HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

OT: Bills IV - Preseason Perspective: 2008 Lions went 4-0

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-30-2012, 12:54 AM
  #151
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husko View Post
Isn't he starting?
I am also of the belief that Moats wins the job. Scott in his normal role, Morrison and Bradham filling in behind the starting three. It's one of the weaker spots on the team.

jBuds is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 06:20 AM
  #152
Takeo
Registered User
 
Takeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 19,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husko View Post
Isn't he starting?
Technically, based on seniority for the moment. He stinks.

Takeo is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:21 AM
  #153
JOHNBOY
BUFFALO SABRES
 
JOHNBOY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denver NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,161
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to JOHNBOY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post
Technically, based on seniority for the moment. He stinks.
I remember when the first picked him up before training camp last year and was thinking how great of a pick up he would be....

JOHNBOY is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 09:22 AM
  #154
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 2,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds View Post
I am also of the belief that Moats wins the job. Scott in his normal role, Morrison and Bradham filling in behind the starting three. It's one of the weaker spots on the team.
Technically, there will be a "starting" strongside linebacker. And that's probably going to be Morrison. Wannstedt's 4-3 needs a strongside linebacker that plays like the weakside backer in terms of positioning and responsibility, but is a bit stouter. Morrison.

That said, how much is Buffalo going to be in a base 4-3? My bet is less that half the time. Morrison and Sheppard get replaced on passing downs with Scott and a DB. Morrison is probably first to go.

And anytime Wannstedt throws in a change-up defense, with the strongside linebacker rushing, Moats is the guy.

So, Morrison could be the "starting" outside linebacker but play 25% of the snaps.

The guy I'm interested in is Carder. He reminds me of a bigger version of Zach Thomas. I think he takes over from Barnett in a year or two and never leaves the field. For ten years.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 11:57 AM
  #155
Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 22,102
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
Technically, there will be a "starting" strongside linebacker. And that's probably going to be Morrison. Wannstedt's 4-3 needs a strongside linebacker that plays like the weakside backer in terms of positioning and responsibility, but is a bit stouter. Morrison.

That said, how much is Buffalo going to be in a base 4-3? My bet is less that half the time. Morrison and Sheppard get replaced on passing downs with Scott and a DB. Morrison is probably first to go.

And anytime Wannstedt throws in a change-up defense, with the strongside linebacker rushing, Moats is the guy.

So, Morrison could be the "starting" outside linebacker but play 25% of the snaps.

The guy I'm interested in is Carder. He reminds me of a bigger version of Zach Thomas. I think he takes over from Barnett in a year or two and never leaves the field. For ten years.
Yea, and it looks like they are pretty open to specializing the use of these linebackers with lots of subpackages. Bradham seems to be training to take over/back-up Morrisson's role in general but also might steal snaps early on. Then there are different looks at nickel. It looks like they'll be using Moats to provide some pass rush from the position on the right downs, which is good because that's his best asset.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Searcy get some reps at Scott's nickel LB/safety role and see if he's a guy who might be able to help cover tight ends. He seems to have the athletic attributes and a similar size to Scott.

I'm really not worried about our linebackers when healthy, they won't be elite but they should be solid enough with what's around them and the amount of use they're going to get. But it remains to be seen how ready any of the guys are to step up if there's injury. Bradham seems like a perfect guy to step up with injury but he has to figure things out first.

It'd be great if the next draft has them add a franchise QB and a really dynamic OLB. If they do the latter then all of a sudden our LBs look pretty good with some solid depth if the young guys show well, some potential guys in place to step in for Barnett when he's done.

Paxon is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 05:26 PM
  #156
SoFFacet
Registered User
 
SoFFacet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,671
vCash: 500
LB is the weakest position on our defense but its better that way than if the weakness were somewhere else. The most effective defenses against the optimal offenses of today's NFL (Saints, Pats, Pack, Lions, etc) rush 4 and drop 7 with an emphasis on taking away the short passing game.

4-3 LBs in this scheme neither rush the passer nor cover the most dangerous threats, and are quite simply less important than the players that do. You don't really need the outrageous physical specimens from the 1st round to sit in a zone or cover the flat. For those roles, its much more efficient to draft LBs in the 3rd/4th and coach them up. I'm very happy with the Sheppard and Bradham picks in the last two drafts, and even more pleased with the Kuechly non-pick (not that we had the chance).

However, as more offenses copy the current offensive formula (much as the Bills are trying to do, in fact), I believe that the need for a dedicated hybrid SS-LB position will arise. And for that, teams will need 1st round specimens (to counter the types of TEs being deployed these days). We are lucky to have a stopgap/progenitor like Scott on our team.

SoFFacet is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 05:32 PM
  #157
New Sabres Captain
ForFriendshipDikembe
 
New Sabres Captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 40,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoFFacet View Post
LB is the weakest position on our defense but its better that way than if the weakness were somewhere else. The most effective defenses against the optimal offenses of today's NFL (Saints, Pats, Pack, Lions, etc) rush 4 and drop 7 with an emphasis on taking away the short passing game.

4-3 LBs in this scheme neither rush the passer nor cover the most dangerous threats, and are quite simply less important than the players that do. You don't really need the outrageous physical specimens from the 1st round to sit in a zone or cover the flat. For those roles, its much more efficient to draft LBs in the 3rd/4th and coach them up. I'm very happy with the Sheppard and Bradham picks in the last two drafts, and even more pleased with the Kuechly non-pick (not that we had the chance).

However, as more offenses copy the current offensive formula (much as the Bills are trying to do, in fact), I believe that the need for a dedicated hybrid SS-LB position will arise. And for that, teams will need 1st round specimens (to counter the types of TEs being deployed these days). We are lucky to have a stopgap/progenitor like Scott on our team.
The Pats were among the worst defenses last year, so I wouldn't look to them as a guide. It's why their top 3 picks all went defense: they needed more talent back there.

I still think talent is important, no matter where. The Saints just picked up two of the top UFA LBs this offseason (with Vilma done for the season). The Packers only have one of the biggest playmakers in the league at LB in Clay Matthews.

And you've got the Eagles, whose LB corps was exposed badly last year because they invested all their money on the front 4 and the secondary...anytime a runner got to the second level, and they had a receiver running a short/intermediate route...teams got BIG plays out of it.

Right now, I think next years 1st should either go to LB, WR, or QB (only QB depending on where we are picking and how Fitz does this year).

New Sabres Captain is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 06:07 PM
  #158
SoFFacet
Registered User
 
SoFFacet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrigsAndGirgs View Post
The Pats were among the worst defenses last year, so I wouldn't look to them as a guide. It's why their top 3 picks all went defense: they needed more talent back there.

Huh? Where did I say we should emulate the Pats Defense?

I still think talent is important, no matter where.

Well yes, in an ideal world with no constraints on the types of players we can field, a talented LB corps would be nice. My only point is that if one must prioritize, as nearly all teams do, LBs are the least important in today's NFL.


The Saints just picked up two of the top UFA LBs this offseason (with Vilma done for the season).

Well the UFAs have to go somewhere, you know. Its a lot better we targeted Mark and Mario than any of the LBs this year. Again, finite resources.

The Packers only have one of the biggest playmakers in the league at LB in Clay Matthews.

3-4 LBs are entirely different animals than what we're talking about.

And you've got the Eagles, whose LB corps was exposed badly last year because they invested all their money on the front 4 and the secondary...anytime a runner got to the second level, and they had a receiver running a short/intermediate route...teams got BIG plays out of it.

Also because of their wide-9 scheme... in any case yes there is a lower limit to the level of LB crappiness one can get away with.

Right now, I think next years 1st should either go to LB, WR, or QB (only QB depending on where we are picking and how Fitz does this year).

I think they have a great thing going by holding off on LB and WR. Gailey's system can still work without elite WR talent and Wanny's can work without elite LBs. I'd be really happy with a consolidating pick, like an OG such as the one the Steelers were able to get this year. Or a QB if the right one is available.
Responses in bold...

SoFFacet is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 06:41 PM
  #159
ChibiPooky
Moderator
Yay hockey!
 
ChibiPooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Fairfax, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,182
vCash: 500
"@AdamSchefter: RT @MPassantino: how about them @buffalobills?!?! Playoffs?? ... Will not surprise me. Buffalo headed in right direction. It's on its QB."

ChibiPooky is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 07:02 PM
  #160
New Sabres Captain
ForFriendshipDikembe
 
New Sabres Captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 40,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoFFacet View Post
Responses in bold...
You mentioned the Pats as one of the most effective defenses against the optimal offenses in the NFL (your first paragraph).

But the point remains...LB is still a very important position. And the defense does need to improve there.

New Sabres Captain is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 07:20 PM
  #161
Myllz
ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 14,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrigsAndGirgs View Post
You mentioned the Pats as one of the most effective defenses against the optimal offenses in the NFL (your first paragraph).

But the point remains...LB is still a very important position. And the defense does need to improve there.
The teams listed were the optimal offenses.

Myllz is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 08:38 PM
  #162
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 2,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoFFacet View Post
LB is the weakest position on our defense but its better that way than if the weakness were somewhere else. The most effective defenses against the optimal offenses of today's NFL (Saints, Pats, Pack, Lions, etc) rush 4 and drop 7 with an emphasis on taking away the short passing game.
Complete generalization. That's like saying the optimal offenses in the league are sending out four receivers and leaving one back into block.

Defenses that do the job against passing offenses disrupt timing. Many ways to do that.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 10:34 PM
  #163
Push Dr Tracksuit
Gerstmann 3:16
 
Push Dr Tracksuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
Complete generalization. That's like saying the optimal offenses in the league are sending out four receivers and leaving one back into block.

Defenses that do the job against passing offenses disrupt timing. Many ways to do that.
With the current in vogue method being to drop 7 and rush 4. Eliminate routes that take less than 3 secs to develop and have a 4 man rush that takes 3 secs to get to the QB. Use the blitz sparingly to take advantage of long passing downs.

Push Dr Tracksuit is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 10:42 PM
  #164
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 2,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imlach a cup View Post
With the current in vogue method being to drop 7 and rush 4. Eliminate routes that take less than 3 secs to develop and have a 4 man rush that takes 3 secs to get to the QB. Use the blitz sparingly to take advantage of long passing downs.
Pittsburgh, Houston, the Jets, Green Bay, Baltimore, Dallas, Cincinnati, Denver, Kansas City, Washington, New Orleans, San Francisco, and Arizona don't do that.

Most 3-4 or 46 teams don't do that (every team I listed is a 3-4 team or a 46 variant defense).

What you described is what the Giants do. Since they won the Super Bowl, it's "in vogue." It certainly works, but you need a pass rush with JPP, Umenyiora, Tuck, and Kiwanuka to do it. Buffalo is trying to replicate their success with Williams, Williams, Dareus, and Anderson.

Most teams don't have four good defensive ends like the Giants. Therefore, they don't rush 4 and drop 7 as a matter of habit. They mix things up to keep the QB and blocking scheme off balance. Guys like Dom Capers, LeBeau, Gregg Williams, the Ryan brothers, etc. in fact don't rush 4 and drop 7 habitually. They're doing something different almost every down.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
07-30-2012, 11:04 PM
  #165
Takeo
Registered User
 
Takeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 19,227
vCash: 500
Sounds like Easley is having a good start to camp. Just say no to Donald Jones!

Takeo is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:45 AM
  #166
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post
Sounds like Easley is having a good start to camp. Just say no to Donald Jones!
For realsZyx. I brought this up a few weeks ago - put me in that minority camp that thinks Nelson is better than Jones. I also obviously had high hopes for Marcus, but the injuries/health have hastened things a bit. A lot, actually.

And I continue to read about this "amazing rapport" or on the field connection Phytcie has with Jones. He seems to target Donald a lot - in camp, at least.

jBuds is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 01:11 AM
  #167
Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 22,102
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds View Post
For realsZyx. I brought this up a few weeks ago - put me in that minority camp that thinks Nelson is better than Jones. I also obviously had high hopes for Marcus, but the injuries/health have hastened things a bit. A lot, actually.

And I continue to read about this "amazing rapport" or on the field connection Phytcie has with Jones. He seems to target Donald a lot - in camp, at least.
I'm pretty sure everyone thinks Nelson is better than Jones. Everyone considers Nelson to be the team's #2 WR, he just happens to be a slot receiver. That's unlikely to change regardless of who plays opposite of Stevie.

Paxon is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 01:32 AM
  #168
Sports Enthusiast
Not Here To Be Liked
 
Sports Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 11,304
vCash: 500
LB is weak but Nick Barnett is one of the best

Sports Enthusiast is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 01:34 AM
  #169
Sports Enthusiast
Not Here To Be Liked
 
Sports Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 11,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChibiPooky View Post
"@AdamSchefter: RT @MPassantino: how about them @buffalobills?!?! Playoffs?? ... Will not surprise me. Buffalo headed in right direction. It's on its QB."
LOL. Schefter must have had too many of those wretched Labatt Blues on his visit. I think it will be tough. 9 wins is a success.

Sports Enthusiast is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 01:36 AM
  #170
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BK Triple Threat View Post
LB is weak but Nick Barnett is one of the best
Barnett is good, but A) he's not one of the best, and B ) he can't play strong, middle, and weak on the same play, unfortunately, if you catch my drift

jBuds is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 07:10 AM
  #171
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrigsAndGirgs View Post
You mentioned the Pats as one of the most effective defenses against the optimal offenses in the NFL (your first paragraph).

But the point remains...LB is still a very important position. And the defense does need to improve there.
Our LB situation isn't as bad as people seem to make it out to be. While yes our LB corps is the weak point in our D, wanny's scheme is very LB friendly so it should balance out.

HiddenInLight is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 08:55 AM
  #172
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
Our LB situation isn't as bad as people seem to make it out to be. While yes our LB corps is the weak point in our D, wanny's scheme is very LB friendly so it should balance out.
Same dilemma that plagues the Sabres at center. I'd ideally have another vet in the mix there at LB. We don't know what we have, really, in Carder, Bradham, White, and to a lesser degree, Moats.

jBuds is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 09:02 AM
  #173
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds View Post
Same dilemma that plagues the Sabres at center. I'd ideally have another vet in the mix there at LB. We don't know what we have, really, in Carder, Bradham, White, and to a lesser degree, Moats.
TBH out of all those names the only one that has a shot at starting week 1 is moats.

HiddenInLight is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 11:31 AM
  #174
ChibiPooky
Moderator
Yay hockey!
 
ChibiPooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Fairfax, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,182
vCash: 500
From the tweets I'm reading it sounds like Carder is really impressing. Anyone actually been watching camp and/or want to chime in on him?

ChibiPooky is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 12:11 PM
  #175
Nibbler
Registered User
 
Nibbler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ambassador to Earth
Country: United States
Posts: 825
vCash: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChibiPooky View Post
From the tweets I'm reading it sounds like Carder is really impressing. Anyone actually been watching camp and/or want to chime in on him?
I would imagine he makes it as a special teamer at the very least.

Nibbler is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:37 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.