LB myth: BB and Pioli don't adress

[TripleOption]

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.

And Rosey is an OLB. OLB's are easier to convert, you can take a smallish 4-3 college end (Vrabel) and make him into an OLB.

It would seem that in Belichicks system that the ILB's slightest bad fit causes huge gaps, reference when Monty Beisel was at ILB, you could just see him f-ing it all up and the Pats got gashed as a result.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

And Rosey is an OLB. OLB's are easier to convert, you can take a smallish 4-3 college end (Vrabel) and make him into an OLB.

It would seem that in Belichicks system that the ILB's slightest bad fit causes huge gaps, reference when Monty Beisel was at ILB, you could just see him f-ing it all up and the Pats got gashed as a result.

OLB's are easier to convert? Vrabel and Bruschi are the ones cuted as evidence. If they are easier how come the Pats don't ahve more depth on their chart?

The ILB excuse is geting old just like the current ILB's. So Seau who before he came here was known as a freelancer can come in and adapt to the Pats system???


I think the Pats are just being to picky and have been able to get by with this excuse because they go back to Bruschi and Seau(AD this yr also) and don't have to address it. then everyone complains how they are so slow and can't cover. well it appears they are late in getting to the QB with the blitz. Add one fast linebacker to the mix, add even two and the front 3 gets that much better, and the back four have to cover less time and even get help covering zones.

 

[TripleOption]

OLB's are easier to convert? Vrabel and Bruschi are the ones cuted as evidence. If they are easier how come the Pats don't ahve more depth on their chart?

The ILB excuse is geting old just like the current ILB's. So Seau who before he came here was known as a freelancer can come in and adapt to the Pats system???


I think the Pats are just being to picky and have been able to get by with this excuse because they go back to Bruschi and Seau(AD this yr also) and don't have to address it. then everyone complains how they are so slow and can't cover. well it appears they are late in getting to the QB with the blitz. Add one fast linebacker to the mix, add even two and the front 3 gets that much better, and the back four have to cover less time and even get help covering zones.

Bruschi is an ILB that played DE in College before moving to OLB/MLB in the NFL. He is suited to play the WLB in the 3-4.

The common theme between all the ILB's is that they are SMART. Seau adapted because of his experience. He was older and the freelance thing was out of his system. That takes time in the NFL. "Speed" doesn't cut it. BB needs big, strong, smart ILB's.

The Pats are being "picky" (a ridiculous assertion) because when the ILB sucks, the defense is a sieve.

 

[Ring 6]

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.

No, but not one that had more value than the other guy we chose. I think you are looking at it backward, we aren't drafting to find LBs, we are drafting to find the best players and value, and LBs have tended to not be the best values for those reasons.

It would be a much bigger issue if we were not consistently bringing in veterans to play the postion.
Linebacker is a very cerebral position. They have a multitude of responsibilities on every call, and must read the play to determine what to do. DL basically do the exact same thing on the same call regardless of the play, THEN react. LBs must react as the play develops. Corners, like DL, have a primary responsibility then a reaction after that, and safeties while their responsibilities vary from call to call, also carry out the first responsibility then react.

A LB needs to read and react as the play develops.
That is why experience is an important characteristic in a LB. Our defense has widely been described as complex. The position most affected by the complexity is LB.

I don't know why there is an issue that the Patriots have a position on the field that they do not fill heavily in the draft, because they feel it is the most difficult to fill effectively with draft choices, so instead they acquire veterans.
I'm not seeing what is bad about that, and why it wouldbe important for a team to place equal value on draft choices vs veterans at every position on the field.

 

[Ring 6]

OLB's are easier to convert? Vrabel and Bruschi are the ones cuted as evidence. If they are easier how come the Pats don't ahve more depth on their chart?

The ILB excuse is geting old just like the current ILB's. So Seau who before he came here was known as a freelancer can come in and adapt to the Pats system???


I think the Pats are just being to picky and have been able to get by with this excuse because they go back to Bruschi and Seau(AD this yr also) and don't have to address it. then everyone complains how they are so slow and can't cover. well it appears they are late in getting to the QB with the blitz. Add one fast linebacker to the mix, add even two and the front 3 gets that much better, and the back four have to cover less time and even get help covering zones.

You are talking like the Patriots arbitrarily decided 'we don't want to draft LBs' for no particular reason, and feel so strongly about protecting that whim that they make excuses for it.

 

[mgteich]

Have the patriots performed poorly from the LB position since Belichick arrived? Ask Peyton Manning. Would have been better using our top draft picks on players who likely would have waited a couple of years, instead of bringing in Colvin, Vrabel and Thomas? instead of bring in Phifer?

IN 2002 I wanted Harris baaad. We ended up with a TE. In 2004 I wanted us to trade up a few spots for EJ Henderson. We ended up with Bethel Johnson. In 2006, I didn't like the LB option, but we could have had Lawson instead of Maroney. I would have drafted Davis Harris (with a slight trade down) or Beason or Poz instead of Meriweather or at 28.

Belichick disagreed as he has each year since I wanted Napolean Harris. That's six years in a row. So why do I think he might pick a LB this time. Well, I just call them DE's and hope: Long, Gholston, Groves.

 

[Ring 6]

Have the patriots performed poorly from the LB position since Belichick arrived? Ask Peyton Manning. Would have been better using our top draft picks on players who likely would have waited a couple of years, instead of bringing in Colvin, Vrabel and Thomas? instead of bring in Phifer?

IN 2002 I wanted Harris baaad. We ended up with a TE. In 2004 I wanted us to trade up a few spots for EJ Henderson. We ended up with Bethel Johnson. In 2006, I didn't like the LB option, but we could have had Lawson instead of Maroney. I would have drafted Davis Harris (with a slight trade down) or Beason or Poz instead of Meriweather or at 28.

Belichick disagreed as he has each year since I wanted Napolean Harris. That's six years in a row. So why do I think he might pick a LB this time. Well, I just call them DE's and hope: Long, Gholston, Groves.

I think its just easy to see how many plays a LB can make in this system. We have seen tons made by Bruschi, Vrabel, McGinest, Colvin, etc, etc over the years.
That makes it easy project a top LB as a guy who could be good here in the draft. We wait 3 months to get one guy in the first round. What are you going to dream about?
WR- There is a long history of 1st rounders having no impact.
RB- Same thing, and by late round 1 they all have questions.
OL/DL- Not too interesting for a 3 month buildup.

LB tends to be a position that we can envision 'steal' of a draft pick. We are a LB oriented team, we have age at LB, there are tons of good college Lbs who were the best player on their team.
I think its a case of LB being an easy want, and many other options being less exciting

 

[signbabybrady]

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.

This is the exact myth I am trying to bust with this thread....I understand the value of youth but my point in this thread is that our LBs have been a core to this team every year going back to the first SB so why would anyone be so insistant that it has to happen in order for us to reach the top again.

With the guys that we are definitely going to have back next year you can find a few other guys to fit with them and you don't have to use #7 on a LB if that is not the best available.

People can stop panicing about youth at LB...our LBs have always been a strength even with age.

 

[RayClay]

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.

They haven't played with only 10 players, is that what you're saying?