Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=Paintrain;535696]You think so? Blades is so overmatched, IMO, at OLB it's not even funny. He can't cover the TE. If I was an offensive coordinator I would be running my offense thru the TE if I saw that matchup.[/quote]Can't cover the TE, or failed to cover Jason Witten on one play last year?

We don't have a linebacker on our team who can consistently cover Witten. I wouldn't worry about that though. Unless we're caught in a bad package, that's a safety's job. Blades has proven to be an excellent short zone defender and a fantastic asset against the run. If he had Rocky's body (minus the knees of course), he'd already be a superstar.

Again, I ultimately agree that if there's a college DE sitting there at 13 like say, Everette Brown who could play WLB for us, we have to pull the trigger. But we'll easily find a spot for Blades on this defense. Heyer, I'm less sure about, because 2009 is a make or break year for him.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

I think we're hurting here more than at any other position, including offensive line. So many questions

1. How much longer can we count on Fletcher in the middle? He's basically been Superman but how close is he to just dropping dramatically in production (and even games played)

2. What are our intentions with Rocky? Assume there's a cap and he becomes a free agent after this upcoming season, are we planning on locking him up long term? And where are we playing him? Right now he's the starting weak-side backer but some would argue that he's better suited for the strong-side

3. Do we give Blades the chance to be the everyday starter at either of the outside spots, or his versatility too valuable and do we keep him as the rotating LB off the bench?

4. Where is our depth? We just signed Fincher and we've also got (for now) Tyson Smith and Matt Sinclair. Smith and Sinclair combined have only slightly more NFL gameday experience than Paintrain. And Fincher only has a bit more than that. Do we need a Cato June type veteran to come in and provide some "experience" a la Randall Godfrey?

5. What about Khary Campbell?

6. Can we afford to pass on a linebacker at #13? I'd say yes, if we had a later first or even a second round pick but right now we don't. So I don't know, it really depends on whether you feel more comfortable with Heyer/Jansen at RT or Blades at either OLB slot.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

The more time goes by, it looks to me Redskins are going to draft LB in 1st round.. Redskins have been emphasizing on search for a RT through free agency, or at least that's what we have heard.. And we haven't heard of any news regarding LB beside re-signing Fincher and MW.. If we haven't found right one yet by the time, we probably will give Heyer a chance.. I just hope we would be able to draft a soon to be star LB or DE who we can depend on for the years to come..

Off the point but; a news that opened my eyes: [URL="http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80f2ef24&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true"]Ravens LB Lewis signs incentive-laden, seven-year contract[/URL]
Granted, he won't be there for 7 years literally but that's still a huge commitment if you ask me.. Especially after shelling out 10 million dollars in first year..

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=SmootSmack;535702]I think we're hurting here more than at any other position, including offensive line. So many questions

1. How much longer can we count on Fletcher in the middle? He's basically been Superman but how close is he to just dropping dramatically in production (and even games played)

2. What are our intentions with Rocky? Assume there's a cap and he becomes a free agent after this upcoming season, are we planning on locking him up long term? And where are we playing him? Right now he's the starting weak-side backer but some would argue that he's better suited for the strong-side

3. Do we give Blades the chance to be the everyday starter at either of the outside spots, or his versatility too valuable and do we keep him as the rotating LB off the bench?

4. Where is our depth? We just signed Fincher and we've also got (for now) Tyson Smith and Matt Sinclair. Smith and Sinclair combined have only slightly more NFL gameday experience than Paintrain. And Fincher only has a bit more than that. Do we need a Cato June type veteran to come in and provide some "experience" a la Randall Godfrey?

5. What about Khary Campbell?

6. Can we afford to pass on a linebacker at #13? I'd say yes, if we had a later first or even a second round pick but right now we don't. So I don't know, it really depends on whether you feel more comfortable with Heyer/Jansen at RT or Blades at either OLB slot.[/quote]1. We can bank on Fletch this year, but it's critical we have a contingency plan in place. I do think Blades is going to step right in for him, which is why I don't think we'll be in the market for Maualuga or for Laurinaitis.

We can't just plug in Blades if he's needed elsewhere. I also don't think you can count on him to replace the leadership of Fletcher as long as he's still on the roster. This is his defense until the day we cut him.

2. I think Rocky has lost his role as a nickel LB for good. I think we'll move him across to SLB, and I don't think he's in the future plans. Of course, a breakout season could mean a franchise tag next year.

3. Well, an impact linebacker from the draft is more of a need than getting Blades on the field, but at the same time, I wouldn't sign anyone to block Blades, and I'd work to get him on the field for 40-50% of snaps from the base 4-3 package, and he's the de-facto nickel linebacker. And, I don't think that Fletch should play 100% of snaps this year. Blades should get a small percentage of his snaps, plus it will work well that way with the whole radio in the helmet thing.

4. Getting an undersized DE in the draft will do wonders for the depth issue, but I'd still float a contract offer at Marcus Washington anyway. No smallish cover-two type OLBs please.

5. Sign that tender, son.

6. Yes, we can afford to pass at a linebacker at No. 13, and we should if one of the big four tackles there. If we could turn our third round pick into a late second rounder, the draft is deep enough to land a pass-rushing LB there.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

Go with HB, Fletch, and Rocky. HB was a de facto starter for much of last year, and we finished ranked 4th in Defense. Marcus, Philip, Wynn, they are all just stop-gaps til we can address those positions next year. We don't have the picks to do it now. The O was terrible last year, we need multiple O lineman who could potentially start. I'm pretty sure Justin Geisinger started at LT when we were still in the hunt. That never needs to happen again.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

I really like larry English of northern Illinois, he's a great DE, but has never played OLB, but analyst compare him to lamarr woodley and tsuggs, which if I knew I was getting a player like that, I would take him in an instant...clay Matthews as a second rounder is another possibility, but his stock just keeps growing...to b honest though, I'm not really comfortable with moving a college DE to SLB if they hadn't played any LB in college, that's why I would pass on maybin, EBrown, etc. Orakpo I think could do it but he'll be long gone by the time we pick(ditto for curry) sintim I don't like at all plus he's a 3-4 OLB anyway...Cushing is perfect, but gets injured too much, maualugas good, but he's a MLB really not an OLB(still he's really good and is troy polamalu at LB) ...I'm gonna pass on both Ohio state linebackers because I think laurinatis is gonna be a bust and freeman doesn't make plays, like the USC LBs...if the DEs converting to linebacker don't succeed then we can always move them back to DE...Jason Williams of western Illinois is a good sleeper, as is victor butler of Oregon state, and both the Hawaii LBs

If I had to pick my top 3 LBs I would draft it would be:
1 Rey maualuga
2 larry English
3 brian Cushing

Keep in mind, if we don't draft an OLB with our first pick, we can always sign like a crowell and then draft a brandon spikes or a mark herzlech of BC

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535706]1. We can bank on Fletch this year, but it's critical we have a contingency plan in place. I do think Blades is going to step right in for him, which is why I don't think we'll be in the market for Maualuga or for Laurinaitis.[/quote]

I don't think we will be in the market for Laurinaitis either, but I believe (as I believe many others do too) that his best position in the NFL could be at the WILL in a 4-3 (more so than Maualuga), but 13 is a bit high to draft someone and then move them to a new position. Especially when you only have four picks overall

[quote]2. I think Rocky has lost his role as a nickel LB for good. I think we'll move him across to SLB, and I don't think he's in the future plans. Of course, a breakout season could mean a franchise tag next year.[/quote]

I kinda still wish we had gotten DeMeco Ryan that year

[quote]3. Well, an impact linebacker from the draft is more of a need than getting Blades on the field, but at the same time, I wouldn't sign anyone to block Blades, and I'd work to get him on the field for 40-50% of snaps from the base 4-3 package, and he's the de-facto nickel linebacker. And, I don't think that Fletch should play 100% of snaps this year. Blades should get a small percentage of his snaps, plus it will work well that way with the whole radio in the helmet thing.[/quote]

You want a Blades avatar don't you?

[quote]4. Getting an undersized DE in the draft will do wonders for the depth issue, but I'd still float a contract offer at Marcus Washington anyway. No smallish cover-two type OLBs please.[/quote]

What about two-year plea of getting Wilson more playing time at OLB?

[quote]5. Sign that tender, son.[/quote]

Seems convinced still that there is a big market out there for him

[quote]6. Yes, we can afford to pass at a linebacker at No. 13, and we should if one of the big four tackles there. If we could turn our third round pick into a late second rounder, the draft is deep enough to land a pass-rushing LB there.[/quote]

Word

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

Nice thread... I don't think i can really add anything. Just nice.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

What has been said I agree with. Its good to see some people are off the Malauga banwagon, and realize he's a MLB and can't play squat at OLB.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

I don't understand why there is always concern about Cushing's durability, and other than Goat, no one questions the injury issues with Orakpo. He has had numerous injuries in college.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=vallin21;535738]What has been said I agree with. Its good to see some people are off the Malauga banwagon, and realize he's a MLB and can't play squat at OLB.[/quote]

Urlacher sucked until they moved him to the middle. There is no guarantee that Maualuga would not be the same.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=53Fan;535741]Urlacher sucked until they moved him to the middle. There is no guarantee that Maualuga would not be the same.[/quote]
I'm not saying he wouldn't but I'd take Cushing before I take Maualuga. Just for the fact that OLB is a need and MLB isn't. I think we can get 2-3 good years out of Fletcher, and for Maualuga to wait until Fletcher retires seems like a waste of a pick. I would trade down and get a 2nd and a late first and draft Alex Mack.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

Oh yeah. I was agreeing with you Vallin. Urlacher could'nt play squat at OLB but is great in the middle. Maualuga may be the same. Too many people are assuming he can play the outside just because he's good in the middle.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[quote=GTripp0012;535701]Can't cover the TE, or failed to cover Jason Witten on one play last year?

We don't have a linebacker on our team who can consistently cover Witten. I wouldn't worry about that though. Unless we're caught in a bad package, that's a safety's job. Blades has proven to be an excellent short zone defender and a fantastic asset against the run. If he had Rocky's body (minus the knees of course), he'd already be a superstar.

Again, I ultimately agree that if there's a college DE sitting there at 13 like say, Everette Brown who could play WLB for us, we have to pull the trigger. But we'll easily find a spot for Blades on this defense. Heyer, I'm less sure about, because 2009 is a make or break year for him.[/quote]
Well, I'll agree to disagree. I think he can be a very good MLB but I don't think he's going to be a capable OLB over 16 games.

[quote=Larry Michael is Satan]Go with HB, Fletch, and Rocky. HB was a de facto starter for much of last year, and we finished ranked 4th in Defense. Marcus, Philip, Wynn, they are all just stop-gaps til we can address those positions next year. We don't have the picks to do it now. [b]The O was terrible last year, we need multiple O lineman who could potentially start. I'm pretty sure Justin Geisinger started at LT when we were still in the hunt. That never needs to happen again.[/b][/quote]
Man, I swear some of you guys are frustrated OL that never got a crack at the show, LOL. We don't need 'multiple linemen that could potentially start' with our 4 picks. We can go into the season with a starting OL of Samuels, Dockery, Rabach, Thomas and Heyer and it won't be a disaster. Of course we can use depth but we have glaring unfilled postions at DE and OLB that have to be addressed. Our #1 priority is generating a pass rush. You realize that increasing the pass rush increases sacks and turnovers which help the offense, right? You can't address every hole with $7 mill in cap room and 4 draft picks so you address your biggest holes and do your best to fill the rest.

Re: Addressing the LB position
 

[url=http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/10/burnett-bolts-the-boys-for-the-bolts/]ProFootballTalk.com - BURNETT BOLTS THE ‘BOYS FOR THE BOLTS[/url]

Kevin Burnett signs with the Chargers