apuszczalowski Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 Don't read too much into players skills while trying to understand the Ryan brothers joke of a defense. But some of Ryans former suck ups Players have come out and said his defence is very easy, especially for the front 7, the guys that had trouble with it can't have it written in crayon
PolishDave Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 But some of Ryans former suck ups Players have come out and said his defence is very easy, especially for the front 7, the guys that had trouble with it can't have it written in crayon I'd love to see proof of that. Got any links? And easy compared to what? Certainly not Jim Schwartz's defense.
Marty McFly Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 I don't know. I am not sure this signing answers that question. If he does try to play Zach inside I worry about his suitability. Reggie is built for the inside, Hope Ragland can beat him out in camp and make that 2nd round pick worth the 4th we traded to move up for. ragland. I could see that happening. IDC if Ragland doesnt run a fast 40, theres a difference between playing fast and being fast and playing fast is more important We aren't going to have one, probably. Just like we won't have a Brady, or the best player at most positions. Hopefully his scheming will adjust for that difference? It could.
BarleyNY Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 I don't know. I am not sure this signing answers that question. If he does try to play Zach inside I worry about his suitability. You might see Zach on the inside on passing downs and Nickel/Dime/etc. packages. Ragland could take the inside on rushing downs and in the base (and bigger) defensive formation(s). Zach could play the outside when in those.
ganesh Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 We aren't going to have one, probably. Just like we won't have a Brady, or the best player at most positions. Hopefully his scheming will adjust for that difference? I agree...Trying to force players into a scheme is dumb..as evidenced by Ryan's tactics.
TPS Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 You might see Zach on the inside on passing downs and Nickel/Dime/etc. packages. Ragland could take the inside on rushing downs and in the base (and bigger) defensive formation(s). Zach could play the outside when in those. Yes, it would be the Brown Brothers in nickel formation, unless they also draft Foster at 10, and PBrown would be the odd man out.
GunnerBill Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) You might see Zach on the inside on passing downs and Nickel/Dime/etc. packages. Ragland could take the inside on rushing downs and in the base (and bigger) defensive formation(s). Zach could play the outside when in those. They could do that I agree but it is a band aid solution. For me Zach is a nice fit as the will Ragland is best suited to playing the strong side on early / running downs. They need a real do it all guy between them. Who knows how McDermott sees it? Edited February 5, 2017 by GunnerBill
BarleyNY Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 They could do that I agree but it is a band aid solution. For me Zach is a nice fit as the will Ragland is best suited to playing the strong side on passing downs. They need a real do it all guy between them. Who knows how McDermott sees it? Getting a stud do-it-all MLB would be the best case scenario, but I'm just trying to work with what we've got. I'd like to see what Zach can do in the middle behind a quality DL. As for Ragland, where I want to see him on passing downs is on the sideline. No way do I depend on him to cover a TE or RB. Remember, the Nickel is the base defense in the NFL now. That means two LBs (or one LB and a safety-LB hybrid) on the field. Zach can be one of those LBs. Ragland would be a liability.
GunnerBill Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 Getting a stud do-it-all MLB would be the best case scenario, but I'm just trying to work with what we've got. I'd like to see what Zach can do in the middle behind a quality DL. As for Ragland, where I want to see him on passing downs is on the sideline. No way do I depend on him to cover a TE or RB. Remember, the Nickel is the base defense in the NFL now. That means two LBs (or one LB and a safety-LB hybrid) on the field. Zach can be one of those LBs. Ragland would be a liability. Sorry I meant Ragland on the strong side on running downs. I was distracted when typing!
BarleyNY Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 Sorry I meant Ragland on the strong side on running downs. I was distracted when typing! Ah! No worries. That makes more sense. Hope it was a good distraction.
RyanC883 Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 He'd be ok for warm weather games as a backup as long as he doesn't have tackle Bell type backs. luckly there are not many Bell type backs!! Would be a great signing. Can never have too many play-making LB's. If we sign Romo, then I think we get a FA WR like Jeffrey. If not, I think we get one in the draft.
gonzo1105 Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 I'm not in love with re-signing Zach Brown to a long term deal tbh. He's been a journeyman his whole career. He is not the best run defender, and he's only had one season where he played above his skill level(last season). If the contract is right then fine but giving this guy 5-6 mill a season will blow up on you
GunnerBill Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 I'm not in love with re-signing Zach Brown to a long term deal tbh. He's been a journeyman his whole career. He is not the best run defender, and he's only had one season where he played above his skill level(last season). If the contract is right then fine but giving this guy 5-6 mill a season will blow up on you In Rex's scheme I'd agree. I think he is a really good fit as a Will for what McDermott wants to do.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 So whos gonna be Kuechly Foster @ pick 10
John from Riverside Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 i dont understand people giving up on ragland so quick
billrooter Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) Please tell me you're kidding. I am confused as to why the vast majority of posters pencil Reggie Ragland into exclusively being a run thumper 3-4 type linebacker? I have to admit I did not watch him play at Alabama much, but at his workout for NFL teams I dug up that he ran a 4.62 and have read about his great instincts. Why would it be out of the question for him to be able to be a great sideline to sideline guy as well as coverage linebacker, imo 4.62 is very good speed for a backer playing any spot. Edited February 5, 2017 by billrooter
GunnerBill Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 i dont understand people giving up on ragland so quick I am not and I am not on down as him as some, but he is not a natural fit for what McDermott runs.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 i dont understand people giving up on ragland so quick If that was prompted by my post I can assure you I am not giving up on Ragland. I'm just over Preston. I think Foster is really good and Preston & Ragland can rotate in and out until one earns the Sam role.
purple haze Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 Smart move if they can get it done in the $5-$6M AAV range. Great fit for McDermott's D, and still young. It would really alleviate some of my worries about the LB position heading into 2017... Some... Folks might hate it, but I want Rueben Foster on this team. Even if they signed Zach. I'm not in love with re-signing Zach Brown to a long term deal tbh. He's been a journeyman his whole career. He is not the best run defender, and he's only had one season where he played above his skill level(last season). If the contract is right then fine but giving this guy 5-6 mill a season will blow up on you A journeyman? He was a 2nd rd pick of the Titans, played there for four years then came to the Bills. He's not a journeyman. He's a guy who had some good stretches in Tennessee and appeared to realize a lot of his potential last season. I can understand why they would want to keep him. He's athletic, aggressive and fits what we believe McD will run on defense. Foster @ pick 10 So, I'm not alone? I thought it was just me. That dude would be dynamite behind our D-line.
BaaadThingsMan Posted February 5, 2017 Posted February 5, 2017 Is Ragland a rookie next year since he didn't play a down?
Recommended Posts