truth on hold Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 i like everything i've seen and heard about willis. he could be the biggest impact player on defense we've had since bruce smith. but can a rookie really be expected to learn the defense and opposing teams offenses that quickly that they can effectively make the defensive play calling adjusments? how much of a responsibility is play calling for a MLB in the 4-3 cover-2?
obie_wan Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 i like everything i've seen and heard about willis. he could be the biggest impact player on defense we've had since bruce smith. but can a rookie really be expected to learn the defense and opposing teams offenses that quickly that they can effectively make the defensive play calling adjusments? how much of a responsibility is play calling for a MLB in the 4-3 cover-2? NO- All rookies are too stupid to play this complex game. Especially when the defense is as vanilla as the one Jauron runs. Very little blitzing, just all out attack the line of scrimmage.
LynchMob23 Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 Just because the MLB traditionally calls the plays, doesn't mean he has to in this defense. Crowell knows the scheme, as does Whitner. Between the two they can (and Spikes if still here) call the plays while the young MLB learns the defense and can do it accurately on his own.
truth on hold Posted March 20, 2007 Author Posted March 20, 2007 Just because the MLB traditionally calls the plays, doesn't mean he has to in this defense. Crowell knows the scheme, as does Whitner. Between the two they can (and Spikes if still here) call the plays while the young MLB learns the defense and can do it accurately on his own. isnt it hard to get the best perspective on how the offense is lining up and hear all the QBs signals unless you're in the middle and relatively close to the line? can u give me examples of teams where the MLB or ILB didnt call the defensive plays?
marauderswr80 Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 Look at the LB the Texans had Demeco Ryans.....he was beast and a MAJOR leader on that defense of the Texans. Granted they were so so on defense, but none the less, was a major leader. I also believe he called signals for them........
obie_wan Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 Look at the LB the Texans had Demeco Ryans.....he was beast and a MAJOR leader on that defense of the Texans. Granted they were so so on defense, but none the less, was a major leader. I also believe he called signals for them........ You must be mistaken. First, seeing Ryans on the field was a mirage. Ryans never would have been to able to play since he was a rookie - thus not capable of contributing immediately. Second, all rookies are too stupid to be able get on the field let alone call the defensive signals. Teams would rather spite themselves and pass on the superior talent to go with the experienced vet with less than ideal skills.
The Big Cat Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 Look at the LB the Texans had Demeco Ryans.....he was beast and a MAJOR leader on that defense of the Texans. Granted they were so so on defense, but none the less, was a major leader. I also believe he called signals for them........ I often wondered about this guy? Was he a I-get-1000-tackles-9-yards-from-scrimmage kinda guy or was he legit? Never watched him much
marauderswr80 Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 I often wondered about this guy? Was he a I-get-1000-tackles-9-yards-from-scrimmage kinda guy or was he legit? Never watched him much 110% legit. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7782 If im not mistaken, at some point in the season he was in the running for the ROY.......
The Dean Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 i like everything i've seen and heard about willis. he could be the biggest impact player on defense we've had since bruce smith. but can a rookie really be expected to learn the defense and opposing teams offenses that quickly that they can effectively make the defensive play calling adjusments? how much of a responsibility is play calling for a MLB in the 4-3 cover-2? Of course a rookie (or, at least SOME rookies) would be up to this task. Given the choice, though, would you rather have a PROVEN, SAVVY vet make the call, or a rookie with unknown abilities in that area at the NFL level?
Sketch Soland Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 Of course a rookie (or, at least SOME rookies) would be up to this task. Given the choice, though, would you rather have a PROVEN, SAVVY vet make the call, or a rookie with unknown abilities in that area at the NFL level? what's wrong with a proven, savvy rookie with known NFL abilities who can leap tall o-lineman with a single bound and can edit wikipedia articles on the fourier series with one hand tied behind his back? Isn't Willis just this archetypal primordially gifted specimen?
The Dean Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 what's wrong with a proven, savvy rookie with known NFL abilities who can leap tall o-lineman with a single bound and can edit wikipedia articles on the fourier series with one hand tied behind his back? Isn't Willis just this archetypal primordially gifted specimen? If we draft him, I hope so. Otherwise, I really hope it's a myth.
Pyrite Gal Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 Almost certainly not. As the signal caller last year, Fletch took responsibility for essentially being a coach on the field using his near decade of experience to analyze what the O was likely to do given the down and distance, the formation the opposing O lined in and which players they put on the field.. While this is only football and not brain surgery, a rookie calling signals would need to match wits with OC designing his plays to fool the opponent, match wits with vet QBs making changes based on what we are doing, and have a pretty clear idea of what the opposing players do well, what their vulnerabilities are and how our team matches up against them. Having all this info is possible from studying the playbook really hard and absorbing it in the mini-camp and pre-season time a rookie has before opening day. Having a real knowledge of what opposing players like and can do and the tendencies of the opposing team in particular situations also can be obtained with reading and absorbing the scouting reports and watching a boatload of film. However, even if a player could give the virtual 24/7 commitment needed to perform these mechanical tasks as well as he can, he then has to also develop the ability to think all this true quick enough in a game situation and also communicate all of this effectively to his fellow players and of course do all this while deciding whether this particular play calls for him to tackle like a DT (which we want the Cover 2 MLB to do on run plays) or pass cover like a safety (which we expect the Cover 2 MLB to do on pass plays). Most rookies are simply dealing with the fact that their opponents are a significantly faster and significantly more athletic assemblage opponents than they have ever faced. Essentially all NFL players comment on how much faster the players are in the NFL than the college game because essentially it is is like the took the best athlete in your high school conference (not just your school but the entire conference) xeroxed him 11 times and put him out on the field for you too face. Its possible I think for a rookie to do this, but incredibly really big incredibly doubtful for it to occur and even if it did, watching this is likely to be incredibly painful while we watch this rookie become a vet by learning by getting burned. It would be stupid to take this as claiming that all rookies are stupid, because all it is saying is that this involves a unique collection of actually fairly common (among the rarified world of top flight athletes) of skills in terms of athletic ability, mental smarts and leadership skills.
BuffaloBilliever Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 No need. With a rookie blockin' the middle, there should be no problem with TKO or Angelo being the signal caller. Also, what people must realize, is that after the draft they aren't thrown directly in to the freakin fold. They have training camp and practice games for a reason. Even if Willis is the signal caller, he'll have had plenty of experience in practice/scrims/preseason to be at least as able as he can be.
DrDawkinstein Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 Doesnt Troy Pomnotevengonnatry make the calls for Pittsburgh? either way, no, i dont think you HAVE to be in the MLB spot in order to see the Offense. and i think that even if it takes Willis a year, Spikes, Crowell or Whitner could all make calls until hes ready.
bud8andbills Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 i like everything i've seen and heard about willis. he could be the biggest impact player on defense we've had since bruce smith. but can a rookie really be expected to learn the defense and opposing teams offenses that quickly that they can effectively make the defensive play calling adjusments? how much of a responsibility is play calling for a MLB in the 4-3 cover-2? Proof any rookie can succeed in any system: Denny Hamlin in NASCAR finished 4th in overall standings last year in his rookie campaign. These guys do not get there for being dumb.
truth on hold Posted March 21, 2007 Author Posted March 21, 2007 Proof any rookie can succeed in any system: Denny Hamlin in NASCAR finished 4th in overall standings last year in his rookie campaign. These guys do not get there for being dumb. never equated rookie w/ dumb. but rookie by definition is inexperienced. thats the question: can a rookie MLB be expected to call the defensive signals? and if no can another position in a 4-3 defense call them? there've been a few well thought responses, but i felt need to clarify the question (which i thought was clear the first time around.)
The Dean Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Proof any rookie can succeed in any system: Denny Hamlin in NASCAR finished 4th in overall standings last year in his rookie campaign. These guys do not get there for being dumb. That might be evidence that a particular rookie can succeed in a particular system. It is by no means proof that ANY rookie can succeed in ANY system. What about all the other rookies in all the other racing leagues? Did they ALL succeed in EVERY league? Yikes! The lack of BASIC logic is appalling.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Why let Willis do it when you can either have Spikes or Crowell call out signals.
gobillsinytown Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 "Most rookies are simply dealing with the fact that their opponents are a significantly faster and significantly more athletic assemblage opponents than they have ever faced. Essentially all NFL players comment on how much faster the players are in the NFL than the college game because essentially it is is like the took the best athlete in your high school conference (not just your school but the entire conference) xeroxed him 11 times and put him out on the field for you too face." Pyrite Gal: You hit the nail on the head. My father had a friend who briefly played for the Houston Oilers as an outside linebacker, when most NFL teams were playing the 3-4. He said it took him almost two full weeks to really get used to the speed and power of the players lined up against him. He played for SMU when they were a nationally ranked team. By comparison, he said NFL practices were harder than some of his games, especially during camp when everyone is competing for a job. If you think about it, there are typically no more than 4 players on any college team that will make it to the NFL. NFL playbooks are significantly more complicated than college playbooks, because at the NFL level it's a full time job with high compensation, and it's expected of them to absorb the information. Film study is also something that players are expected to do, which is not emphasized as much in college. So the difference between college and pro ball is like the difference between what you learned about your profession in college, and what your profession actually turned out to be like on a daily basis. That is: night and day
DrDawkinstein Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 That might be evidence that a particular rookie can succeed in a particular system. It is by no means proof that ANY rookie can succeed in ANY system. What about all the other rookies in all the other racing leagues? Did they ALL succeed in EVERY league? Yikes! The lack of BASIC logic is appalling. yeah, but dont let that bad example cloud you from the overall point. i dont think any rookie should be EXPECTED to be able to do anything. then if he CAN do it, bonus! if not, then any of our veteran LBs or our "super-smart" aspiring star SS should be able to do it. a question for the "can a rookie MLB be expected to call the defensive signals?" group. if you are talking EXPECTATIONS, and you are dealing with rookies and veterans, shouldnt you EXPECT veterans like Spikes and Crowell to be able to make the calls? and give the new kid the benefit of the doubt for a year?
Recommended Posts