09-02-2016, 07:06 PM
Quote:so wed still have no edge rush
Day isnt a nose tackle lol
Glock, I'm just saying I wish we could run a 34 so we could get Smith and Jack on the field at the same time with Poz and Skuta.
That's just me.
Quote:so wed still have no edge rush
Day isnt a nose tackle lol
Quote:Seattle ran their scheme because it fit their personnel, and put ALL of their best players on the field at once.
So we're trying to force that scheme, even though it barely fits our players. We have a sub par OTTO (sorry, but he doesn't do much) in Skuta, but can't replace him due to the physical requirements of that position. We'll be keeping either Jack or Telvin on the bench every snap, just cause.
Quote:the otto position is stupid
Quote:This is how we'd run a 3-4 with our personnel
FS
SS
CB CB
OLB MLB MLB OLB/CB
DE NT DE
FS - Gipson
SS - Cyprien/Telvin (think Bucannon)
CB - Ramsey
CB - House
OLB - Fowler
OLB - Yannick
MLB - Jack/Poz
MLB - Telvin
DE - Malik
NT - Roy Miller
DE - Odrick
Quote:I look at it this way: Yes it is enticing to have Jack, Telvin and Poz as the base LBs and have them on the field at the same time. But putting Jack at OTTO would usually have him lined up at the LOS over a TE. While he might have the size to do it, it is clear from last night he excels in space, and playing him at will gives him the space to excel. The way I understand OTTO, that would be the one position of the three that would not allow him to work in space as much.
Quote:I don't see why this couldn't work. Bradley has this obsession with this Leo and Otto nonsense.Yep, it only made sense for Seattle, hence why they're the only team to make it work. This scheme is laughable, and there is no valid reasoning as to why we should run it.
He needs to scratch that junk and go with something more traditional.
Quote:I don't see why this couldn't work. Bradley has this obsession with this Leo and Otto nonsense.
He needs to scratch that junk and go with something more traditional.
Quote:Him playing will would put Telvin on the bench though.Playing Jack at OTTO, although not ideal, let's you put your best three LBs on the field at the same time. Sure Jack might struggle at times getting off blocks but ultimately I think the guy will make plays no matter where you play him.Everyone said Telvin was too small to play in the NFL, and he'd have a hard time in such a physical environment. I say we just scrap the whole OTTO, make it SAM, and stick Jack there. What's the worse that can happen? We lose? That already happens.
Quote:Everyone said Telvin was too small to play in the NFL, and he'd have a hard time in such a physical environment. I say we just scrap the whole OTTO, make it SAM, and stick Jack there. What's the worse that can happen? We lose? That already happens.
Quote:Bullseye, nice explanation.
So that basically means the ol ball coach's scheme doesn't allow for our best players to be on the field.
Epic Fail in my book.
Quote:Everyone said Telvin was too small to play in the NFL, and he'd have a hard time in such a physical environment. I say we just scrap the whole OTTO, make it SAM, and stick Jack there. What's the worse that can happen? We lose? That already happens.
Quote:Which is why Jack is on/Telvin is off in base 4-3.
We're playing more nickel than not, so it wouldn't be a traditional "benching" if Telvin is out on run downs.
It's about putting the best guys on the field by situation.
Quote:SAM, SLB, "OTTO," strongside
It's all the same alignment. Changing the name changes nothing as far as matchups.
Quote:232 tackles
2 INT's
5 FF
Top 100 2016
Should've made pro bowl
Yeah, lets bench him.