What if Von Miller just moved in to the DE position next season?

[artie_dale]

I was listening to the Denver ESPN station on the way home this afternoon, and Tom Nalen and the other guy talked about how good our defense is against the run when Von wasn't playing this season. I agreed with them. If Von may have ruined his chances of being an all around effective OLB by his actions this season (gaining mass is one of them). BUT, he still put some pressure on the QB when he did play and DID make good tackles against the run at times. But, for some reason, the Von Miller-less unit seems to play much, much better against the run overall.

SO, Von to DE? Is that possible? We need more depth at the DE position, and if Von doesn't plan on losing the mass he put on, he sure as heck ain't gonna be the same OLB he was the last two years.

P.S. I'm open to it because I'm pretty sure (99.9% sure) that he won't be the same player he was. But then, maybe he wouldn't be an effective DE either.

[Davii]

I was listening to the Denver ESPN station on the way home this afternoon, and Tom Nalen and the other guy talked about how good our defense is against the run when Von wasn't playing this season. I agreed with them. If Von may have ruined his chances of being an all around effective OLB by his actions this season (gaining mass is one of them). BUT, he still put some pressure on the QB when he did play and DID make good tackles against the run at times. But, for some reason, the Von Miller-less unit seems to play much, much better against the run overall.

SO, Von to DE? Is that possible? We need more depth at the DE position, and if Von doesn't plan on losing the mass he put on, he sure as heck ain't gonna be the same OLB he was the last two years.

P.S. I'm open to it because I'm pretty sure (99.9% sure) that he won't be the same player he was. But then, maybe he wouldn't be an effective DE either.

I have a good feeling Von and the coaches have a good handle on everything that made him seem not up to his standards this season and I feel they will change. If his weight is one of them, and I agree that it hindered him somewhat, i'm sure he will lose it. I hope Von comes back 100% and is back in the game fully next year, although I don't think realistically he will be last year's Von for at least another full season due to how long ACL recovery generally takes.

I don't think there's any reason to move Von to DE. He still graded out as our best LB when he was in and was still one of the best in the NFL.

[silkamilkamonico]

Terrible idea IMO. If Denver tries to devalue his worth and move him to DE, Miller should just hold out for a trade to a team that's going to use him for his strength's. Just my 2 cents.

On a side note, I'm pretty shocked that people are already throwing this guy under the bus because of an injury and a year in which he made a terrible decision and significantly paid the rice for it. JMO.

The guy is 24 year's old for crying out loud.

[DenBronx]

I am against the idea of moving Miller to DE. He is maybe the best OLB in the game right now and our best player on defense. So that doesnt make sense to tamper with that. Miller COULD play the position though, I have no doubt about that. But he is able to make more plays at OLB plus its a natural fit too for his style.

Now, we should just draft another DE.

[Hawgdriver]

What you do with Von is you ask him Von, do you want to be one of the best defensive players of all time in the NFL?

[artie_dale]

If the Linebackers we started the season with played great against the run (which they did), isn't that worth considering going with? Don't get me wrong, I loved Von Mille, but his willingness to try to manipulate the process in order to get away with such a stupid, stupid, decision (there is one quarter of the year that players know they should smoke week... (facepalm)), and the fact that he decided to drive numerous times without license and did so poorly... I can't help but question his maturity. Yes, he's ONLY 24 and I know I was still growing at that age so definitely, more chances are required (but how many?).

I wasn't throwing him under the bus. I was just trying to think of a way to keep the effective run stopping defense (you have to admit the Miller-less defense played so much better against the rush) while injecting Miller directly into the Pass Rusher position so he can do what he's been so good at. That would also allow us to consider drafting a different position (maybe CB).

[SR]

Our effectiveness against the run doesn't start or end with Von or any other linebacker. Our effectiveness against the run begins with Knighton and Williams and whichever DEs are in the game. Miller is AWESOME against the run. Look at his stats. Didn't he lead the entire NFL in tackles for loss and tackles behind the LOS last year? Cut the kid a break Artie.

[CoachChaz]

He also lead in these categories before adding 20 pounds and blowing out a knee. Assuming he comes back 100%, the best case scenario for Von would be playing outside in a 3-4 defense. He can still be dominant as a blitzing SAM, but the defense plays better as a whole when he isnt. So, I get where the idea of moving him to DE might make sense on paper...but I dont think that would be a good move for him and his skill set.

[Tned]

Terrible idea IMO. If Denver tries to devalue his worth and move him to DE, Miller should just hold out for a trade to a team that's going to use him for his strength's. Just my 2 cents.

On a side note, I'm pretty shocked that people are already throwing this guy under the bus because of an injury and a year in which he made a terrible decision and significantly paid the rice for it. JMO.

The guy is 24 year's old for crying out loud.


By all accounts he made multiple bad decisions over multiple years to result in the six game suspension.

That said, on the idea of moving him to DE, I don't feel strongly one way or another. On some passing downs, he more or less was playing DE the last couple years.

It's not a simple call. If he's playing a true LB role, he can't rush the passer on every down, which is his strength. He only rushes the passer on blitzes. You blitz, and you are creating holes in the defense elsewhere, unless you drop an end or tackle into coverage, which has obvious major downsides. If he's playing DE, he's in a position to rush the passer on every pass play.

So, I can see some advantages to him playing DE all the time, but I also think his size and speed is better utilized being moved around as a LB, and prefer slightly bigger ends than Miller.

[chazoe60]

Von is arguably the best OLB in the league versus the rush. If our run defense was worse when he was in it was probably because he made the opposition run to the opposite side of him and our true weakness was focused on.

Next year watch Von close on run plays, he's as disruptive a force as there is.

[MOtorboat]

He basically was playing defensive end this year...

[Joel]

Our effectiveness against the run doesn't start or end with Von or any other linebacker. Our effectiveness against the run begins with Knighton and Williams and whichever DEs are in the game. Miller is AWESOME against the run. Look at his stats. Didn't he lead the entire NFL in tackles for loss and tackles behind the LOS last year? Cut the kid a break Artie.
Mainly that. From a personnel standpoint though (and depending on who else can start at DE) I'd rather have Miller at LB and Wolfe, Jackson or Ayers at DE than Miller at DE and Irving at LB.

It's six months away though and we can only guess if Miller or Wolfe will ever play again. I'm no doctor, but everything about Millers injury fits a preexisting ALL tear causing an ACL tear; if that's what happened his return next year will probably be temporary and brief. Hope for the best and plan for the worst, but right now I can't look past this weeks game.

[SR]

Miller will be back, Joel. I don't think its time to start the chicken little stuff. There has been nothing but internet speculation about the ALL and no official statement suggesting he injured that so I'll go with what I know...he had a clean ACL tear and will be out for 6-8 months.

[MOtorboat]

Is there some history of 24 year old stars who haven't returned from an ACL tear that I don't know about?

[BroncoNut]

say wha?

[BroncoNut]

Is there some history of 24 year old stars who haven't returned from an ACL tear that I don't know about?

maybe I am retarded, but my understanding is that it is a pretty routine injury and recovery. frustrating with the time off that is necessary to heal, sure, but other than that... ???

[Slick]

Isn't next season his last on his rookie contract?

[SR]

Isn't next season his last on his rookie contract?

I believe so.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Isn't next season his last on his rookie contract?

We have a club option for a 5th. Then, we could tag him for a sixth if we wanted to. Considering what has gone on with him this last year I doubt the team is going to prioritize signing him to a new deal this offseason.

[NightTerror218]

I was reading an article abiut the von miller affect to the defense and every stat was better including rush defense. So can you give me an example of the defense better without him besides the entire team playing better against chargers?

[CoachChaz]

I was reading an article abiut the von miller affect to the defense and every stat was better including rush defense. So can you give me an example of the defense better without him besides the entire team playing better against chargers?

Numbers were pretty good against Oakland and Houston. Yes, I know it's Houston and Oakland. I think the biggest distortion in games he didnt play in was the Cowboys game.

[Dzone]

I dont care about next year. To much riding on this game and hopefully the super bowl. If we lose, life as we know it will end...how can anyone think beyond this. Its life or death

[BroncoNut]

I dont care about next year. To much riding on this game and hopefully the super bowl. If we lose, life as we know it will end...how can anyone think beyond this. Its life or death

at bowling last night a skins friend of mine was saying win lose or draw (for us), it's going to be a great game. true, but that's not really the point

[Joel]

Miller will be back, Joel. I don't think its time to start the chicken little stuff. There has been nothing but internet speculation about the ALL and no official statement suggesting he injured that so I'll go with what I know...he had a clean ACL tear and will be out for 6-8 months.
I hope you're right, but—has there been a lot of internet speculation about Von Millers ALL? I haven't seen anyone else comment on it, and so would be very interested in seeing any such comments, if only because it would indicate people ARE aware of and looking into it (both for Miller and Harris, though Millers description of his loose knee pre-injury fits the scenario better.) The official team statement I saw was that his MRI showed no other ligament damage, but it's hard to take that at face value since NO ONE had ever even SEEN an ALL till last November.


Is there some history of 24 year old stars who haven't returned from an ACL tear that I don't know about?
There's a long and lamentable history of ACL tears being notoriously unpredictable. As technology's advanced, it's gotten better the last decade or so (i.e. it's no longer automatically career-threatening,) but the prognosis still varies about as widely as possible. Sometimes guys are never the same, sometimes they come back good as new, and sometimes they LOOK good as new for the first one or two seasons—until the same ACL tears AGAIN and ends their career. You just never know.

That's why some doctors long suspected there might be another UNKNOWN ligament subject to injury during ACL tears, amd went looking for it over decades: Last November some Belgian doctors finally found it. It's weird to think that, despite doctors dissecting cadavers since before the birth of Christ, there were still undiscovered parts of the human body in 2013, but (apart from a long forgotten century old note) it appears so. On first seeing the story I started to re-post it in light of all our season-ending injuries, then thought, But none of those are ACLs.

Needless to say, that's no longer the case.

Try here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24826323, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterolateral_ligament and especially here: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/13/a-surprising-discovery-a-new-knee-ligament/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

In particular, note Wikipedias comment that
The ALL, which is presumed to occur in at least 97% of the human population,[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterolateral_ligament#cite_note-Claes-2013-1)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterolateral_ligament#cite_note-Vincent-2012-4) seems to stabilize medial rotation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medial_rotation) of the knee.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterolateral_ligament#cite_note-Claes-2013-1)The "pivot shift" phenomenon in ACL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterior_cruciate_ligament) injury patients may be ascribed to additional trauma to the ALL.as well as the NYT quotes from the doctor who rediscovered the ALL:
While some surgeons noted that a ligament seemed to exist there, none named and systematically studied it, and many came to consider it a continuation of other tissues, such as the nearby iliotibial band.

But a few years ago, Dr. Claes and his colleagues began to suspect otherwise. Their interest had been piqued by a problem that occurred in some patients who had undergone reconstructive surgery for an injured anterior cruciate ligament, or A.C.L. Despite the repaired knees’ appearing afterward to be healthy, the joint would sometimes give way as people moved.

“We thought, something is still not right” in that knee, said Dr. Claes, who wondered whether additional, untended knee injuries might be to blame, and if so, whether they were occurring in uncharted knee parts. “I know it probably sounds crazy to say that we thought there might be this new ligament,” he said.

But, like Dr. Segond so long before him, Dr. Claes became convinced that such a tissue must exist. Positioned at the front of the knee, it would be vulnerable to tearing when an A.C.L. was injured; the same forces would move through both ligaments. But, unlike torn A.C.L’s, this new tissue’s injuries would remain untreated, potentially leading, Dr. Claes considered, to knee instability and buckling.

So, knowing it should be there, he and his colleagues began to search for this chimerical ligament in the 41 donated knees. And there it was, a narrow band of tissue, clearly separate from the illiotibial band and neatly linking the femur and the tibia. Because it was located on the outside, front portion of the knee, they named it the anterolateral ligament, or A.L.L.

They subsequently identified, measured and scanned the A.L.L. in all but one of the donated knees, and even in that final knee, Dr. Claes said, he suspects there may once have been an A.L.L, but it possibly ruptured and withered at some point.

Whether a similar process occurs in living people who injure and don’t treat an A.L.L. — because they don’t know they have one — is unknown, Dr. Claes said, but is potentially the weightiest question raised by this new research. “We think that it’s quite likely many people who tear an A.C.L. also tear an A.L.L,” he said, and that lingering injury or weakness in this overlooked ligament could leave joints unstable.
Now, think back to Miller saying his knee was "loose" in the final weeks BEFORE he tore his ACL, but he never said anything and tried to play through it—and soon tore his ACL.

How often have we seen an ACL tear AGAIN even a year or two after being fully repaired? How often has it prompted annoncers and analysts to conclude, "Well, I guess his knee's just never gonna be whole again; too bad, he had a nice career." Note the past tense. I'm not saying this is definitely the situation with Miller and/or Harris, I just wish there was some evidence the doctors were checking, because I don't expect any doctor to keep track of ALL new discoveries in the LAST MONTH, even in their field.

[weazel]

injuries suck... they should have moved Manning to kicker

[CrazyHorse]

I don't like it. I think Von is best suited for where we used him. LB on early downs and DE in obvious passing situations. I know he added weight but before that wouldn't he be considered a bit undersized for DE. We should also have pretty good depth at that position next year if some injured guys come back and we re-sign players. There's Ayers, M. Jackson, Wolfe, McCray, Q. Smith, Phillips, and Mincey. I'm much more worried about DT where we only have Vickerson, Sly, Knighton, and Unrein. LB doesn't have much depth either with Trevathan, Woodyard, Irving, Lenon, and Maybe Stewart. Von is definitely needed there more.

[DenBronx]

Again, adding muscle didnt cause him to injure his ACL. End of story.

[CrazyHorse]

Again, adding muscle didnt cause him to injure his ACL. End of story.

Nope, never said that. He did seem more effective last year at his lighter weight but that might have been him just shaking off rust this year.

[Joel]

Nope, never said that. He did seem more effective last year at his lighter weight but that might have been him just shaking off rust this year.
For what it's worth, Miller came into the NFL around 245 and yes, that would be VERY light for a starting NFL DE, even in a 4-3. http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/von-miller?id=2495202 People said (with some justification) Doom was too light to run stuff when he was 250. I doubt there's one starting NFL DE playing at 245, and wouldn't expect many backups are that light. Heck, one of the counterarguments raised when I suggested he play Mike was his size; if he was too light for a MLB he was definitely too light to be a DE.

It would make more sense at his current weight but pretty much everyone seems to think that added weight diminished his effectiveness. Note: I'm not taking a position on it either way, just stating my impression of what everyone else is saying.

[DenBronx]

Our effectiveness against the run doesn't start or end with Von or any other linebacker. Our effectiveness against the run begins with Knighton and Williams and whichever DEs are in the game. Miller is AWESOME against the run. Look at his stats. Didn't he lead the entire NFL in tackles for loss and tackles behind the LOS last year? Cut the kid a break Artie.

I agree SR. Our DTs and DEs are studs against the run. We have lacked that for many many mannnnnnnny years. There was a stretch there where I know any RB loved to play Denver just because our DL was pathetic. Even Vickerson and Wolfe were studs against the run. I also have to give Del Rio and Fox a little credit here too for fixing this problem.


How I wish everyone could have stayed healthy this year.

[DenBronx]

Nope, never said that. He did seem more effective last year at his lighter weight but that might have been him just shaking off rust this year.


I meant to quote someone else CrazyHorse.


Miller didnt seem rusty really but I do think as much time away he took wasnt good for football shape. Miller said he felt his knee wasnt feeling good the night before. I blame Miller for that, he's got to be smarter about taking care of his body. I blew my calf out playing in a city softball league several years back. The night before my calf didn't feel right and I probally shouldnt have played that game. If I would have rested it, iced and stretched it I might have never blew it out. Now my calf looks like the muscle is cut in half because I wasnt smart enough to rest it.

I do not however, think by him adding muscle contributed to him getting injured.


He will be back stronger and better than ever. Miller has got the IT factor. He could play DE or OLB but I think having him stay at OLB he is able to do much much more for this defense. He is fast enough to drop back into coverage if he needs to yet still fast enough to strip sack fumble a QB. IMO, he is a top 5 defensive player in the NFL.


Only one who can stop Miller is Miller. He just needs to make smarter choices in life.

[SR]

For what it's worth, Miller came into the NFL around 245 and yes, that would be VERY light for a starting NFL DE, even in a 4-3. http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/von-miller?id=2495202 People said (with some justification) Doom was too light to run stuff when he was 250. I doubt there's one starting NFL DE playing at 245, and wouldn't expect many backups are that light. Heck, one of the counterarguments raised when I suggested he play Mike was his size; if he was too light for a MLB he was definitely too light to be a DE. It would make more sense at his current weight but pretty much everyone seems to think that added weight diminished his effectiveness. Note: I'm not taking a position on it either way, just stating my impression of what everyone else is saying. Doom at 250-260 at his height is a big fella

[OldschoolFreak]

I like Joel's idea. Why not swing Miller into the Mike slot?

[MOtorboat]

I like Joel's idea. Why not swing Miller into the Mike slot?

Oh FFS.

Because he is not, and never will be, best used as a middle linebacker.

:tsk:

[DenBronx]

I like Joel's idea. Why not swing Miller into the Mike slot?

Lol this just keeps getting worse.


I gladly welcome back the move Champ to Safety threads.

[zbeg]

I dont care about next year. To much riding on this game and hopefully the super bowl. If we lose, life as we know it will end...how can anyone think beyond this. Its life or death

Oh come on, that's not really true.

It's much more important than that.

[dogfish]

I like Joel's idea. Why not swing Miller into the Mike slot?

because he's going to switch to QB after manning retires. . .

[Poet]

Maybe he should be a third down back? - King87 said with so much sarcasm that the world slowed down for 4.5 seconds.

[TXBRONC]

Is there some history of 24 year old stars who haven't returned from an ACL tear that I don't know about?

Yes some guy number one pick from 1968 unfortunately I forgot the guy's name who he played for. It may have been the Bears.

[nevcraw]

i know one thing for sure.. if he wasn't suspended, hurt or fat he would be lining up @ Harris Jr. spot on the outside right now...

[SR]

I like Joel's idea. Why not swing Miller into the Mike slot?

Because he's not and has never been a MLB. Lets create a vacancy at a position where we had an All-Pro player and plug him in to a position he has literally never played. Brilliant!

[CrazyHorse]

Yes some guy number one pick from 1968 unfortunately I forgot the guy's name who he played for. It may have been the Bears.

Medical technology has come along way since then. We've just recently discovered the ALL.

[artie_dale]

I was reading an article abiut the von miller affect to the defense and every stat was better including rush defense. So can you give me an example of the defense better without him besides the entire team playing better against chargers?

Opponent Rush totals per game:

Team = Yds
Balt = 58
NYG = 23
Oak = 49
Phi = 166
Dal = 52
Jac = 71

Indi = 121 (Von returns)
Wash = 122
SD = 131
KC = 144
NE = 116
KC = 159
Tenn = 96
SD = 177 (Von exit early)

Hou = 87
Oak = 64

The numbers tell the story. Yes, I agree, one can argue about the caliber of teams we played with and without Von, and yes, because of our record setting offense's ability to put up big points most of the time has to be considered. But, I hope nobody blames the offense too much for the defenses underachievement.

[broncobryce]

Terrible idea IMO. If Denver tries to devalue his worth and move him to DE, Miller should just hold out for a trade to a team that's going to use him for his strength's. Just my 2 cents.

On a side note, I'm pretty shocked that people are already throwing this guy under the bus because of an injury and a year in which he made a terrible decision and significantly paid the rice for it. JMO.

The guy is 24 year's old for crying out loud.

This. Von Miller will be up for DPOY every season he is healthy IMO. He's that good, and if Denver doesn't resign him, they will regret it. If Manning does stick around a few more seasons, that makes Von even more valuable since the other team will most likely need to pass more to keep up with our offense. It's really a no brainer.

[broncobryce]

And if we played a 3-4 Von would be even better.

[Ravage!!!]

I don't know that he would be, and.... its harder to build a 34 defense as opposed to a 43.

[CoachChaz]

I don't know that he would be, and.... its harder to build a 34 defense as opposed to a 43.

I dont know...we already have most of the pieces

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Von just needs to stay around 255 and remain the best outside linebacker in football....how's about them apples?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Forgive the Bostonian accent on Patriot week.

[broncobryce]

I don't know that he would be, and.... its harder to build a 34 defense as opposed to a 43.

I'm not saying we should switch, I was just saying as great as he is he would be even better in a 3-4.

[Simple Jaded]

How bout the Broncos just leave him in the role he already dominates?

[Joel]

Doom at 250-260 at his height is a big fella
He's got long arms though, so it's not a typical frame. I remember someone commenting about it after his rookie year when there was so much debate over whether we could justify paying for sack numbers from a guy "so small" he only played third down; apparently the classic height=armspan rule doesn't apply to Doom.

All that said, he's a significantly bigger guy and better run stopper (though still not great) at 260 than he was at 250. 260's not an awful place to be if we want Miller to be a DE, but I don't know why we would. Either way, he'll still be on the field doing pretty much the same thing (except DEs only need to cover on zone blitzes.) In my mind, it's less a question of where Miller should play than who ELSE we want on the field with him: Nate Irving at SLB or Derek Wolfe/Robert Ayers/Malik Jackson at DE. That seems like an obvious choice.


I like Joel's idea. Why not swing Miller into the Mike slot?
I appreciate the support, but you probably don't want to invite that mountain of grief. It's safest to just accept that Bill George and Sam Huff would have no place in the new-and-improved postmodern NFL, that we need pass rushers far more than a defensive QB and it's impossible for even a HoF talent to do both, even if the MLB is closer to the QB than either DE and Dick Butkus racked up 18 sacks in one season just two years after he took over from George (the NFLs original MLB and effectively creator of the 4-3.)


Yes some guy number one pick from 1968 unfortunately I forgot the guy's name who he played for. It may have been the Bears.
Not sure who you're thinking of; Chicago's only had two #1 overall picks (the last in the '40s) and 1968s #1 overall pick was HoFer Ron Yary.

That said, until relatively recently ACL tears were always career-threatening and frequently career-ending, at any age, and even when guys came back from it, they were usually never the same (e.g. Willis McGahee the elusive NCAA speedster and post-ACL-tear Willis McGahee the NFL power back.) Here's a nice overview of ACL tears that ended, shortened and/or lessened careers from Red Grange to Wes Welker: http://www.nfl.com/fantasyfootball/story/09000d5d8077cd9d/printable/draft-preview-knee-injuries-alter-rb-draft-values Fortunately ACL repairs have come a long way since the days of Grange and Sayers.

[MOtorboat]

Dear Joel,

Every month that goes by gets FURTHER from 1960, not closer.

Sincerely,
Everyone

[Ravage!!!]

Well, a #1 pick doesn't necessarily mean #1 overall. It's referring the the number one pick within their own draft. So a first rounder is still a #1 pick.

But, its a passing league and getting TO the passer is MUCH more important than the MLB spot. That's just a fact. You don't take a premiere, game changing, pass rushing, QB sacking OLB and move them to MLB where he reads for runs and drops back into pass coverage (yes of course the MLB can blitz). That completely negates his most valuable skills.

That being said, I LOVE having a stud MLB. But not at the expense of taking Von from the outside and moving him in! A mediocre MLB and Von on the outside is MUCH MUCH more important than the other way around. Can you imagine if the NYG did that with Taylor or if the Chiefs did that with Thomas?

[artie_dale]

Opponent Rush totals per game:

Team = Yds
Balt = 58
NYG = 23
Oak = 49
Phi = 166
Dal = 52
Jac = 71

Indi = 121 (Von returns)
Wash = 122
SD = 131
KC = 144
NE = 116
KC = 159
Tenn = 96
SD = 177 (Von exit early)

Hou = 87
Oak = 64

The numbers tell the story. Yes, I agree, one can argue about the caliber of teams we played with and without Von, and yes, because of our record setting offense's ability to put up big points most of the time has to be considered. But, I hope nobody blames the offense too much for the defenses underachievement.


^^^This was the main reason I asked this question when I created this thread. Someone even asked what I was talking about. Nothing?

[Simple Jaded]

I just can't imagine wanting to move a great pass rusher to MLB so bad that I have to convince myself that ACL tears are career threatening.

[Ravage!!!]

I just can't imagine wanting to move a great pass rusher to MLB so bad that I have to convince myself that ACL tears are career threatening.
Well, they are threatening. But I would have to see him NOT perform before considering any kind of move, and I already know I don't want to move a player to a position he's never played before.

[Joel]

I don't know that he would be, and.... its harder to build a 34 defense as opposed to a 43.
I'm not convinced a 3-4's harder to build either, it's just a DIFFERENT build; all about the versatile OLB pair and a dominant NT instead of the dominant DE pair and a versatile MLB.

Miller would be at his best at his natural positon: 3-4 OLB. Unfortunately, we don't have enough guys who'd be great 3-4 OLBs; it's basically Miller and Phillips, and Phillips doesn't have many good years left at what's a very demanding position. I don't know if Vickerson or Knighton have played 3-4 NT in the pros; Vickerson would probably be good enough, but I'm not sure Knighton would be good enough to rotate with him there.

Those are just the main spots though; Trevathan and Woodyard would be good ILBs (though lighter than I'd like, even there,) but who are their backups? Who are our DEs? Just like NTs, 3-4 DEs must be bigger and stronger than their 4-3 counterparts, to compensate for the missing lineman. Wolfe could do that IF he comes back, but who else? Knighton, leaving no one to spell Vickerson when he tires at the grueling NT spot? Unrein?

The pro reality is it's nearly impossible to build a front seven that can play the 3-4 AND 4-3 well; free agency, the cap and the conflicting priorities of the two base Ds mean that the best 3-4 players tend to be snatched up by 3-4 teams, and the same with the best 4-3 players. The Ravens did it for a while, and the Pats have flirted with it, but it takes a very deep versatile bench that's not an option for most front offices. Switching from a 3-4 to 4-3 or vice versa isn't something causually, quickly or easily done.

[Simple Jaded]

Well, they are threatening. But I would have to see him NOT perform before considering any kind of move, and I already know I don't want to move a player to a position he's never played before.

Not as threatening as Grange/Sayers NFL, either way I would wait til his career is actually in peril before I moved him to a position he's never played. And even then, if I wanted a MLB I might just draft/sign a MLB.

[Joel]

Well, a #1 pick doesn't necessarily mean #1 overall. It's referring the the number one pick within their own draft. So a first rounder is still a #1 pick.

But, its a passing league and getting TO the passer is MUCH more important than the MLB spot. That's just a fact. You don't take a premiere, game changing, pass rushing, QB sacking OLB and move them to MLB where he reads for runs and drops back into pass coverage (yes of course the MLB can blitz). That completely negates his most valuable skills.

That being said, I LOVE having a stud MLB. But not at the expense of taking Von from the outside and moving him in! A mediocre MLB and Von on the outside is MUCH MUCH more important than the other way around. Can you imagine if the NYG did that with Taylor or if the Chiefs did that with Thomas?
The shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and the MLB is closer to the QB than DEs are. According to his Wikipedia page, the primary reason Bill George turned himself into the first MLB (inventing the 4-3) was because he was charging the line on every snap and the QB just threw it over his head, so he decided to start dropping back and snagging passes.

A quality blitzer, run stuffer and coverage LB>a quality blitzer alone, or even a blitzer and run stuffer. The 4-3s strengths are at DE and MLB, not DT or OLB; that's the biggest functional difference between a 4-3 and 3-4. If Butkus can post 18 sacks in a season from the MLB spot, supremely talented MLBs can be elite pass rushers in addition to run stuffers and coverage LBs.


I just can't imagine wanting to move a great pass rusher to MLB so bad that I have to convince myself that ACL tears are career threatening.
Um... WHAT?! :confused: You shouldn't need to be "convinced" ACL tears are career-threatening; until about the last decade or two it was an axiom, and even now players often come back shadows of their former selves—or not at all. Regardless, that has NOTHING to do with WHERE Miller should play coming off an ACL tear; a MLB with a repaired ACL is neither better nor worse than an OLB with a repaired ACL, especially if it tears again.


Well, they are threatening. But I would have to see him NOT perform before considering any kind of move, and I already know I don't want to move a player to a position he's never played before.
If the ACL tear diminishes or derails Millers career, moving him won't change that; I have no idea where Jaded got the idea that was my argument.

[Simple Jaded]

I guess I don't actually know why you're trying to convince yourself that his knee injury is career threatening, but there's no reason to think that at this point.

Btw, Adrian Peterson, Jamaal Charles and Thomas Davis say what's up.

[Joel]

I guess I don't actually know why you're trying to convince yourself that his knee injury is career threatening, but there's no reason to think that at this point.

Btw, Adrian Peterson, Jamaal Charles and Thomas Davis say what's up.
Three guys whose ACL tears were just two years ago; talk to me in 2-3 more seasons. Particularly in Davis' case; from Wikipedia:


On September 18, 2011, Thomas Davis tore his ACL for the 3rd time in 3 years. No NFL players has ever recovered and returned from three ACL tears. Davis says he will be the first and hopes to be an inspiration to others.
His stats say this was the best season of his career so far; his injury history says he's due for a FOURTH ACL tear any second. That makes sense given that, according to the Dallas Mavericks team orthopedic surgeon,
When an ACL tears, it does not heal. Unlike most other ligaments, the ACL never has the opportunity to mend due to its position and role in the knee -- it's very much like a rubber band. That's why this is a forever kind of injury.
He does go on to say ACL repairs have come a long way from the days when chances of ever playing again were even money even with the best surgeon, and athletes now have about a 97% chance of playing again after an ACL tear. Ironically, that's apparently because surgeons STOPPED trying to do true repairs, which are evidently imposible at present: They REPLACE the ACL with part of a neighboring tendon. http://www.txsportsmed.com/acl.php

The thing to get here though is that it's a "forever kind of injury," and the recent exams that found ALLs in 40 out of 41 knees (and evidence it had simply atrophied from damage in the other one) show ACL tears more often than not mean ALL tears, too. Sure, players can come back from ACL tears—but the risk of a SECOND tear is real and high, and how many times can a player come back from a torn ACL even if he doesn't decide to cut his losses? Apparently the record's 3—IF Davis' knee holds together.

I'm not (very) concerned whether and how well Miller and Harris will play again; I'm concerned about a SECOND ACL tear ending their careers. None of that has anything to do with Miller moving; again, he wouldn't be any better as a one-legged MLB than he would as a one-legged SLB. This time I didn't bring up moving him, so you can stop busting my balls about it.

[artie_dale]

I'm not saying "Career ending", otherwise it wouldn't make sense to suggest moving to the DE position.

What I am saying is, when Von is 100% healthy and weighs LESS, best pass rusher in all of the NFL AND showed improvement in the other LB areas of responsibility.

IF Von doesn't lose the weight, he's not going to be the same LBer and he'll probably be more injury prone. SO, maybe he'd be a decent DE (I only suggest this because of the numbers that showed how well the rest of the team played against the run with and without him at the OLB position).

IF Von doesn't recover from this injury, then it doesn't matter.

What I do know is, this defense played pretty damn good against the run without him, and played worse against the run with him. I also know that we'd like more DE/DL depth and that we definitely need to entertain drafting another good CB.

If I could have it my way, Von would have never put on the weight which would more than likely have lead to him not injuring his knee.

The fact that Thomas Davis (just learned of the multiple ACL tears) fully recovered gives me hope. But, there are far more few success stories than there are not so successful stories.

[MOtorboat]

^^^This was the main reason I asked this question when I created this thread. Someone even asked what I was talking about. Nothing?

A couple of things. The games were closer. The Denver offense ran every team out of the gym for the first six games, they didn't do that in the subsequent eight games. However, just throwing out the yardage numbers for a team's running game doesn't even come close to showing us a full picture of anything. Total yards per game went down by 20 yards per game with Miller in the lineup. Opposing passing yardage went from 296 per game to 220.

Some of the increase in rushing yardage allowed could be the teams they were playing, but also the competitiveness of those games and the scheme Denver was deploying, i.e., more two and three man fronts with three and four linebackers, rather than a straight 4-3.

I just don't think you can look at rushing yards and definitively say Miller isn't any good against the run. Denver will always be a better with Miller in the lineup, because he's the best player on the field when he's on the field.

[MOtorboat]

Also have to laugh at the debate over 3-4 versus 4-3...

Denver was basically running a 3-4/2-4 nickel/3-3 over when Miller was in the lineup, so schematically, he was basically a defensive end...

[artie_dale]

A couple of things. The games were closer. The Denver offense ran every team out of the gym for the first six games, they didn't do that in the subsequent eight games. However, just throwing out the yardage numbers for a team's running game doesn't even come close to showing us a full picture of anything. Total yards per game went down by 20 yards per game with Miller in the lineup. Opposing passing yardage went from 296 per game to 220.

Some of the increase in rushing yardage allowed could be the teams they were playing, but also the competitiveness of those games and the scheme Denver was deploying, i.e., more two and three man fronts with three and four linebackers, rather than a straight 4-3.

I just don't think you can look at rushing yards and definitively say Miller isn't any good against the run. Denver will always be a better with Miller in the lineup, because he's the best player on the field when he's on the field.

I'm with ya, MO and even said that we could consider the caliber of the teams we were playing and that since the offense played so well in some of those games, that the opposition would have gone away from the run because of it.

I heard Nalen and his crew talk about it over the radio waves and they agreed that the defense as a whole, seemed to play better without Von in there (for some reason). Earlier in the year, before Von even came back, I honestly thought the defense was playing pretty well without Von and was actually CONCERNED that the team might consider trading him since the D was doing so well without him. His poor decisions could really change team decision maker's thoughts on him. But, the way he played last year, we've gotta see for ourselves before we could let that kind of talent go. Hopefully, he recovers and drops the weight.

[Joel]

Also have to laugh at the debate over 3-4 versus 4-3...

Denver was basically running a 3-4/2-4 nickel/3-3 over when Miller was in the lineup, so schematically, he was basically a defensive end...
The way I remember, it depended on down/distance/score. Put it this way: I don't remember Wolfe, Knighton, Vickerson or Phillips spending much time on the bench except on 3rd and long, and that means 4 guys had their hand in the dirt most of the time. If anything we went to more like a 5-2 when blitzing Miller (which was often,) swapping a LB for a DB when we went to nickel.

Even in base D—of either type—LBs sometimes blitz from a three-point stance and/or linemen drop into coverage in zone blitzes, and we all know nickel and dime packages trade LBs for DBs.

Yet in BASE D the 3-4s strengths are a dominant NT clogging the middle/collapsing pockets, while gifted versatile OLBs rush the passer, force outside runs back to guys who'd ALL be DTs in a 4-3 and occasionally cover RBs/TEs in the flat. The 4-3s strengths are DEs edge-rushing and stuffing outside runs, while a versatile MLB covers the middle field, flows to runs and occasionally blitzes.

It's very hard to field a roster well-suited to both, because it takes a pair of great 4-3 DEs and a solid MLB PLUS and a pair of great OLBs and a solid NT. That's hard enough to do with the cap and FA, but since each position is so critical to its respective scheme, they ALSO need good backups (especially the 3-4 NT; that's a punishing and tiring job, and few people big and strong enough to do it can play every down for an entire game.) Miller's far better suited for a 3-4 OLB spot, but the Broncos are far better suited to a 4-3.

Just to be clear (since it seems to often get lost) that's not "look how much more I know than you," it's "don't pretend you don't know this."

[Hawgdriver]

^^^This was the main reason I asked this question when I created this thread. Someone even asked what I was talking about. Nothing?

Artie, what you posted makes me want to cut Von. That is nonsense, since he's a DPOY caliber player. So I don't know man. I'd like to understand, too.

[Hawgdriver]

A couple of things. The games were closer. The Denver offense ran every team out of the gym for the first six games, they didn't do that in the subsequent eight games. However, just throwing out the yardage numbers for a team's running game doesn't even come close to showing us a full picture of anything. Total yards per game went down by 20 yards per game with Miller in the lineup. Opposing passing yardage went from 296 per game to 220.

Some of the increase in rushing yardage allowed could be the teams they were playing, but also the competitiveness of those games and the scheme Denver was deploying, i.e., more two and three man fronts with three and four linebackers, rather than a straight 4-3.

I just don't think you can look at rushing yards and definitively say Miller isn't any good against the run. Denver will always be a better with Miller in the lineup, because he's the best player on the field when he's on the field.

That's a start but isn't completely satisfactory.

[Joel]

That's a start but isn't completely satisfactory.
It largely is for me. Teams that need to score 1 pt/minute to win don't run, and our first four games were blowouts, while our fifth was a shootout; it's hard to argue any D that gave up 48 pts was better off without Miller. Granted, we had a lot of injuries that game, but while Miller was on suspension we were #1 in run D and #31 in pass D.

Some of that was because we genuinely did play the run quite well when we everyone else was healthy (or in Wolfes case, appeared healthy,) got less pressure without Miller and had less coverage without Champ. Even at the end of the season though we were still top 10 in rushing yards and top 5 in yards/att, and never got better than 27th in pass D. Once we stopped blowing everyone out (and since all three of our losses were with Miller they weren't Denver blowouts) opponents had the opportunity to run more.

Also, the quality WAS different; we faced Jamaal Charles twice with Miller. Even when we didn't have Miller, Philly and the NFL rushing leader ran for 166 yds against us (though Moreno had more yards and TDs on 4 less carries than than the guy who said he sucks), which stands out sharply from the totals by other teams we faced without him. Both Oakland games were without Miller, and two others were against shattered Giants and Texans teams; both KC and SD games, plus the NE game, were with Miller.

It's safe to say most teams would allow more rushing yards in 5 games agianst playoff teams (including 2 losses) than blowouts of teams who earned Top Ten draft picks.

[MOtorboat]

Joel,

I don't know how many times I have to write this in a thread where you are trying to discuss Miller's role on the team, but Denver doesn't play ANY of the base defenses you are talking about when Miller is in the lineup.

VON MILLER DOES NOT PLAY SLB. NOR IS HE PLAYING OLB. He is playing a hybrid position that is a combination of DE/OLB. Let's call it the Bronco Rover. What your trying to do is pigeon-hole the Bronco defense into a specific scheme in order to make adjustments to a scheme they don't even play.

You sit here and type until your face is blue about Denver needing to move Miller to MLB, and they don't even have a frickin' MLB.

You're creating a giant straw man.

[Hawgdriver]

Mo if you are correct I need to disregard Joel.

[MOtorboat]

Mo if you are correct I need to disregard Joel.

You shouldn't disregard Joel. He just likes to pigeon hole the defense into a scheme that Denver isn't playing.

Yes, both the head coach and defensive coordinator are teachers of the base 4-3 defense, and in that sense the historical stories about Dick Butkus and others who pioneered the middle linebacker position are correct. They learned and taught that defense for years. Jack Del Rio played middle linebacker in that scheme.

But what they do with Miller is completely different.

They used a base over/under scheme in 2011 and 2012 and with the addition of Phillips, they actually played something similar to a 3-4, but honestly. They were in a 3-4 nickel defense pioneered by Dom Capers in Green Bay with Clay Matthews that is a 2-4-5.

They use multiple fronts, often from play to play.

[Hawgdriver]

Ok, thanks for giving detail to the nuances Mo and clarifying that Joel isn't a complete stooge. Joel, you are not disregarded.

BTW can't we all just agree that Von is a beast that needs to get his shit together? Can't we all agree there is a real need for a thread explaining Y the sumo-Von?

[Joel]

Joel,

I don't know how many times I have to write this in a thread where you are trying to discuss Miller's role on the team, but Denver doesn't play ANY of the base defenses you are talking about when Miller is in the lineup.

VON MILLER DOES NOT PLAY SLB. NOR IS HE PLAYING OLB. He is playing a hybrid position that is a combination of DE/OLB. Let's call it the Bronco Rover. What your trying to do is pigeon-hole the Bronco defense into a specific scheme in order to make adjustments to a scheme they don't even play.

You sit here and type until your face is blue about Denver needing to move Miller to MLB, and they don't even have a frickin' MLB.

You're creating a giant straw man.
I NEVER IN THIS THREAD SUGGESTED MILLER PLAY MLB, so any strawman here isn't mine. Not wanting to rehash this again was a big part of why. We'll never agree on the topic, and that's that.

That being said: We NEVER (or even just SELDOM) played our BASE D with our STARTING Sam? Seriously?

Yes, Miller crowds the line a lot, especially on passing downs, but I haven't seen him as an actual down lineman much. If the 5-2 umbrella D had been good against the pass, Bill George wouldn't have gotten so sick of QBs throwing over his head into the middle of the field that he started dropping back as the original MLB and almost accidentally invented the 4-3.

Miller's ideally suited to be an elite blitzer, run stuffer and coverage LB. He's got the speed AND strength to excel in all three roles, making him a great choice for 3-4 OLB or 4-3 MLB. Frankly, some of his decisions the past year imply he may not be sharp enough to QB the defense as a 4-3 MLB, so maybe he is better off where he is. But he's no more a 4-3 DE than he is a 4-3 MLB. He plays DE in our nickel, and we do run a lot of nickel; teams in general are using it more, for obvious reasons. But that's not our base D, because the run still matters.


Ok, thanks for giving detail to the nuances Mo and clarifying that Joel isn't a complete stooge. Joel, you are not disregarded.

BTW can't we all just agree that Von is a beast that needs to get his shit together? Can't we all agree there is a real need for a thread explaining Y the sumo-Von?
We can all agree he needs to get it together, yes, but there was a decent argument for Miller gaining a little weight whether he played DE, SLB MLB. There aren't many 245 lb. guys at any of those spots, because each requires too much run-stuffing and must shed too many offensive linemen, whether tackling QBs or RBs. I'm not convinced his added weight has diminished him in any way; I'm inclined to think that Wolfe looked worse without Miller and Miller looked worse without Wolfe because the absence of either let teams double and neutralize the other.

Now BOTH are gone, so Knighton likely to be doubled on runs (per the article on him Carol just posted) and Phillips on passes; someone like Williams, Jackson and/or Ayers must step up.

[MOtorboat]

I NEVER IN THIS THREAD SUGGESTED MILLER PLAY MLB, so any strawman here isn't mine. Not wanting to rehash this again was a big part of why. We'll never agree on the topic, and that's that.

That being said: We NEVER (or even just SELDOM) played our BASE D with our STARTING Sam? Seriously?

Yes, Miller crowds the line a lot, especially on passing downs, but I haven't seen him as an actual down lineman much. If the 5-2 umbrella D had been good against the pass, Bill George wouldn't have gotten so sick of QBs throwing over his head into the middle of the field that he started dropping back as the original MLB and almost accidentally invented the 4-3.

Miller's ideally suited to be an elite blitzer, run stuffer and coverage LB. He's got the speed AND strength to excel in all three roles, making him a great choice for 3-4 OLB or 4-3 MLB. Frankly, some of his decisions the past year imply he may not be sharp enough to QB the defense as a 4-3 MLB, so maybe he is better off where he is. But he's no more a 4-3 DE than he is a 4-3 MLB. He plays DE in our nickel, and we do run a lot of nickel; teams in general are using it more, for obvious reasons. But that's not our base D, because the run still matters.


We can all agree he needs to get it together, yes, but there was a decent argument for Miller gaining a little weight whether he played DE, SLB MLB. There aren't many 245 lb. guys at any of those spots, because each requires too much run-stuffing and must shed too many offensive linemen, whether tackling QBs or RBs. I'm not convinced his added weight has diminished him in any way; I'm inclined to think that Wolfe looked worse without Miller and Miller looked worse without Wolfe because the absence of either let teams double and neutralize the other.

Now BOTH are gone, so Knighton likely to be doubled on runs (per the article on him Carol just posted) and Phillips on passes; someone like Williams, Jackson and/or Ayers must step up.

:sigh:

You really do not get it.

I'll try it again. (I don't know why)

Denver DOES NOT play a 4-3. They also DO NOT play a 3-4.

Are you with me yet?

[Joel]

:sigh:

You really do not get it.

I'll try it again. (I don't know why)

Denver DOES NOT play a 4-3. They also DO NOT play a 3-4.

Are you with me yet?
Not really, or rather, I disagree. We're not running a base nickel (really,) and certainly not a base "Denver D" that's similar to the 4-3, 3-4 AND nickel yet different from each. Sure, there will be wrinkles from play to play and down to down; that's why we run a lot of nickel and dime on third down (just like most teams.) But Tweener isn't an actual position and that's not what Miller plays, not even since he gained enough weight to be viable as a tweener rather than too light to be anything but an OLB or speed-rushing third down DE.

We don't run a 5-2, however one christens that fifth lineman or assigns his duties. If 1960 was a long time ago, 1950 was even longer. Miller's not just an elite pass rusher who can play the run; if he were, gaining 10 lbs. to become a Shaun Phillips clone would make perfect sense and I never would have suggested he cover, read plays and call audibles in addition to the other two.

[Hawgdriver]

Are you guys arguing more than semantics?

[MOtorboat]

Are you guys arguing more than semantics?

No. I'm not sure Joel knows what he's seeing. I will provide an example in a moment.

[MOtorboat]

Not really, or rather, I disagree. We're not running a base nickel (really,) and certainly not a base "Denver D" that's similar to the 4-3, 3-4 AND nickel yet different from each. Sure, there will be wrinkles from play to play and down to down; that's why we run a lot of nickel and dime on third down (just like most teams.) But Tweener isn't an actual position and that's not what Miller plays, not even since he gained enough weight to be viable as a tweener rather than too light to be anything but an OLB or speed-rushing third down DE.

We don't run a 5-2, however one christens that fifth lineman or assigns his duties. If 1960 was a long time ago, 1950 was even longer. Miller's not just an elite pass rusher who can play the run; if he were, gaining 10 lbs. to become a Shaun Phillips clone would make perfect sense and I never would have suggested he cover, read plays and call audibles in addition to the other two.

Joel, I'm about to show you the first six plays against Washington (Miller's second game). Please tell me what you see.
1st Play of the Game
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/1stPlay_zps67c8da1f.png
2nd Play of the Game
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/2ndPlay_zps005931d1.png
3rd Play of the Game
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/3rdPlay_zps1341a4cc.png
4th Play of the Game (1st play of Washington's second drive)
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/4thPlay_zps7e5ca350.png
4th Play of the Game, second look
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/4thPlaySecondView_zps3968a4ab.png
5th play of the Game
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/5thPlay_zps1446619e.png
6th play of the Game
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/6thPlay_zps923b5f58.png

[Hawgdriver]

Yeah, ok, interesting.

[MOtorboat]

San Diego...first three plays...
1st Play
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/1stPlay_zps8b3d6f2c.png
2nd Play
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/2ndPlay_zps3e9e1e2a.png
3rd Play
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/3rdPlay_zps17d811ad.png

[MOtorboat]

Let me know when you see this "Base 4-3" your always opining about where Miller "only" plays the lowly Sam position...
New England
1st Play
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/1stPlay_zps7b9ba881.png
2nd Play
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/2ndPlay_zpsd1feaa22.png
3rd Play
http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r250/clapton_2/3rdPlay_zps7f865774.png

Actually, I think they set up in base 3-4 more than I thought.

[dogfish]

Are you guys arguing more than semantics?

yes. . . the fate of nations hangs in the balance!


actually. . . the simplest line of thought would suggest that *we* (aka, the coaching staff) really need to see how von comes back from the injury and subsequent procedure. . . at least IMO. . . and whether JDR will be back, although that one looks very likely unless he wants to bolt for a minor college job. . . will wolfe be back at full strength? will we still have ayers or philips? yea. . . not nearly enough info ATM. . . i myself will assume that his role remains largely unchanged going forward, until we have empirical evidene otherwise. . . that can't happen before septmeber, so i won't worry about it until then. . .

[Poet]

Correct me if I am wrong, but my impression was that during the first half of the season Denver was running a 4-3, and then the addition of Von and the subtraction of Vickerson lead you guys to taking more snaps at 3-4.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

5-2

[Simple Jaded]

Three guys whose ACL tears were just two years ago; talk to me in 2-3 more seasons. Particularly in Davis' case; from Wikipedia:


His stats say this was the best season of his career so far; his injury history says he's due for a FOURTH ACL tear any second. That makes sense given that, according to the Dallas Mavericks team orthopedic surgeon,
He does go on to say ACL repairs have come a long way from the days when chances of ever playing again were even money even with the best surgeon, and athletes now have about a 97% chance of playing again after an ACL tear. Ironically, that's apparently because surgeons STOPPED trying to do true repairs, which are evidently imposible at present: They REPLACE the ACL with part of a neighboring tendon. http://www.txsportsmed.com/acl.php

The thing to get here though is that it's a "forever kind of injury," and the recent exams that found ALLs in 40 out of 41 knees (and evidence it had simply atrophied from damage in the other one) show ACL tears more often than not mean ALL tears, too. Sure, players can come back from ACL tears—but the risk of a SECOND tear is real and high, and how many times can a player come back from a torn ACL even if he doesn't decide to cut his losses? Apparently the record's 3—IF Davis' knee holds together.

I'm not (very) concerned whether and how well Miller and Harris will play again; I'm concerned about a SECOND ACL tear ending their careers. None of that has anything to do with Miller moving; again, he wouldn't be any better as a one-legged MLB than he would as a one-legged SLB. This time I didn't bring up moving him, so you can stop busting my balls about it.

You know there is a hell of a lot more than three players who've had ACL tears and come back, but ya know what? Think whatever you want.

He's done and Joel is right. Joel's always right.

[Joel]

It's clearest here: http://tinyurl.com/p6c2exh and here: http://tinyurl.com/pk82nn7, possibly because we knew SD would try to run a lot (the second pic is on 3rd and 2, so a run was still likely even though it was third down.) Miller does crowd the line a lot, as previously noted, and Phillips frequently plays standing up, so it often looks a lot like a 3-4. If you didn't know better, wouldn't you say this: http://tinyurl.com/n3frb9k, this: http://tinyurl.com/o8a9ued, this: http://tinyurl.com/o8mmdor and this: http://tinyurl.com/o8q748v look like 3-4 sets?

If you couldn't see Phillips number—just saw him standing up just behind the LoS opposite Miller doing the same, with three downlinemen in between and 2 more LBs behind them in the middle—wouldn't you say Phillips and Miller were BOTH playing OLB in a 3-4? Which is admittedly convenient, since both are 3-4 OLBs by talent, training and disposition.

The difference is Phillips drops in coverage even less than most modern OLBs, who themselves play less coverage than LBs 60 years ago. Remember, the whole reason we have multiple LBs is because when the pass came along coaches discovered 7 down linemen and 1 LB couldn't handle all the receivers, so they went to a 6-2 and then a 5-3 before Greasy Neale decided he needed a 4th DB and came up with a 6-1, which Steve Owen replaced with a 5-2, then Bill George made himself a MLB and we got the 4-3.

In other words, the difference between down linemen and LBs is LBs COVER, however rarely. Miller does that, but—despite his 3-4 OLB career—Phillips doesn't except on the occasional zone blitz if he happens to be the lineman who drops into coverage (he'd be my first choice over, say, Knighton or Jackson.) Phillips doesn't play from a three-point stance anymore than Miller does, because he's an agile speed rusher at 255 lbs, not the kind of 275-280 lb. DE who overpowers OTs.

It's a 4-3 base that often LOOKS like a 3-4, not because of anything Miller does, but because Phillips often plays standing up, because he's more about speed and agility than power. Miller's usually close to the line because Sams usually play less coverage than Mikes and Wills, so whether Miller's trying to get to the runner or passer, the closer he is to the line, the better. The main difference unique to us (to the extent there is one) is that Sam doesn't come out in nickel packages: A DT leaves, DE moves over and Sam takes his spot, but even that's common in the NFL.

[Joel]

5-2
The 5-2 went out with bobby socks (before, actually) when Bill George realized it left a gaping hole in the middle of the field, and responded by becoming the first MLB, thereby inventing the 4-3.

Our D often looks like a 5-2 or 4-3 (depending on how close Miller is to the line) because Phillips plays standing up, using his speed and quickness rather than trying to bull-rush OTs at 255.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Pitt and SF use similar formations. It's sometimes referred to as the fifty.

[Joel]

Pitt and SF use similar formations. It's sometimes referred to as the fifty.
Well, they run 3-4s, so I'm still not convinced it's a truly different formation rather than the OLBs crowding the line in close. Until/unless they put their hand down and almost NEVER play coverage, it's still a 3-4. There's an argument we run a pseudo-3-4 with Vickerson playing NT and Knighton and Wolfe playing DE; at 285, Wolfe could play 3-4 DE, and usually came inside as a DT in the nickel, while Miller took his old spot. The difference remains that Phillips almost never plays coverage: He has 4-3 DE duties, not 3-4 OLB; only Miller covers, but no more than most Sams.

Whether that means we truly have the personnel for it remains to be seen; with Miller and Phillips we have the starting OLBs, and Vickerson and Knighton could rotate at NT, but we've seen how thin our depth would be in that kind of formation: We don't really have ANYONE to play 3-4 LB if Miller or Phillips is hurt (and Phillips ain't gettin' any younger.)

[Simple Jaded]

I think Quanteris Smith could make a conversion to 3-4 OLB, Lerentee McCray looked promising too.

[ForgettingBrandonMarshall]

You know what would help Miller out? A healthy front 7.

[Joel]

I think Quanteris Smith could make a conversion to 3-4 OLB, Lerentee McCray looked promising too.
Maybe. We couldn't have gotten him without an ACL tear of his own, which reportedly had a "setback" in preseason that sent him to IR for the year. I like to think they'd have just said he re-torn it if that happened, but they said Wolfes post-seizure physical ruled out connections to his preseason spinal injury (even though it gave no clue to WHATEVER is wrong,) then put him on IR with a spinal injury this week. Hopefully Smiths ACL is fully recovered (though that's impossible: They can only replace it) and his ALL undamaged (though that's statistically VERY unlikely.)

Point being (as someone noted in the Wolfe thread) we don't know WTF we've got or will have (if anything) in Smith. When I see him making plays, I'll buy in; right now who's coming off a torn ACL and has never played a pro down. Fingers crossed, but I'm not counting on him for anything at this stage.

[Joel]

You know what would help Miller out? A healthy front 7.
Since he's part of it, probably so. It's a valid point though, as in the Wolfe thread; Miller+Wolfe>Miller/Wolfe. The whole's really greater than the sum of the parts there, since both tend to be doubled on passing downs: Anyone who doubles BOTH of them is either giving someone else a free shot at the QB or sending a maximum of 3 receivers.

[artie_dale]

So... the way the defense shut down the run yesterday (against the Pats), and played all around, still not enough to back up what I said, that the Defense, for some reason, seems to play better without Miller (THIS SEASON)?

Again, I'm not calling for Miller's head or would rather NOT have him. But, the numbers are there and I think it's worth considering if it betters the team (unless he really gets back to last year's form, I'm absolutely willing to eat crow) as a whole and by saving the team some money.