Burgess - A Question Mark On Defense

[Ring 6]

Actually, based on the Scout Inc report, I think he may benefit from moving to OLB on running downs since it is his speed and moves that are his strength on run downs, not engaging tackles. As a 3-4 OLB, you engage the tackles less than you do as a 4-3 DE. Based on Scout Inc's report (which is very superficial), him being a 4-3 DE and not a 3-4 OLB may be the reason why he isn't considered a good run defender.

I see it exactly the opposite. He needs to controll his 2 gaps the one between him and the DE and the one between him and the sideline. He needs to take on blockers, whether its the T, the TE or a pulling G, not run to chase. But the speed and moves they are saying are a positive as a DE are a negative as an OLB. There is no doubt he would be very slow for an OLB.
In the 43 he has typically played in a one gap system. That does not involve 'taking on' Ts, but getting past them.
A 2gap requires you to engage, control and shed the blocker because you are responsible for the gap on either side of him. A one gap players shoots through that gap and does not have responsibility for any other gap. Its night and day.
You can't take the analysis of a player as a one gap and apply it to a 2gap. And you cant take 'fast DE' and turn that into 'fast OLB'

 

[mgteich]

I agree that a situational pass rusher was worth a 3rd and a 5th. I had thought that Green had that role.

I was more than fine with bringing in Burgess and Banta-Cain to improve the pass rush.

Please distinguish the roles you expect from Banta-Cain and Burgess. Also is Green now simply a backup DE?

Well that is part of the issue. BB needed pass rush help. For some reason you seem to think he wouldnt get it unless it came in a package that brought something else with it. I disagree.
Would a starting NT be worth the price? Was Ted Washington? Would a starting ILB? A nickel corner?
Burgess, as a sub package DE will play as much or more than all of those players.
I disagree neither of us have any evidence.
Mine is his career and what he has been doing in practice.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I agree that a situational pass rusher was worth a 3rd and a 5th. I had thought that Green had that role.

I was more than fine with bringing in Burgess and Banta-Cain to improve the pass rush.

Please distinguish the roles you expect from Banta-Cain and Burgess. Also is Green now simply a backup DE?

I know you were asking Andy but this answer seems pretty cut and dry. Green is a up-the-middle pass rushing presence as opposed to someone that can bring heat off the edge.

TBC doesnt have the speed or the talent that Burgess has...Plus TBC is a solid presence on STs...To be frank, I think it's up for debate that TBC is a lock to make the roster.

 

[Rob0729]

I see it exactly the opposite. He needs to controll his 2 gaps the one between him and the DE and the one between him and the sideline. He needs to take on blockers, whether its the T, the TE or a pulling G, not run to chase. But the speed and moves they are saying are a positive as a DE are a negative as an OLB. There is no doubt he would be very slow for an OLB.
In the 43 he has typically played in a one gap system. That does not involve 'taking on' Ts, but getting past them.
A 2gap requires you to engage, control and shed the blocker because you are responsible for the gap on either side of him. A one gap players shoots through that gap and does not have responsibility for any other gap. Its night and day.
You can't take the analysis of a player as a one gap and apply it to a 2gap. And you cant take 'fast DE' and turn that into 'fast OLB'

You are talking about the responsibilities of a D-lineman for a 2 gap, not an OLB. An OLB in a 3-4, 2 gap system does not have a gap responsibilty as you say. They take on a role very similiar to a DE in a 4-3 except they do it from a standing position in most cases and line up outside the tackle rather than usually over them. In a two gap system the d-linemen have gap responsibilities to free up the LBs to make plays.

By the way, who said he would be real slow for a 3-4 OLB? Compared to say Willie McGinest? Is he fast or quick anyway (two very different things)? Two different things. Who said that his open field movement is purely speed and not instincts and smarts. McGinest was painfully slow as an OLB, but his instincts and smarts made him very effective. Besides, Belichick for the most part during the Super Bowl years chose size and intelligence over speed at LB. Burgess being able to make those moves may speak far more to his abilities than just his speed.

 

[mgteich]

The debate about Banta-Cain making the team is "For Posters Only". No one on the team has any intention of cutting Tully. He is a backup veteran who knows the system well and who can play a major role if necessary. If not, he is a fine emergency backup and a top special teamer. The only reason that he hasn't been here his entire career is that SF chose to overpay by a large amount for his services.

I know you were asking Andy but this answer seems pretty cut and dry. Green is a up-the-middle pass rushing presence as opposed to someone that can bring heat off the edge.

TBC doesnt have the speed or the talent that Burgess has...Plus TBC is a solid presence on STs...To be frank, I think it's up for debate that TBC is a lock to make the roster.

 

[Rob0729]

Well that is part of the issue. BB needed pass rush help. For some reason you seem to think he wouldnt get it unless it came in a package that brought something else with it. I disagree.
Would a starting NT be worth the price? Was Ted Washington? Would a starting ILB? A nickel corner?
Burgess, as a sub package DE will play as much or more than all of those players.
I disagree neither of us have any evidence.
Mine is his career and what he has been doing in practice.

Ted Washington was brought in for a 4th rounder and only played first and second down. So apparently, Belichick did

You mean you evidence is that Burgess was successful playing OLB in a Belichickian 3-4 when asked especially in goalline situations? Ok, I can agree with it. Evidence isn't proof that you are right. It evidence that supports your theory. Proof is when by mid season he is only lining up in subpackages as a DE or a down OLB.

So based on five days of practice (the only amount of time we have been privvy to with Burgess), it is proof that Belichick isn't going to use him at OLB. Again, the guy came in a week before camp broke and between walkthrough day and days off after the game, we have had a very limited exposure to what Burgess is doing in practice. Besides, the practice has been heavy 4-3. The Pats had used heavy 4-3 the entire preseason of 2006 (I think) and went back to 3-4 near exclusively once the season started. Don't read too much from what you see in practice. Belichick consistently plays players in different positions during the preseason and training camp to make them more versatile and make it easy to move them if there is an emergency (for example when Troy played DB in camp and then late in the season, injuries made it neccessary for him to play it in real games).

 

[mgteich]

A 3-4 OLB has edge responsibilities. He must be able to pass-rush. However, he must also be able to contain running backs and screens on his side.

You are talking about the responsibilities of a D-lineman for a 2 gap, not an OLB. An OLB in a 3-4, 2 gap system does not have a gap responsibilty as you say. They take on a role very similiar to a DE in a 4-3 except they do it from a standing position in most cases and line up outside the tackle rather than usually over them. In a two gap system the d-linemen have gap responsibilities to free up the LBs to make plays.

 

[Rob0729]

I agree that a situational pass rusher was worth a 3rd and a 5th. I had thought that Green had that role.

I was more than fine with bringing in Burgess and Banta-Cain to improve the pass rush.

Please distinguish the roles you expect from Banta-Cain and Burgess. Also is Green now simply a backup DE?

Well, I think you are assuming that they will only go with a four man front in passing situations exclusively. In a three man front, Green would still play DE and either Burgess or Banta-Cain would play the elephant.

 

[mgteich]

I agree, notwithstranding the fact that Green was brought in to play the elephant position.

Well, you are assuming that they will only go with a four man front in passing situations. In a three man front, Green would still play DE and either Burgess or Banta-Cain would play the elephant.

 

[Rob0729]

A 3-4 OLB has edge responsibilities. He must be able to pass-rush. However, he must also be able to contain running backs and screens on his side.

I agree, but it is different than what Andy Johnson is saying. A DE in 4-3 has the similiar responsibilities on running down. Setting the edge is not exclusive to the two gap (although setting the edge isn't called that when a 4-3 DE does much of the same things) and even in the two gap setting the edge doesn't happen on every run down even in that OLB's direction.

Also taking on pulling guards, TEs, RBs, and FBs is far different than lining up on the tackle and trying to get by him. The Scouting report said that Burgess size has given him trouble taking on tackles, not smaller players. Burgess is still bigger than most RBs and TE and his problem is taking on 300lbs tackles.

 

[Ring 6]

You are talking about the responsibilities of a D-lineman for a 2 gap, not an OLB. An OLB in a 3-4, 2 gap system does not have a gap responsibilty as you say. They take on a role very similiar to a DE in a 4-3 except they do it from a standing position in most cases and line up outside the tackle rather than usually over them. In a two gap system the d-linemen have gap responsibilities to free up the LBs to make plays.

OK. NOw I understand the problem. You dont know how the defense works.
Every front 7 player is responsible for 2 gaps. The NT the gaps on either side of the C, the DEs either side of Ts, the ILBs either side of Gs and the OLBs the sideline and the gap between him and the DE.
It is totally, absolutely wrong that our DL are in a 2gap to tie free the LBs to make plays. The LBs are responsible for 2 gaps. Watch the ILBs when the play goes away, they step up into the G area to defend the cutback.
The point of a 2gap is that 2 players are responsible for each gap, and EVERY gap needs to be accounted for.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree that a situational pass rusher was worth a 3rd and a 5th. I had thought that Green had that role.

I was more than fine with bringing in Burgess and Banta-Cain to improve the pass rush.

Please distinguish the roles you expect from Banta-Cain and Burgess. Also is Green now simply a backup DE?

Green has always been a backup DE.
TBC is on the depth chart, backing up the OLBs and in the rotation as a sub package DE. I believe Burgess is the starter in that role (I expect Thomas across from him) and TBC is a backup who can also get int eh package if AD is playing off the los.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree, notwithstranding the fact that Green was brought in to play the elephant position.

I am getting very confused. The 'elephant position' is not part of our defense. It was when Pete Carroll was the coach though.
Jarvis Green is a 34 DE. If he is in to rush the passer it is from an inside position. Our outside pass rushers in sub packages are OLBs.

I think we need a tutorial on the Patriots defensive scheme, because in this thread we've added a position that doesnt exist, and stated that only 3 players on the front 7 have 2 gap responsibilities in a 2gap scheme.

 

[Rob0729]

OK. NOw I understand the problem. You dont know how the defense works.
Every front 7 player is responsible for 2 gaps. The NT the gaps on either side of the C, the DEs either side of Ts, the ILBs either side of Gs and the OLBs the sideline and the gap between him and the DE.
It is totally, absolutely wrong that our DL are in a 2gap to tie free the LBs to make plays. The LBs are responsible for 2 gaps. Watch the ILBs when the play goes away, they step up into the G area to defend the cutback.
The point of a 2gap is that 2 players are responsible for each gap, and EVERY gap needs to be accounted for.

I admit I had a bit of a mental lapse along misunderstood what you were saying. That is the problem with doing this at work. I understand how the defense works.

Gap responsibility for OLB isn't like D-linemen though because even on running downs, there may not be a blocker to engage. Also, taking on and tying up blockers on run downs is not exclusive to the 2 gap although more common.

Even when they do it, isn't a always a tackle which is what Burgess seems to struggle with. If he has strength issues to engage a 300lb lineman, why would that mean he would have problems taking on a 210lb RB or a 230lb TE?

 

[Ring 6]

I agree, but it is different than what Andy Johnson is saying. A DE in 4-3 has the similiar responsibilities on running down. Setting the edge is not exclusive to the two gap (although setting the edge isn't called that when a 4-3 DE does much of the same things) and even in the two gap setting the edge doesn't happen on every run down even in that OLB's direction.

Also taking on pulling guards, TEs, RBs, and FBs is far different than lining up on the tackle and trying to get by him. The Scouting report said that Burgess size has given him trouble taking on tackles, not smaller players. Burgess is still bigger than most RBs and TE and his problem is taking on 300lbs tackles.

On the TE side the OLB is responsible for the gaps on either side of the TE.
On the open side of the field he is responsible for outside the T, which ends up being the gap between the T and the FB or pulling G.
There is no mystery or debate that is the definition of a 2 gap defense. When the play goes away he is responsible for the reverese and cannot abandon his 2gap area. The integrity of defending your portion of the field is the most essential concept of a 2gap system.

As far as the Scouting report, I would agree that in the run game, the issue with taking on tackles is different, but that also changes the issue of 'speed and moves' being a positive. Its like moving a small quick 43 DT to DE. He now becomes bigger and slower for the postion.

 

[mgteich]

I certainly agree that all of the front seven have 2-gap responsibilities. I've never said differently.

Perhaps your memory is better than mine, perhaps not. My memory is that Willie often played the elephant position and that Belichick used this role while he was here, especially in the 2003 and 2004 defenses where all the front seven would stand up until the offense was set. Green was brought in to replace McGinist and was given starter money to be a backup.

In any case, now is now. If Green is only a backup DE, then he is a very expensive one. I'm not saying he isn't worth it since Belichick has had difficulty finding a starting quality DL without using a first round draft choice. Perhaps he now had succeeded with a pick just out of the first. Another way of looking at this is that Belichick has been willing to pay alot for defensive linemen and for linebackers, a reasonable use of picks and cap money.

I am getting very confused. The 'elephant position' is not part of our defense. It was when Pete Carroll was the coach though.
Jarvis Green is a 34 DE. If he is in to rush the passer it is from an inside position. Our outside pass rushers in sub packages are OLBs.

I think we need a tutorial on the Patriots defensive scheme, because in this thread we've added a position that doesnt exist, and stated that only 3 players on the front 7 have 2 gap responsibilities in a 2gap scheme.

 

[Rob0729]

I am getting very confused. The 'elephant position' is not part of our defense. It was when Pete Carroll was the coach though.
Jarvis Green is a 34 DE. If he is in to rush the passer it is from an inside position. Our outside pass rushers in sub packages are OLBs.

I think we need a tutorial on the Patriots defensive scheme, because in this thread we've added a position that doesnt exist, and stated that only 3 players on the front 7 have 2 gap responsibilities in a 2gap scheme.

The Pats have their SOLB line up as OLBs with their hands on the ground on passing downs and play a hybrid OLB/DE role. Isn't that the textbook definition of the elephant?

I agree that Green never played it though.

Yes, Pete Carroll uses the elephant in his defense, but so does Belichick. Carroll has a 4-3 defense with a DE playing the hybrid OLB/DE. Belichick has a 3-4 defense with an OLB playing the hybrid OLB/DE.

 

[Ring 6]

I admit I had a bit of a mental lapse along misunderstood what you were saying. That is the problem with doing this at work. I understand how the defense works.

Gap responsibility for OLB isn't like D-linemen though because even on running downs, there may not be a blocker to engage. Also, taking on and tying up blockers on run downs is not exclusive to the 2 gap although more common.

Even when they do it, isn't a always a tackle which is what Burgess seems to struggle with. If he has strength issues to engage a 300lb lineman, why would that mean he would have problems taking on a 210lb RB or a 230lb TE?

One gap specifically means you are resposible for 1 gap, meaning you AVOID blockers rather than engage them, as you must do in a 2gap. Most 43s are one gap, and Burgess has always played on 1 gap teams.
THAT is the issue of concern.
The scouting report is scouting him as a 43 one gap DE.
The duties are entirely different. Its blatantly obvious the getting pusjed around by an OT when you are a one gap 43 DE changes when you are a 2gap 34 OLB, but so does everything else in the report.
His 'speed and moves' being good from a 43 DE does not mean they are good as a 34 2 gap OLB.
Being a 2gap player responsible for OT to sideline is far, far different from anything he has ever done.
Can he adapt and be good at it? Its possible, but you are asking for almost a career change from an older player.

This is where I lose you. Why would we have Burgess out on the field doing something he has never done, and that appears to not best fit his skillset when we have at least 3 other players, Woods, TBC, and Crable who are suited to the position?

BB just said yesterday he wont have one player doing everything Vrabel did (when talking about Hochstein) and he doesnt need to.
I am extremely confident that our first down defense is better with Pierre Woods at OLB than with Derrick Burgess, just as I'd rather have Vince Wilfork at NT than Jarvis Green. But all 4 players have their role.
I'm not sure why we feel a BB coached team would need to have 11 players playing every snap.

 

[Rob0729]

I certainly agree that all of the front seven have 2-gap responsibilities. I've never said differently.

Perhaps your memory is better than mine, perhaps not. My memory is that Willie often played the elephant position and that Belichick used this role while he was here, especially in the 2003 and 2004 defenses where all the front seven would stand up until the offense was set. Green was brought in to replace McGinist and was given starter money to be a backup.

In any case, now is now. If Green is only a backup DE, then he is a very expensive one. I'm not saying he isn't worth it since Belichick has had difficulty finding a starting quality DL without using a first round draft choice. Perhaps he now had succeeded with a pick just out of the first. Another way of looking at this is that Belichick has been willing to pay alot for defensive linemen and for linebackers, a reasonable use of picks and cap money.

Yes, Willie played the elephant. So did Rosie. Granted they didn't really use it last year so it may be presumptuous of us to assume they will re-employ it with Burgess and TBC here.

 

[Ring 6]

The Pats have their SOLB line up as OLBs with their hands on the ground on passing downs and play a hybrid OLB/DE role. Isn't that the textbook definition of the elephant?

I agree that Green never played it though.

Yes, Pete Carroll uses the elephant in his defense, but so does Belichick. Carroll has a 4-3 defense with a DE playing the hybrid OLB/DE. Belichick has a 3-4 defense with an OLB playing the hybrid OLB/DE.

The elephant position is a DE position in a base 43. Thats the definition.
You are mixing up a base defense with a sub package.
We do not take our players and realign them for a sub package, the sub package is a different personell group.
Because of our 2gap system the DEs we want for the 34 are not suited to be pass rushing DEs in a sub package, they are more big than fast.
So when we choose players for sub package positions, the DEs are better inside rushers than outside, and the best outside rushers we have are the OLBs, because our 34 OLBs resemble 43 DEs.
Its not a hybrid positions, its 2 different personell packages.

Heres an example that might help.
We had Greg Spires on our roster at one point. He would have been a DE in the sub packages, but really not have a position in the base. He wasn't agile enough to play OLB and was too small to play DE. (This is very analogous to Burgess IMO). If he had stayed he would have been one of our best pass rushers. So we wouldnt have turned an OLB into a DE we would have taken the OLB off the field and replaced him with Spires.
There have been a lot of cases where BB has had players on the roster who only were useful in sub packages, or even on special teams. Wes Mallard was a 220lb "linebacker" who never would have seen the field but was a s/t ace. In the case of Burgess I think he could play in the base if needed, I think we can find situations where we want him in the base, but he is primarily here to play in sub packages.
He doesnt even need to have a position in the base to be valuable to us.