Middle Linebacker David Harris

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,259
Reaction score
1,230
I am for making a serious offer to David Harris of the Jets. I don't know him well but his size and stats are very good. And it would open up more possibilities on draft day. We would probably have to trade up in the first round to get what we need there. And I would still draft another ML and Nose.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I am for making a serious offer to David Harris of the Jets. I don't know him well but his size and stats are very good. And it would open up more possibilities on draft day. We would probably have to trade up in the first round to get what we need there. And I would still draft another ML and Nose.

Harris has been a decent three down ILB for the Jets since entering the league in 2007. He´s already 31 years old though and it remains to be seen how much he´ll be asking for as he averaged $9 million per year over his last contract.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...-underrated-player-rex-ryan-article-1.1874128

"Pro Football Focus ranked Harris 18th out of 55 inside linebackers in a 3-4 base scheme last year. He has started every game (86) since Ryan took over five years ago and been terrific in run support.

Harris, however, has struggled in pass coverage. Quarterbacks had a 119.2 passer rating throwing into Harris' coverage last season. Only six linebackers allowed a worse rating."

It would appear Harris is a 2 down player at this juncture. If the Packers were to go that route Spikes might be the cheaper option.

Harris has been the anchor of the Jets defense; even with the changing of the guard you'd think they'd want to keep him.

With the age and coverage limitations he won't touch another big contract.

While it would be nice to have a Spikes or Harris for situational play...short yardage, goal line, defending Peterson and Forte, bad weather games played on the ground...the Packers have too many 2-down and situational players in the front 7 as it is.

A 3-down ILB who can lead (or grow into leadership) is the higher priority.
 
OP
OP
gopkrs

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,259
Reaction score
1,230
Not important if The Pack have two down situational players if they aren't excellent on the 2 downs they play. Mathews plays well in the middle but they don't want to leave him there. All the others constantly miss the running hole and put too little pressure on the passer. Harris had 6 sacks last year and led his team in tackles. 31 by itself is not scary to me. Let the docs look at that one.
 

Ace

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
94
Location
Milwaukee
Not important if The Pack have two down situational players if they aren't excellent on the 2 downs they play. Mathews plays well in the middle but they don't want to leave him there. All the others constantly miss the running hole and put too little pressure on the passer. Harris had 6 sacks last year and led his team in tackles. 31 by itself is not scary to me. Let the docs look at that one.

So if they play great for 2 downs but then give up an 80 yd TD on the 3rd down it's ok because they were great on downs 1 and 2? I guess I don't follow that logic.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
31,732
Reaction score
7,666
Location
Madison, WI
Harris, however, has struggled in pass coverage. Quarterbacks had a 119.2 passer rating throwing into Harris' coverage last season. Only six linebackers allowed a worse rating."

Hawk and Jones already "excel" at that aspect of their respective games, we don't need more LB's that can't cover
 
OP
OP
gopkrs

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,259
Reaction score
1,230
I was only saying that if he is a great upgrade for a 2 down player...we could use him. We have several tweeneers that will do better in coverage than any linebacker. Jones does not excel at anything.
 

Ace

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
94
Location
Milwaukee
I was only saying that if he is a great upgrade for a 2 down player...we could use him. We have several tweeneers that will do better in coverage than any linebacker. Jones does not excel at anything.

Understatement of the century
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
12,752
Reaction score
2,683
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
I was only saying that if he is a great upgrade for a 2 down player...we could use him. We have several tweeneers that will do better in coverage than any linebacker. Jones does not excel at anything.
You forgot about bonehead penalties.
 

profile_removed

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
608
Reaction score
20
The kid I wish we had was Jamie Collins of the Pats. This kid can probably play all 4 positions and start for us at 3. (He's no Clay). He's good in coverage and rushing. I believe he's an OLB for the Pats, but I think his size and ability translates to ILB very well.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
The kid I wish we had was Jamie Collins of the Pats. This kid probably play all 4 positions and start for us at 3. (He's no Clay). He's good in coverage and rushing. I believe he's an OLB for the Pats, but I think his size and ability translates to ILB very well.
Sure. How about Levy who played inside and outside last season? And if the Packers had Brown and Bradham from the Bills, two guys nobody seems to know about, we'd be a legit favorite for the NFC. Then again, if pigs had wings they'd fly.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I was only saying that if he is a great upgrade for a 2 down player...we could use him. We have several tweeneers that will do better in coverage than any linebacker. Jones does not excel at anything.

We don't need another guy at ILB not being able to cover RBs and TEs. Barrington most likely is a two down player so we have to bring in a guy capable of being the lone LB in the dime package.
 

Vrill

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Messages
1,803
Reaction score
137
We don't need another guy at ILB not being able to cover RBs and TEs. Barrington most likely is a two down player so we have to bring in a guy capable of being the lone LB in the dime package.

Paul Dawson fits that bill nicely.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Paul Dawson fits that bill nicely.

The things you still haven´t addressed about Dawson is that most experts don´t see him as a great fit in a 3-4 and teams will have major issues with his character.
 
OP
OP
gopkrs

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,259
Reaction score
1,230
We don't need another guy at ILB not being able to cover RBs and TEs. Barrington most likely is a two down player so we have to bring in a guy capable of being the lone LB in the dime package.
Well, maybe we can agree to disagree. I am sometimes a traditionalist and I think the presence of a hitter at ML is very important on 1st and 2nd downs. He sets the tone for the entire D. Barrington is the best we seem to have (except Mathews) and he does not fill the position as I would like. He misses the hole too much and does not seem to be able to figure out what is coming at him. Actually, I blame some of that on the coaches not being able to teach how to play the position. I see ML as a position that makes a statement for your D. Every team should try their damndest to have a great one.
 

Ace

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
94
Location
Milwaukee
Well, maybe we can agree to disagree. I am sometimes a traditionalist and I think the presence of a hitter at ML is very important on 1st and 2nd downs. He sets the tone for the entire D. Barrington is the best we seem to have (except Mathews) and he does not fill the position as I would like. He misses the hole too much and does not seem to be able to figure out what is coming at him. Actually, I blame some of that on the coaches not being able to teach how to play the position. I see ML as a position that makes a statement for your D. Every team should try their damndest to have a great one.

Then we draft Perryman and save the free agent money. If we're spending the $ in free agency I want a guy for all 3 downs
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Well, maybe we can agree to disagree. I am sometimes a traditionalist and I think the presence of a hitter at ML is very important on 1st and 2nd downs. He sets the tone for the entire D. Barrington is the best we seem to have (except Mathews) and he does not fill the position as I would like. He misses the hole too much and does not seem to be able to figure out what is coming at him. Actually, I blame some of that on the coaches not being able to teach how to play the position. I see ML as a position that makes a statement for your D. Every team should try their damndest to have a great one.

The problem with having a traditional ILB is that those guys have to cover RBs and TEs in today's game.

I'm convinced that if the Packers partner Barrington with Perryman we will enjoy a lot of jarring hits next season but on the other hand they'll drive us crazy in coverage.

I'm OK with Barrington getting a chance to start but don't like him to be the dime backer. The Packers have to bring in someone being able to play all three downs.
 
OP
OP
gopkrs

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,259
Reaction score
1,230
I'm not sure what is wrong with replacing the ML with a safety type player on passing downs or for that matter allow the ML stud to blitz. You should not be putting the ML one on one on a back either way though he could look out for a screen.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I'm not sure what is wrong with replacing the ML with a safety type player on passing downs or for that matter allow the ML stud to blitz. You should not be putting the ML one on one on a back either way though he could look out for a screen.
You've described a dime coverage variation.

There are too many tweener run/pass downs to not have a ILB who can take on runners and get off OLmen at the second level or drop in coverage depending on the play call. In 2-high safety, you need an ILB who can drop and cover the short-to-intermediate middle zone.

While there are SS/LB hybrid types like Cameron, they're hard to find.

Besides, Cameron can do what he does because he's playing next to Bobby Wagner, an exceptional ILB who can play downhill or use his 4.5 speed in coverage.

In any case, the Cameron comparison in this draft would be Shaq Thompson, a special athlete who will be long gone before pick #30.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Curly Calhoun

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 23, 2015
Messages
2,030
Reaction score
487
I am for making a serious offer to David Harris of the Jets. I don't know him well but his size and stats are very good. And it would open up more possibilities on draft day. We would probably have to trade up in the first round to get what we need there. And I would still draft another ML and Nose.



Good player, addresses a need position. 31 years old, likely has played his best football. Probably would not play on special teams, would have to be paid a fair amount more than some rookie who would and possibly has a brighter future.

I don't see Ted going this way.
 
OP
OP
gopkrs

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,259
Reaction score
1,230
Some of you keep referring to rookies. Just exactly who are these rookies that are sure things? Especially since we draft at the bottom. Wide outs and the defensive backfield seem to be our forte in picking. Not linebackers. Anyway, maybe he will be too expensive. I see where there may be 4 or 5 teams going after him. I just like the idea of having someone I know will perform. Especially when you draft so low.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
31,732
Reaction score
7,666
Location
Madison, WI
S Just exactly who are these rookies that are sure things? I just like the idea of having someone I know will perform. Especially when you draft so low.

There is never a "sure thing" when it comes to the draft (see NFL draft history). This is why scouts get paid. Trying to determine if a player can make it to the next level isn't an exact science. There are so many variables (not just stats) that go into evaluating college players .
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Some of you keep referring to rookies. Just exactly who are these rookies that are sure things? Especially since we draft at the bottom. Wide outs and the defensive backfield seem to be our forte in picking. Not linebackers. Anyway, maybe he will be too expensive. I see where there may be 4 or 5 teams going after him. I just like the idea of having someone I know will perform. Especially when you draft so low.

In addition to what Pokerbrat said adding a free agent is no sure thing either. A lot of FA signings haven't worked out in the past and I rather address the position with some cheap youngsters than hand out a pretty decent contract to a 31-year old.
 

Curly Calhoun

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 23, 2015
Messages
2,030
Reaction score
487
Some of you keep referring to rookies. Just exactly who are these rookies that are sure things? Especially since we draft at the bottom. Wide outs and the defensive backfield seem to be our forte in picking. Not linebackers. Anyway, maybe he will be too expensive. I see where there may be 4 or 5 teams going after him. I just like the idea of having someone I know will perform. Especially when you draft so low.


Rookies aren't sure things, but then neither are veterans. Rookies cost less and provide you with a younger body that can play on special teams. Ted likes to go that way more often than not.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top