Linebackers, linebackers, linebackers

[Kaiser]

Where is the depth at QB, S, DT?

So if we had 5 QBs, 8 Safeties and 7 DT's (which we do) you would start a thread complaining about it?

 

[Sinister]

Drafting them instead of letting the UDFA class dictate it.

The Cowboys were doing this at DE for several years(letting the UDFA classes dictate) because the Cowboys believed (foolishly in my estimation) that anyone drafted would just be a backup to DeMarcus Ware and Spencer, it was dumb then and it is even dumber now since we have do not have the caliber of players playing Linebacker that would dictate that these players would solely be backup players in fact there is a need for players who can step in and contribute all across the defense.

And I'm sorry you're argument that we should just get rid of Lee and McClain since they get injured so often is mind-blowingly (is this a word) idiotic. Lee and McClain might be the two best players on the entire defense, but let's cut them and eat their contracts, sure buddy.

 

[hra8700]

I think you guys are looking at this all wrong.

McClain, Lee, Hitchens, and Brinkley are the only established veterans getting more than the minimum who are primarily here as inebackers.
Gachkar is mostly a special teamer but he'll be around and a backup at linebacker.
That's 5. Add Wilber (who could also move to DE) and Wilson, that's 7.

Rivers, Smith, Watson, Davis, Anderson, Lawrence, Wilson are all on minimum contracts. These are fringe players...they can all easily be cut.
Nzeocha might be IR'd this year.

More importantly, since a 4th and 7th round pick probably won't play much this year anyway, let's look at next year:

McClain and Wilber are FA's. Brinkley and Gachkar both have contracts that make it easy and likely that they will be cut...plus they're more backups than starters anyway.

So next year the only quality startable linebackers under contract are Lee and Hitchens. If Wilson becomes a startable player next year, we don't need to resign McClain. If he is a backup, then we can cut Brinkley.

Good teams draft towards the future. We don't Wilson or Nzeocha this year...but we will next year.

 

[Zekeats]

So if we had 5 QBs, 8 Safeties and 7 DT's (which we do) you would start a thread complaining about it?

8 safeties

 

[gmoney112]

It's pretty simple really.

Linebackers get hurt, especially ours. Our starting LB core, while one of the best in the league when healthy, tend to get banged up. At least Lee and McClain do.

We had Cameron Lawrence in a few spots last season, and other teams took advantage because offenses will exploit a defense's weakest link. And they took advantage of Lawrence more than a few times.

We now have enough depth to not only provide competition at the backup spots, but worst case scenario, a player more talented than Cameron Lawrence will be in on spot duty should the need arise.

Injuries are going to happen in your front 7, especially your LB core. You need guys that have some talent and can diagnose plays that can come in and play if need be.

This draft was about solidifying our front 7 as well as adding a CB to our secondary, since we're relatively thin at the position, and next year could see Carr and Claiborne jettison'ed. I like Moore, but he should be a 5th CB, not a starter.

We now have enough depth at LB that the position is solidified this season, even if injuries occur.

We added talented pass rushers to the DL, and added much needed depth at LB, thereby solidifying the front 7. Which, I think everyone can concur, was the priority for this offseason.

 

[Blast From The Past]

Yes there is such a thing as having too many linebackers, especially in a 4-3. Think about it, most 4-3 teams keep anywhere from 6-8 linebackers on the team. I think our scouts over value the position way too much. 3 linebackers are on the field in the base defense. Base defenses see the field about an average of 25% of the time. Most of the time defenses are in nickel and dime packages which call for 1-2 linebackers to be left in the game.
We now have McClain, Lee, Hitchens, Brinkley, Gachkar, Wilber, Rivers, Smith, Watson, Davis, Anderson, Lawrence, Wilson and Nzeocha. 14 players at a position where 75% of the time only 2 linebackers will be on the field. The picks could have been spent better elsewhere like interior defensive line, defensive backs or even running back. I would have went DB heavy considering that most of the time you will have 5-6 defensive backs in the game at the same time.
I just don't understand why we always seem to focus in on linebackers. The 3-4 I could understand, but a 4-3 it just doesn't add up to me.

Kick them tires. Don't let none of them get comfortable and put it on cruise control.

 

[Alexander]

And I'm sorry you're argument that we should just get rid of Lee and McClain since they get injured so often is mind-blowingly (is this a word) idiotic. Lee and McClain might be the two best players on the entire defense, but let's cut them and eat their contracts, sure buddy.

I never a thing about cutting them.

I stated simply, and it is almost irrefutable with the evidence, that their handicaps and lack of reliability are causing ripples in the roster composition. They are drafting and signing free agents to take out insurance. Looking at this roster right now, it is almost we did not resign McClain in the first place. It is almost like our draft process and even their board ran along the lines that he was not around.

I have no problem drafting for the future, but I think they went a little overboard there and did not apply that same philosophy evenly in regards to roster composition.

 

[Vinnie2u]

My concern was that we only added one CB to the Equation since seasons end.. and added 5 Lb's and Lee comes back.. Durant and Carter were the losses...

 

[Sinister]

I never a thing about cutting them.

I stated simply, and it is almost irrefutable with the evidence, that their handicaps and lack of reliability are causing ripples in the roster composition. They are drafting and signing free agents to take out insurance. Looking at this roster right now, it is almost we did not resign McClain in the first place. It is almost like our draft process and even their board ran along the lines that he was not around.

I have no problem drafting for the future, but I think they went a little overboard there and did not apply that same philosophy evenly in regards to roster composition.

Hey, I get that and I respect your criticism.

I just don't agree with it. I think too often in the past the Cowboys have reached for players and didn't follow their board. This year they let the draft come to them (their words not mine) and I can't criticize them for that. I don't mind that they went heavy at linebacker (although I don't really think they did).

A huge part of the draft is following your board and I think for the most part they did that if they went heavy in places where they didn't need to well so be it.

I have no idea about the Cowboys draft philosophy, but I know that they are not making the head scratching moves that they once made. They too often in the past did not have a solid direction. If someone took a player they liked they would panic and start trading and make an even bigger mess of things.

Of course maybe they just got lucky and next year it all falls apart, but for now I can't say that they made any glaring mistakes.

 

[Alexander]

I just don't agree with it. I think too often in the past the Cowboys have reached for players and didn't follow their board. This year they let the draft come to them (their words not mine) and I can't criticize them for that. I don't mind that they went heavy at linebacker (although I don't really think they did).

The stock response to criticism when needs are not addressed is "sticking to your board". Reaching for need is a cardinal sin, no question. But at least from where I see it, they did just that in the third round. Chaz Green might be a versatile player, but his injury history etc. make it tough for me to believe they had him ranked right there, within the top 100 players in this draft. What I do believe is he fit their "short board" which it appears they use and how they prioritized a swing tackle, he was the "last of the Mohicans".

 

[dallasdave]

You didn't hear? We're taking three of those LB'S and making them switch over to RB. So those numbers aren't really exact.

Multi-tasking I love it.

 

[Sinister]

The stock response to criticism when needs are not addressed is "sticking to your board". Reaching for need is a cardinal sin, no question. But at least from where I see it, they did just that in the third round. Chaz Green might be a versatile player, but his injury history etc. make it tough for me to believe they had him ranked right there, within the top 100 players in this draft. What I do believe is he fit their "short board" which it appears they use and how they prioritized a swing tackle, he was the "last of the Mohicans".

I just think that that is part of their philosophy during the draft, if they like a player in a certain round at a need position then they are going to take that player and sometimes they seem to have blinders on to some of the other falling talent.

I don't really agree with that philosophy, I would rather they were a little more flexible in this regard, but what I don't want to see is the team panicking if that player is not there, and trading up or down (basically flailing around the board) because they have to get that next player and they have done that in years past.

With Green like with most of the prospects it is a mostly a wait and see.