drags defenders down. Sam Mills and Dat Ngyen are a lot smaller than Watson but both would pop you in the mouth. I don\'t think we\'ll ever see that from Watson. That mostly agrees with what I saw too. However, Watson is built to make a hit; I don\'t see any reason to believe that a little focus in the offseason couldn\'t change this fact. Also, the general view is that he \"sometimes makes arm tackles\", so I\'m not sure that, in general, he drags players down. There is a scouting report on him in a recent thread that says something to that effect.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

03-31-2005, 03:26 PM	#29
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Nothing but linebacker talk! I guess I mean this: you see a lot less talent guys at DT than you do LB...to me-atleast on teams that win :thumbsup:

03-31-2005, 03:34 PM	#30
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Nothing but linebacker talk! JKool -- While we agree on some points we disagee on the MAIN points. Here\'s some thoughts: 1. The WLB might have it tougher than the MLB is SOME ways. But I think when EVERYTHING is taken into consideration that it takes a much more unique person to play MLB rather than OLB. I think you can take a MLB with speed and he could adjust to WLB just fine. Not always but I believe that statement is much more true than the opposite. I don\'t think you can take a WLB and convert him into a MLB very easily. Which is my whole point. It takes a different skill-set for a MLB. A MLB has to be nearly as fast as a WLB and he really needs to be much more physical. 2. Anyone could call the defensive alignements. But, for my money, I think the MLB is much more suited for the job. The FS is too far away from the QB and the defensive linemen can hear the MLB much better than a FS. You RARELY ever see a FS or anyone else calling the defensive plays.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616