LB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

[signbabybrady]

I think there is a big Myth out there that BB and Pioli don't adress the MLB position.

They just don't do it via the draft.

Since BB and Pioli came here they have Found 3 stud LBers via Free Agency, Vrabel, Colvin, and Thomas. It may be early to call Thomas a stud but still.

Than add in guys Like Cox, Phifer, Seau....
That is 6 really good LBers, I wouldn't exactly call that ignoring the position.

When you consider the talented LBers that were already here Willie, TJ, Bru....there has actually probably been more talented players at that position than any other position on the team.

Think about it our LBing core has been one of the strenghts of this team year in and year out yet we always want to get more. Guess that is the nature of the beast.

Now I am not saying I don't want a young LBer that could possibly be here for 10 seasons but I don't think this has been a position that has been neglected the way some people around here like to think.

 

[oldskool138]

Re: MLB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

LOL I thought you were talking about Babe Ruth calling the home run at Wrigley Field type myth. Wrong MLB.

 

[TripleOption]

Re: MLB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

I think there is a big Myth out there that BB and Pioli don't adress the MLB position.

They just don't do it via the draft.

Since BB and Pioli came here they have Found 3 stud LBers via Free Agency, Vrabel, Colvin, and Thomas. It may be early to call Thomas a stud but still.

Than add in guys Like Cox, Phifer, Seau....
That is 6 really good LBers, I wouldn't exactly call that ignoring the position.

When you consider the talented LBers that were already here Willie, TJ, Bru....there has actually probably been more talented players at that position than any other position on the team.

Vrabel, Colvin and McGinest are not MLB or ILB. Thomas played mostly at OLB.

 

[fgssand]

Re: MLB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

Vrabel, Colvin and McGinest are not MLB or ILB. Thomas played mostly at OLB.

I think he meant all Lb's and he is right......we do have now and have always had one hell of a group of linebackers.

By the way Thomas played inside much of this year and Vrable can be found inside quite often as well - as injury & need dictates.

No question, it would be great if we could find a young, smart stud LB'er to star from day one - maybe, picking #7 this is the year or maybe the Big "O" Oscar is the guy, who knows.

Man, it's nice to see a football post.

 

[primetime]

Re: MLB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

Too early to call Thomas a stud? He was the best player on the defense in the biggest game of the year.

 

[TripleOption]

Re: MLB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

I think he meant all Lb's and he is right......we do have now and have always had one hell of a group of linebackers.

By the way Thomas played inside much of this year and Vrable can be found inside quite often as well - as injury & need dictates.

No question, it would be great if we could find a young, smart stud LB'er to star from day one - maybe, picking #7 this is the year or maybe the Big "O" Oscar is the guy, who knows.

Man, it's nice to see a football post.

He said "MLB", which is the Mike LB or Middle LB.

Thomas was brought over after spending the bulk of his time at OLB. Vrabel has been and OLB/DE his whole career and was only moved to ILB for a short time due to injuries.

 

[signbabybrady]

Re: MLB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

He said "MLB", which is the Mike LB or Middle LB.

Thomas was brought over after spending the bulk of his time at OLB. Vrabel has been and OLB/DE his whole career and was only moved to ILB for a short time due to injuries.

he was right though I had posted about ILB on another thread and it was on my mind when I started this one...I did mean just LBs and will change the title now.

 

[cornhuskers_2002]

There aren't that many ILB'ers that can play this defense that have come out in the past 5 years. There are not many people who can play it well.

 

[TripleOption]

The position of ILB is dieing

Not really. An MLB in a 4-3 or even some 4-3 OLB's would do nicely. Hell, a smart 3-4 OLB like Vrabel can fit. The Tampa 2 teams tend to have smaller faster LB's, more like bigger Safeties. They wouldn't fit.

Zach Thomas or Morgan would fit right in. If only the Pats had the low pick last year. Pat Willis would have been real nice to grab.

I would think that players like Kawika Mitchell, Ray Lewis, Keith Brooking, James Farrior, EJ Henderson etc...would fit in physically. Then it all comes down to their football smarts.

 

[VJ11]

As you might know, BB likes his LBs experienced, who have seen almost everything, so they can digest the defensive playbook more easily. This rules out some draftee busting into the line-up in his rookie season. And due to the fact that the Pats base defense is the 3-4, they don't have MLBs, but ILBs. We've seen Chad Brown yo-yoing between the Pats roster and the street and even Pittsburgh the last couple of season. It's very hard to find the right guys to play ILB in the Patriots defense. Why do you think BB made that phone call to Seau when the man had retired from the Chargers only a day earlier?
We'll have to look at the current depth chart to find who will be ILB in 2008, because the only alternatives are FA guys who have played at Pittsburgh, San Diego, or Dallas (the teams that are running the 3-4 as well).

 

[TripleOption]

the only alternatives are FA guys who have played at Pittsburgh, San Diego, or Dallas (the teams that are running the 3-4 as well).

I disagree. The ILB in the teams you mentioned are probably equivalent to the MLB in a 4-3.

The 3-4 in New England is a completely different animal. I don't think any of those other teams ask of their DL and LB what they are required to do in New England.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

There aren't that many ILB'ers that can play this defense that have come out in the past 5 years. There are not many people who can play it well.

I think this is a HUGE myth.

If you don't give someone a chance to play you'll never find one.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

I disagree. The ILB in the teams you mentioned are probably equivalent to the MLB in a 4-3.

The 3-4 in New England is a completely different animal. I don't think any of those other teams ask of their DL and LB what they are required to do in New England.

There are alot of teams now palying the 3-4. you can't tell me there aren't 3-4 linebackers out there.

 

[TripleOption]

There are alot of teams now palying the 3-4. you can't tell me there aren't 3-4 linebackers out there.

Arrgghh.

Read the thread. There are 3 teams playing the 2 gap 3-4, all fighting for the limited 3-4 talent coming out of College.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Adalius was forced outside this year when Colvin got hurt. Prior to that, he was an ILB

 

[TripleOption]

Adalius was forced outside this year when Colvin got hurt. Prior to that, he was an ILB

He was moved inside by BB. He was an outside edge rusher type in Baltimore. There was much debate about where he would play here in NE, and the consensus was that OLB was his "natural position". In fact, there was a lot of dissension about his move to ILB.

 

[Ring 6]

I think this is a HUGE myth.

If you don't give someone a chance to play you'll never find one.

But its insane to 'give a chance' to someone who lacks the skillset.

Our system asks for different skills at the LB position than what is traditional.
Our LBs typically are responsible for a smaller area of the field. Our LBs are required to beat OL blocks.
In many 4-3 systems the focus of the defensive lineman is to keep the OL off of the LB. (I remember a guy I played in High School with was a DT. He was good, but undisciplined and also the guy who liked to fall on the pile and getcredit for a tackle. In HS he did whatever he wanted, and it was allowed, because he could manhandled anyone who was blocking him. He went to play college ball, and quit duringhis first season. The college played a 4-3 system that was designed to free up the LBs. He was actually coach to BLOCK the OL. He was plssed because he said they were making him be an OL not a guy who makes every tackle)

In most systems, you want the MLB to have exceptional speed. Your system dictates that you are tyingup the blockers who willhave a good angle on him, and his job is to outrun the blocking to the point of attack.
While that guy COULD possess the skills that are valued in our system, he has not used them, and they are not the skills that dictated his high draft value.
In our system, speed is less valued, but being able to take on and shed a blocker is more valued. In other words, I want a different guy to run sideline to sideline than to play between the C and T on one side of the field.

In most systems, speed is a highly valued skill. "Our ideal ILB" would be average or slow in at MLB in most college systems, but big enough and very fast as DE.

If you look at our defense vs, say the Colts, you see that:

Our LBs are the same size (actually bigger than) their DEs.
Our DEs are the same size (actually bigger than) their DTs.
Our LBs are massive compared to their LBs.

Most college system, and most of the NFL is closer to the Colts skillset position by position. (Many college LBs end up NFL safeties for example)

For us to draft a LB high, we would be drafting someone who is a fit for BOTH systems, or someone who we will be changing their position in the NFL.

When you are looking at college LBs, the skills that cause them to be high picks, are the ones we value least (they are high picks because our system is not common in the NFL). The guys who have the skills we covet probably played DE in college, or were LBs that are not high on anyone elses list. (The problem is there are not many of those because they aren't playing LB in college).
A good analogy would be drafting Centers in the NBA, needing a 7 footer to run your system, but 95% of the Cs in college are 6'8". You wont be drafting Cs very often, and the guy who fits your plans, also fits everyone elses.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

Not really. An MLB in a 4-3 or even some 4-3 OLB's would do nicely. Hell, a smart 3-4 OLB like Vrabel can fit. The Tampa 2 teams tend to have smaller faster LB's, more like bigger Safeties. They wouldn't fit.

Zach Thomas or Morgan would fit right in. If only the Pats had the low pick last year. Pat Willis would have been real nice to grab.

I would think that players like Kawika Mitchell, Ray Lewis, Keith Brooking, James Farrior, EJ Henderson etc...would fit in physically. Then it all comes down to their football smarts.

Arrgghh.

Read the thread. There are 3 teams playing the 2 gap 3-4, all fighting for the limited 3-4 talent coming out of College.

I read the thread and it seems to me a guy like David Harris would work out well. This is one of the biggest myths ever perpetuated. BB hasn't picked one because there hasn't been value and I think he's tried to get away with older guys for so long and every year the piper gets closer to wanting to being paid.

One of these seasons they aren't going to have viable options when a couple guys go down and it's going to be a long season. Especially since there lb's are slowing and it's affecting the secondary.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

But its insane to 'give a chance' to someone who lacks the skillset.

Our system asks for different skills at the LB position than what is traditional.
Our LBs typically are responsible for a smaller area of the field. Our LBs are required to beat OL blocks.
In many 4-3 systems the focus of the defensive lineman is to keep the OL off of the LB. (I remember a guy I played in High School with was a DT. He was good, but undisciplined and also the guy who liked to fall on the pile and getcredit for a tackle. In HS he did whatever he wanted, and it was allowed, because he could manhandled anyone who was blocking him. He went to play college ball, and quit duringhis first season. The college played a 4-3 system that was designed to free up the LBs. He was actually coach to BLOCK the OL. He was plssed because he said they were making him be an OL not a guy who makes every tackle)

In most systems, you want the MLB to have exceptional speed. Your system dictates that you are tyingup the blockers who willhave a good angle on him, and his job is to outrun the blocking to the point of attack.
While that guy COULD possess the skills that are valued in our system, he has not used them, and they are not the skills that dictated his high draft value.
In our system, speed is less valued, but being able to take on and shed a blocker is more valued. In other words, I want a different guy to run sideline to sideline than to play between the C and T on one side of the field.

In most systems, speed is a highly valued skill. "Our ideal ILB" would be average or slow in at MLB in most college systems, but big enough and very fast as DE.

If you look at our defense vs, say the Colts, you see that:

Our LBs are the same size (actually bigger than) their DEs.
Our DEs are the same size (actually bigger than) their DTs.
Our LBs are massive compared to their LBs.

Most college system, and most of the NFL is closer to the Colts skillset position by position. (Many college LBs end up NFL safeties for example)

For us to draft a LB high, we would be drafting someone who is a fit for BOTH systems, or someone who we will be changing their position in the NFL.

When you are looking at college LBs, the skills that cause them to be high picks, are the ones we value least (they are high picks because our system is not common in the NFL). The guys who have the skills we covet probably played DE in college, or were LBs that are not high on anyone elses list. (The problem is there are not many of those because they aren't playing LB in college).
A good analogy would be drafting Centers in the NBA, needing a 7 footer to run your system, but 95% of the Cs in college are 6'8". You wont be drafting Cs very often, and the guy who fits your plans, also fits everyone elses.

SO basically over the past four years or so .... you can't find one linebacker in 7 rounds to groom into a starter? this isn't a new problem they just discovered. the last young linebacker was Rosey when they first signed him.

 

[TripleOption]

I read the thread and it seems to me a guy like David Harris would work out well. This is one of the biggest myths ever perpetuated. BB hasn't picked one because there hasn't been value and I think he's tried to get away with older guys for so long and every year the piper gets closer to wanting to being paid.

One of these seasons they aren't going to have viable options when a couple guys go down and it's going to be a long season. Especially since there lb's are slowing and it's affecting the secondary.

I agree about Harris, but my frustration is with posters repeatedly offering the Cowboys, 49ers, Chargers or Steelers as viable 3-4 teams.