The Problem I See with the Pats Linebackers

[zipster9]

I really like our LB group. Remember, in the red-zone Spikes is really good because he doesn't have to run so far to cover.

Would like to see better coverage by the secondary, leave the LBs intact, they will get better as they grow together as a unit.

But, play-action passing is where Spikes gets killed. He cannot cover TEs or slot receivers.

We really need a better LB that has speed.

 

[Sciz]

But, play-action passing is where Spikes gets killed. He cannot cover TEs or slot receivers.

We really need a better LB that has speed.

If you expect LBs to be able to cover slot receivers, then you're going to be disappointed more often than not.

 

[Nunchucks]

But, play-action passing is where Spikes gets killed. He cannot cover TEs or slot receivers.

We really need a better LB that has speed.

What he needs is to recognize play-action better.

 

[Kontradiction]

It seems to me the Pats are in an unusual position with their linebackers. In most areas, if there's a problem that should be addressed, there's a clear solution to it (in theory, at least) even if acheiving that solution is difficult: the WR group, say, is thin. The safety position needs an upgrade, etc.

Linebackers seem a little different. Mayo, Spikes, and Hightower are all solid players. Hightower was just a rookie, and will hopefully take a leap next year. But when he was drafted, the comparison to Spikes was made. And sure enough, as a starting group these guys all seem to share the same problems in coverage/space.

That issue is continually noted, but I'm not sure what should be done about it. A guy like Fletcher would be better in coverage, for example, but to this point he hasn't been seen as a starting caliber linebacker. Obviously you have guys rotate in and out, but at a certain point the hope is that your starting guys will be able to handle any situation.

So what's the answer? Shift back to the 3-4? Understand that it's hard for any positional grouping to be perfect? Consider moving a guy like Spikes to find someone better in coverage?

The team is better suited to play in the 3-4, but the Fletcher loss early in the season was bigger than most people made it out to be. It meant that Spikes had to be on the field for more passing downs than he normally would have been. And, though he gives it 110% every play, Spikes is simply a liability in coverage. I wouldn't mind shifting back to more of a 3-4 look next season (understanding that we typically line up in Nickel a lot, but I digress), personally. The LB's are more built it and we could make better use of Chandler Jones in the elephant role that McGinest used to excel in.

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

The lack of coverage linebacker killed us all year. Pretty interesting to think what this team would look like with Lavonte David drafted instead of Tavon Wilson.

We needed a saety no doubt, but David was a big name around here, and after the year he had, its a little painful thinking what might have been.

 

[JackBauer]

But, play-action passing is where Spikes gets killed. He cannot cover TEs or slot receivers.

We really need a better LB that has speed.

What they need is a safety who doesn't suck.

 

[Froob]

Spikes needs an extensions. You'd be crazy to let him leave. One of the few players who plays with some attitude. I'd puke if he left and went to the ravens.

 

[nekromantique]

hightowers coverage skills slowly improved over the course of the season...and that gives me hope that they will continue to do so.

Mayo's struggles in coverage are perplexing since he probably has the best speed and movement skills of the 3. hes average at best in instinct i guess.

Spikes probably has the best instincts (when in coverage, not playing play-action), but hes just a big slow LB, meant to deliver a big hit to a ball-carrier rather than cover in space. stick him in a zone and its not as bad...but he shouldn't be covering Man 2 man.

Hightower could probably make the switch to DE, but id like to see what a real Safety combination could do for us first (Gregory shouldnt be a starter, though mccourty is fine at FS).

Until then, Wilson can continue to play that S/LB role in nickel/dime situations.

 

[DocHoliday]

People have been ribbing Spikes all day on twitter since the game on his speed:

(bottom first):

 

[LiveShot]

Not enough SPEED.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I would like to see a true coverage LB drafted.

Then keep Spikes through the end of his rookie deal and then let him walk to find his millions.

This will give the new LB a chance to learn the system and get the optimal return on Spikes.

This. We need a fast, tall LBer who can cover tight ends. Against the run I doubt you find a better LB unit than those 3.

 

[supafly]

This. We need a fast, tall LBer who can cover tight ends. Against the run I doubt you find a better LB unit than those 3.

Either that or take Spikes off the field after downs one and two.

Fletcher is coming back next year, that may help. It certainly can't be counted on, but it should supply some depth and competition.

I think they've been trying to find that "cover LB" for awhile now, and just haven't succeeded enough to equal success. Tracy White, Bobby Carpenter, Jeff Tarpinian, Koutevides, etc..

I would imagine that they'll once again try to fix that hole, or at least make improvements on it. It'd be funny if we're all looking at S, WR, CB, OL for the draft and Belichick goes LB and TE...although I can't say that I'd be shocked anymore.

 

[Fencer]

I think just for the simple reason that if there's 4 guys they'll have less space to cover per man.

That assumes only 3 rush, which wasn't terrifically common even in 3-4.

 

[Fencer]

I have to think the answer lies at least partly in scheme, which is point that overlaps with the personnel one of ensuring that both safeties can cover a lot of ground.

The obvious thing to say is that you glue a man each to the most dangerous WRs while putting everybody else in zone. But there are lots of ways offenses could try to frustrate that.

 

[aluminum seats]

The 43 or 34 isn't going to change what LBs do in coverage.
There are very few LBs in the NFL who can cover anyone legitimately one on one. Our LBs would be fine if the secondary covered well.

My impression was 3-4 vs 4-3 would have an effect on what LBs do in coverage--how could it not?

On the secondary, of course all aspects of a defense affect the others, but it I don't think it's as simple as if the secondary plays well, the LBs won't have any trouble in coverage. Seems a bit too simplistic.

 

[Spiral]

If Spikes could run faster than a 4.95, he probably would be better in coverage. He would probably also be on another team, as he wouldn't have lasted until the end of the second round, when he became a value pick for BB. A decent player, with definite limitations.