- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 37,724
- Reaction score
- 16,525
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Jones cant play LB. Sometimes he stands up as a DE but he cant play LB, otherwise yeah, LB is becoming less important, however, we still need 2 in sub and 3 in base, so while backups don't see the field, a starter getting injured would leave a hole.Definitely concerned about the lack of LB's. But I always look at what the draft tells us about what BB is thinking. Or it could be that BB's lack of a LB pick is tell us about the entire position of LB as it relates to today's defense game. Do we really need a lot of LB's in a game which is increasingly focused on DL and DB's? How many 3 down LB's are there really?
When you add that to fact that Ninko and Jones BOTH can play some LB, and maybe we really do have enough LB's. Still, Tripp or KPL would have been nice additions
NoI think they could be moving back to the 4-3 under, so that would mean the rotation in the base would look like this potentially.
5Tech LDE – Easley, Armstead, C. Jones (#95)
1Tech NT – Wilfork, Kelly, Siliga
3Tech DT – Kelly, Easley, Armstead, C. Jones (#94)
Leo RDE – C. Jones (#95), Ninkovich, Buchanan, Smith, Moore
Sam – Ninkovich, Collins, Hightower
Mike – Hightower, Mayo, Beauharnais
Will – Mayo, Hightower, Collins, White
I do not care if you disagree, but offer some reasoning; you make yourself look like a pompous know it all when you do things like this.