Cowboys Linebackers Look Good on the Surface, but...
by Dave Halprin on Jun 22, 2009 1:00 AM CDT
72 comments
Now that we're past the draft, the OTAs and the mini-camps, it's time to start looking forward toward training camp. This training camp should be an interesting one especially where the bottom of the roster is concerned. When the Cowboys decided to draft 12 players back in April, that was a clear indication they weren't content with the players and the competition for backup positions and special teams candidates. So instead of trading out of their picks, they stayed put, even adding a draft pick in the process.
Looking at the roster, there probably will be few true, starting-position battles going on. Who will start opposite Roy Williams? Will Mike Jenkins or Orlando Scandrick be the guy opposite Terence Newman? And possibly even a battle at guard with Kyle Kosier and Montrae Holland.
But there's one position that has to be of some concern to the organization. It's not a problem with the starters, but the backups across the board.
I'm talking about the linebacker position, both inside and outside. Everybody knows the paramount importance of linebackers in a 3-4 defense. They're the playmakers, they're the guys who set the tone. On the surface, it looks good for Dallas in 2009. DeMarcus Ware is simply one of the best defensive players in the NFL. No worries there. Opposite him will be Anthony Spencer. Spencer has shown flashes of playmaking ability in his time but you have to be a little worried about injuries and his elevation to full-time starter. Still, I have confidence that Spencer will produce. In the middle, Bradie James is solid, a team-leader and someone you can depend on to do the job. Keith Brooking may not be the same player he was three or four years ago, but even taking that into account he should be serviceable. So the starting four should be a plus for the team, especially with the contributions of Ware.
But what do we have behind those starters? A lot of wash-outs and a handful of fresh-faced college players looking to make their way in the league. Oh yeah, every one of those rookies is making some kind of transition to a new position, or at least some new responsibilities.
The lead candidate for the nickel LB to replace Brooking in passing situations is Bobby Carpenter. I won't waste anybody's time recounting his history with the Cowboys except to say he's yet to show he can be a semi-regular contributor. He at least knows the defense by now but experience alone won't get it done. Even if he comes out of San Antonio with the job, there's no guarantee he will be any better than he has been so far in his career. The other two main candidates, Jason Williams and Stephen Hodge, are both rookies. Hodge was a safety/linebacker hybrid in college and Williams is looking at a new role that will be less about attacking and more about coverage and playing in space. It's entirely possible one, or both, of those players will stand-out in training camp and prove to be a real gem, but the odds are not overwhelming in our favor. It can take time for college players to adjust, so they might not be ready yet for the responsibilities.
On the outside, we have even less experience behind the starters. With Greg Ellis' release (which I agreed with), the Cowboys really are counting on college DE's Brandon WIlliams and Victor Butler to be ready to go should they be needed. Again, rookies learning a new position/responsibility in a new defense can be a scary proposition. We could be just one injury away from playing one of these guys regularly.
Other candidates for the backup spots include guys like Matt Stewart, Justin Rogers and Steve Octavien. There's not much there to hang your hat on.
So training camp is going to be very interesting. We'll get to see the rookies put through their paces and we'll see if Bobby Carpenter can once again turn in a good training camp, but translate that to actual games in 2009.
Wade Phillips knows, as does any 3-4 defensive coordinator, how valuable and important linebackers are to the success of their defense. The Cowboys have a quality unit of starters, but the backups are a risky deal at this point.
I'll be watching this area at training camp very closely. Let's pray that some of the kids "get it" and can produce. Either that, or pray for no injuries.
0 recs |
72 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I'll pray for both
it was weird, I... I mean you probably didn't hear about it because I went under the name of Mike Honcho. But I just wanted you to know that. If you can hear me, if it got into your brain somehow. That I spread my buttcheeks as Mike Honcho.
by AirforceBat on Jun 22, 2009 1:23 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it's scary having 4 rookies
and Barbie as our primary backups at LB. If one of our starters goes down for any length of time, our defense could be in trouble.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 22, 2009 6:30 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Its a Big Gamble...
But I trust Wade’s instinct on Defense…he must be seeing something out of the rookies that gave them the confidence to release Ellis…i would also be looking at the waiver line towards the end of training camp…i am sure we would look at some experiences LB’s getting cut by other teams…
by thejanusman on Jun 22, 2009 7:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't trust this coaching staffs ability to judge talent.
Choice, Not playing
Felix, not playing enough
Barber in the starting roll
Brad Jhonson as a backup
Cory Proctor, on the team at all.
by Musiccitynorm on Jun 22, 2009 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some of those things are the coaching staff's fault...
…and some of them are the personnel guys’ faults. You can’t blame everybody for everything. Give unto Jerry that which is Jerry’s (backup QB, for instance), and give unto Wade that which is Wade’s.
And I agree with Janus that Wade’s judgment on defense probably deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 22, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Brad Johnson
was Garret’s call.
by lildrummerboy on Jun 22, 2009 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is not a sole
in football that thought Barber would have a hard time handling the load as a full time starter last year, you can’t put that one on the coaches
First to six!!!
by sduncan24 on Jun 22, 2009 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
I think it was Dion Sanders who said he would take a beating as a starter and wear down.
I think he was a big question going in as a starter.
by Musiccitynorm on Jun 22, 2009 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is wearing down and there is injured. He was injured.
Runnig backs dont wear down by game7.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barber did not wear down, his foot was stepped on in the seahawk game and it resulted
in a dislocated toe. Barber tried to play through the injury and ended up developing a calf strain, which pretty much left him hampered for the remainder of the season.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
by cowboy78 on Jun 22, 2009 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Johnson
was a totally incomprehensible and indefensible decision by the part of our top brass. It was painfully obvious during the entire preseason he couldn’t get it done. Any of us fans could scout him and come up with that conclusion. Even crazier—AIkman spoke postively about Johnson during last year’s preseason. That blew me away and left me scratching my head. That “good decision maker” rhetoric seemed ill fated. And it was.
But I think this doubt should be balanced with the fact that they had a pretty good draft last season.
by Eagles suck on Jun 22, 2009 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was fine with him until I realized he could no longer reach the line of scrimmage with a pass.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barber is fine as the starter
He got hurt last year. So did a lot of our players. It happens.
by DoomsdayD75 on Jun 22, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Especially Proctor. He’s too slow to finesse and too weak to take a bull-rush.
by GhostofGaryHogeboom on Jun 22, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
proctor is gone soon
they are just going to have to put someone in there that can anchor against Bunkley or Patterson.
Proctor is unable.
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
-Winston Churchill
by HudBaby on Jun 22, 2009 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'd like to point out
those guys are all on the offensive side of the ball. Garrett deserves some legitimate blame for underutilizing these guys. Felix especially. And overutilizing Barber, considering we had no idea if he’d be able to handle a full load. While I want Proctor gone as much as the next guy…apparently, noone yet has been good enough to overtake him, which is utterly ridiciulous but o well.
Wade wasn’t too much better – Henry needed to get hurt for him to finally give jenkins some real time. ANd Jenkins to me looked drastically better than Henry out there. But we’ve seen multiple attempts at moving guys around to better the team, which i like (Spears to NT, Roy WIlliams to linebacker, the 46 D, etc).
by foyesboys on Jun 22, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LB battles will be interesting but...
I am most intrigued by Jenkins vs. Scandrick. Is there ANY chance that both Jenkins and Scandrick beat out Newman, and Newman ends up being the 3rd corner? Is it axiomatic that Newman is the starter despite what happens in training camp? With Newman’s inability to stay healthy, and the young CBs ready to step up, is there a downside with making Newman the 3rd CB (who would end up playing 40-50 snaps a game anyway)? If there isn’t much difference in talent between the 3 (I am not enough of an expert to guage, but after watching some of last night’s Boys/Gints replay, it seemed all 3 CBs were indistinguishable), then why not make the guy who is ostensibly more fragile the 3rd CB? This is a young man’s game, and a young man’s position. I’d be interested to see KC Joyner’s metrics on Newman, and see if there’s any statistical validity to making Newman the 3rd CB.
by egtuna on Jun 22, 2009 8:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
no, there is no chance
You don’t pay Newman that kind of money and not start him, he’s a top 10 CB in the league when healthy and much better than both Jenkins and Scandrick right now.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 22, 2009 9:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
despite what coaches say about training camps
evaluating everyone, I think newman’s contract forces him to start
by MdFan24 on Jun 22, 2009 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont know,
I believe big contract keeps you on the team longer. I believe big money buys you more opportunitys. I believe big money makes one believe you may be a little better than you really are but I dont believe it makes you a starter.
Newman will start even if he is out played a little because coaches prefer the known to the unknown. Newman is a known quantity who is very good. However, it seems like it would put a little less wear and tear on him and might extend his career if we could lessen his reps this year or next by 40%. I hope we have 3 starters by the end of TC.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Derrick Brooks anyone?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/06/21/brooks/index.html?bcnn=yes
not sure where he’d play but this is a guy who’d be a good mentor for our young guys and may still have some gas in the tank.
by Scoobay on Jun 22, 2009 9:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
he's not big enough to play OLB in a 3-4
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 22, 2009 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does his body and game fit our scheme. I would think he could cover but he has lost a step.
He doesnt seem big enough for running downs in the 3-4.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way, in my opinion
It has been shown time and time again in the NFL— you cannot be a leader on a team unless you can still contribute on the field. We’ve seen it with Bryan Cox, we’ve seen it with Hugh Douglas and Jeremiah Trotter, and last year we saw it in our own backyard to a lesser extent with Zach Thomas. The other players are only going to listen to you and respect what you have to say if you are able to back it up during games. It’s the same reason that injured players struggle to remain leaders on their teams and often have to fade into the background a bit.
Not sure if Derrick Brooks is still capable of contributing on the field at a high level, but I have a high level of confidence in the efficiency of the NFL market, and I believe that if he has something left in the tank, someone will sign him. I certainly don’t think it will be us, since we play a 3-4 and Brooks is ill-suited for that scheme.
(On a side note: pretty garbage effort by King this week, even by his standards)
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 22, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if that was the objective....
it would have been easier to try and hang onto Zach Thomas for another year then it would to bring in the same type of talent at same point in career and try and make it work…and least we had a known commodity in ZT
by McLovin9 on Jun 22, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say it's about time that this team finally starts building from within.
I thought the Ellis release was a huge step in that direction. We spent a couple of years grooming Spencer, and now we let him step in and show why we drafted him. This is the model for which all of the consistently good teams of this decade (PIT, NE, IND, etc.) stay young and stay good. I think at this point bringing in another veteran just takes a step back in the wrong direction.
by Mandmeisterx on Jun 22, 2009 10:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
If we do bring in a Vet. It should be done a week before the season starts when you know what you have isnt enough. I think thats the big reason he hasnt been picked up. Stunt the growth and limit the reps of the youth. I really do feel he will be playing come Sept somewhere.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah why bring a Vet? we had Ellis on the roster, its counterintuitive, unless
after TC, coaches realize that a. rookies are not good enough or b. injuries force us to scour the waver wire.
by dcfanz on Jun 22, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL, thats what I said.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe
Pitt and NE have had plenty of success bringing in veterans to fill holes.
by foyesboys on Jun 22, 2009 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a difference between
having a hole, and having a first round draft pick that you’ve groomed for two years waiting in the wings take a back seat to a veteran.
by Mandmeisterx on Jun 23, 2009 5:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually New England does both...
They routinely bring in vets every year who contribute to their team.
Demarcus Ware: The Beast of the East.
The L.A. Lakers are 2009 NBA Champions!
by gee-roj on Jun 23, 2009 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again,
I think there’s a huge difference between bringing someone in out of neccessity and bringing a guy in and stunting the growth of up and coming players, especially ones that you have a high pick invested in. For instance, they never made a serious attempt at running with Seau or Harrison again because they had young guys that they thought could get the job done. The thing that makes you or breaks you is timing. It’s about knowing when to make these moves. That’s why I think you see a lot of those guys get 1-3 year contracts, so that they can keep the seat warm for the young guys and then be sent packing without enduring the hassle.
by Mandmeisterx on Jun 23, 2009 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Worried about backups???
Who are the backups for Pitts, NE, NYG, or Philthy?
The Steelers have but a single backup at ILB. Some scrub named Keyaron Fox. Their OLB backups are a second year guy with no tackles in 4 appearances (Bruce Davis) and a 5th year guy that had 10 total tackles last year (Frazier).
How ’bout the Jints? A weak starting crew is backed up by Danny Clark, Bryan Kehl, Chase Blackburn, and Zak DeOssie. Oooh, I want me some of that (sarcasm alert).
Philthy? No name, 3rd year scrubs Akeem Jordan and Stewart Bradley are first-time starters with 4th year Gocong (who had only 59 tackles last year) the senior member. The backups? Former starter Gaither is the only experienced guy with a whole series of 1st and 2nd year nobodies.
The Patsies? Behind the aging LB corps (Bruschi is 2 years older than Brookings, Thomas is 31), a 2nd year guy (Mayo) and a scrub (Pierre Woods) they’ve got a big bunch of lower draft picks and UDFAs. Banta-Cain you ask? 10 tackles last year.
It would be easy to go through every roster and say the same thing. What makes the ’Boys stronger than most (if not all) is they have a group of athletes competing for playing time, but not really needing them to start.
Carpenter is an athlete and is capable of playing well at both ILB and OLB. Sure, he hasn’t beat out the starters and as a former #1 you would say that he’s been disappointing so far, but that doesn’t mean he can’t play. His only start was quite impressive.
Stewart and Rogers have experience and some talent and could sub in a pinch.
But I really like the rookies. The Williams brothers and Butler look like real keepers. All are extremely athletic, were conference leaders in sacks/tackles, and are very hard workers. All the scouting reports repeated the words “productive” and “leader”.
We may very well have the best set of LBs in the league.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jun 22, 2009 11:41 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
A big nose tackle
would sure help our linebackers out.
I agree with fighter, the backups are talanted and will do fine.
Remember when Dat went down? If I remember right his backup was Bradie James. Bradie was catching the same negetive stuff Bobby catches now. I dont know if it will turn out the same but, one can hope.
by Musiccitynorm on Jun 22, 2009 1:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not true
James was never criticized as not being physical or tough.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 22, 2009 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Au contraire
He was labled a big bust until he replaced Nguyen.
Last year, at this time, the same was said of Burnett.
Look, I’m not a Carpenter apologist. He should have made more of a contribution. There should have been no need to bring in Brookings. But there are extenuating circumstances (position changes, acknowledged coaching mistakes not giving him enough opportunities).
He has had, by all accounts, a great offseason. He is going to be given the opportunity. I honestly believe that the nickel is perfect for him. It’s more about straight line speed and reaction (aka finesse) than the power required in run defense.
And as someone stated above, there is not going to be another option added, for better or worse. I say give the guy a chance and wish him well…not bemoan the fact that we don’t have a Pro Bowl alternative.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jun 22, 2009 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say he wasn't labeled as a bust
I said he was never criticized for not being tough and physical…like Barbie is.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 22, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apples and oranges. They both wrote off by many on here.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the difference is one was justified, the other one wasn't
James had trouble learning the scheme, but once he did he was fine. Barbie, on the other hand, will always remain a bust with us because he isn’t physical or tough enough to be an every down ILB.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 22, 2009 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
IThe point I was making has been lost.
Terry, I didnt think the conversation was about your personal opinion of James vs Barbie, but that of a more generalized opinion. The point is many people have been labeled a bust early in their careers by wannabe GMs(me included) b. James had(or was on the fast tack to getting) the label of bust until he broke out. I do agree that Barbie doent look physical the last couple of years but i didnt see that his 1st year or 2. Is he hurt, lost, or lost his taste for hitting. i dont know but Fighter said it best. he looks to have been given the keys to play on passing downs. Williams at best probably wont be ready till much later in the year.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 22, 2009 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Leonard Davis was a bust before we moved him to his natural position
Bobby has not had a chance at his normal position, he will probably be released next year then show us he did have something to give. He needs to have some stability and stop being moved around. I have seen so much from him in interviews that I believe this is a smart guy and could make some plays.
by rioplayer7 on Jun 23, 2009 12:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barbie is a 4-3 OLB
He certainly has no business playing inside in a 3-4 defense. When released eventually, he might become a decent LB on a 4-3 team.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 23, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude
You’re as fanatical about hating on Barbie as you are an apologist for Romo.
Carpenter has talent. Has he had trouble adjusting to the 3-4, position changes, coaches…sure. But that doesn’t mean he can’t do it.
Why don’t we let training camp make the final decision and then we talk about whether or not he did?
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jun 23, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not true at all
I don’t hate Barbie, I just realize he doesn’t have the toughness or physicality to play inside in a 3-4. Those are the facts and they will never change. Carp has had 3 TCs and several pre season games to prove otherwise so it’s not going to happen
He certainly has talent, but it takes far more than talent to play that particular position in the NFL.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 23, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with Terry he does not fit our team
But I really like how intelligent he is and I think he will be a good player somewhere
by rioplayer7 on Jun 24, 2009 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
for his sake
I hope he ends up with a 4-3 team while he is still in his prime, I think at that position he could be a good player since his DL will protect him and he can use his speed to make plays.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jun 24, 2009 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you in general, Fighter...
…and I think that often we have so much time on these message boards to devote scrutiny to even the smallest holes that we end up asking for a Pro Bowler at every position, even backups. Some depth is certainly good, but quality depth at every position is just not possible in today’s NFL. You have to pick where you devote your resources.
Where I disagree slightly is that our scheme is built around our LBs, and it’s one of the strengths of our team. I don’t think you can say that for New England or Philadelphia, where the LBs are not the top unit on defense and are not asked to lead the way in winning games.
Pittsburgh is probably the best point of comparison, since their 3-4 scheme lives and dies by its LBs, just as ours does. I’d say that Pittsburgh can be a bit more comfortable about their lack of depth because they start 4 studs every Sunday. For us, we have a bit of a weak spot at one ILB spot (Brookings), so I do think it’s valid to talk about depth and express concern. That said, we’ve got Carpenter and a number of rookies in there are safety options. I don’t know if you can ask for much more that at this point. If Carpenter doesn’t get it done this season, that’s on him, but I don’t think you can ask for many more personnel, draft pick, and financial resources to be devoted to LB.
But I’d argue that Ste
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 22, 2009 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lawrence Timmons (Pitt) vs. Keith Brookings (Atl)
Timmons had 65 tackles (75 career) vs. Brookings at 102 tackles (1127 career).
While Timmons is much younger and on the upside, it can hardly be said that Timmons is a stud comparatively.
I’ll recind the scrub label for Bradley, but Philthy’s problems last year were at the LB position and they hardly improved this offseason.
Lastly, with the uncertainty and long-term need at ILB, we used our 1st draft pick on the guy we wanted…so at least they addressed the need. Further, J Williams looks to be the most athletic LB on our roster, has played LB his entire career (albeit at MLB & OLB in the 4-3), and is a high-character guy.
As for the OLB position, we have two “Wade guys” in Rogers and Stewart to hold down the backup position until the rooks are ready. I really like the potential of Butler and B Williams but will concede that some drop in production would occur. But you could say that about every team.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jun 22, 2009 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fighter, we're on totally different pages on Timmons/Brooking
I’m sorry, but Timmons is a first round draft pick from 2007 who is poised to become a star in that system. He is improving every year. Brooking is at the end of his career, and is RAPIDLY getting worse with each coming season.
I feel very comfortable saying Timmons is leagues better than Brooking. Tackles are a very low worth stat— I’d be much more interested in where those tackles were made, and how many were within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, and how many were Brooking making tackles further downfield because he can no longer shoot gaps or keep up with RBs like he once could.
I watched Brooking last year, he is not close to Timmons. I hope he has a good season, but it’s apples and oranges here.
And are you really counting Stewart as being capable of “holding down” anything? Do we think he has even a shot of making the team??
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 22, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe, maybe not
I’m the last guy you’ll ever see thinking that stats are all that telling (lies, damn lies, and stats).
I’m not comparing Timmons to Brookings, per se. I was simply stating that Timmons can hardly be considered a stud right now. And your point that, “well, they don’t need backups ’cause they have four studs” is really moot. Okay, we can say the very same thing.
Except that we can say that we have some young talent that very well could put us in a great position, especially if Carpenter can come through. He is, after all, a 1st Rounder as well.
I’m just a little tired of the logic that everyone else’s rookies are gonna be studs, but ours suck (oversimplification) a defeatist argument.
And no, long term, Stewart is not the solution. But for a game or two until the rookies are ready to get thrown in the fire, or at least to substitute mid-game…yes, he and/or Rogers and/or Carpenter, etc. We’re not void of backup talent.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jun 22, 2009 8:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley?
Steward Bradley is definitely no scrub. He was their leading tackler last year, and (I’ll say it at the risk of angering Bradie James fanatics) he’s probably the best MLB in the division. He is a Pro Bowl caliber player.
Also, Jerrod Mayo was the Defensive ROY last year, and all indications are, he’s only going to get better.
Otherwise, a pretty fair analysis.
by Mandmeisterx on Jun 22, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Bradie is significantly better at this given role in his defense
However, and it pains me to say it— Bradley is an excellent 4-3 MLB.
On the plus side, the guy spent the offseason intering at Vogue Magazine. So there’s that.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 22, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
lmao
Bradley is #3 at best in the East. BJ and Fletcher can fight it out for #1.
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
-Winston Churchill
by HudBaby on Jun 22, 2009 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
???
Antonio Pierce is the best 4-3 MLB in the NFC East, and it’s not that close. London Fletcher piles up tackles and I admire him as a player but he’s nowhere near the difference maker Pierce is.
Pierce vs. Bradie would be a difficult comparison due to their differing systems, but Pierce might win out there too.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 22, 2009 11:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Pierce may have been the best two years ago,
but I definitely think he’s lost a step. He didn’t look like the same player to me last year.
by Mandmeisterx on Jun 23, 2009 5:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, from what Ive read about him he has fallin a good bit.
Im willing to bet Bradley will be the best by the end of this year. He is a young good looking player. Eagle fans sure love him.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the goverment from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
by squidlo97 on Jun 23, 2009 8:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmmm
I attributed that to injuries. But maybe you’re right and it’s more than that. A player’s prime can pass quickly in this league. I’d agree that two years ago he was unquestionably top of the heap in the division.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 23, 2009 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The rookies can probably be counted on for somethings, but not for others
I have no doubt that a number of our rookie LBs will be able to contribute to our pass rush almost from Day 1. We will be able to plug them in in passing situations and tell them to get after the QB, and they’ll be able to do that, because it’s a skill that translates fairly well from college.
But I think, as has been expressed above, that it will be a much longer timeline to get them to the point where they’re every-down contributors, or where they’re taking on the type of responsibility that Kevin Burnett had in the nickel.
For those types of assignments, I think backup duty is going to fall on Carpenter, for better or for worse.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jun 22, 2009 1:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That is my biggest worry as well.
I continue to hope we will see a lot of those 1 LB sets on the nickel and dime with a DB playing that other inside spot. Hopefully someone can play it more effectively than Henry.
by Mandmeisterx on Jun 22, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carpenter is ideal for the Nickel...
I feel more comfortable with him on passing downs than on run plays. Its my hunch that he will do just fine if put in on 3rd and obvious passing downs.
by thejanusman on Jun 22, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's where Wade's expertise in this pressure-filled scheme will be tested
Big Time.
It’s a make or break year for the Son of Bum in more ways than one this season.
Celebrity or Imposter?
YOU Decide...
http://www.xanga.com/metaltometal/689036052/celebrity-or-imposter/
by silverblue5 on Jun 22, 2009 4:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ware rated #2 most irreplaceable player in the NFL by Football Outsiders:
Football Outsiders made a list of the top 10 most irreplaceable players in the NFL, pointing out that a guy who never started a college game filled in ably for the 2007 MVP. Only Peyton Manning was considered more indispensable than our own DeMarcus Ware, and they give him some nice love:
We’ve compiled a list of the 10 most irreplaceable players in the game, taking into account their performance on the field (using our statistics), the scheme they play in, and the depth chart around them.
2. DeMarcus Ware, ROLB, Cowboys
Some pass-rushers aren’t effective against the run — take Dwight Freeney, who often vacates his gap to try to rush around the offensive tackle to the passer. Ware’s not like that. When it comes to stopping the run, the only gap against which the Cowboys were in the top 10 a year ago was left tackle, which is Ware’s responsibility. The Cowboys’ league-high Adjusted Sack Rate (which adjusts cumulative sack totals for the number of passes attempted and quality of offense), of course, owes much to the impact Ware has. He’s the best two-way defender in the game.
by Baked Potato Soup on Jun 22, 2009 7:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
didn't know
he was so good against the run
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
-Winston Churchill
by HudBaby on Jun 22, 2009 10:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
id agree with that
If Ware goes down, we’re gonna need to score 25+ppg to win. Unless spencer/a couple rookies step up. This team seems to rely so much on him.
Harrison over Ware for MVP was an absolute joke. I’m still mad about that
by foyesboys on Jun 23, 2009 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
im more worried about our backup linemen (and some of our starters)
than i am about our linebackers…. we have the secondary to stack the line and run blitz more than occasionally, esp if sensi can cover like we have heard
by CowboysFan4Life on Jun 22, 2009 9:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Finally a post that realizes the only thing that matters
Again, rookies learning a new position/responsibility in a new defense can be a scary proposition. We could be just one injury away from playing one of these guys regularly.
Our strength really is going to be our defense this year, and I am not very confident that our depth in almost any position besides rb. We are really young and weak in our back up positions and all it will take in pretty much any position is one injury and we are pretty much screwed.
by rioplayer7 on Jun 23, 2009 12:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That's life in the Salary Cap era
Look at every other team. Seriously, every one. There is not a single team that can boast of depth accross every position. The salary cap simply won’t allow it.
Rookies at backups allow you to pay your superstars. If you don’t have any stars at the skill positions, then you can load up your team with midrange vets galore and you’ll be Washington.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jun 23, 2009 8:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you don’t have any stars at the skill positions, then you can load up your team with midrange vets galore and you’ll be Washington
Classic
by Mandmeisterx on Jun 23, 2009 8:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I got faith in the youth
after seeing Bradie getting pressure form the middle last year, i want to see jason williams with his speed do the same, i think he can be a force in the not so distant future. I also want to see how the rookie OLBs workout
by FearTheStar on Jun 23, 2009 3:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Blogging The Boys
Related FanShots on Blogging The Boys
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
