No Inside Linebacker

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,616
Reaction score
58,066
Location
SoCal
Guys, I hate to break it to you, this team is not looking to sign or draft (with a high pick) an inside linebacker. I'm not enthralled with the Buc/Minter combo but I think BASK has settled on it. I don't think they're playmakers or enforcers. In fact they're not special. But I believe the cards BELIEVE they don't need to upgrade and won't.
 

overseascardfan

ASFN Addict
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Posts
8,807
Reaction score
2,096
Location
Phoenix
Guys, I hate to break it to you, this team is not looking to sign or draft (with a high pick) an inside linebacker. I'm not enthralled with the Buc/Minter combo but I think BASK has settled on it. I don't think they're playmakers or enforcers. In fact they're not special. But I believe the cards BELIEVE they don't need to upgrade and won't.

Personal opinion or reliable source in the organization???
 

Jetstream Green

Kool Aid with a touch of vodka
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Posts
29,477
Reaction score
16,651
Location
San Antonio, Texas
I know Ouchie is sincere and he possibly may be right but what I like the most is that it's the perfect reverse mojo because one has to really believe to enact the magic :raccoon:
 

Harry

ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Posts
11,929
Reaction score
26,064
Location
Orlando, FL
The Cards may add a depth pick, but I too think they like their starters. Keim, however, has shown he'll take a bargain if one falls in his lap. Buc could be moved outside. He may have more passing upside than he's getting credit for having.
 

juza76

ASFN Icon
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Posts
13,798
Reaction score
9,618
Location
milan-italy
If they like Minter as a starter it s mean they are Blind
Is a low average Starter with deep athletic limits
With him playing 3 downs we dont go anywhwre if we want to make a superbowl trip
 

Mitch

Crawled Through 5 FB Fields
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Posts
13,405
Reaction score
2,982
Location
Wrentham, MA
If they like Minter as a starter it s mean they are Blind
Is a low average Starter with deep athletic limits
With him playing 3 downs we dont go anywhwre if we want to make a superbowl trip

I thought he was one of the few players who played well in the NFC Championship. I think he's made good progress as a 2-down ILB---they started subbing in for him when they went to the nickel, which was good.
 

Mitch

Crawled Through 5 FB Fields
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Posts
13,405
Reaction score
2,982
Location
Wrentham, MA
Bucannon is a fixture now at WILB. Minter is solid as a 2 down ILB. But I also think that Steve Keim, BA and Bettch like what they have in Alani Fua and Gabe Martin. They also like Kenny Demens on STs. However, Keim likes to stock a position a year before a starter heads into FA, so it's possible that he could draft an ILB with the thought that Minter is in a contract year and might go elsewhere as a 2017 UFA.

The one wild card here might be whether Steve Keim and company would prefer to add an ILB who, like Bucannon, can play all three downs, just as the 49ers had with Willis and Bowman. The question is---do they feel they potentially already have that guy in Fua or Martin?
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
39,814
Reaction score
24,022
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
I'm hearing a lot of opinions on the board lately that I hope are completely inaccurate, because they are deeply disturbing. This is one of them, and the idea we'll stand pat and patch the holes in our offensive line internally is another one. Why would we want to do nothing at some of the positions we need real upgrades at? It makes absolutely zero sense.
 
OP
OP
Ouchie-Z-Clown

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
63,616
Reaction score
58,066
Location
SoCal
I'm hearing a lot of opinions on the board lately that I hope are completely inaccurate, because they are deeply disturbing. This is one of them, and the idea we'll stand pat and patch the holes in our offensive line internally is another one. Why would we want to do nothing at some of the positions we need real upgrades at? It makes absolutely zero sense.

Because I think you can read from the season and all the post-season comments that the team likes this pairing. I don't agree, but I think the writings on the wall but most of you don't want to read it.
 

conraddobler

I want my 2$
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Posts
20,052
Reaction score
237
The number one need is a pass rush and they've said as much.

Campbell is a good DT we need more help on the line we need a premier DE and another premier DT.

There is almost no way we're going to get all that AND a premier ILB in one off season so if I were working this problem then I'd work the line first too.

It's just the logistics of the thing.

Having said all that if the opportunity would arise then I think this is all just for naught as I think they'll grab it if available.

What they say could mean less than nothing as people say a lot it's what they do you should focus on.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
39,814
Reaction score
24,022
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
Because I think you can read from the season and all the post-season comments that the team likes this pairing. I don't agree, but I think the writings on the wall but most of you don't want to read it.

I'm afraid you might be right.

The number one need is a pass rush and they've said as much.

Campbell is a good DT we need more help on the line we need a premier DE and another premier DT.

There is almost no way we're going to get all that AND a premier ILB in one off season so if I were working this problem then I'd work the line first too.

It's just the logistics of the thing.

Having said all that if the opportunity would arise then I think this is all just for naught as I think they'll grab it if available.

What they say could mean less than nothing as people say a lot it's what they do you should focus on.

Campbell is a DE, not a DT. The only DTs in this scheme are NTs. Granted, we play our fronts in a multitude of manners, but he is a DE.
 

conraddobler

I want my 2$
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Posts
20,052
Reaction score
237
I'm afraid you might be right.



Campbell is a DE, not a DT. The only DTs in this scheme are NTs. Granted, we play our fronts in a multitude of manners, but he is a DE.

Yes he is a DE with 5 sacks.

Which is why I said he's a good DT because he plays more like one now than a DE.

My bad though thanks for pointing this out as I hate to be in error and you like to point them out so this works for all of us. :D
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,419
Reaction score
29,824
Location
Gilbert, AZ
I'm hearing a lot of opinions on the board lately that I hope are completely inaccurate, because they are deeply disturbing. This is one of them, and the idea we'll stand pat and patch the holes in our offensive line internally is another one. Why would we want to do nothing at some of the positions we need real upgrades at? It makes absolutely zero sense.

I agree with Ouchie that the team probably thinks they're good with Buc and Minter at ILB. What this should mean is:

1) Bucannon isn't going "back" to safety.
2) We have a need at safety — unless we re-sign both Rashard Johnson and Tony Jefferson

I also think that we'll be less aggressive in free agency than we've been the last couple years. Pouring more resources into the offensive line when we've invested 2 first-round picks and 2 free agents at the position isn't wise, particularly when we have like 50 OL coaches.

I don't think that Bettcher wants to blitz as much as Bowles did.
 

Dan H

ASFN Addict
Banned from P+R
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Posts
6,205
Reaction score
5,207
Location
Circle City, IN
Yes he is a DE with 5 sacks.

Which is why I said he's a good DT because he plays more like one now than a DE.

My bad though thanks for pointing this out as I hate to be in error and you like to point them out so this works for all of us. :D

Given our lack of LB'ers . . . would we be better off switching to a 4-3?
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,419
Reaction score
29,824
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Given our lack of LB'ers . . . would we be better off switching to a 4-3?

We were essentially playing a 5-2 last year. It's not like we have a Clark Haggans-type playing OLB right now and holding down the edge.

The problem would be the same if we playing a traditional even front: how are you going to get after the passer? Neither Minter nor Bucannon have shown much aptitude for the A-gap blitz.
 

LoyaltyisaCurse

IF AND WHEN HEALTHY...
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Posts
53,873
Reaction score
19,668
Location
CA
Then ILB WILL REMAIN A JOKE...

Cannon is a SS and Minter is just a notch above Raynoch Thompson.
 

don7031

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 24, 2014
Posts
1,035
Reaction score
297
Unless they strike gold in a late round draft choice, the only way the Cardinals are going to significantly upgrade the middle linebacker position is to pry the bong out of D'Washs hands.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,419
Reaction score
29,824
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Hey, Hey, Hey.

Raynoch Thompson was the best thing since LeVar Woods.

Minter is basically Ronald McKinnon upgraded to the 21st Century NFL. Take away his draft position, and Minter is a perfectly adequate player that you can win with. Now, if he's around beyond 2016 (contract year!) is an open question.
 
Top