Burgess - A Question Mark On Defense

[Ring 6]

No you haven't misread me, but you mave have misread AndyJohnson. He believes that Burgess hasn't played in a similiar system from a two point stance and he believes it is unlikely he can make the transition to a two point stance OLB in the 3-4.

What you are saying is pretty much in agreement with me. What AndyJohnson is saying that the most likely scenario and possibly best case scenario (I am inferring this part a bit) is what you suggest as the worst case scenario.

What I am saying is that Burgess role on this team looks to me to be as a 'starter' in sub packages to rush the passer. He would be a backup OLB in our base 3-4 behind Woods, and most likely also behind TBC.
Expecting more than that is over optimistic IMO.

 

[RayClay]

The original discussion was based upon an assertion that Burgess would be the 'starting' OLB.
The one who is saying is is possible is ME, I stop short of saying probable.

Greg Spires was used as an example of a player filling a role, not a comparison to Burgess.
Quick, athletic and a good tackler are good qualities but every quick athletic good tackler isnt a LB.

I think he said "I expect". We all can guess based on looking at his athleticism and wondering what was in BB's mind. He spent a lot of time on this decision and probably has thought about whether he could play some OLB.

I thought you were taking the position that there was no way because he hasn't played regularly in a 3-4. If not, I apologize. I'm sure BB knows whether he feels he's a prospect. No one else really knows one way or the other until they start working him. Vrabel played linebacker, but played little as a backup. McGinest played dome LB in college.

Colvin played 4-3 LLB if pro reference is to be believed. Hard to believe he got 10 sacks from there.

I just think any player has adjustments and vets have an easier transition if they're capable. I'm guessing BB at least tries him in something like the 3-4 as an OLB, but who knows.

 

[Ring 6]

I think he said "I expect". We all can guess based on looking at his athleticism and wondering what was in BB's mind. He spent a lot of time on this decision and probably has thought about whether he could play some OLB.

I thought you were taking the position that there was no way because he hasn't played regularly in a 3-4. If not, I apologize. I'm sure BB knows whether he feels he's a prospect. No one else really knows one way or the other until they start working him. Vrabel played linebacker, but played little as a backup. McGinest played dome LB in college.

Colvin played 4-3 LLB if pro reference is to be believed. Hard to believe he got 10 sacks from there.

I just think any player has adjustments and vets have an easier transition if they're capable. I'm guessing BB at least tries him in something like the 3-4 as an OLB, but who knows.

Right. I am not saying it can't happen because he hasnt played the exact position. I'm saying there is a large difference between 43 DE and 34 OLB that people seem to overlook just because the size requirements are similar. I'm saying that the chances of DE-X at 6'2 260lbs being able to effectively convert from 43 one gap DE to 34 2gap OLB are well under 50/50, but that player, if a good pass rusher, has a built in spot in our system subbing in for half the plays in nickel and dime.

 

[mgteich]

Okay, we've had our review on the 3-4 2-gap. BTW, for those who want more, just go google the 3-4.

Andy, please again review the gap responsibilities of the ROLB in our defense when the opponents are in a one TE formation on the opposite side. The way I count the gaps, there are no gaps outside the LOT on the ROLB's side, just the lane between the LOT and the sideline. The ROLB surely is responsible for the keeping the running back inside, and protecting the lane. On passing downs, the ROLB is relatively free to attack the QB.

 

[Ring 6]

Okay, we've had our review on the 3-4 2-gap. BTW, for those who want more, just go google the 3-4.

Andy, please again review the gap responsibilities of the ROLB in our defense when the opponents are in a one TE formation on the opposite side. The way I count the gaps, there are no gaps outside the LOT on the ROLB's side, just the lane between the LOT and the sideline. The ROLB surely is responsible for the keeping the running back inside, and protecting the lane. On passing downs, the ROLB is relatively free to attack the QB.

If they run toward the weakside OLB, they wont just not block him. They will bring a pulling G or FB, sometimes shift the T out. So the gaps are the gaps on either side of whoever comes to block which is from the DE to the sideline. The appearance of the blocker creates the 2nd gap.
As far as pass rushing, remember we are typically in a zone. So the freedom of the ROLB to rush is no greater than the LOLB based upon how we roll the zone. The flat is equally important on the weakside or the strong side.
In terms of being blocked, theoretically, its a great rush opportuinty because you've got a RB or G coming out, but in practice most teams slide the T out.

 

[jays52]

It is quite clear to me that they are developing Burgess as the Jack, while attempting to get some value from him by playing him at end. Once he mentally grasps the scheme, and gets practice reps in the two point, it is pretty clear to me that he will play in the base 34 on the outside. In other situations, he will put his hand in the dirt. Again, this is getting back to the kind of schematic flexability this defense hasn't had in some time.

 

[jays52]

If they run toward the weakside OLB, they wont just not block him. They will bring a pulling G or FB, sometimes shift the T out. So the gaps are the gaps on either side of whoever comes to block which is from the DE to the sideline. The appearance of the blocker creates the 2nd gap.
As far as pass rushing, remember we are typically in a zone. So the freedom of the ROLB to rush is no greater than the LOLB based upon how we roll the zone. The flat is equally important on the weakside or the strong side.
In terms of being blocked, theoretically, its a great rush opportuinty because you've got a RB or G coming out, but in practice most teams slide the T out.

So, let's say they run a green dog with the Jack, you're honestly suggesting that in most schemes the tackle is going to be responsible to block that solo?

 

[Ring 6]

It is quite clear to me that they are developing Burgess as the Jack, while attempting to get some value from him by playing him at end. Once he mentally grasps the scheme, and gets practice reps in the two point, it is pretty clear to me that he will play in the base 34 on the outside. In other situations, he will put his hand in the dirt. Again, this is getting back to the kind of schematic flexability this defense hasn't had in some time.

And this is clear to you because?

 

[Ring 6]

So, let's say they run a green dog with the Jack, you're honestly suggesting that in most schemes the tackle is going to be responsible to block that solo?

Inserting yuor own terminology confuses matters?
Are you asking if the weak OLB blitzes?
In practice, against our defense the OL typically slides out, and yes, he is blocked by the T.

 

[jays52]

And this is clear to you because?

Simple. Because he can play out of the two point and they gave a 3rd for him. You don't give up a 3rd for a situational guy. Further, Burgess has the hips and the footwork to play out of the two point. He's a more valuable player in the two point because of the versatility afforded. The team would be foolish not to develop him into a linebacker. Further, fans would be foolish to guage the player upon two preseason games worth of situational snaps.

 

[jays52]

Inserting yuor own terminology confuses matters?
Are you asking if the weak OLB blitzes?
In practice, against our defense the OL typically slides out, and yes, he is blocked by the T.

Who blocks the 5 tech?

 

[Ring 6]

Simple. Because he can play out of the two point and they gave a 3rd for him. You don't give up a 3rd for a situational guy. Further, Burgess has the hips and the footwork to play out of the two point. He's a more valuable player in the two point because of the versatility afforded. The team would be foolish not to develop him into a linebacker. Further, fans would be foolish to guage the player upon two preseason games worth of situational snaps.

Playing 50% of the snaps and being our top pass rusher is worth a 3rd.
Playing him in situations that he is not suited for doesnt make him worth more.
You are assuming that he has the ability to play 2 gap 34 OLB. What are you basing that on?
I'm not basing anything on preseason games, I'm basing it on his career, on his skillset, on the rest of the roster, and on an understanding of how vastly different the positions of 43 one gap DE and 34 2gap OLb are.

 

[Ring 6]

Who blocks the 5 tech?

No one because a 2gap 34 doesnt have a '5 technique player'.
If you are asking who blocks the weakside DE, the G slides out.
There are many different ways to pass block the 3-4, but most often against us, you get the T and G sliding out when that LB blitzes.

 

[Ring 6]

Who blocks the 5 tech?

By the way, if you want to try to impress people by using lingo, you should use it properly.

 

[Ring 6]

Simple. Because he can play out of the two point and they gave a 3rd for him. You don't give up a 3rd for a situational guy. Further, Burgess has the hips and the footwork to play out of the two point. He's a more valuable player in the two point because of the versatility afforded. The team would be foolish not to develop him into a linebacker. Further, fans would be foolish to guage the player upon two preseason games worth of situational snaps.

Whether you are lined up in a 2point or 3 point stance is not the issue.

The issue is that instead of playing 1 gap DL where you rush the passer, and try to disrupt the running play if it happens to come your way, a 3-4 2 gap OLB needs to take on a blocker and defend the run with 2 gap discipline on anything outside the OT, cover RBs, TEs and sometimes WRs in his drop zone, blitz and rush the passer from farther away, against a different blocking scheme, defend the reverse, defend the screen pass...........
Its not simply stand up and do the same things you did when you were a down lineman.
Certainly some players can make that transition, but Burgess' career does not give us an indication of his ability to handle these responsiblities becuase he has never been asked to. Whether or not he can is a big question yet to be answered, but the answer is more likely no than yes.