PDA

View Full Version : Linebackers



broncofaninfla
11-17-2008, 10:20 AM
This group played better than any combination we have tried all season long. I'm for keeping this group intact and allowing them to build on their continuity as they will get even better with more playing time together. These young and hungry players have made the most of their opportunities and have outplayed our starters by far. Larsen will be our starting MLB for the rest of the season. This was by far the best play by our MLB’s this season, he is by far our best MLB. As good as DJ Williams is, I would almost be apprehensive about returning him to the line up at this point. Maybe sliding Woodayrd over to take Winborns spot? Larsen, Woodyard and Williams are our best LB’s. If I’m Shanny, Niko would be cut today and Webster and Bailey will be looking for work at the end of the season. :salute:

roomemp
11-17-2008, 01:00 PM
When DJ comes back, I say move him to the Strong side and keep Woodyard at weakside. Keep Larsen in the middle of course.

Zweems56
11-17-2008, 01:12 PM
For the love of god, dont even think about moving DJ one more time.

Italianmobstr7
11-17-2008, 01:22 PM
DJ is not moving anywhere. When DJ comes back it will be Winborn, Larsen, Williams. Woodyard is good, but not good enough to keep DJ off the field.

underrated29
11-17-2008, 01:23 PM
can woodyard play the strongside?

DJ's spot is weakside, and its his throne when he comes back..

But i love woodyard, and like him and his energy on the field. So I would prefer to keep him on the field, but not at the expense of DJ.

CoachChaz
11-17-2008, 01:25 PM
How great would it be if we actually drafted a few LB's in higher rounds that had talent

Zweems56
11-17-2008, 01:26 PM
It woudl be horrible.

CoachChaz
11-17-2008, 01:28 PM
As opposed to 6th round picks and undrafted FA's that essentially get hand jobs because they have a fraction more heart than the hacks we usually line up each week.

G_Money
11-17-2008, 01:40 PM
This was the conflict I wasn’t looking forward to when we re-signed DJ.

Everybody knows I think the world of Woodyard. When we picked him up as a UDFA I was ecstatic, thinking “Okay, now he can be DJ’s understudy for a year and take over when DJ goes out to get big money.”

And then we paid DJ.

And I thought, “Okay, well…DJ’s best position is the weak-side, so he could be worth the contract with a real DC, and the best Woodyard could hope to be at the Will is probably what DJ already is. But man, I thought Woodyard could really be somebody…”

And then DJ got hurt, and Woodyard stepped in without breaking a sweat.

And now I’m thinking, “Dammit, there was no way we could let go of one of the only two Pro Bowl talents on the defense, so we really HAD to re-sign DJ, but why does he have to be stupid, and a bad leader? Now we HAVE to find a way to get Woodyard on the field.”

DJ can really only live up to his talent at the Will. He doesn’t have the brain to figure out how to translate that talent to the strong-side for whatever reason, and he doesn’t have the instincts to play the middle the way we need it played. Larsen HAS those instincts and was everywhere on the downs he was in the game. I’d like to take a good LONG look at him there over the last half of the season, regardless of Webster’s health. But if it can’t be Larsen, then it shouldn’t be Webster or Niko or DJ either, and we need to draft or sign a highly-talented MLB.

Which only leaves Sam available. Boss is probably done. For his career, I mean. If he’s not, he should be done with us – he’s nothing special, most especially after another surgery. Winborn is a good ST guy and a good backup for DJ, but I don’t want him playing as a starter. And Louis Green is NOT the answer. So either we need a strong-side backer…or this is where Woodyard has to make his mark.

Wesley isn’t the right size for it, since he has to shed more blocks and fight through more trash playing on the tight-end side of the field. He’s tremendous in the open field and with a clear path to the ball-carrier, things that will be less available on that side. Will IS his best position, but unlike DJ he’s not dumb. He might be able to learn it and thrive there.

As a player, I compared Woodyard to Mobley. Mobley played out of position for most of his career. He should have been a Will too, but we kept adding those, so he played the strong side a lot, and stepped in at MLB in emergencies. And he had a fine career doing that.

I think Woodyard can do the same. If he can’t, he can’t, and then I gnash my teeth and throw sackcloth and ashes on my head, because we can’t get a playmaker like Woodyard on the field due to his position already being filled. But if we can teach him how to fight through blocks and go low instead of high when he has to in order to make the play, maybe add a 290 lb run-stopping DE on his side that can force the action back in toward him…

He can have a valuable place on this team.

I’d like that. I think he’s a leader, a man of character, and a fine football player. And we need all three of those things on our defense right now, whatever position they have to play.

~G

CoachChaz
11-17-2008, 01:52 PM
Woodyard = Gold.

G_Money
11-17-2008, 01:55 PM
As opposed to 6th round picks and undrafted FA's that essentially get hand jobs because they have a fraction more heart than the hacks we usually line up each week.

You know I thought Woodyard was a much higher talent, Coach.

I thought Larsen went about the right place.

But Larsen fell because he can’t play every down and Woodyard fell because he was thought of as a tweener.

I don’t think he’s a tweener, and Larsen’s two downs were more valuable last game than any we could have had from a 3-down LB on our roster.

I’d like an every-down stud at MLB, sure. And a quality RB, and at LEAST one great safety, and a DE who can stop the run AND get pressure, and a DT who can do the same, and…

We need a lot, still. :tsk: It won't help us much to get another mega-talented LB draftee in here if we can't teach them how to play the middle. Most of the early-round guys have the talent but not the knowledge yet, and the instincts are a little shaky.

We can't teach Webster how to play it correctly, we couldn't teach DJ how to play it correctly...

I have concerns about how fast a rookie LB who isn't already good at the responsibilities of his position will be able to pick it up with us, because our defensive staff is stocked with bad teachers.

We still need the talent, but it remains to be seen if Larsen can be a 2-down thumper for us who makes a difference. If he can, name him the starter and then see what happens on draft day. We don't have a Larsen waiting around at safety. We don't have a placeholder or a decent contributor. That position is a wasteland for us right now, and if we decide to add a safety in the first round and all the LBs we want for the middle are gone by our next pick, I want to see if Larsen CAN man the position for us with more adequacy than we’ve been getting. I don't want to reach on a LB just because we want a higher-round pick filling that role.

Once the talent’s in the league, I don’t care where it was drafted, just if it produces. Spikes, Maualuga and Laurinaitis could all bust, and Larsen could play for 8 years.

Just sayin.

~G

Zweems56
11-17-2008, 02:20 PM
As opposed to 6th round picks and undrafted FA's that essentially get hand jobs because they have a fraction more heart than the hacks we usually line up each week.

Sarcasm coach....

LRtagger
11-17-2008, 02:21 PM
Put Woodyard at SS on 1st and 2nd downs as well as 3rd and short...just like how we played Larsen at MLB....took him out on 3rd and long.

Guy runs a 4.5 40 and has good size and can definitely hit. Manuel plays in the box on 1st and 2nd down anyways, so why not just let Woodyard play SS when DJ gets back? Hell Woodyard might even be better in coverage than Manuel, who knows.

As far as cutting Niko, that would be a terrible move. The guy isnt a great MLB, but with the way our Linebackers are going down it would be dumb to let any of them go right now. Plus he is probably the best special team coverage guy on the team. If we really dont want him here, we can probably geta 7th for him in the offseason. There are lots of teams in need of special team leaders.

broncofaninfla
11-17-2008, 02:34 PM
IMO, our best three linebackers this season are Williams, Larsen and Woodyard. I'd like to see them ALL be on the field at the same time and feel that Woodyard has played at a level that merits giving him a chance to take over Winborns current position. There isn't much of a size difference with them and Woodyard has more of an upside. As for Larsen, he is the best MLB on our team this season and he has a chance to get even better. Denver might be able to draft or sign somebody with even more talent next year and Larsen would then give us great depth at that position but for now, he is our guy at MLB.

CoachChaz
11-17-2008, 02:43 PM
When we signed Woodyard, I assumed it was to play SS. I wanted to see Denver draft him as well and was happy that we got him wothout using a pick.

However, I'd still rather see him playing SS. The 230 they have him listed at is a complete gift and I think his speed is at least equal to guys in his weight class that play the SS spot exceptionally well (Jermaine Phillips, Michael Boulware, Rodney Harrison, Kerry Rhodes, Gibril Wilson, Daniel Bullocks, etc.)

CoachChaz
11-17-2008, 02:48 PM
Sign Dansby, move Woodyard to SS, draft accordingly

broncofaninfla
11-17-2008, 02:52 PM
When we signed Woodyard, I assumed it was to play SS. I wanted to see Denver draft him as well and was happy that we got him wothout using a pick.

However, I'd still rather see him playing SS. The 230 they have him listed at is a complete gift and I think his speed is at least equal to guys in his weight class that play the SS spot exceptionally well (Jermaine Phillips, Michael Boulware, Rodney Harrison, Kerry Rhodes, Gibril Wilson, Daniel Bullocks, etc.)


I like him best at LB but would be game to see him at SS if that's what it takes to get him on the field. As weak as we are at safety this year, he would be an instant upgrade for us. He has the speed and the instincts to play the position. :beer:

Lonestar
11-17-2008, 03:00 PM
This was the conflict I wasn’t looking forward to when we re-signed DJ.

Everybody knows I think the world of Woodyard. When we picked him up as a UDFA I was ecstatic, thinking “Okay, now he can be DJ’s understudy for a year and take over when DJ goes out to get big money.”

And then we paid DJ.

And I thought, “Okay, well…DJ’s best position is the weak-side, so he could be worth the contract with a real DC, and the best Woodyard could hope to be at the Will is probably what DJ already is. But man, I thought Woodyard could really be somebody…”

And then DJ got hurt, and Woodyard stepped in without breaking a sweat.

And now I’m thinking, “Dammit, there was no way we could let go of one of the only two Pro Bowl talents on the defense, so we really HAD to re-sign DJ, but why does he have to be stupid, and a bad leader? Now we HAVE to find a way to get Woodyard on the field.”

DJ can really only live up to his talent at the Will. He doesn’t have the brain to figure out how to translate that talent to the strong-side for whatever reason, and he doesn’t have the instincts to play the middle the way we need it played. Larsen HAS those instincts and was everywhere on the downs he was in the game. I’d like to take a good LONG look at him there over the last half of the season, regardless of Webster’s health. But if it can’t be Larsen, then it shouldn’t be Webster or Niko or DJ either, and we need to draft or sign a highly-talented MLB.

Which only leaves Sam available. Boss is probably done. For his career, I mean. If he’s not, he should be done with us – he’s nothing special, most especially after another surgery. Winborn is a good ST guy and a good backup for DJ, but I don’t want him playing as a starter. And Louis Green is NOT the answer. So either we need a strong-side backer…or this is where Woodyard has to make his mark.

Wesley isn’t the right size for it, since he has to shed more blocks and fight through more trash playing on the tight-end side of the field. He’s tremendous in the open field and with a clear path to the ball-carrier, things that will be less available on that side. Will IS his best position, but unlike DJ he’s not dumb. He might be able to learn it and thrive there.

As a player, I compared Woodyard to Mobley. Mobley played out of position for most of his career. He should have been a Will too, but we kept adding those, so he played the strong side a lot, and stepped in at MLB in emergencies. And he had a fine career doing that.

I think Woodyard can do the same. If he can’t, he can’t, and then I gnash my teeth and throw sackcloth and ashes on my head, because we can’t get a playmaker like Woodyard on the field due to his position already being filled. But if we can teach him how to fight through blocks and go low instead of high when he has to in order to make the play, maybe add a 290 lb run-stopping DE on his side that can force the action back in toward him…

He can have a valuable place on this team.

I’d like that. I think he’s a leader, a man of character, and a fine football player. And we need all three of those things on our defense right now, whatever position they have to play.

~G

I've liked Woodyard since seeing him at the combine..

Hell play the kid at safety since he realistically can't beat DJ out of the job..

HE was a safety long before becoming a LB and only did so because his college team was desperate at LB..

He certainly would not be any worse than the skells we have there.. would he be an all pro there I doubt it, but certainly a solid tackler in open space..

While I'd rather have an Atwater/Smith or Atwater/Lynch combo back there woodyard and a day one choice next year could indeed make him That a strong point for a decade or more..

The other option is trade DJ and get some decent players or choices for him.

I just want the best players on the field at all times even if they are not ultra experienced.. They will never get it unless they can be playing..

Lonestar
11-17-2008, 03:09 PM
When we signed Woodyard, I assumed it was to play SS. I wanted to see Denver draft him as well and was happy that we got him wothout using a pick.

However, I'd still rather see him playing SS. The 230 they have him listed at is a complete gift and I think his speed is at least equal to guys in his weight class that play the SS spot exceptionally well (Jermaine Phillips, Michael Boulware, Rodney Harrison, Kerry Rhodes, Gibril Wilson, Daniel Bullocks, etc.)


I did not see this or the other post concerning Safety when I posted mine..

HE was a Safety in college before being a LB was moved to LB as a Junior I think it was to fill a big hole there and he was the best athlete available..

I saw him at the combine and thought like you he would be drafted as a Safety as his size fro LB was at best questionable..

He is a great athlete and a so far a damned fine tackler.. Get him on the field.. let his instincts kick in and allow him to play.. If he is not fast enough to play deep center let him play SS and a 4th LB or shallow center field and let those that dare to come into that area they get thumped for the audacity of doing so..

CoachChaz
11-17-2008, 03:17 PM
I did not see this or the other post concerning Safety when I posted mine..

HE was a Safety in college before being a LB was moved to LB as a Junior I think it was to fill a big hole there and he was the best athlete available..

I saw him at the combine and thought like you he would be drafted as a Safety as his size fro LB was at best questionable..

He is a great athlete and a so far a damned fine tackler.. Get him on the field.. let his instincts kick in and allow him to play.. If he is not fast enough to play deep center let him play SS and a 4th LB or shallow center field and let those that dare to come into that area they get thumped for the audacity of doing so..

Much like letting Larsen play MIKE for the rest of the season, I'd like to see Woodyard get some PY at SS...it will give the team a good idea if it's a needed position to fill or not and it keeps him on the field. God knows he can do any worse than the current group of hacks out there.

For that matter, give Barrett a shot at FS for a few games. If they work out, then we don't really have to look at that position in the draft and can maybe focus on a stud RB in the first.

Lonestar
11-17-2008, 03:42 PM
Much like letting Larsen play MIKE for the rest of the season, I'd like to see Woodyard get some PY at SS...it will give the team a good idea if it's a needed position to fill or not and it keeps him on the field. God knows he can do any worse than the current group of hacks out there.

For that matter, give Barrett a shot at FS for a few games. If they work out, then we don't really have to look at that position in the draft and can maybe focus on a stud RB in the first.

AS I said somewhere else let them play and then we at least know if they are keepers or not and need to move on if they are not. If they are what we think they will be, cut the dead wood in front of them and draft backups day two instead of starters..

I've always said this team is more of playoff team in 09 than in 08.

CoachChaz
11-17-2008, 03:45 PM
AS I said somewhere else let them play and then we at least know if they are keepers or not and need to move on if they are not. If they are what we think they will be, cut the dead wood in front of them and draft backups day two instead of starters..

I've always said this team is more of playoff team in 09 than in 08.

I completely agree...but it's not Shanny's style to actually take a look at the talent he so deperately wanted in April. Doesn't make sense. is it just me or when he refuses to play certain young players...isnt it the same as admnitting he screwed up drafting?

LRtagger
11-17-2008, 03:48 PM
I did not see this or the other post concerning Safety when I posted mine..

HE was a Safety in college before being a LB was moved to LB as a Junior I think it was to fill a big hole there and he was the best athlete available..

I saw him at the combine and thought like you he would be drafted as a Safety as his size fro LB was at best questionable..

He is a great athlete and a so far a damned fine tackler.. Get him on the field.. let his instincts kick in and allow him to play.. If he is not fast enough to play deep center let him play SS and a 4th LB or shallow center field and let those that dare to come into that area they get thumped for the audacity of doing so..

He was a LB in High School and signed with Kentucky to play Safety. They moved him to OLB midway through his FRESHMAN year because they ended up needing him there.

BUT, he is still a tweener. He was listed at 6'1", 219lbs at the combine and I think was the fastest LB there. I think with the right offseason program, he can be our starting SS next year. There is no reason why he should not be on the field as a starter next year.

Lonestar
11-17-2008, 03:58 PM
He was a LB in High School and signed with Kentucky to play Safety. They moved him to OLB midway through his FRESHMAN year because they ended up needing him there.

BUT, he is still a tweener. He was listed at 6'1", 219lbs at the combine and I think was the fastest LB there. I think with the right offseason program, he can be our starting SS next year. There is no reason why he should not be on the field as a starter next year.

He was indeed the fastest LB at the combine that was the thing that got my eye a s I'd never heard of him prior to that battery of tests.. I watch him from that point on and was really impressed with everything I saw of him..

They commented time and agian him being a converted safety adn taht was part of the reason he was the fastest LB..

Obviously He did not impress ANY NFL scouts as he was not drafted.. but was really happy we signed him.

broncohead
11-17-2008, 05:56 PM
I've liked Woodyard since seeing him at the combine..

Hell play the kid at safety since he realistically can't beat DJ out of the job..

HE was a safety long before becoming a LB and only did so because his college team was desperate at LB..

He certainly would not be any worse than the skells we have there.. would he be an all pro there I doubt it, but certainly a solid tackler in open space..

While I'd rather have an Atwater/Smith or Atwater/Lynch combo back there woodyard and a day one choice next year could indeed make him That a strong point for a decade or more..

The other option is trade DJ and get some decent players or choices for him.

I just want the best players on the field at all times even if they are not ultra experienced.. They will never get it unless they can be playing..

Trade DJ? He was the best player on the D before he got injured. At a position that already has issues outside of DJ and you think we should trade him? Wow. I don't know why everybody is all over Larsen and Woodyard. They both played good games but they haven't played enough to determine if they will be solid starters. I see DJ moving on the depth chart again. Most likely to the SAM LB IF Woodyard continues to play well.

dogfish
11-17-2008, 06:19 PM
Larsen will be our starting MLB for the rest of the season.


i'd like to see it-- he looks like a more consistent tackler than either webster or niko, and he attacks his gaps with controlled aggression-- but i won't hold my breath. . . my guess is that as soon as webster's healthy, larsen will go back to fullback and webster will be back to starting at MIKE. . . we'll see. . .

Lonestar
11-17-2008, 08:34 PM
Trade DJ? He was the best player on the D before he got injured. At a position that already has issues outside of DJ and you think we should trade him? Wow. I don't know why everybody is all over Larsen and Woodyard. They both played good games but they haven't played enough to determine if they will be solid starters. I see DJ moving on the depth chart again. Most likely to the SAM LB IF Woodyard continues to play well.


one sentence out of 18 and you picked up only on that one.. WOW..

It was merely an thought as of anyone on the D he would be the only one that might bring a few players or good choices.. He is young and has a decent contract..

Now that is unlikely to happen and alot more likely than him agreeing to move back to SAM.. I'm sure that is in his contract some where he hated it so much..

As for Woodyard will is his natural spot if not Safety IMHO it is time to play all the rookies and second year players to see what we have. If they are keepers then we do not have double up on them in the draft and stick only where we have desperate needs..

Right now we desperately need:
2 DE run contain as well as Pass rush..
DT to replace Robertson who will not be around much after this maybe next year.
MLB unless larsen is the answer..
Both safeties unless Woodyard and the other kid are answers here..

OK at:
SAM Winborn is OK there.. Woodyard in a pinch.
CB Champ is a stud and Bly, Jack Williams looks good enough to cut loose Bly huge contract.. Paymah could/should be a keeper for nickle dime and back up IF we can get a Pass rush..

Most of the spots we already have backups as starters.. so drafting backups is not needed.. IMHO

nj10
11-17-2008, 08:47 PM
Draft Sam LB Jared Brock out of West Texas A&M!

broncohead
11-17-2008, 10:21 PM
one sentence out of 18 and you picked up only on that one.. WOW..

It was merely an thought as of anyone on the D he would be the only one that might bring a few players or good choices.. He is young and has a decent contract..

Now that is unlikely to happen and alot more likely than him agreeing to move back to SAM.. I'm sure that is in his contract some where he hated it so much..

As for Woodyard will is his natural spot if not Safety IMHO it is time to play all the rookies and second year players to see what we have. If they are keepers then we do not have double up on them in the draft and stick only where we have desperate needs..

Right now we desperately need:
2 DE run contain as well as Pass rush..
DT to replace Robertson who will not be around much after this maybe next year.
MLB unless larsen is the answer..
Both safeties unless Woodyard and the other kid are answers here..

OK at:
SAM Winborn is OK there.. Woodyard in a pinch.
CB Champ is a stud and Bly, Jack Williams looks good enough to cut loose Bly huge contract.. Paymah could/should be a keeper for nickle dime and back up IF we can get a Pass rush..

Most of the spots we already have backups as starters.. so drafting backups is not needed.. IMHO

First of all Woodyard won't move to safety. He hasn't played it in a long time and he'll be a better LB. Second where did it ever say that DJ hated SAM? Maybe I missed this. DE, Safety, and DT are still our biggest needs IMO. I wouldn't mind drafting in that order either. Other than that there still needs to be impovement at RB, the other safety position, and MLB.

Lonestar
11-18-2008, 12:03 AM
First of all Woodyard won't move to safety. He hasn't played it in a long time and he'll be a better LB. Second where did it ever say that DJ hated SAM? Maybe I missed this. DE, Safety, and DT are still our biggest needs IMO. I wouldn't mind drafting in that order either. Other than that there still needs to be impovement at RB, the other safety position, and MLB.


DJ has stated it several times and was considering NOT resigning in DEN if they wanted him to go back there.. he moved to MLB last year under protest and much cajoling because he was told he could do it.. only to find out it was more mental than he "COULD" be.

He is a natural WIL and wants to stay there.. and barring a catastrophe will do so the rest of his career..


You never know what mikey is doing with trying to convert players..


Sharpe was a WR..
Lepsis was a TE..
DJ was a super WILL and rookie almost rookie of the year.. converted to SAM and then Mike..
Price was a LB for most of his college career and in the last year moved to DE, was allowed to play there the first couple of years then moved to DT..
Foxworth was a CB and not a great one and was tried to covert him to safety..
numerous RB were converted to FB's.
mikey attempted to make Jake the consummate rollout QB into a drop back passer..


this is just the short list..

so anything can happen in dove valley if mikey wants it to whether it is good or NOT..

broncofaninfla
11-18-2008, 10:17 AM
i'd like to see it-- he looks like a more consistent tackler than either webster or niko, and he attacks his gaps with controlled aggression-- but i won't hold my breath. . . my guess is that as soon as webster's healthy, larsen will go back to fullback and webster will be back to starting at MIKE. . . we'll see. . .

I hope you are wrong. If Larsen plays as good as he did last week again this week against the Raiders, it should be his job to lose. To me it is blatantly obvious how better our defense is with Larsen at MLB over Webster or Niko. I look for Hillis/Haynes combo at FB and Larsen to stay put. I say this because Denver has moved Niko out of the MLB spot and to the weakside, here is a copy and paste from the Denver Post this morning:
The Broncos have moved Niko Koutouvides from middle linebacker to the weakside spot. He is backing up rookie Wesley Woodyard, who is playing in place of the injured D.J. Williams. "I think Niko is still a good linebacker," Shanahan said.

:beer:

Superchop 7
11-18-2008, 07:21 PM
Niko has been moved to weak side.

NICE MOVE BRONCOS !!!!

Should do much better there.

broncofaninfla
11-19-2008, 09:58 AM
Copy and paste from Denver Post this morning:

The Broncos have won the past two games without Bailey and Williams and gave one of their most inspired defensive performances without starting middle linebacker Nate Webster when they won at Atlanta on Sunday. The defense held the Falcons' running backs to fewer than 100 yards and did not allow a passing touchdown.
That performance led to speculation that perhaps the backups — especially at linebacker, where the starters on Sunday were Winborn and rookies Spencer Larsen and Wesley Woodyard — were playing better than the players they replaced.
Not so fast, coach Mike Shanahan said.
"Let's not get too far ahead of ourselves," he said. "It's one game. They had a good game. We'll evaluate it week by week."

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 12:03 PM
I posted this in another thread thought it worth while posting it here..

Frankly after seeing the game on NFL replay.. 11-5 is not a chance in hell.. IF we win this division it is an empty win cause SAN lost it more than we deserved it with superb play...

The defense was just shy of pathetic and had smith not dropped a sure TD in the End zone this euphoria would not be happening..

Yes it was a win.. but dropping passes on our side (leading the league in them), and while everyone was happy with the LB play perhaps I had higher expectations going into the game, after hearing on here how great they played..
Other than a couple for great plays behind the LOS they were making the plays 5-8 yards down field all day.. They ate our lunch up the gut.. but we contained them pretty much when they tried to go wide.

Sorry but I was not impressed at all with our Defense in this game.. other than it was not AS bad as it was a few weeks ago..

I saw a alot of pretty good runs by Hillis and Pope maybe I did not get to see every play on replay but why Hillis is not the starting RB as we speak boggles my imagination..

*********

while IMHO they are better than webster and probably Boss they have a lot of improvement to become great LB's.... most of the plays I saw were 4-5 yard on our side to the LOS..

LRtagger
11-19-2008, 01:06 PM
I posted this in another thread thought it worth while posting it here..

Frankly after seeing the game on NFL replay.. 11-5 is not a chance in hell.. IF we win this division it is an empty win cause SAN lost it more than we deserved it with superb play...

The defense was just shy of pathetic and had smith not dropped a sure TD in the End zone this euphoria would not be happening..

Yes it was a win.. but dropping passes on our side (leading the league in them), and while everyone was happy with the LB play perhaps I had higher expectations going into the game, after hearing on here how great they played..
Other than a couple for great plays behind the LOS they were making the plays 5-8 yards down field all day.. They ate our lunch up the gut.. but we contained them pretty much when they tried to go wide.

Sorry but I was not impressed at all with our Defense in this game.. other than it was not AS bad as it was a few weeks ago..

I saw a alot of pretty good runs by Hillis and Pope maybe I did not get to see every play on replay but why Hillis is not the starting RB as we speak boggles my imagination..

*********

while IMHO they are better than webster and probably Boss they have a lot of improvement to become great LB's.... most of the plays I saw were 4-5 yard on our side to the LOS..

You have to consider how good Atlanta's offense has been this year. Everyone and their mom was expecting Atlanta to have a field day running and throwing against us. Our D really stepped up and held their potent rushing game in check. If not for some questionable calls on offense (did you see the reverse toss to Royal on 3rd and short or the 3rd and less that 1 that we handed off to Tater when we have a guy like Hillis in the backfield), we would have put up 35+...and if not for a couple bonehead mistakes on D (offsides on 4th and 1 which kept a TD drive alive and offsides on 3rd and 8 that kept a FG drive alive) we would have held them to probably around 10 to 13 points.

I'm not saying our defense is top level, but we were without our two best players on D, had I think 3 or 4 rookies starting, and we held them to 13 points in the first half when our offense was sputtering.

Dont get me wrong, we still have a long way to go, but it gave us a little hope. We have the building blocks to be a pretty good D in the future if we get rid of that maroon Slowik.

If we can hold good offensive teams to 20 points or less we have a real shot at making a run IMO.

shank
11-19-2008, 01:17 PM
and while everyone was happy with the LB play perhaps I had higher expectations going into the game, after hearing on here how great they played..
Other than a couple for great plays behind the LOS they were making the plays 5-8 yards down field all day.. They ate our lunch up the gut.. but we contained them pretty much when they tried to go wide.

most of the plays I saw were 4-5 yard on our side to the LOS..


2,1,1,-4,3,8,1,0,1,9,1,2,7,4,5,-2,2,1,5,0,28,2,3,0

really JR? 'most?'

we held the (coming into the game) league's 2nd leading rusher to less than 3.3 yards per carry. without the single long run he would have had only 2.3 YPC. they did well, especially considering the situation from a health standpoint.

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 01:29 PM
2,1,1,-4,3,8,1,0,1,9,1,2,7,4,5,-2,2,1,5,0,28,2,3,0

really JR? 'most?'

Of the ones I saw and looked at the made a lot of tackles 7-8 yard on our side of the LOS.. Now I did not see every play as they edit out plays on the replay show.. But I was not overly impressed with teh LB core we had on teh field.. winborn did make a few behind the LOS for losses but mostly when they went wide..

Up the gut is what I was talking about if you read my post again " They ate our lunch up the gut.. but we contained them pretty much when they tried to go wide."

Perhaps with further study I will see this great play everyone was gushing about, but on first blush I did not see it.. Of course I did watch it at midnight but ran back alot of plays to see who was making the tackle and where..

While Larsen was indeed in a lot of tackles I think they were pretty much all positive yarders.. in a couple of places he was tossed around like a rag doll by OLINES guys that our DL could not contain..

BTW I'd take him in a heart beat over webster or Nicko as we speak but that still does not place him in an all pro status like some semed to be gushing about..

shank
11-19-2008, 01:38 PM
Up the gut is what I was talking about if you read my post again " They ate our lunch up the gut.. but we contained them pretty much when they tried to go wide."



ok, here's the yards per play of runs up the middle (nfl.com):

1,1,3,1,2,4,2,5,28,2

again, without the one big run, that's only 2.3 YPC. that's much improvement.


(i know that with the big run, that's 4.9 YPC, but you are arguing that they ran well up the middle, where if you look at it, they generally got stuffed no matter where they tried to run on sunday).

LRtagger
11-19-2008, 01:48 PM
Of the ones I saw and looked at the made a lot of tackles 7-8 yard on our side of the LOS.. Now I did not see every play as they edit out plays on the replay show.. But I was not overly impressed with teh LB core we had on teh field.. winborn did make a few behind the LOS for losses but mostly when they went wide..

If they edited the game, then they probably took out most of the boring plays where we stuffed them.

If you take out Turner's 28 yard TD run, he had 24 carries for 53 yards. That is pretty damn good if you ask me especially considering what he has done to the rest of the league and what he did to us last time he played us. Larsen was a big part of plugging his gaps something Webster can not do.

All that while still running the same old idiotic Slowik scheme. It must mean that it was the players that stepped up. All three LBs really had a good game.

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 01:56 PM
ok, here's the yards per play of runs up the middle (nfl.com):

1,1,3,1,2,4,2,5,28,2

again, without the one big run, that's only 2.3 YPC. that's much improvement.


(i know that with the big run, that's 4.9 YPC, but you are arguing that they ran well up the middle, where if you look at it, they generally got stuffed no matter where they tried to run on sunday).

thanks for the research it was not that big a deal..


If they edited the game, then they probably took out most of the boring plays where we stuffed them.

If you take out Turner's 28 yard TD run, he had 24 carries for 53 yards. That is pretty damn good if you ask me especially considering what he has done to the rest of the league and what he did to us last time he played us. Larsen was a big part of plugging his gaps something Webster can not do.

All that while still running the same old idiotic Slowik scheme. It must mean that it was the players that stepped up. All three LBs really had a good game.

Anything we did on Sunday was better than webster in the middle ..

But does not raise the thought process that unless Larsen becomes alot more proficient we should still be looking day one for a Mike..

Do not get me wrong I like the kid and perhaps behind a quality DLINE he would be a damned fine MLB.. But what are the odds of mikey expending more quality choices on DLINE..

broncofaninfla
11-19-2008, 01:57 PM
Stats aside, consider the plays and points in the game when our LB's stopped the Falcons RB’s. We stopped drives, forced punts and kept the score within reach. We controlled the tempo of the game at times with our defense. I can’t recall any point this year when we played at that level. This helped in getting our offense back on the field and helped in keeping their rhythm going. As good as the Falcons offense is, this is our best defensive effort of the year and certainly gives us reason for optimism given the involvement of our young up and coming players.

G_Money
11-19-2008, 02:03 PM
Linebackers were at the point of attack, they made the plays on first contact, they filled holes and they played hard without too much excess celebration. They congratulated each other, cheered on their teammates…it was a very professional performance.

And like tagger said, without a couple of stupid penalties we’d look even better, even with a few out-of-positions and over-pursuits.

There were times the running game busted open, but not many, as was also illustrated above. There were times we screwed up – but what I liked was even when we screwed up we only had one big let-down – that HUGE run up the middle where there was no one around for miles. I can’t figure out for the life of me why we lined the MLB up so far to the outside, but I haven’t seen the replay so I can’t tell what we were trying to do.

This defense didn’t crumple on the final drive, though. Didn’t crumple on the FG drive that could have been a dagger-in-the-heart touchdown and was continued because of penalty. This defense showed resilience.

Not EXCELLENCE, but resilience and effort and some decent fundamentals for once. And a lot of it came from the LB position.

I’ll take what I can get right now.

~G

shank
11-19-2008, 02:06 PM
they played hard without too much excess celebration.

cough*winborn*cough



he really rubs me the wrong way. i'm surprised he didn't dance like an idiot and talk smack when he dropped that easy interception, as he usually does so when he helps gang tackle a guy after he gets a first down :tsk:

G_Money
11-19-2008, 02:13 PM
thanks for the research it was not that big a deal..



Anything we did on Sunday was better than webster in the middle ..

But does not raise the thought process that unless Larsen becomes alot more proficient we should still be looking day one for a Mike..

Do not get me wrong I like the kid and perhaps behind a quality DLINE he would be a damned fine MLB.. But what are the odds of mikey expending more quality choices on DLINE..

I would be fine with Larsen as a backup and ST player. He seems like a terrific backup to have. I just want him to be backing up someone significantly better than him. If he's backing up a 1st round monster talent, or a tremendous FA, great. Our interior D won't fall apart in case of injury to said talent, and we get to put him to use on ST, or whenever Shanny decides to have him play FB. :rolleyes:

If he's backing up Webster, then he should be starting, and we'll cover his deficiencies in the pass game with scheme and other fast players.

~G

LRtagger
11-19-2008, 02:14 PM
If you think Winborn celebrates a lot, they dont even how half of it on TV.

There was one run by Turner, a sweep to the sideline, and Turner absolutely blew up Winborn. Winborn still got in his face after the play.

He was also constantly jawing at the Atlanta sideline after almost every play. Not exaggerating.

G_Money
11-19-2008, 02:14 PM
cough*winborn*cough



he really rubs me the wrong way. i'm surprised he didn't dance like an idiot and talk smack when he dropped that easy interception, as he usually does so when he helps gang tackle a guy after he gets a first down :tsk:

Yeah, but even Winborn celebrated less than usual. :eek:

Shocking, I know. THAT was subdued Winborn. He wasn't trying to out-do Webster on the Ludicrously Inappropriate Celebration scale.

~G

broncofaninfla
11-19-2008, 02:16 PM
cough*winborn*cough



he really rubs me the wrong way. i'm surprised he didn't dance like an idiot and talk smack when he dropped that easy interception, as he usually does so when he helps gang tackle a guy after he gets a first down :tsk:

Winborn isn't a bad LB, just seems like an idiot! If the guy didn't celebrate at the wrong times and wasn't so animated after every tackle he is involved in I'd like him. As it is now, I can't stand him. I'm hoping coaches either tell him to shut up or hope he gets replaced by Woodyard when DJ comes back. :beer:

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 02:24 PM
lets compare the game to YTD 11games


game YTD averages
TOP 33.42 32.18
yard per game 364.0 386.6
1st downs allowed 20 20.7
Passing yards 250 243.5
average gain 7.6 7.6
Rushing yards 114 143.1
YPR 3.3 4.9


29 yards improvement on rushing minus 6 on passing..

seems to me like were were pretty much average in this game..

Sorry I do not see a HUGE improvement that Y'all did but then of course I just got to see the replay..

topscribe
11-19-2008, 02:27 PM
Niko has been moved to weak side.

NICE MOVE BRONCOS !!!!

Should do much better there.

Yup, now he's a very expensive third string WILL.

Oh well, he's still good on STs . . .

-----

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 02:27 PM
I would be fine with Larsen as a backup and ST player. He seems like a terrific backup to have. I just want him to be backing up someone significantly better than him. If he's backing up a 1st round monster talent, or a tremendous FA, great. Our interior D won't fall apart in case of injury to said talent, and we get to put him to use on ST, or whenever Shanny decides to have him play FB. :rolleyes:

If he's backing up Webster, then he should be starting, and we'll cover his deficiencies in the pass game with scheme and other fast players.

~G

I can deal with this but frankly would still rather have a monster DT in the first.. Knowing of course we will not be able to get that low..

topscribe
11-19-2008, 02:29 PM
I would be fine with Larsen as a backup and ST player. He seems like a terrific backup to have. I just want him to be backing up someone significantly better than him. If he's backing up a 1st round monster talent, or a tremendous FA, great. Our interior D won't fall apart in case of injury to said talent, and we get to put him to use on ST, or whenever Shanny decides to have him play FB. :rolleyes:

If he's backing up Webster, then he should be starting, and we'll cover his deficiencies in the pass game with scheme and other fast players.

~G



While Larsen was indeed in a lot of tackles I think they were pretty much all positive yarders.. in a couple of places he was tossed around like a rag doll by OLINES guys that our DL could not contain..

BTW I'd take him in a heart beat over webster or Nicko as we speak but that still does not place him in an all pro status like some semed to be gushing about..


Fellas, we have to give a player a little break when that is his first start ever at that position in the NFL . . .

-----

shank
11-19-2008, 02:32 PM
While Larsen was indeed in a lot of tackles I think they were pretty much all positive yarders.. in a couple of places he was tossed around like a rag doll by OLINES guys that our DL could not contain..


missed this. yardages on larsen's tackles in the run game:

2,0,5,1,0

topscribe
11-19-2008, 02:43 PM
missed this. yardages on larsen's tackles in the run game:

2,0,5,1,0

The play that really impressed me was his tackle at the sideline. The RB tried
to turn the corner, and Larsen was already there. Remember that?

So much for "slow" . . .

-----

broncofaninfla
11-19-2008, 02:44 PM
Fellas, we have to give a player a little break when that is his first start ever at that position in the NFL . . .

-----

Especially considering he last week was the first time he sat in on any defensive meetings and practiced with the defense this season and oh yeah, he was our starting FB! It was easily the best MLB of the season. He might not be the long term answer but he is definitely the answer right now.
Copy and paste from Rocky Mountain News:
Larsen had worked at linebacker during offseason workouts as well as running back, but since the beginning of the season, he had worked on offense.
So last week, with all of those weeks in mind, he didn't meet with the running backs, spending time in defensive meetings with linebackers.
He then met with running backs coach Bobby Turner one morning to go over some video on the Falcons as well as to cover his responsibilities at fullback in the game plan.
"Training camp, you have that whole playbook, it's a lot bigger," Larsen said. "But game planning (each week) . . . there's a few fronts we're going to run, a few coverages we're going to run, and I just had to know those inside and out. . . . I felt like it wasn't that tough a transition."

shank
11-19-2008, 02:44 PM
The play that really impressed me was his tackle at the sideline. The RB tried
to turn the corner over there, and Larsen was already there. Remember that?

So much for "slow" . . .

-----
his pursuit angle on that play was absolutely perfect. he trailed the back through the whole play, completely taking away any chance of a cutback, but stayed close enough that he cut him off at the sideline for no gain. doesn't get any better than that.

topscribe
11-19-2008, 02:48 PM
Especially considering he last week was the first time he sat in on any defensive meetings and practiced with the defense this season and oh yeah, he was our starting FB! It was easily the best MLB of the season. He might not be the long term answer but he is definitely the answer right now.
Copy and paste from Rocky Mountain News:
Larsen had worked at linebacker during offseason workouts as well as running back, but since the beginning of the season, he had worked on offense.
So last week, with all of those weeks in mind, he didn't meet with the running backs, spending time in defensive meetings with linebackers.
He then met with running backs coach Bobby Turner one morning to go over some video on the Falcons as well as to cover his responsibilities at fullback in the game plan.
"Training camp, you have that whole playbook, it's a lot bigger," Larsen said. "But game planning (each week) . . . there's a few fronts we're going to run, a few coverages we're going to run, and I just had to know those inside and out. . . . I felt like it wasn't that tough a transition."

Larsen might not be the long-term answer, but he might be, too. Don't
count that guy out. Nobody thought he would be much in college, either.
Then he got All Pac-10 in his senior year and was considered by some as
the second best linebacker in the conference.

I'm not saying he's going to be an All-Pro. All I'm saying is, remember Karl
Mecklenburg . . .

-----

LRtagger
11-19-2008, 02:49 PM
lets compare the game to YTD 11games



29 yards improvement on rushing minus 6 on passing..

seems to me like were were pretty much average in this game..

Sorry I do not see a HUGE improvement that Y'all did but then of course I just got to see the replay..

You cant compare those numbers. None of the teams we have played this year have been as balanced as Atlanta. I mean, honestly...was there anyone on this planet who would have bet against Turner running for over 100 yards?

This effort on D was better than any other effort this year. And thats without Champ and DJ. If Champ were on Roddy, he would have had half the catches and yards.

Again, we were not lights out, but let's face it...nobody expected us to be able to contain ANYTHING the Falcons did on offense, but we did. We held the second best running game in football to less than 100 yards with a bunch of backups, kept Matt Ryan from throwing a TD pass, kept him from throwing for 300+ yards, and intercepted him once...all this with Slowik still calling the shots.

These guys really stepped up for that game bigtime.

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 05:02 PM
You cant compare those numbers. None of the teams we have played this year have been as balanced as Atlanta. I mean, honestly...was there anyone on this planet who would have bet against Turner running for over 100 yards?

This effort on D was better than any other effort this year. And thats without Champ and DJ. If Champ were on Roddy, he would have had half the catches and yards.

Again, we were not lights out, but let's face it...nobody expected us to be able to contain ANYTHING the Falcons did on offense, but we did. We held the second best running game in football to less than 100 yards with a bunch of backups, kept Matt Ryan from throwing a TD pass, kept him from throwing for 300+ yards, and intercepted him once...all this with Slowik still calling the shots.

These guys really stepped up for that game bigtime.

lets just see if this is a blip on the radar or the real thing before reaching fro the stars..

Lets hope that slowick does not get the credit for the game plan, but those players that played for the moment, lights out.. DO get the credit..

LRtagger
11-19-2008, 05:11 PM
lets just see if this is a blip on the radar or the real thing before reaching fro the stars..

Lets hope that slowick does not get the credit for the game plan, but those players that played for the moment, lights out.. DO get the credit..

Definitely. Even if the defense plays that well the rest of the season, Slowik should not be let off the hook IMO. He should be fired regardless unless we win the Super Bowl 13-10.

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 05:26 PM
Definitely. Even if the defense plays that well the rest of the season, Slowik should not be let off the hook IMO. He should be fired regardless unless we win the Super Bowl 13-10.

please do not give him any chance whatsoever.. 49-0 maybe, any score at all in the Superbowl gets him fired on the spot..:laugh::laugh::laugh:

topscribe
11-19-2008, 05:31 PM
please do not give him any chance whatsoever.. 49-0 maybe, any score at all in the Superbowl gets him fired on the spot..:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Why wait for the SB? Let's can his ass right now. :nod:

-----

Simple Jaded
11-19-2008, 08:22 PM
Why wait for the SB? Let's can his ass right now. :nod:

-----

He can take Jaime Winborn with him, too.......

Lonestar
11-19-2008, 09:59 PM
He can take Jaime Winborn with him, too.......

he was the only one making plays on their side of the LOS.. While I really dislike his bravado antics on the field he was about the only one making tackles that past few weeks..

gobroncsnv
11-19-2008, 11:52 PM
Only trouble was he'd celebrate holding a back to a 7 yard gain, or only letting them get a couple yards past the first down marker. At least a couple games ago. I do concede he played rather well last week. But I think much of it was having better play beside him (Larsen/Woodyard), and yes, this is me, also conceding that our dline played better, especially against the run. I just still can't see this bunch holding back the Colts, or someone like them. Would LOVE to be pleasantly surprised.