jetfixer
Cheesehead
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
Not in the conventional sense. The whole point of the tweener discussion is whether the defense benefits from this type of player in this position. It kinda sorta makes sense in a 3-4 where you have a run stuffer at the other ILB position.I have no idea if Killebrew can play LB.
I can agree with that.
Whose has the best coverage skill for the linebackers this year?
Hate to beat a dead horse, but the Packers have also not invested much into this position in a long time. Jake Ryan being picked in the 4th round is the closest thing you could call a substantial investment since AJ Hawk in 2006. I hope to see that change in this draft.
I think their last impression is of a guy that, although played the play perfectly earlier in the game, was beaten badly by Lynch in the playoff loss on a long pass on their way to a come back and then followed it up getting run all over the field by the Eagles in a preseason game. Neither of which were impressive, but without perspective, it was the last image most of us have of him. And for me, he showed potential, but never "arrived" for me. Will he continue getting better after the inujury? I'm willing to let him compete and win the spot, but i'm also not comfortable penciling him in either. We have lots of room at ILB to win a job. I expect at least 2 more added to the roster before the draft is over.Which brings up the point, why are so many people just completely ignoring Sam Barrington? I'm not saying he's going to be an elite guy but why do people just automatically assume that the team has given up on him?
Having a terrific ILB isn't that important in the NFL. Only appears that way for the Packers because they've had terrible ILBs (also terrible luck with ILB health). Packer's coaches could justifiably be perfectly comfortable thinking that Barrington will come back healthy and that Ryan showed enough that they don't feel the need for a new starter at ILB.
Which brings up the point, why are so many people just completely ignoring Sam Barrington? I'm not saying he's going to be an elite guy but why do people just automatically assume that the team has given up on him?
Seems like an impressive guy. Very charismatic for his age. Has the personality traits of a leader.You must be logged in to see this image or video!
Huh? More athletic?For me, Kentrall Brothers has edged slightly ahead of Ragland. More instinctive and athletic.
Ragland is a very good and underrated coverage LB. He kept Hunter Henry in check in man coverage, which isn't surprising given how much the entire defense was giving it to Arkansas.Ragland isn't a problem in coverage and that's really all the Packers need. Most ILBs have zone coverage responsibilities and what's really important for that is understanding where routes are going and where you need to be; 40 time isn't nearly as important as some seem to think.
I don't see him being ignored at all in these pages.Which brings up the point, why are so many people just completely ignoring Sam Barrington? I'm not saying he's going to be an elite guy but why do people just automatically assume that the team has given up on him?
Huh? More athletic?
Ragland is a very good and underrated coverage LB. He kept Hunter Henry in check in man coverage, which isn't surprising given how much the entire defense was giving it to Arkansas.
But he also played well against Engram at Ole Miss, who is a basically an 230 pound receiver in the position whose athleticism receives comparison to Jordan Reed. These guys were held to one catch a piece-one. And Alabama's defense looked terrible against Ole Miss that day. Knocking him for his coverage skills is foolish.
Brothers ran a 4.89 at the Combine and did only 19 lifts at 245 lbs.For me, Kentrall Brothers has edged slightly ahead of Ragland. More instinctive and athletic.
Brothers ran a 4.89 at the Combine and did only 19 lifts at 245 lbs.
I found the available tape on this guy unimpressive. He hops around a lot until he figures out where the play is going, which is not entirely instinctive. Frankly, for a run stuffing ILB, I like Chubb's tape better, he's more athletic, and looks more natural at the position.
Ragland is in another class entirely.
Engram averaged about 3 catches per game for about 39 yards, and scored 2 TDs on the season. Regardless of any pro projections he was not a particularly productive TE, with the whole country holding him in check.He kept Hunter Henry in check in man coverage, which isn't surprising given how much the entire defense was giving it to Arkansas.
But he also played well against Engram at Ole Miss, who is a basically an 230 pound receiver in the position whose athleticism receives comparison to Jordan Reed. These guys were held to one catch a piece-one. And Alabama's defense looked terrible against Ole Miss that day. Knocking him for his coverage skills is foolish.
I would be comfortable agreeing with that if it wasn't for the fact that the importance of the position for the Packers was clearly shown when they moved Clay Matthews inside to try and fill the glaring weakness. Taking your best player on Defense and moving him like that, is very telling as to how important it was to the Packers to make a change and the other options available to them at the time (2 years). Besides getting Barrington back, nothing has changed on the Packer defense since Matthews last played ILB.
I definitely think the Packers are hoping Barrington and Ryan are the answer to the position, or maybe they would have done something in the FA market, but they didn't. The 2 problems with that logic, IMO, one....Barrington is coming off of an injury and to this point hasn't really shown to be much more then being an average at best ILB and the second problem, depth. What happens if either Ryan or Barrington go down?
Improved 3 down play and depth is what I am looking for at the ILB position and that doesn't include moving your best OLB back into the position. It definitely doesn't include the level of play we have seen there for the last 4 or so years.
Ask the Denver Broncos how important having good linebackers are, including ILB's.
I'd rather ask the Broncos how nice it is to have two terrific corners, Von Miller, Demarcus Ware and an excellent dline since those pieces were vastly more important than the ILB to the Bronco's success.
Packers moved Clay inside not because the position was enormously important but because the team had three OLBs that they were comfortable with on the field and only Clay was capable of playing inside. The overall defense was better with Clay inside and Perry on the field rather than Perry sitting on the bench to allow some other guy to play inside. Clay wasn't even a very good ILB. I have no problems drafting an ILB but it just seems like there's a ton of focus on a position group that the majority of the NFL agrees isn't the most important position on the field.
There's 0 chance they'll pass on Ragland. He's a solid day one starter, good character, and they can confidently move Matthews outside. I probably exaggerated his coverage skills, but he's shown enough for me to have faith in him. I'll cut him a break on the gain to #83- it was either busted coverage, or a perfectly executed pick.Engram averaged about 3 catches per game for about 39 yards, and scored 2 TDs on the season. Regardless of any pro projections he was not a particularly productive TE, with the whole country holding him in check.
There is a cut up of the Arkansas game with by my count 10 Arkansas pass plays. Ragland had coverage on Henry on 3 of those 10 plays. He did give up a catch to #83, whoever that is, for a decent gain.
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
2 of those 3 plays were Henry releasing into the flat. On one I would not call it man coverage; it was an outstanding middle linebacker reacting off the play action to make the tackle at the LOS. On the other he chucked Henry into another player at the line of scrimmage messing up the play. This is not what we're talking about here. We want to know about coverage outside the box. Is he a 360 degree player?
That takes us to the last play in this clip at 4:46. Now that's good man coverage up the seam even if the QB led Henry into the safety. That single play shows more than we've seen out any ILB in Green Bay, including Matthews, in quite some time. Sometimes one play is worth a whole lot more than 2 games worth of stats.
The more I look at Ragland the more I believe Thompson would be an idiot to pass on him if he's available. And I don't know what these mock draft guys are doing. This guy should not get out of the top 15.
I see Atlanta grabbing Ragland at 17. The only way to prevent that would be to slide up to #15 by giving the Titans our #1 and #2 and not so sure they would do that and really not so sure I want Ragland that bad. But if he was the sure thing, we could do worse with our #1 and #2 (2012 Perry/Worthy).
Lol! Jack could possible be around at 15, his talent might be worth that trade, but I'm not 100%. He's an elite coverage LB and would give them a lot of flexibility. But I don't think they had as many pro-style opponents as Alabama, so it's hard to project how he'll handle being in the middle compared to Ragland.I see Atlanta grabbing Ragland at 17. The only way to prevent that would be to slide up to #15 by giving the Titans our #1 and #2 and not so sure they would do that and really not so sure I want Ragland that bad. But if he was the sure thing, we could do worse with our #1 and #2 (2012 Perry/Worthy).
I agree with you, last year the Broncos had an overall better Defense then the Packers, but that defense also included Marshall and Trevathan at ILB. Did you see how much the Bears valued Trevathan? Marshall's contract alone is almost $1M more then the combined contracts of Barrington, Ryan and Bradford. Not saying that salary guarantees performance, but its obvious to me that the Packers have tried to fill the ILB as cheaply as possible in the past several year and it shows. I don't see your logic about moving Matthews. You are admitting that the ILB position sucked and the only way to even attempt to fix it was to move your highest paid defensive player out of his natural position. I understood the move....short term, but 2 years? If we become short handed at TE, do we temporarily move Jordy into the position, because we have better back-up WR's then TE's? Maybe for a game, but not after you have had time to address the problem.
So you are right, maybe the ILB is a position of least importance and the Packers actions over the last few years seem to be backing up your opinion, but IMO if that doesn't change to some extent, we are going to keep seeing the efforts of the other 9 guys on the field undermined by the mistakes being made by our ILB's.