Training Camp: KEY battles for roster spots

[kerouac9]

Goodness, Spanky: Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

First off: Hayes started one (1) game in 2004 as an MLB, against Seattle in game 15 and had nine (9) tackles. The rest of the time he was strickly a ST'er....and a darn good one at that. How can you tell me he's not got what it may take to become a good MLB. That he wasn't able to dislodge McKinnon...hell man he was in his second year. He was a D3 in '03 for crying out loud.

If all of our special teamers were so good (Hayes, all the backup corners, etc.), why did our coverage teams suck so bad last season? You'd think that it would have been a strength, but apparently everyone is blameless, as long as they're still on the roster.

Second off: All I said regarding Mitchell is that he has been slow to recover from his ACL and that is the reason he fell in the draft. I never said he was a Pro Bowl material.

You said that it was the only reason he fell in the draft. I'm not so sure. It was also (perceived) tentative play last season at Oklahoma. You didn't say that he'd be a Pro Bowler, but you did say that he'd be "back to top form." Before the ACL, he was a prohibitive 1st round prospect. That sounds like you expect a lot from him...

...Considerably more than I. Before the injury, Lance Mitchell was a far better prospect than Gerald Hayes ever was.

Thirdly: Huff has never played W/OLB so how do you know how he will end up playing in this position this year.....and I never implied that they were Pro Bowl players either.... but there is no denying that Darling has proved himself as a solid player over the years.....with last year being his most productive yet.

Well, how do you know how he'll play on the weakside? There's a difference between the two positions, as well as on the outside and in the middle. All I said is that Blackstock fits the WLB profile better than either Huff or Darling, and that the sooner he can step into that job, the better.

I didn't even mention that LBs are not, in fact, members of the defensive secondary. Perhaps you missed that point in all your research. Maybe you ought to look it up.

Fifthly: There are numerous resources available through the media team at the NFL that put this type of info together (optimum size type info). Do your bloody homework. How about the other premier OLB over and above those you mentioned: Vrabel at 6'4"/261 or Joey Porter at 6'3"/250 or DJ Williams at 6'1"/242 or Marcus Washington at 6'3"/243.

I don't count 3-4 OLBs as WLBs, because it's a totally different position, with a totally different prospect profile than a 4-3 OLB. It's like saying that Bertrand Berry and Richard Seymour play the same position and have the same profiles just because they're both DEs.

That discounts Vrabel and Porter (even though Porter now plays for the Chiefs, the success of Steeler LBs translating out of the 3-4 system that Pittsburgh uses is varied--at best). At the same time, the NFL.com depth chart for the Redskins lists Washington at SLB. LeVar Arrington plays the Weakside spot for the Redskins. Perhaps you should do more research, or something.

D.J. Williams (6'0", 242) does play the weakside position for the Broncos, but he's closer to Blackstock's weight than Huff's or Darling's. So what were you trying to say? 5 lbs. is a lot in the NFL.

 

[spanky1]

Goodness, Spanky: Do you ever get tired of being wrong?



If all of our special teamers were so good (Hayes, all the backup corners, etc.), why did our coverage teams suck so bad last season? You'd think that it would have been a strength, but apparently everyone is blameless, as long as they're still on the roster.



You said that it was the only reason he fell in the draft. I'm not so sure. It was also (perceived) tentative play last season at Oklahoma. You didn't say that he'd be a Pro Bowler, but you did say that he'd be "back to top form." Before the ACL, he was a prohibitive 1st round prospect. That sounds like you expect a lot from him...

...Considerably more than I. Before the injury, Lance Mitchell was a far better prospect than Gerald Hayes ever was.



Well, how do you know how he'll play on the weakside? There's a difference between the two positions, as well as on the outside and in the middle. All I said is that Blackstock fits the WLB profile better than either Huff or Darling, and that the sooner he can step into that job, the better.

I didn't even mention that LBs are not, in fact, members of the defensive secondary. Perhaps you missed that point in all your research. Maybe you ought to look it up.



I don't count 3-4 OLBs as WLBs, because it's a totally different position, with a totally different prospect profile than a 4-3 OLB. It's like saying that Bertrand Berry and Richard Seymour play the same position and have the same profiles just because they're both DEs.

That discounts Vrabel and Porter (even though Porter now plays for the Chiefs, the success of Steeler LBs translating out of the 3-4 system that Pittsburgh uses is varied--at best). At the same time, the NFL.com depth chart for the Redskins lists Washington at SLB. LeVar Arrington plays the Weakside spot for the Redskins. Perhaps you should do more research, or something.

D.J. Williams (6'0", 242) does play the weakside position for the Broncos, but he's closer to Blackstock's weight than Huff's or Darling's. So what were you trying to say? 5 lbs. is a lot in the NFL.

5 lbs is alot in the NFL........what falls quicker to the ground.....5 lbs of feathers or 5 lbs of stones?

K9.....what weighs 5 lbs....let me give you an example.....go to your favorite store and buy a six pack of toilet paper....charmin will do.....it weighs more than five lbs......try it, you will see I'm right. Now come back and tell me that 5 lbs. means a lot in the nfl.

Gheez......

 

[joeshmo]

5 lbs is alot in the NFL........what falls quicker to the ground.....5 lbs of feathers or 5 lbs of stones?

K9.....what weighs 5 lbs....let me give you an example.....go to your favorite store and buy a six pack of toilet paper....charmin will do.....it weighs more than five lbs......try it, you will see I'm right. Now come back and tell me that 5 lbs. means a lot in the nfl.

Gheez......

You cant be serious can you.

5 lbs does make a difference. If you know anything about training at all 5 lbs of muscle or lean mass can make all the difference in the world. Which is why you hear athletes talk about wanting to loss or gain 5 lbs all the time. In fact some highly trained athletes have what they want to loss or gain down to the pound.

Now your little what falls quicker question really doesnt apply here since that is gravitational force and we are not talking about LB's falling out of a tree here. The real equation you should be looking for is.

Force = Mass * Acceleration

So yes 5 lbs could mean a lot.

 

[BigRedRage]

warner was named starter months ago

What about the quarterback situation. Is everyone still sold on Warner? I am not convinced Warner is the answer. There should be an open quarterback challenge in camp and preseason. Then if Warner wins fine,battle over.

 

[BigDavis75]

That discounts Vrabel and Porter (even though Porter now plays for the Chiefs, the success of Steeler LBs translating out of the 3-4 system that Pittsburgh uses is varied--at best). At the same time, the NFL.com depth chart for the Redskins lists Washington at SLB. LeVar Arrington plays the Weakside spot for the Redskins. Perhaps you should do more research, or something.

D.J. Williams (6'0", 242) does play the weakside position for the Broncos, but he's closer to Blackstock's weight than Huff's or Darling's. So what were you trying to say? 5 lbs. is a lot in the NFL. [/QUOTE]

Maybe you should do your research, Kendrell Bell went to the Chiefs, not Joey Porter. Also, what do you mean Steelers LBs success is varied at best? I do agree with you though on Hayes, since our D is more attacking, so is our D-Line, which means our tackles don't protect our LBs from blockers ala Bears a couple years back; so a smaller guy like Hayes is less likely to succede.

 

[BigDavis75]

What I really like about this group of LBs is that we can let Blackstock and Lance Mitchell sit the bench for a while to lear the schemes and recover from injuries respectively, which will be very important in the long run.

 

[Redsz]

Some good points brought up.

As for the TE/FB situation yo brought up there is some teeth to the FB playing more and TE playing less. An article stated a while ago that in the mini camps the 2 back sets were being used a lot more then last year. But they never said if the TE was on the field or if we wwere still using the 3 wide sets. My guess is that the 3 wide set is our staple which means in mini camp we were using a lot of 3 wide 2 back sets with no TE. I think we are going to use that set a lot more next year or at least until a TE emerges from our group. Which diminishes the playing time of the TE for at least the time being.

Exactly. You get your best players on the field. And giving Femi and Hodgins more action in 3 wide 2 back sets will cover up an obvious weakness at TE (until proven otherwise) with a strength IMO. Plus having Hodgins block for JJ will help his transition to the NFL (hopefully).

Now hopefully we can actually get our 3 WR's on field without any broken feet or blown out knee's to make this offense go.

As for Darling and Huff competition I am of the believe that the switch was made because Huff has about 5 more lbs then Darling, 2 inches taller, and is faster. All the while retaining similar styles and and abilities. Huff just needs to be as consistent as Darling is/was. But Darling will still get plenty of playing time with Pendy liking to keep guys fresh and rotate different guys for different packages.

Good point. We do need more size. I'm just very weary of Huff based on the fact that I have seen so little of him. The wraps out of Seattle suggested that he has the physical talent but makes mental errors. Which is something we can't have happen this year if we want to improve against the run. Players taking the wrong gap KILLED us last year.

Darling has a place on this team. And I think him at 2nd string was somewhat blown out of context by the media. And as you say, even if he isn't starting in the base defense... I'm sure he will have plenty of oppurtunties in different looks (3-4, 5 man front, 3-3-5 etc) because of his ability to play inside and out and in rotation with other LB's.

As for Hayes I am going to make the prediction right now that by game 8 Mitchell or someone else will be the starting at MLB. I just didnt see the ability for him to be a starter when he got the chance last year, at least not like everyone else saw.

God I hope not Joe. I hope the coaching staffs faith in him pays off.

Blackstock wont be starting this year(unless injury of course) but he will see a lot of playing time on pass rush downs and be groomed to start, may make the move by next year but no latter then 2007 when Huffs and Darlings contract ends.

I agree. Blackstock will be a strictly rotational player where he can do what he does best - go after the QB. Aparently Pendergast has already worked in some new stuff into the playbook for him.

 

[joeshmo]

God I hope not Joe. I hope the coaching staffs faith in him pays off.

I don think the coaches have that much faith in him. Some but not a whole lot.

They tried to replace him with Hartwell in FA, they drafted a MLB, when Huff and Darling can both play the spot as well.

 

[1DS]

I should hope so. As of this moment, with Dansby securing the spot at the Strongside OLB position, this team lacks anything like a true Weakside linebacker, a premire position in the NFL today. Huff/Darling/Hayes are too big and don't have quite the skill set to play the position effectively (mostly because none of them have the wheels to get out into the flat to cover 'backs on pass routes).

I agree that Blackstock should get a lot of playing time this season, and maybe a start of two toward the end of the season. If his instincts can improve and he can really hit the books and be a factor, hopefully the Cards will locate OLBs that they're not going to have to keep drafting them year after year.

I'm not certain that either Mitchell or Hayes are going to be the long-term answer at MLB. I'm optimistic for Mitchell, but not overly so. There's a reason that he fell so far in the draft, and it may have more to do with just the injury. I wonder if docs saw something on film... but the reward was defintely worth the risk.

Any draft pick can turn out to be a fantastic player. Zach Thomas comes to mind. He fell to the 5th round as well. Now, i'm not saying bank on Mitchell becoming a pro-bowler, but it could happen.

 

[Pariah]

First off:
...
Second off:
...

Thirdly:
...
Fifthly:

Is anyone else wondering what happened to "fourthly?"

(this doesn't mean I'm taking sides...just wondering if there was another point....)

 

[kerouac9]

Maybe you should do your research, Kendrell Bell went to the Chiefs, not Joey Porter. Also, what do you mean Steelers LBs success is varied at best? I do agree with you though on Hayes, since our D is more attacking, so is our D-Line, which means our tackles don't protect our LBs from blockers ala Bears a couple years back; so a smaller guy like Hayes is less likely to succede.

Touche on Bell/Porter. But this doesn't change the fact that he's a 3-4 OLB, which is a totally different position than a 4-3 WLB, which was my primiary point...

As for the "varied success of Steelers LBs", I meant once they leave Pittsburgh as free agents. Levon Kirkland was a stud in Steeltown, but stunk it up in Seattle and then Philly. Steeler LBs don't seem to do as well when (wait for it, Spanky) placed in a 4-3 defense.

 

[BigDavis75]

Touche on Bell/Porter. But this doesn't change the fact that he's a 3-4 OLB, which is a totally different position than a 4-3 WLB, which was my primiary point...

As for the "varied success of Steelers LBs", I meant once they leave Pittsburgh as free agents. Levon Kirkland was a stud in Steeltown, but stunk it up in Seattle and then Philly. Steeler LBs don't seem to do as well when (wait for it, Spanky) placed in a 4-3 defense.

Chad Brown has been successful and so has Earl Holmes, and Joey Porter is 6'3" 250, right around ideal size for a OLB according to spank.

 

[kerouac9]

Chad Brown has been successful and so has Earl Holmes, and Joey Porter is 6'3" 250, right around ideal size for a OLB according to spank.

Chad Brown never had as good a season with the Seahawks as he did his final year with the Steelers. Yes, he had as many or more tackles four times, but never again as many sacks (13--!!!), Forced Fumbles (3) or INTs (2) as he did his final year in the Black and Gold (1996). He has had a good career, but nothing like what he did in 14 games in a contract year in Pittsburgh.

Earl Holmes, on the other hand, was never really a standout player for the Steelers. He had one good year in Cleveland, then got released, and then has had a couple of all right seasons in Detroit. I guess he gets a lot of tackles, but so did Ronald McKinnon, and that never meant that he was very good. He's never had more than 4 sacks in a season (with PIT), never has really forced fumbles or got INTs. I mean, he's a solid player, but the guys who are/were special in the Steel City never seem to transfer that when they get out of northwest Pennsylvania.

As for Joey Porter: I said that that's a 3-4 OLB, which is a totally different position than a 4-3 OLB, which is what I'm talking about. Porter's too big for a 4-3 OLB. In a 4-3 defense, he'd probably be a MLB or a DE.

 

[WisconsinCard]

Well I guess you could say Nvarre vs McCown for #2 Id put money on Navarre.

How much???? I'll take that bet. I am sure I wont hear from you though. Your just spewin again...

 

[ajcardfan]

How much???? I'll take that bet. I am sure I wont hear from you though. Your just spewin again...

If you think swd will not make a bet you don't know him very well.

 

[WisconsinCard]

If you think swd will not make a bet you don't know him very well.

He's not dumb enough to take that bet. He has said several things about JM that I have proposed a bet. Never to be taken up on.

 

[BigDavis75]

Chad Brown never had as good a season with the Seahawks as he did his final year with the Steelers. Yes, he had as many or more tackles four times, but never again as many sacks (13--!!!), Forced Fumbles (3) or INTs (2) as he did his final year in the Black and Gold (1996). He has had a good career, but nothing like what he did in 14 games in a contract year in Pittsburgh.

Earl Holmes, on the other hand, was never really a standout player for the Steelers. He had one good year in Cleveland, then got released, and then has had a couple of all right seasons in Detroit. I guess he gets a lot of tackles, but so did Ronald McKinnon, and that never meant that he was very good. He's never had more than 4 sacks in a season (with PIT), never has really forced fumbles or got INTs. I mean, he's a solid player, but the guys who are/were special in the Steel City never seem to transfer that when they get out of northwest Pennsylvania.

As for Joey Porter: I said that that's a 3-4 OLB, which is a totally different position than a 4-3 OLB, which is what I'm talking about. Porter's too big for a 4-3 OLB. In a 4-3 defense, he'd probably be a MLB or a DE.

Joey Porter is an amazing athlete and could play any spot you just listed. Often on third downs he'll go play RE and Hampton will come out of the game (if its not a running situation). But, I remember this one time he was being blocked by Ogden and he reached over him and pulled down Elvis Grbac with one arm. It may have been the most amazing play I've ever seen. Also, he is quick enough to beat RBs to the corner as he has done to Jamal Lewis many a time. I agree with you most OLBs in 3-4 couldn't play LBs in 4-3 (take the Patriots for example), but Porter is a freak.