boyst Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 i'm not going to spend much time thinking unless i get carried away. really disinterested with elaborate constructed x's and o's. current cast here just makes respectable discussions of them rather bland; in other words - no one actually wants to talk football and acts as if this is twitter. of course, i must admit i usually don't help but i see no reason. starting easy. lawson is good enough to play 43 end. he would be ideal rotating in with hughes who is now, imo, only good at pass rush. lawson can edge set and has shown a good ability to play twists and other moves that give ol fits. lawson won't ever be an outside edge rusher but could work a decent mix tandem with washington. washington is a guy that is going to have a long career in the nfl so long as he doesn't slack off and keeps his eye on the ball. he has a good skillset, good natural gifts and is going to be similar to dwan edwards, for those who want a comparison. washington is going to be able to play 43 dt or de. he will be suitable as a 43 3 tech dt, 5,6,7 tech de. he is likely going to be the best value of the draft when the dust settles due to his ability to play various positions. because i'm lazy here is a link about it... https://www.profootballfocus.com/defensive-line-techniques-the-prototypes/ the big issue with washington is that dareus is not ideal as a 1 tech dt. puts too much on the middle linebacker and ragland... we don't know... ragland we can't say much but i do not see him being able to play 43 mlb successfully. don't know much at all to say here but he is more of a 34 mike than anything. i won't say much but i am thinking he is odd man out. if he pans out, with two 3 tech dt's he could be good. but ultimately we are likely to see a hybrid 43 which the de's are not just rushers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 i'm not going to spend much time thinking unless i get carried away. really disinterested with elaborate constructed x's and o's. current cast here just makes respectable discussions of them rather bland; in other words - no one actually wants to talk football and acts as if this is twitter. of course, i must admit i usually don't help but i see no reason. starting easy. lawson is good enough to play 43 end. he would be ideal rotating in with hughes who is now, imo, only good at pass rush. lawson can edge set and has shown a good ability to play twists and other moves that give ol fits. lawson won't ever be an outside edge rusher but could work a decent mix tandem with washington. washington is a guy that is going to have a long career in the nfl so long as he doesn't slack off and keeps his eye on the ball. he has a good skillset, good natural gifts and is going to be similar to dwan edwards, for those who want a comparison. washington is going to be able to play 43 dt or de. he will be suitable as a 43 3 tech dt, 5,6,7 tech de. he is likely going to be the best value of the draft when the dust settles due to his ability to play various positions. because i'm lazy here is a link about it... https://www.profootballfocus.com/defensive-line-techniques-the-prototypes/ the big issue with washington is that dareus is not ideal as a 1 tech dt. puts too much on the middle linebacker and ragland... we don't know... ragland we can't say much but i do not see him being able to play 43 mlb successfully. don't know much at all to say here but he is more of a 34 mike than anything. i won't say much but i am thinking he is odd man out. if he pans out, with two 3 tech dt's he could be good. but ultimately we are likely to see a hybrid 43 which the de's are not just rushers. Just because Reggie Ragland is a throwback LB does not mean he cannot play in a 4/3 If you are a instinctual LB you can play in ANY scheme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Just because Reggie Ragland is a throwback LB does not mean he cannot play in a 4/3 If you are a instinctual LB you can play in ANY scheme and this is why i generally do not talk x's and o's. its a waste of my god damn time. mr reggie ragland: 1) has not played football in 1 year. 2) has not played in the nfl. 3) was pulled from the game last he played. 4) injured severely and needed surgery 5) regarded as a throwback lb 6) shown a lack of awareness on the field ... i wont' even bother to reply to the rest of your thought that instincts mean you can play any position. i'll just add this to the pile of ridiculous things you say and i'm still waiting to debate how we are not a good defense due to rex ryan's poor scheme that stemmed from the shoutbox week 9 when you said and have remained saying "it is not the time." in fact, i believe yousaid we can talk about it after the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty McFly Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Washington played DT in college, Lawson played DE and Ragland would be just fine as a 4-3 MLB. I'm not a huge Preston brown fan but I assume he would be the WLB and I guess Hughes would be slb Pretty much this but Hughes stays at DE and we draft a new LB to play SLB or maybe Z Brown if we keep him Zack Brown WLB, Ragland MLB, Foster SLB This works very well too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 I mean, it's not like Rex ran a straight 3-4. His playbook involves a lot of looks... including plays with only 10 men. I'm going to go ahead and acknowledge this gem (since nobody else has). I chuckled pretty hard after reading this. That being said... carry on gentlemen. Lots of good info/insight in this thread from majority of posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts