Do We Really Need Linebackers?

[Teague31]

I know the 3-4 is built on LB's and I don't mind drafting one at some point but I can't imagine a first day pick, not when we have glaring needs at OL, FS, WR. I think we can all agree that Ware and James are set. Assuming Dat retires, you still have Burnett, Fowler and Shanle for the other ILB spot. I think Burnett will be really good once healthy and I was impressed by fowler against the run and shanle against the pass. At the other OLB, I think Fujita will be resigned. A full training camp in the 3-4 will do him good- we also have Thornton coming back. I just don't see LB as the glaring need this offseason- not at the expense of the other positions already listed.

[BigDFan5]

Do We Really Need Linebackers?


yes!!

[WoodysGirl]

yes!!:signmast: What he said.

At such a crucial spot in the defense, the balance is tipping to scrub level. Need to elevate that position w/more playmakers.

[Juke99]

:signmast: What he said.

At such a crucial spot in the defense, the balance is tipping to scrub level. Need to elevate that position w/more playmakers.


:signmast: What she said.

[BigDFan5]

:signmast: What she said.



:signmast: both very smart people

[kojak]

Yes!!!!

[big dog cowboy]

:signmast:
I'm all in.

[Billy Bullocks]

Again, our biggest defensive problem, IMO, wasn't nessecarily Davis at FS..you gotta realize once teams began to figure out our scheme, especially that Ware was our only consistant pass rush threat form the LB spot, they keyed in on that.

The 3-4 is built on disguising your 4th rusher...you can't do that when everyone knows it's DeMarcus Ware

[Clove]

:signmast:
I'm all in.:signmast:What all of them said + 1.

[Idgit]

Two biggest missing factors in getting to and winning in the playoffs: turnovers and scoring defense. That's going to happen best with more pressure from the linebackers, where we're solid, but already thin. Give me a FA and a first or second round draft pick, please.

[ddh33]

Oh, I think this team needs a LB in a bad way. In fact, you could make a strong case that the team needs more than one. If Fujita is resigned and Thornton and Burnett come back healthy, then you're a lot better than you were this past season. But I still think you need one more playmaker to play opposite Ware.

[Manster68]

Again, our biggest defensive problem, IMO, wasn't nessecarily Davis at FS..you gotta realize once teams began to figure out our scheme, especially that Ware was our only consistant pass rush threat form the LB spot, they keyed in on that.

The 3-4 is built on disguising your 4th rusher...you can't do that when everyone knows it's DeMarcus Ware

This is why a Manny Lawson would be so effctive here.

Also, I am tired of seeing Dallas' inside linebackers not make a tackle behind the line of scrimmage. They get pushed around way too much.

[hendog]

What every one of them said!

[hendog]

I say either Manny Lawson or Bobby Carpenter in 1

[cowboys19]

Thats why the Pats are so successful on D. Even with all their Injuries, they have always had strong linebackers.

Bruschi
Vrabel
Johnson
McGinnest

all good- to great linebackers

not to mention Colvin another very good player

[rexrobinson]

not only do we need another LB, we need another DeMarcus Ware type on the opposite side. I am a big fan of Manny Lawson, but Carpenter wouldnt be bad pick at all.

I want offenses to have to consistantly worry about 2 super freak athletes who can both get to the QB in a flash. Thet wreaks havoc. We need some havoc.

Simply put, we need another "It" factor LB like D. Ware

[SALADIN]

I know the 3-4 is built on LB's and I don't mind drafting one at some point but I can't imagine a first day pick, not when we have glaring needs at OL, FS, WR. I think we can all agree that Ware and James are set. Assuming Dat retires, you still have Burnett, Fowler and Shanle for the other ILB spot. I think Burnett will be really good once healthy and I was impressed by fowler against the run and shanle against the pass. At the other OLB, I think Fujita will be resigned. A full training camp in the 3-4 will do him good- we also have Thornton coming back. I just don't see LB as the glaring need this offseason- not at the expense of the other positions already listed.

Assuming all of the starters you mentioned are healthy by the season opener then Bobby Carpenter is a starter by mid season. IMO, Carpenter is every bit the football player Hawk is, and he can put his hand on the ground (and rush the passer from anywhere).

So yes, if the best player, who may be a LB, is there by the time we pick (18 or otherwise) then you pull the trigger.

[Eskimo]

If an bookend OLB is there at #18 to pair opposite Ware then that is probably the pick. The two quickest ways to improve this team are to become more aggressive on defense which will require another passrushing OLB and to shore up the OL. The OL part may be best accomplished by FA at this point.

However. if there is no highly rated OLB on the board at #18, I wouldn't mind grabbing one of the LT prospects here or trading down if we think the guy we like will be available later.

[Smith22]

I pretty much agree with everything said in this thread. When running a 3-4, you should be strong at LB'er, and simply put, we aren't right now. Ware is our only real threat at rushing the passer, and, as others have said, we could use some attitude on defense. Good looking draft for LB'ers and OT's, so not getting either would be a mistake IMO.

[blindzebra]

We have one play maker, Ware.

One okay guy, James who put together half a good season in his career.

One talented guy who is hurt, Burnett.

And a bunch of back ups and special teamers in Fujita, Shanle, Fowler and Thornton.

We absolutely need a LB, in fact we need two new starters and I would not be sad to see the entire bunch of back ups go.

[ghst187]

I say either Manny Lawson or Bobby Carpenter in 1

ditto

[CrazyCowboy]

Absolutely--a smart one who can recognize the offensive formations and then make the important defensive call to his team mates......

[Doomsday101]

If your going to run the 3-4 then yes LB is a must. Fowler and Shanle are good backups and role players but Dallas needs to add more talent to the LB core

[Hostile]

If your going to run the 3-4 then yes LB is a must. Fowler and Shanle are good backups and role players but Dallas needs to add more talent to the LB coreIf Burnett can't jump up and take the SOLB or the ILB next to James then we need 2 starting LBs, 1 inside, and 1 outside. I really like Fowler and I really like Fujita, but you nailed it.

[junk]

If Burnett can't jump up and take the WOLB or the ILB next to James then we need 2 starting LBs, 1 inside, and 1 outside. I really like Fowler and I really like Fujita, but you nailed it.

Ware is a weak side OLB. Dallas needs a guy for the strong side.

[DLCassidy]

Thats why the Pats are so successful on D. Even with all their Injuries, they have always had strong linebackers.

Bruschi
Vrabel
Johnson
McGinnest

all good- to great linebackers

not to mention Colvin another very good player

Only McGinnest the pass rusher was a 1st round pick. Good linebackers are frequently found in later rounds. Bruschi and Vrabel were 3rd round choices. Colvin a 4th rounder. The retired Johnson was a 2nd round choice.

I think we should/need to draft an OLB. But I have seen nothing from the group of choices that could be available to us to indicate any of them are worth a mid first round selection. If OLB is our top priority, and IMO it isn't, I think we could move down 10-12 slots and still get the same/similar quality player.

[rexrobinson]

if Dallas drafts a Ware type OLB in Lawson or Carpenter, then I think we will see Ware and whomever they pick swap Weak side, Strong side often to mix stuff up. We will finally see exotic packages that dont always involve 3 down lineman and bookend LBs always in the same spot

Look what Ware did when the swapped him on the Strong Side all of a sudden. That RT didnt know what steam rolled him.

I mean imagine this. DeMarcus Ware can be effective rushing the QBs blindside, and also effective on the strong side because the QB is constantly seeing him and thinking...good God is he getting blocked or not?

[Hostile]

Ware is a weak side OLB. Dallas needs a guy for the strong side.Correct, my bad.

[Maikeru-sama]

Yes, Ware plays on the Weak-Side aka the playmaking side. We need a Strong Side Linebacker who can do all the things a Sam linebacker can do like stop the run, cover Tight Ends but I think we need one that is agile enough to get after the Quarterback as well.

I think Right Tackle is more pressing though. We gave up some huge yards late in the Season to Larry Johnson and Clinton Portis, but those guys were playing at an extremely high level late in the season and was running on just about everybody.

[Hostile]

Yes, Ware plays on the Weak-Side aka the playmaking side. We need a Strong Side Linebacker who can do all the things a Sam linebacker can do like stop the run, cover Tight Ends but I think we need one that is agile enough to get after the Quarterback as well.

I think Right Tackle is more pressing though. We gave up some huge yards late in the Season to Larry Johnson and Clinton Portis, but those guys were playing at an extremely high level late in the season and was running on just about everybody.I'm going to agree with you that OL is a pressing need, but disagree that it is more pressing.

Let's say we draft McNeil in round 1 and put him at RT and get Flo back. How much will our offense improve? Even if Julius is healthy all year.

If we can get a solid season out of Burnett at SOLB or ILB and add whichever spot he doesn't occupy how much will our defense improve? I'm going to say it will make a big jump forward. Especially if we also address FS.

You can win it all with a dominating defense and a steady offense. We can fix OL without reaching in round 1 for a RT.

[DLCassidy]

You can win it all with a dominating defense and a steady offense. We can fix OL without reaching in round 1 for a RT.

The operative word there is reach. If we don't trade down, I don't want to see us REACH for anything. That includes reaching for a OLB or FS.

[junk]

Yes, Ware plays on the Weak-Side aka the playmaking side. We need a Strong Side Linebacker who can do all the things a Sam linebacker can do like stop the run, cover Tight Ends but I think we need one that is agile enough to get after the Quarterback as well.

I think Right Tackle is more pressing though. We gave up some huge yards late in the Season to Larry Johnson and Clinton Portis, but those guys were playing at an extremely high level late in the season and was running on just about everybody.

The YPC against the defense were actually high all year. Teams just didn't really seem to try to exploit until the year wore on.

It'd be hard to pass a top notch tackle prospect if one was available. Need some youth on the OL as well.

I agree with your thoughts on SOLB, but I think its a big of a need as tackle and you might get better value in the draft. I expect the team to get a vet for RT.

[Maikeru-sama]

I'm going to agree with you that OL is a pressing need, but disagree that it is more pressing.

Let's say we draft McNeil in round 1 and put him at RT and get Flo back. How much will our offense improve? Even if Julius is healthy all year.

If we can get a solid season out of Burnett at SOLB or ILB and add whichever spot he doesn't occupy how much will our defense improve? I'm going to say it will make a big jump forward. Especially if we also address FS.

You can win it all with a dominating defense and a steady offense. We can fix OL without reaching in round 1 for a RT.

True. I respectfully disagree though :p: .

Keep in mind, my thesis is placed knowing full well there will be no Dat, Glover, and Singleton. Also, we are both going to assume that the Tackle works out (not a bust) as well as your linebacker is not a bust. Let's just also assume that we dont get a Top Tackle in Free Agency.

Facts
*Rob Petitti gave up 13.5 Sacks last year and when Flozell Adams went down, Torrin Tucker gave up 12.5 in 11 Games.

*The offense struggled greatly when Flozell Adams went down because you had to protect your Right and Left Tackle.

*More than likely, the in-effectiveness of your offense may have put a strain on your defense ala field position, time on the field, etc etc.

*Jason Witten still had a nice year but his true destructive nature was never really unleased on the opposition because he was either kept in to block on the line or was at Fullback and was lead blocking or getting crack blocks before going out on routes.

*Bledsoe is one of the most immobile Quarterbacks in the game but can absolutely carve a Defense up for Thanksgiving Dinner if you give him the time.

*Having to always leave an extra blocker in to help your Tackle out limits some of your play calling and one weak Domino on the Offensive Line can be a negative chain reaction for the other comrades.

Benefits of Drafting a Tackle

*Any player can be a bust, Tackle, Quarterback, Linebacker etc etc, so there are always risks.

*If this Tackle pans out, you not only get Flozell Adams back, but you get the Right Tackle position finally settled for years. Which is a position that has plagued Parcells from Day 1, ala Ryan Young, Torrin Tucker and Robert Petitti.

*If this 1st Round pick works out, you Neutralize menaces like U and Strahan (they move these guys around alot) and Jevon Kearse, which is a serious blow to the teams these players play for.

*Now that you have good tackles, you can open up the offensive playbook, maybe Petitti and Johnson play better as the line has been upgraded and your Running Game has improved. I dont care which Tackle we get, but I know Mcneil's best asset is his runn blocking ability.

*This upgrade could keep the offense on the field longer, put up more points by keeping Bledsoe upright, possibly make the running game more effective, and all of this would improve the defense greatly.

Those are the reasons I want to draft a Tackle instead of a Linebacker. Me and you have went round and round on this for about a month now, you have a good thesis and I think I have a good thesis. I really dont think you can go wrong going either way.

But of course Hostile, I am willing to debate with you about anything and everything because you always bring good arguments to the table, facts, etc etc and you dont just respond with

:rolleyes:

and

:jerk:

When you dont agree with somebody :p: .

- Mike G.

[Qwickdraw]

:stupid:

oops, wrong one.:o:

:signmast:
:D

[Clove]

If you have Ware and Lawson/Carpenter or Jeremy Mincey coming off of that edge at the same time, unless you have 2 Pro Bowl Tackles or double both of them, you are in serious trouble as an offense.

Also, those LB'rs I mentioned, you cannot stand them up at the point of attack. So when you try to run wide, (just like Ware finally stop letting teams do on his side) you can't run wide with those big LB'rs standing up TE, FB, and Linemen.

Fujita is too slow footed and not nearly as strong of either of the 3 I mentioned. Thronton is not agile enough to cover out of the back field.

Burnett is not a pass rusher type.

[Sasquatch]

cover Tight Ends but I think we need one that is agile enough to get after the Quarterback as well.



Yeah, I'd take LB with the first pick in a heartbeat, not only for QB pressure but to shore up coverage in short over the middle routes which was a weakness.

[snapper]

Benefits of Drafting a Tackle

*Any player can be a bust, Tackle, Quarterback, Linebacker etc etc, so there are always risks.

*If this Tackle pans out, you not only get Flozell Adams back, but you get the Right Tackle position finally settled for years. Which is a position that has plagued Parcells from Day 1, ala Ryan Young, Torrin Tucker and Robert Petitti.

*If this 1st Round pick works out, you Neutralize menaces like U and Strahan (they move these guys around alot) and Jevon Kearse, which is a serious blow to the teams these players play for.

*Now that you have good tackles, you can open up the offensive playbook, maybe Petitti and Johnson play better as the line has been upgraded and your Running Game has improved. I dont care which Tackle we get, but I know Mcneil's best asset is his runn blocking ability.- Mike G.

Unless that #18 pick is the second coming of Anthony Munoz, I don't see how taking an offensive tackle will improve the offensive line right away. I think it would be best to look for a tackle in FA to compete with Petitti and Tucker and try and find a promising prospect in the later rounds.

Besides FS, drafting a LB would have the greatest immediate impact in 2006.

[Bob Sacamano]

The 3-4 is built on disguising your 4th rusher...you can't do that when everyone knows it's DeMarcus Ware

how many times are you going to have to say that before people get it? :lmao2:

[Bob Sacamano]

The operative word there is reach. If we don't trade down, I don't want to see us REACH for anything. That includes reaching for a OLB or FS.

the deepest positions in the draft are OT, OLB, and S

we won't be reaching at 18 if we choose a top player from any of those 3 positions

[superpunk]

But of course Hostile, I am willing to debate with you about anything and everything because you always bring good arguments to the table, facts, etc etc and you dont just respond with

:rolleyes:

and

:jerk:

When you dont agree with somebody :p: .

- Mike G.

:rolleyes::jerk::muttley:

[Bob Sacamano]

I'd take an OLB because it will have more of an impact than an OT

I've never seen a playmaking OT before ;)

and I don't want another Rob Pettiti situation at OT, next year, all the 1st round OT prospects outside of McNeil, who should go in the 2nd/3rd, are 310 lbs. or less, they're going to suffer from the same strength issues that Pettiti had, rather we sign Barry in FA, and draft a big OT w/ potential such as Ryan O'Callaghan in the 2nd/3rd, hell, Andrew Whitworth will be available in the 2nd, and he's a mauler

[MichaelWinicki]

Yeah, I'd take LB with the first pick in a heartbeat, not only for QB pressure but to shore up coverage in short over the middle routes which was a weakness.

Bingo!

Huge weakness!

[MichaelWinicki]

Unless that #18 pick is the second coming of Anthony Munoz, I don't see how taking an offensive tackle will improve the offensive line right away. I think it would be best to look for a tackle in FA to compete with Petitti and Tucker and try and find a promising prospect in the later rounds.

Besides FS, drafting a LB would have the greatest immediate impact in 2006.

It won't.

Mike G. thinks "Munoz" is going to be there at #18 and he won't.

Take a LB or FS and then grab the best guy available in round 2.

[BigDFan5]

It won't.

Mike G. thinks "Munoz" is going to be there at #18 and he won't.

Take a LB or FS and then grab the best guy available in round 2.

Rd 1 Lawson
rd 2 Martin Nance
Rd 3 jason Allen

:)

[MichaelWinicki]

I'd take an OLB because it will have more of an impact than an OT

I've never seen a playmaking OT before ;)

and I don't want another Rob Pettiti situation at OT, next year, all the 1st round OT prospects outside of McNeil, who should go in the 2nd/3rd, are 310 lbs. or less, they're going to suffer from the same strength issues that Pettiti had, rather we sign Barry in FA, and draft a big OT w/ potential such as Ryan O'Callaghan in the 2nd/3rd, hell, Andrew Whitworth will be available in the 2nd, and he's a mauler


YES!

That's exactly right. All those people that want to grab a OT at #18 don't realize that a OT taken at that spot probably will not be any better than a year #2 Pettiti. And if that's the case I'm sticking with the less expensive guy.

[superpunk]

I'd take an OLB because it will have more of an impact than an OT

I've never seen a playmaking OT before ;)

and I don't want another Rob Pettiti situation at OT, next year, all the 1st round OT prospects outside of McNeil, who should go in the 2nd/3rd, are 310 lbs. or less, they're going to suffer from the same strength issues that Pettiti had, rather we sign Barry in FA, and draft a big OT w/ potential such as Ryan O'Callaghan in the 2nd/3rd, hell, Andrew Whitworth will be available in the 2nd, and he's a mauler

I'm with ya. In our 3-4, you can NEVER have enough competent LBers. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see us take at least one on day 1 for the next three years. We get another OLB, and hopefully some more ILBs, and this defense can take off.

[Bob Sacamano]

1. Lawson
2. Nance
3. O'Callaghan

;)

in response to BigD

[Bob Sacamano]

I'm with ya. In our 3-4, you can NEVER have enough competent LBers. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see us take at least one on day 1 for the next three years. We get another OLB, and hopefully some more ILBs, and this defense can take off.

I think we're set at ILB with James and Burnett, in the future, of course

but agree to agree ;)

[Bob Sacamano]

YES!

That's exactly right. All those people that want to grab a OT at #18 don't realize that a OT taken at that spot probably will not be any better than a year #2 Pettiti. And if that's the case I'm sticking with the less expensive guy.

plus long overlooked fact on here, OT is one of the hardest positions, 2nd to QB IMO, to transition to, from college to the pros, hell, the 1st OT taken last year, at 16, Alex Barron, was still getting pushed around in wk. 17

[superpunk]

1. Lawson
2. Nance
3. O'Callaghan

;)

in response to BigD

I'm with ya on 1 and 2, although I might rather have Parham if he's there when we select, but you're gonna have to educate me on O'Callaghan.

[Hostile]

True. I respectfully disagree though :p: .

Keep in mind, my thesis is placed knowing full well there will be no Dat, Glover, and Singleton. Also, we are both going to assume that the Tackle works out (not a bust) as well as your linebacker is not a bust. Let's just also assume that we dont get a Top Tackle in Free Agency.

Facts
*Rob Petitti gave up 13.5 Sacks last year and when Flozell Adams went down, Torrin Tucker gave up 12.5 in 11 Games.

*The offense struggled greatly when Flozell Adams went down because you had to protect your Right and Left Tackle.

*More than likely, the in-effectiveness of your offense may have put a strain on your defense ala field position, time on the field, etc etc.

*Jason Witten still had a nice year but his true destructive nature was never really unleased on the opposition because he was either kept in to block on the line or was at Fullback and was lead blocking or getting crack blocks before going out on routes.

*Bledsoe is one of the most immobile Quarterbacks in the game but can absolutely carve a Defense up for Thanksgiving Dinner if you give him the time.

*Having to always leave an extra blocker in to help your Tackle out limits some of your play calling and one weak Domino on the Offensive Line can be a negative chain reaction for the other comrades.

Benefits of Drafting a Tackle

*Any player can be a bust, Tackle, Quarterback, Linebacker etc etc, so there are always risks.

*If this Tackle pans out, you not only get Flozell Adams back, but you get the Right Tackle position finally settled for years. Which is a position that has plagued Parcells from Day 1, ala Ryan Young, Torrin Tucker and Robert Petitti.

*If this 1st Round pick works out, you Neutralize menaces like U and Strahan (they move these guys around alot) and Jevon Kearse, which is a serious blow to the teams these players play for.

*Now that you have good tackles, you can open up the offensive playbook, maybe Petitti and Johnson play better as the line has been upgraded and your Running Game has improved. I dont care which Tackle we get, but I know Mcneil's best asset is his runn blocking ability.

*This upgrade could keep the offense on the field longer, put up more points by keeping Bledsoe upright, possibly make the running game more effective, and all of this would improve the defense greatly.

Those are the reasons I want to draft a Tackle instead of a Linebacker. Me and you have went round and round on this for about a month now, you have a good thesis and I think I have a good thesis. I really dont think you can go wrong going either way.

But of course Hostile, I am willing to debate with you about anything and everything because you always bring good arguments to the table, facts, etc etc and you dont just respond with

:rolleyes:

and

:jerk:

When you dont agree with somebody :p: .

- Mike G.Thanks. I actually enjoy the debates and how much they make me think. If someone is making me think it means they clearly aren't a stooge. I see no advantage to disrespecting a good debate.

Let's start with the "any player can be a bust" angle. Agreed, so it isn't worth bringing it up. I won't call your #1 hope a potential bust and you won't call my #1 hope a potential bust because all we are doing is basing our hopes on the potential we think they have by personal observation and study.

I am opposed to an OT in round for a few reasons. Now, when I say "opposed" I do not mean if we draft a RT I am going to hate it. I'm talking about balanced against the need to finish the Defense overall, and the LB corps in particular. Here are my reasons...

1. We are closer to a dominant Defense than we are to a top 10 Offense. The shortest distance between 2 points is still a straight line. Finish the D and we are a strong contender immediately, because even with Offensive troubles last year we stayed in all but 1 game. That means the offense is steady, even with guys who don't perform up to some standards. Give a steady offense a dominant Defense and good things can happen. Adding an OT is not going to give us a dominant offense.

2. We lost 4 LBs to injury last season. Dat Nguyen, Al Singleton, Kevin Burnett, and Michael Barrow. The last one is a non factor. The other 3 are not. One was our Defensive Captain and play caller. In a defensive scheme where a premium is placed on LB that is too much to overcome. We can't overcome something like that again and expect to take the next step.

3. This Draft is deep at LB and OT. LBs for a 3-4 scheme will be at a higher premium than OT. Especially if a team is looking to make the transition from a 4-3 to a 3-4. Always place the higher value on the rarer gems.

4. The difference from OT to OT for the 1st 3 rounds is generally not that significant past the top guy. In this Draft that is D'Brickashaw Ferguson and I don't see us having a prayer of getting him. The difference in LBs is more significant as the rounds go by and they get smaller and smaller.

5. I still believe Rob Petitti will be fine. His run blocking grades were high. I think the coaching staff is quite happy with him even if the fan base is not. I see potential there and I hope we tap into it rather than sweep it aside just to start over.

[Bob Sacamano]

I'm with ya on 1 and 2, although I might rather have Parham if he's there when we select, but you're gonna have to educate me on O'Callaghan.

O'Cally, big guy, a Parcells' trait for Olineman, but carries weight well, and so far in Senior Bowl workouts, is looking mighty nice, plus Cal has had some pretty prolific offensive attacks while he was their best Olineman

good value in the 3rd round

buyer beware: had surgery on both his shoulders a couple years ago

[Bob Sacamano]

5. I still believe Rob Petitti will be fine. His run blocking grades were high. I think the coaching staff is quite happy with him even if the fan base is not. I see potential there and I hope we tap into it rather than sweep it aside just to start over.

wow, I did not know that, thanks for bringing that up

and I agree with what you're saying

[MichaelWinicki]

plus long overlooked fact on here, OT is one of the hardest positions, 2nd to QB IMO, to transition to, from college to the pros, hell, the 1st OT taken last year, at 16, Alex Barron, was still getting pushed around in wk. 17


Exactly!

But many think a OT taken at #18 is going to be a finished product.

Not hardly.

[superpunk]

O'Cally, big guy, a Parcells' traight for Olineman, but carries weight well, and so far in Senior Bowl workouts, is looking mighty nice, plus Cal has had some pretty prolific offensive attacks while he was their best Olineman

good value in the 3rd round

Apparently Jonathan Scott has been kicking *** at the senior bowl practices, and Lawson has been destroying T's Winston and that other guy :confused:. Good picks at 1 and 2? Scott could be a mauler on the right, even though I'm inclined to just say leave the Oline the way it is, maybe just provide depth.

[Bob Sacamano]

Apparently Jonathan Scott has been kicking *** at the senior bowl practices, and Lawson has been destroying T's Winston and that other guy :confused:. Good picks at 1 and 2? Scott could be a mauler on the right, even though I'm inclined to just say leave the Oline the way it is, maybe just provide depth.

I'm really liking Scott, but IMO, he's going to be the 3rd OT taken, late 1st, early 2nd

I'd rather sign Barry to play RT, and draft O'Cally, that's those 2, and Pettiti, battling for RT, the odds of finding a keeper improve dramatically, moreso than spending all our money on a 1st round pick

[MichaelWinicki]

Thanks. I actually enjoy the debates and how much they make me think. If someone is making me think it means they clearly aren't a stooge. I see no advantage to disrespecting a good debate.

Let's start with the "any player can be a bust" angle. Agreed, so it isn't worth bringing it up. I won't call your #1 hope a potential bust and you won't call my #1 hope a potential bust because all we are doing is basing our hopes on the potential we think they have by personal observation and study.

I am opposed to an OT in round for a few reasons. Now, when I say "opposed" I do not mean if we draft a RT I am going to hate it. I'm talking about balanced against the need to finish the Defense overall, and the LB corps in particular. Here are my reasons...

1. We are closer to a dominant Defense than we are to a top 10 Offense. The shortest distance between 2 points is still a straight line. Finish the D and we are a strong contender immediately, because even with Offensive troubles last year we stayed in all but 1 game. That means the offense is steady, even with guys who don't perform up to some standards. Give a steady offense a dominant Defense and good things can happen. Adding an OT is not going to give us a dominant offense.

2. We lost 4 LBs to injury last season. Dat Nguyen, Al Singleton, Kevin Burnett, and Michael Barrow. The last one is a non factor. The other 3 are not. One was our Defensive Captain and play caller. In a defensive scheme where a premium is placed on LB that is too much to overcome. We can't overcome something like that again and expect to take the next step.

3. This Draft is deep at LB and OT. LBs for a 3-4 scheme will be at a higher premium than OT. Especially if a team is looking to make the transition from a 4-3 to a 3-4. Always place the higher value on the rarer gems.

4. The difference from OT to OT for the 1st 3 rounds is generally not that significant past the top guy. In this Draft that is D'Brickashaw Ferguson and I don't see us having a prayer of getting him. The difference in LBs is more significant as the rounds go by and they get smaller and smaller.

5. I still believe Rob Petitti will be fine. His run blocking grades were high. I think the coaching staff is quite happy with him even if the fan base is not. I see potential there and I hope we tap into it rather than sweep it aside just to start over.


Nice reply Hos.

I second everything that you said.

I just hope Charles shows up to tell us what you really meant by all this. ;)

[superpunk]

I'm really liking Scott, but IMO, he's going to be the 3rd OT taken, late 1st, early 2nd

I'd rather sign Barry to play RT, and draft O'Cally, that's those 2, and Pettiti, battling for RT, the odds of finding a keeper improve dramatically, moreso than spending all our money on a 1st round pick

I was only thinking that if he fell a bit. I wish I had more confidence in Burnett, but that dude's got a history. Maybe he can get on the field and contribute, and if he does, I think he can be real good, but he's got to get out there first. If Parcells is satisfied with him, fine. But, I really think if Scott isn't there in the second, we should draft Kai Parham. Played for Al Groh, in a 3-4 defense, that would be a real safe pick for one of our ILB positions, less of a transition to make.

[Maikeru-sama]

Thanks. I actually enjoy the debates and how much they make me think. If someone is making me think it means they clearly aren't a stooge. I see no advantage to disrespecting a good debate.

Let's start with the "any player can be a bust" angle. Agreed, so it isn't worth bringing it up. I won't call your #1 hope a potential bust and you won't call my #1 hope a potential bust because all we are doing is basing our hopes on the potential we think they have by personal observation and study.

I am opposed to an OT in round for a few reasons. Now, when I say "opposed" I do not mean if we draft a RT I am going to hate it. I'm talking about balanced against the need to finish the Defense overall, and the LB corps in particular. Here are my reasons...

1. We are closer to a dominant Defense than we are to a top 10 Offense. The shortest distance between 2 points is still a straight line. Finish the D and we are a strong contender immediately, because even with Offensive troubles last year we stayed in all but 1 game. That means the offense is steady, even with guys who don't perform up to some standards. Give a steady offense a dominant Defense and good things can happen. Adding an OT is not going to give us a dominant offense.

2. We lost 4 LBs to injury last season. Dat Nguyen, Al Singleton, Kevin Burnett, and Michael Barrow. The last one is a non factor. The other 3 are not. One was our Defensive Captain and play caller. In a defensive scheme where a premium is placed on LB that is too much to overcome. We can't overcome something like that again and expect to take the next step.

3. This Draft is deep at LB and OT. LBs for a 3-4 scheme will be at a higher premium than OT. Especially if a team is looking to make the transition from a 4-3 to a 3-4. Always place the higher value on the rarer gems.

4. The difference from OT to OT for the 1st 3 rounds is generally not that significant past the top guy. In this Draft that is D'Brickashaw Ferguson and I don't see us having a prayer of getting him. The difference in LBs is more significant as the rounds go by and they get smaller and smaller.


Good response Hos, kind of funny though, how the Draft is full at Positions the Cowboys are in need of, except for Wide Receiver of course.

5. I still believe Rob Petitti will be fine. His run blocking grades were high. I think the coaching staff is quite happy with him even if the fan base is not. I see potential there and I hope we tap into it rather than sweep it aside just to start over.

The only comment I have is this quote right here. Since the Offseason going into 2004, I have been very leary of character guys and/or guys that didnt play well and the Staff was still high on. Parcells spent alot of his Press Conferences talking about how Delroy Stewart and Pete Hunter were very improved players. So right now, I am very suspect of players that have not performed well, that the coaching staff is very high on.

You made some good points and I am sure the Draft will go defensively, but doesn't mean it is the best thing for the Team ;) .

BTW, went home for break and I got to see some of the practices and Greenway and Lawson look like they are going to make some team proud. And you are right about D'brickershaw Ferguson, he has had his way with every Rush End he has went up against, but no shot at getting him, probably will end up with the Jets.

- Mike G.

[Bob Sacamano]

And you are right about D'brickershaw Ferguson, he has had his way with every Rush End he has went up against, but no shot at getting him, probably will end up with the Jets.

- Mike G.

Boise State Daryn Colledge has done pretty well for himself, could be a good option in the 2nd/3rd, perfect LT prospect, perfect

[Rush 2112]

What happens when you're protecting your rookie RT as much or near as much as Petiti was getting with a healthy Flo.

I take a OT in 3 or FA as depth/competition/insurance and finish the D first 2 rounds.

Until you have a SB caliber D nothing else matters.

Bryan Westbrook just broke off another 30 yarder on our D.

[Hostile]

Good response Hos, kind of funny though, how the Draft is full at Positions the Cowboys are in need of, except for Wide Receiver of course.You are speaking the truth there amigo. There are a couple of guys I like, but not enough to spend a day 1 pick unless they fall and are top value.

The only comment I have is this quote right here. Since the Offseason going into 2004, I have been very leary of character guys and/or guys that didnt play well and the Staff was still high on. Parcells spent alot of his Press Conferences talking about how Delroy Stewart and Pete Hunter were very improved players. So right now, I am very suspect of players that have not performed well, that the coaching staff is very high on.I would agree with you if this was equal across the board. He praised Bradie James, still with the team and playing very well now. He praised Al Johnson, okay, maybe not the best example, but he's still starting rather than waived. He praised Patrick Crayton, a possible key figure for a while.

Yes, some guys who got his attention are gone. But certainly not all of them. It isn't quite the madden curse yet.

You made some good points and I am sure the Draft will go defensively, but doesn't mean it is the best thing for the Team ;) .I believe it is if we want to reach the next level Mick. JMO though. If you disagree that's cool. I just don't see how some changes on the OL push us over the top. Even if we had Denver's OL I don't think it would be enough. Keep our offense as is and give me a defense like the Bears had this year as far as points allowed and suddenly we are cotenders for real. Therein lies the difference.

BTW, went home for break and I got to see some of the practices and Greenway and Lawson look like they are going to make some team proud. And you are right about D'brickershaw Ferguson, he has had his way with every Rush End he has went up against, but no shot at getting him, probably will end up with the Jets.

- Mike G.I think D'Brickashaw is the best pure football player in this Draft. I have seen very little of Greenway, and none of Lawson. I look forward to some web links of these guys in action. I'd be very happy if someone like them or Dumervil fell to us in the 2nd and we got your OT in the 1st.

[ddh33]

In a perfect world, I would love to have a bookend tackle to help solidify the OL for years. But young guys take time to develop - even the high draft choices. I've been saying it for a while, but I think Bill believes he has a good RT here already. I think Pettiti will be better next year, and that a veteran tackle will be brought in just in case he's not...

I do wish this draft was deeper at receiver. I don't see anyone who blows me away. I think they are all developmental type guys. With that in mind, I wouldn't be surprised if Dallas looked for someone who had a very high ceiling - like the Colston kid, or went the other way and got a guy who could help immediately on special teams in the punt return game.

I do believe that Dallas adds at least one more playmaker to the LB group. I expect that to happen early.

[DLCassidy]

The thing noone seems to speak of much is that what we do in FA will determine in large measure who we draft. We added a ton of youth to our D last year. Wouldn't it make some sense to add some experience to the mix?

How would you feel if on D we added the following FA's:

Akin Ayodele- OLB- nice bookend for Ware
Chris Hope- FS- 4 year starter- 96 tackles from a FS?
Grady Jackson- DT- massive NT to rotate with Fergy- Glover will be cut
Sam Cowart- ILB- the experience we need inside to pair with B James

Such a FA group could allow us theoretically to go OT, OG, WR (McNeil, Lutui, Baskett?) in rounds 1-3. It's the offense that's older as a group. That's where the youth needs to be added.

[Eskimo]

YES!

That's exactly right. All those people that want to grab a OT at #18 don't realize that a OT taken at that spot probably will not be any better than a year #2 Pettiti. And if that's the case I'm sticking with the less expensive guy.

The Cowboys shouldn't be that short sighted in their drafting strategy. I foresee Flo making the transition to RT in the next couple of years (he's also only got two years left on his current deal) and we are going to have a hole at LT. The past couple of drafts have been pretty weak at LT but there appear to be several prospects available this year. It would be a mistake to pass up such players when available because even scrubs like Pettigout get $6M/yr in FA.

[Clove]

The thing noone seems to speak of much is that what we do in FA will determine in large measure who we draft. We added a ton of youth to our D last year. Wouldn't it make some sense to add some experience to the mix?

How would you feel if on D we added the following FA's:

Akin Ayodele- OLB- nice bookend for Ware
Chris Hope- FS- 4 year starter- 96 tackles from a FS?
Grady Jackson- DT- massive NT to rotate with Fergy- Glover will be cut
Sam Cowart- ILB- the experience we need inside to pair with B James

Such a FA group could allow us theoretically to go OT, OG, WR (McNeil, Lutui, Baskett?) in rounds 1-3. It's the offense that's older as a group. That's where the youth needs to be added.I like everything but the OLB..I would rather get that in the draft.

[Bob Sacamano]

The thing noone seems to speak of much is that what we do in FA will determine in large measure who we draft. We added a ton of youth to our D last year. Wouldn't it make some sense to add some experience to the mix?

How would you feel if on D we added the following FA's:

Akin Ayodele- OLB- nice bookend for Ware
Chris Hope- FS- 4 year starter- 96 tackles from a FS?
Grady Jackson- DT- massive NT to rotate with Fergy- Glover will be cut
Sam Cowart- ILB- the experience we need inside to pair with B James

Such a FA group could allow us theoretically to go OT, OG, WR (McNeil, Lutui, Baskett?) in rounds 1-3. It's the offense that's older as a group. That's where the youth needs to be added.

I hate that free agency, Hope will demand big bucks, and we already have enough tied up in the secondary as it is, the only person that catches my eye is Akin Ayodele, but he's basically just a 2-down player, and struggles in coverage, while our LBs are asked to have many coverage responsibilities

[SilverStarCowboy]

We need PLAYMAKING Linebackers.

[Clove]

We need PLAYMAKING Linebackers.And their are plenty in the draft.. I agree.

[DWAREZ]

:signmast: What she said.


:signmast: What they said!!!

[chinch]

Do We Really Need Linebackers?
This is like asking a guy in a kyack.... do you really need that paddle?

[BigDFan5]

This is like asking a guy in a kyack.... do you really need that paddle?


:lmao2:

[baj1dallas]

I know the 3-4 is built on LB's and I don't mind drafting one at some point but I can't imagine a first day pick, not when we have glaring needs at OL, FS, WR. I think we can all agree that Ware and James are set. Assuming Dat retires, you still have Burnett, Fowler and Shanle for the other ILB spot. I think Burnett will be really good once healthy and I was impressed by fowler against the run and shanle against the pass. At the other OLB, I think Fujita will be resigned. A full training camp in the 3-4 will do him good- we also have Thornton coming back. I just don't see LB as the glaring need this offseason- not at the expense of the other positions already listed.

Shanle is done. He blows. Fowler is a STer at best and Fujita and Thornton are roleplayers. Dat will retire. That leaves the Boys one good linebacker short of what they need for the 3-4. I wouldn't call OL a glaring need to be honest...you just need to get those guys to play better. Likewise, at WR you want something for the future, but it's not something you need to make a run at the SB. Linebacker is.

[Manster68]

Shanle is done. He blows. Fowler is a STer at best and Fujita and Thornton are roleplayers. Dat will retire. That leaves the Boys one good linebacker short of what they need for the 3-4. I wouldn't call OL a glaring need to be honest...you just need to get those guys to play better. Likewise, at WR you want something for the future, but it's not something you need to make a run at the SB. Linebacker is.

I have no problem with that. What I noticed is that I saw too many times a linebacker make a tackle 3-10 yards down field when they need to be stuffing them at the LOS or backwards.

The linebackers are there in the draft.

Get the speedster Lawson, then get Kai Parham (from Virginia and Al Groh's system) in the second round.

[junk]

Shanle is done. He blows. Fowler is a STer at best and Fujita and Thornton are roleplayers. Dat will retire. That leaves the Boys one good linebacker short of what they need for the 3-4. I wouldn't call OL a glaring need to be honest...you just need to get those guys to play better. Likewise, at WR you want something for the future, but it's not something you need to make a run at the SB. Linebacker is.

Shanle is a good nickel backer. He was making plays there until he had to fill in full time. I just don't think he is a good full time linebacker. Great role player/depth/STer.

[rexrobinson]

I have seen very little of Greenway, and none of Lawson.


Here is some of what Lawson has done

from this post
http://dallascowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47363

Manny Lawson DL North Carolina State 6050 240 9 3/4 35 3/4

Weigh-In Notes: Cut and well built....not much room for a lot of growth.

Monday Practice Notes: The most athletic player along the defensive front here in Mobile. His drops in punt protection were VERY smooth and could give an indication as to his comfortability as possible linebacker. Explosive off the line. Does a great job getting across the face of lineman on all downblocks which leads him to make more than his share of plays in the running game. Uses his hands effectively. One point even showed his strength by blowing Marcus McNeill into the backfield on a bulrush.

Tuesday Practice Notes: Speed, speed, and more speed. Lawson registered two practice sacks using nothing by his explosiveness off the edge. No pass rush moves, just blew right past the left tackle. Another example would be when Lawson was not ready for one play, actually was still on a knee, the lineman came off the ball on a zone block, and Lawson got off the knee to stop the back five yards in the backfield Also uses his hands very well which is underrated on the defensive line side of things. The one knock for the day was that he allowed himself to be hooked at one point by the offensive tackle.

Wednesday Practice Notes: Quickly becoming apparent one of Lawson’s strengths is his recognition. By recognizing a screen and reacting to it, Lawson picked off a pass. Later in practice Lawson was not fooled by any boot actions. He recognizes blocks and scrapes hard down the line of scrimmage. What a lot of scouts will love is his hustle on and off the field. Manny continues runs on and off the field. Also displays a nasty streak to his game.

[JonJon]

Linebacker, Sminebacker..

What this team really needs is some good ol' fashioned Terrell Owens!

TO!
TO!
TO!
TO!
TO!

Seriously, I would love to get a true playmaker at LB on the first day and possibly bring in a veteran with skills that can school the youngins...Someone like Ray Lewis, who, doesn't necessarily like the 3-4, but can instruct the younger LBs how to make the best out of the position. But only at the right price. FS isn't as glaring a need as you think. If the LB/DE group can consistantly pressure the QB, the FS will look like a pro-bowler, rather it be Davis, Beriault, or whoever is the starter for the 2006-2007 season. I am not worried about sacks; yes, they kill drives, but I would much rather have constant pressure on the QB to force turnovers than sacks. Then, there is the O-Line, which I know should also be addressed with FA and the draft, then we can compete for the NFC crown..assuming we have T.O. of course....

;)

[SkinsandTerps]

Yes. All the Cowboys need is TO. What could be better.

haha. Although I see it as a possibility, I for one would love for it to happen, I am sure most Eagles fans would as well.

As far as LBs, I said yes last week.

[Big Country]

:signmast:What all of them said + 1.


:hammer: :signmast:

DING, DING, DING... WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

[Clove]

Here is some of what Lawson has done

from this post
http://dallascowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47363

Manny Lawson DL North Carolina State 6050 240 9 3/4 35 3/4

Weigh-In Notes: Cut and well built....not much room for a lot of growth.

Monday Practice Notes: The most athletic player along the defensive front here in Mobile. His drops in punt protection were VERY smooth and could give an indication as to his comfortability as possible linebacker. Explosive off the line. Does a great job getting across the face of lineman on all downblocks which leads him to make more than his share of plays in the running game. Uses his hands effectively. One point even showed his strength by blowing Marcus McNeill into the backfield on a bulrush.

Tuesday Practice Notes: Speed, speed, and more speed. Lawson registered two practice sacks using nothing by his explosiveness off the edge. No pass rush moves, just blew right past the left tackle. Another example would be when Lawson was not ready for one play, actually was still on a knee, the lineman came off the ball on a zone block, and Lawson got off the knee to stop the back five yards in the backfield Also uses his hands very well which is underrated on the defensive line side of things. The one knock for the day was that he allowed himself to be hooked at one point by the offensive tackle.

Wednesday Practice Notes: Quickly becoming apparent one of Lawson’s strengths is his recognition. By recognizing a screen and reacting to it, Lawson picked off a pass. Later in practice Lawson was not fooled by any boot actions. He recognizes blocks and scrapes hard down the line of scrimmage. What a lot of scouts will love is his hustle on and off the field. Manny continues runs on and off the field. Also displays a nasty streak to his game.You'd better get your sig patented.:D

[Hostile]

Here is some of what Lawson has done

from this post
http://dallascowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47363

Manny Lawson DL North Carolina State 6050 240 9 3/4 35 3/4

Weigh-In Notes: Cut and well built....not much room for a lot of growth.

Monday Practice Notes: The most athletic player along the defensive front here in Mobile. His drops in punt protection were VERY smooth and could give an indication as to his comfortability as possible linebacker. Explosive off the line. Does a great job getting across the face of lineman on all downblocks which leads him to make more than his share of plays in the running game. Uses his hands effectively. One point even showed his strength by blowing Marcus McNeill into the backfield on a bulrush.

Tuesday Practice Notes: Speed, speed, and more speed. Lawson registered two practice sacks using nothing by his explosiveness off the edge. No pass rush moves, just blew right past the left tackle. Another example would be when Lawson was not ready for one play, actually was still on a knee, the lineman came off the ball on a zone block, and Lawson got off the knee to stop the back five yards in the backfield Also uses his hands very well which is underrated on the defensive line side of things. The one knock for the day was that he allowed himself to be hooked at one point by the offensive tackle.

Wednesday Practice Notes: Quickly becoming apparent one of Lawson’s strengths is his recognition. By recognizing a screen and reacting to it, Lawson picked off a pass. Later in practice Lawson was not fooled by any boot actions. He recognizes blocks and scrapes hard down the line of scrimmage. What a lot of scouts will love is his hustle on and off the field. Manny continues runs on and off the field. Also displays a nasty streak to his game.Hey, thank you very much.

[mmurray21]

I actually dont think there are any problems with the defense that a better offensive line wouldn't fix. Run the ball better and see how much more "talented" the Cowboys linebackers will become.

They could draft nothing but O-linemen and I would be happy (assuming they picked good ones)