Defense wins championships...well Pass Rush does

[TriplecHamp]

I was bored today and was thinking about some recent Super Bowl Champions.

1) Pittsburgh Steelers-James Harrison and Lamarr Woodley were absolute BEASTS at the OLB position. Lamarr Woodley had a pair of sacks and a huge forced fumble. James Harison was held in check for the most part but he had this one play that well....14 point swing.

2) New York Giants...nuff said.

3) Indinapolis Colts...Freeny/Mathis...nuff said

The Pittsburgh Steelers of 2005 had a good pass rush, All of our Championship teams had good pass rushers, the Bucs, and Ravens had a good Pass rush. Im not sure if we have the Pass rush to win the SB this year. Maybe Crable, TBC, Wood or Redd Can step up but maybe not. I don't see how we can have an average Pass Rush and win the SB even our 18-1 team had a good pass rush. IMO we need help and fast.

 

[patsfan-1982]

I was bored today and was thinking about some recent Super Bowl Champions.

1) Pittsburgh Steelers-James Harrison and Lamarr Woodley were absolute BEASTS at the OLB position. Lamarr Woodley had a pair of sacks and a huge forced fumble. James Harison was held in check for the most part but he had this one play that well....14 point swing.

2) New York Giants...nuff said.

3) Indinapolis Colts...Freeny/Mathis...nuff said

The Pittsburgh Steelers of 2005 had a good pass rush, All of our Championship teams had good pass rushers, the Bucs, and Ravens had a good Pass rush. Im not sure if we have the Pass rush to win the SB this year. Maybe Crable, TBC, Wood or Redd Can step up but maybe not. I don't see how we can have an average Pass Rush and win the SB even our 18-1 team had a good pass rush. IMO we need help and fast.

if it would take just a good passrush to win a SB the eagels ravens and cowboys would have won the last 3 SB and that 18-1 team was #2 in the NFL in sack's but they was not a good passrushing team they got most of there sack's in garbage time when team's had to throw cause they were down by 30 ( 4 ) of mike vrabel's 12.5 sack's came vs the redskins when they were up 50 to 0 sack's are overrated

 

[TriplecHamp]

if it would take just a good passrush to win a SB the eagels ravens and cowboys would have won the last 3 SB and that 18-1 team was #2 in the NFL in sack's but they was not a good passrushing team they got most of there sack's in garbage time when team's had to throw cause they were down by 30 ( 4 ) of mike vrabel's 12.5 sack's came vs the redskins when they were up 50 to 0 sack's are overrated

I'm not saying all you need is a Pass Rush I'm saying that I don't think you can win the Superbowl without one. Sacks are not everything that's why I said "Pass Rush". Rushing the Passer,putting pressure on the QB, bringing heat what ever you want to call it we don't have it IMO and we need it if we are going to win the SB. Another thing that has plagued us is not wrapping up. Its hurt us plenty of times including that won freak play in SB 42. How can you sacks are overrated as a Patriots fan, we've been sacked allot recently and we haven't sacked anybody recently. Tom Brady threw plenty of touchdowns in "garbage time" as a Patriot's fan would you say those TD are Overrated?

 

[iapatsfan]

I'm not saying all you need is a Pass Rush I'm saying that I don't think you can win the Superbowl without one. Sacks are not everything that's why I said "Pass Rush". Rushing the Passer,putting pressure on the QB, bringing heat what ever you want to call it we don't have it IMO and we need it if we are going to win the SB. Another thing that has plagued us is not wrapping up. Its hurt us plenty of times including that won freak play in SB 42. How can you sacks are overrated as a Patriots fan, we've been sacked allot recently and we haven't sacked anybody recently. Tom Brady threw plenty of touchdowns in "garbage time" as a Patriot's fan would you say those TD are Overrated?

Couldn't agree more, and the current NE Pats are the worst pass rushing team of all the teams playing a 3-4. I really believe that. I think the Pats current OLB core is as bad as their is when comparing 3-4 teams. It consists of a decent player (Thomas) and a bunch of guys that have never shown the ability to rush the passer at any level. I know TBC was a quality sack guy in college while playing DE, but he's never proven to be anything at OLB.

 

[patsfan-1982]

I'm not saying all you need is a Pass Rush I'm saying that I don't think you can win the Superbowl without one. Sacks are not everything that's why I said "Pass Rush". Rushing the Passer,putting pressure on the QB, bringing heat what ever you want to call it we don't have it IMO and we need it if we are going to win the SB. Another thing that has plagued us is not wrapping up. Its hurt us plenty of times including that won freak play in SB 42. How can you sacks are overrated as a Patriots fan, we've been sacked allot recently and we haven't sacked anybody recently. Tom Brady threw plenty of touchdowns in "garbage time" as a Patriot's fan would you say those TD are Overrated?

will i dont think we are geting peppers but we will be a lot younger and faster at LB this year then we have been in a long time i think the secondary is more to worry about if they cant cover the LB and DL cant get to the QB

 

[mayoclinic]

I think that the strongest teams have an aggressive defense that ideally puts a lot of pressure on opposing offenses and creates confusion and ultimately big plays. Sacks are only one part of the puzzle. Turnovers, 3rd down and red zone defense are all equally key. Stop the Jets on 3rd and 15 last year and we win the division. Obviously, a sack is one way to do that, but not the only way.

Our DL is as strong as ever, probably stronger with the addition of Ron Brace. Or secondary is potentially the deepest we've ever had and the strongest since 2003, with plenty of speed and playmaking ability. I think the coverage will be much better, and Meriweather will become even more of a playmaker. Once Butler and Chung come up to speed we will be able to do a lot more with safety and CB blitzes and creating turnovers.

LB is the biggest weakness. We have decent depth at OLB and 2 out of our 4 starters at LB are pro bowl caliber (Thomas and Mayo). We are thin at ILB and we lack a proven pass rusher opposite Thomas at OLB. No too different from Pittsburgh 2 years ago when James Harrison took over from Joey Porter and Lawrence Timmons and Lamarr Woodley were rookies. If Guyton, Crable, Woods and Redd come through and we don't get killed by injuries then we are in terrific shape. If not, then it will depend on how successful BB is at scheming to cover up for defensive weaknesses.

 

[jays52]

I think that the general statement is correct. Although, I would add that the defense needs to be able to execute their assignments at a high level, regardless of rushing calls. It should also include the ability to create significant gameplan issues with the offense. If a great pass rushing team that is reliant upon one method is playing a well coached offense, they will loose nearly every time. Blocking schemes are amongst some of the more complicated calls in football. If executed properly, they are highly effective at stopping even the most unrelenting pass rush. I would look at it as the ability to get to the quarterback in many ways while remaining ahead of the OC wins championships.

BTW, nice sig. "Keep drinkin myoplex, *****"

 

[Deus Irae]

Regardless of pass rush, 8 of the past 10 Super Bowl winning teams had a top 6 defense. Only the two Manning teams didn't, and they both got there due to fluky wins over the Patriots.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think that the strongest teams have an aggressive defense that ideally puts a lot of pressure on opposing offenses and creates confusion and ultimately big plays. Sacks are only one part of the puzzle. Turnovers, 3rd down and red zone defense are all equally key. Stop the Jets on 3rd and 15 last year and we win the division. Obviously, a sack is one way to do that, but not the only way.

Our DL is as strong as ever, probably stronger with the addition of Ron Brace. Or secondary is potentially the deepest we've ever had and the strongest since 2003, with plenty of speed and playmaking ability. I think the coverage will be much better, and Meriweather will become even more of a playmaker. Once Butler and Chung come up to speed we will be able to do a lot more with safety and CB blitzes and creating turnovers.

LB is the biggest weakness. We have decent depth at OLB and 2 out of our 4 starters at LB are pro bowl caliber (Thomas and Mayo). We are thin at ILB and we lack a proven pass rusher opposite Thomas at OLB. No too different from Pittsburgh 2 years ago when James Harrison took over from Joey Porter and Lawrence Timmons and Lamarr Woodley were rookies. If Guyton, Crable, Woods and Redd come through and we don't get killed by injuries then we are in terrific shape. If not, then it will depend on how successful BB is at scheming to cover up for defensive weaknesses.

No kidding. It's funny how everyone assumes that if someone isn't already an all-pro, he sucks. None of these people have even seen Crable or Redd play, and most of them pretty much open and close the book on Woods based on a fumble that he didn't come up with in the SB in 2007. They all point to Pittsburgh as if they never have any question marks at LB, yet they did basically the same thing a couple of years ago (ditching Porter and going with the 'no-name' young guy named Woodley) that a lot of these people are killing the Pats for (ditching Vrabel and going with whoever comes out on top).

I'm not guaranteeing that the move will work out, but the chicken littles on this board are irritating, at best. Belichick is a hell of a lot closer to the situation than any of us, and he's actually pretty good at evaluating personnel.

Maybe that's why this whole OLB doesn't really bother me at all. We have young guys with potential, and the lack of moves on that front indicates that Belichick probably likes what he sees from them. Either that or he just decided "you know what, screw it, this just isn't challenging enough. I'm going to see if I wan win a SB with no pass rush just for the hell of it".

 

[mayoclinic]

No kidding. It's funny how everyone assumes that if someone isn't already an all-pro, he sucks. None of these people have even seen Crable or Redd play, and most of them pretty much open and close the book on Woods based on a fumble that he didn't come up with in the SB in 2007. They all point to Pittsburgh as if they never have any question marks at LB, yet they did basically the same thing a couple of years ago (ditching Porter and going with the 'no-name' young guy named Woodley) that a lot of these people are killing the Pats for (ditching Vrabel and going with whoever comes out on top).

I'm not guaranteeing that the move will work out, but the chicken littles on this board are irritating, at best. Belichick is a hell of a lot closer to the situation than any of us, and he's actually pretty good at evaluating personnel.

Maybe that's why this whole OLB doesn't really bother me at all. We have young guys with potential, and the lack of moves on that front indicates that Belichick probably likes what he sees from them. Either that or he just decided "you know what, screw it, this just isn't challenging enough. I'm going to see if I wan win a SB with no pass rush just for the hell of it".

The Steelers had the confidence in their ability to judge players and the chutzpah to let Joey Porter go and replace him with UDFA James Harrison, and to bring in Woodley and Timmons. Except for James Farrior, they essentially turned over their starting LB corps between the 2005 SB team and the 2008 one.

If BB feels that Woods, Crable, Redd, Craig (at OLB) and Guyton (at ILB) are up to the job, then who cares what the naysayers think. This is different from 2005, when Bruschi's unexpected stroke left us looking for short-term fixes, and Chad Brown and Monty Beisel obviously couldn't cut it. BB has been trying to turn over the LB corps for 2 years now, and if he has confidence that the young turks are developing and doesn't feel he needs to pursue other options in the draft or FA, then that's fine with me.

Remember how thin we were at QB outside of Brady last year? Thank God we never had to put Matt Cassel to the test - he couldn't win a game in the 4th quarter with a lead to save his life. Maybe, just maybe, this Belichick guy actually knows what he's doing.

 

[Disco Volante]

Talent mixed with luck wins championships.

 

[mgteich]

Yes maybe we should expect that the young turks that Belichick had developed at LB will be as good as those he has developed for us in the best. Just who would those players be? Perhaps Belichick is just trying to prove that he can win a Super Bowl with more UDFA's than anyone in history.

The Steelers had the confidence in their ability to judge players and the chutzpah to let Joey Porter go and replace him with UDFA James Harrison, and to bring in Woodley and Timmons. Except for James Farrior, they essentially turned over their starting LB corps between the 2005 SB team and the 2008 one.

If BB feels that Woods, Crable, Redd, Craig (at OLB) and Guyton (at ILB) are up to the job, then who cares what the naysayers think. This is different from 2005, when Bruschi's unexpected stroke left us looking for short-term fixes, and Chad Brown and Monty Beisel obviously couldn't cut it. BB has been trying to turn over the LB corps for 2 years now, and if he has confidence that the young turks are developing and doesn't feel he needs to pursue other options in the draft or FA, then that's fine with me.

Remember how thin we were at QB outside of Brady last year? Thank God we never had to put Matt Cassel to the test - he couldn't win a game in the 4th quarter with a lead to save his life. Maybe, just maybe, this Belichick guy actually knows what he's doing.

 

[mgteich]

Sure, I agree. If three of our youngsters are good as Harrison, Timmons and Woodley, we'll be fine. And, we'll have no injuries. Otherwise, we will need to scheme to cover up of weakness at linebacker.

The question is why would Belichick volunteer to put us in this vulnerable position.

LB is the biggest weakness. We have decent depth at OLB and 2 out of our 4 starters at LB are pro bowl caliber (Thomas and Mayo). We are thin at ILB and we lack a proven pass rusher opposite Thomas at OLB. No too different from Pittsburgh 2 years ago when James Harrison took over from Joey Porter and Lawrence Timmons and Lamarr Woodley were rookies. If Guyton, Crable, Woods and Redd come through and we don't get killed by injuries then we are in terrific shape. If not, then it will depend on how successful BB is at scheming to cover up for defensive weaknesses.

 

[RayClay]

No kidding. It's funny how everyone assumes that if someone isn't already an all-pro, he sucks...

No, I'm assuming that,if three of the guys we're counting on were passed over by all 32 teams seven times (plus compensation picks) that we're really counting on catching lightning three times. that's a lot different than "not all pros".

They all point to Pittsburgh as if they never have any question marks at LB, yet they did basically the same thing a couple of years ago (ditching Porter and going with the 'no-name' young guy named Woodley)...

Pittsburgh never has question marks at LB. I'll repeat, never. That's because any linebacker who makes it has to compete with first second and third round picks, top FAs like Farrior in addition to low round picks and FAs. Woodley was a second round pick, brought along through competition. Harrison was a FA who took six years to prove himself through that type od competition.

By contrast, TBC and Alexander failed after being inserted by default and I can't see who Woods or guyton beat out either. By the way, the 15th overall pick from 2007 Timmons, will just be a full time starter this year, his third after the release of Foote. Imagine being able to spend two full seasons grooming a first round pick because you already have an experienced starter.

Face it, Pittsburgh's linebacker situation compared to ours is a joke.

Maybe that's why this whole OLB doesn't really bother me at all. We have young guys with potential, and the lack of moves on that front indicates that Belichick probably likes what he sees from them.

Hmmmm... did someone say assuming? How do you know they have pro potential? One mid round pick and 3 FAs.

 

[mayoclinic]

Sure, I agree. If three of our youngsters are good as Harrison, Timmons and Woodley, we'll be fine. And, we'll have no injuries. Otherwise, we will need to scheme to cover up of weakness at linebacker.

The question is why would Belichick volunteer to put us in this vulnerable position.

Because he obviously has confidence in the kids. Why did Pittsburgh volunteer to put themselves in that position in 2007? None of their kids was a sure thing at that point either. Hindsight is always 20-20, and I'm not saying that we'll be fine, but BB obviously felt that addressing the position wasn't as big a priority as the rest of us. Clearly either he's a blithering idiot, or he's an extreme risk taker and adrenaline junkie who likes living on the edge, or he has seen something that makes him feel that the position is not quite as weak as we all think it is. He hasn't been shy about bringing in FAs in the past, so his failure to do so up to now is suggestive.

I wanted an OLB in the draft as much as anyone. If we had gone Chung at 34, Barwin at 40 and Butler at 41 and then taken a DT in the 3rd or 4th round I would have been ecstatic. I keep hoping to read that we've signed, or at least brought in for a visit, one or more FA LBs. So I keep coming back to either BB being an idiot, a daredevil, or having a plan. You seem to prefer the first 2 options. I opt for the latter based on his track record.

 

[patsfan-1982]

Sure, I agree. If three of our youngsters are good as Harrison, Timmons and Woodley, we'll be fine. And, we'll have no injuries. Otherwise, we will need to scheme to cover up of weakness at linebacker.

The question is why would Belichick volunteer to put us in this vulnerable position.

i think the young guy's will play good will they put up the number that the steelers LB put up no maybe mayo and AD will but they will all play good as far as Belichick volunteering to put you in a vulnerable positon ? lol its not your job on the line its his if he thouht they cant play he would cut them cause if they cant play good its not on you its not on me its on him

 

[RayClay]

Yes maybe we should expect that the young turks that Belichick had developed at LB will be as good as those he has developed for us in the best. Just who would those players be?

They are the mythical low round and FA Defensive ends that we carefully groomed into starting linebackers.

Like the unicorn. No one has actually seen one.

Parcells drafted a #4 overall who had played both end and LB in college. Bruschi was a rush end who switched to both LB positions, but was a third round pick. T. Johnson, 2nd round linebacker. Phifer 2nd rounder, veteran. colvin 4th rounder, but had two 10.5 sack seasons in a row before we acquired him. Vrabel, third rounder, couldn't crack the Steelers lineup.

Until Woods outlasts the failed starting career of TBC, or a legitimate challenge, I don't consider him more than interim. Always been a fan, I'd love to see him show starter potential. sure haven't seen it yet.

 

[eom]

god help me.

 

[mgteich]

Actually, I think the plan is very simple.

OLB
1) Thomas will be healthy and the biggest addition (he was injured on Nov 9th)
2) Crable was drafted to compete for the starting job and is expected to do so.
3) Woods was kept as a one-year transition (could stay past 2009)
4) Belichick was thrilled to be able to get Banta-Cain back, Woods with more experience (could stay past 2009).
5) Redd and Craig are the developmental LBs, if either makes the team.

ILB
1) Mayo is Mayo, and is expected to improve.
2) Bruschi is expected to start and split time with Guyton as he did last year.
3) Guyton is expected to improve and split time with Bruschi as he did last year.
4) Appleby and Alexander are competing for for the #4 spot at this point.

MOST IMPORTANTLY
No injuries are allowed.

BOTTOM LINE
I like Thomas, Woods and Banta-Cain. I have great hope for Crable and Guyton. I would much, much prefer two veterans be added, one at OLB and one ILB. In 2001, we added Vrabel, Phifer and Cox. Is there no need now?

Because he obviously has confidence in the kids. Why did Pittsburgh volunteer to put themselves in that position in 2007? None of their kids was a sure thing at that point either. Hindsight is always 20-20, and I'm not saying that we'll be fine, but BB obviously felt that addressing the position wasn't as big a priority as the rest of us. Clearly either he's a blithering idiot, or he's an extreme risk taker and adrenaline junkie who likes living on the edge, or he has seen something that makes him feel that the position is not quite as weak as we all think it is. He hasn't been shy about bringing in FAs in the past, so his failure to do so up to now is suggestive.

I wanted an OLB in the draft as much as anyone. If we had gone Chung at 34, Barwin at 40 and Butler at 41 and then taken a DT in the 3rd or 4th round I would have been ecstatic. I keep hoping to read that we've signed, or at least brought in for a visit, one or more FA LBs. So I keep coming back to either BB being an idiot, a daredevil, or having a plan. You seem to prefer the first 2 options. I opt for the latter based on his track record.

 

[bigfandan]

If BB feels that Woods, Crable, Redd, Craig (at OLB) and Guyton (at ILB) are up to the job, then who cares what the naysayers think. BB has been trying to turn over the LB corps for 2 years now, and if he has confidence that the young turks are developing and doesn't feel he needs to pursue other options in the draft or FA, then that's fine with me.

Maybe, just maybe, this Belichick guy actually knows what he's doing.

This Belichick guy has also offered a 36-yr-old linebacker more money than Miami. Still believe he has FULL confidence on the youngsters. Didn't think so!

This Belichick guy was so desparate he started senior citizens Junior Seau and Rosie Colvin last couple of years.

You know why he was the most picky evaluator of line backers? Concensus all pro young LBs (Woodley) were never going to be enough for him to even take a look?

The truth is that he sucks at evaluating young LB talents. Only ones he liked are aged veteran players with proven NFL track record (Seau, Vrable, A. Thomas, Johnson). He is not in the same league as Parcells on LBs.

My 2cents.