|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678 |
Eo....I am not saying I think the guy sucks, nor am I rooting against him like some posters think other posters do some players....all I am saying is he has a ways to go......I really don't think we disagree on the subject.
If you can answer yes or no, that he needs to improve, then we agree, if not then we don't.
We don't need to quality it any further because I don't mean it any deeper than that. It isn't about him not being a good player.
I am perfectly happy with him on the team and starting....but he isn't so good we don't or can't discuss his play....he isn't that damn good as of yet.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 502
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 502 |
Eo... Its all good Brother...  Thanks for the PM. Hope you enjoyed my reply.  Wimbley didn't have a good year last year. Let's not even look at his stats... He didn't improve in his run stopping techs or performance... He didn't cover very well again either... He is still too one dimensional at this point is his career. Hopefully he'll continue to try and improve. He is young. I not going on the negative on Wiimbley... The guys flys around, gives 110%, great motor, keeps fighting, persues relentlessly, doesn't seem to take plays off and doesn't blame anyone else. He takes personal responisblity for his performace and seems to hold himself accountable... You have to love that... Generally speaking... Some here have favorite players and guys they just won't get behind... Which is fine... But to point out others for doing that and denying that they do or intentionally excluding themselves from that is lunacy... It's not OK to allow yourself that hypocrosy and hold players and others posters here to a different standard... You know who you are... I call total BS on that yet again here...   
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 284
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 284 |
Quote:
Guys that impact at lb usually show their stripes right away.
I disagree. For some, it takes a couple years to hone the skills needed, especially those that are switching positions and learning an all-new defensive scheme. Remember, this will be Wimbley's 3rd year, and even though I am comparing 2 different positions, look at what year 3 brought for BE. This will also be year 3 for DQ and LEON. Add in a little more talent in front of them and I think there will be much improvement.
I think Wimbley will be something special, and the others will be more improved; not nec. pro-bowlers, but adequate starters
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105 |
Quote:
Quote:
Guys that impact at lb usually show their stripes right away.
I disagree. For some, it takes a couple years to hone the skills needed, especially those that are switching positions and learning an all-new defensive scheme.
You're going to have to give me examples because the recent trend amongst linebackers is for the impact players to show up ready from day one.
Guys like Tatupu and Beason and Merriman and Ware and David Harris and Demeco Ryans and Patrick Willis and Kirk Morrison and Nick Barnett and Chad Greenway and Lance Briggs and Karlos Dansby make plays and shut down offenses and showed they were knuckleheads almost immediately.
I'd put Wimbley and DQ in the quality starter category somewhere amongst Angelo Crowell and Daryl Smith and Omar Gaither and Channing Crowder. Guys who have contributed since early on and are good, but lack in the multi- sack, multi-turnover games where it seemed that the opposing offense could not succeed against them.
T_
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
The first that jumps to mind is James Harrison. Wasn't he a UDFA from Kent State who didn't do anything until Year 4? and was in the Pro Bowl last year?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
Quote:
Quote:
I call complete B.S. on that.
I do too, though the reason may be different.
I don't get a sense many people are rooting for players to fail.
That is total BS IMO.
Who??
If Pdawg is going to make those claims, he might as well cowboy up and say who he thinks roots against various players.
I'm not going to "Cowboy up" and call out individuals who I think root against certain players simply because I don't know of any indviduals that do it when it comes to specifics. I'm talking about human nature, and I don't think I'm different then others.
I know that there have been many players in many sports that I wish would lose their positions, simply because I don't like them. I couldn't stand Andre Rison and wanted him to be beaten out and cut. I couldn't stand Garcia and prayed he would be replaced. I could go on and on, but it really doesn't matter.
Last edited by Pdawg; 07/29/08 09:45 PM.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
I'm just throwing this out there, and please feel free to correct me.
Maybe what we're building is a type of defense similar to the Pats when RAC was there. Their LB corps was solid, to say the least. However, I'm not really sure I'd call any of the guys they had "superstars" on the level of a Ray Lewis or a Brian Urlacher.
Instead, IMO, they had a lot of guys who played their position 100% solid. They went where they had to be, did what they were supposed to do, and made tackles.
I'd be perfectly content with never having a single person go to the Pro Bowl, but we were bringing home wins because they did the right things. Yeah, once they start doing that, they start getting some notoriety. And, yes, perhaps the guys we have aren't quite up to the level we need (we'll find out soon enough).
All I'm saying is that maybe we're putting together a defense with a lot of truly solid players with a few bona fide studs mixed in (Wimbley if he can improve on the low points in his game, Wright if he continues to improve, Shaun Rogers if he lives up to potential).
What did Savage say a couple years ago? You need a few true playmakers and then you build around them?
JMHO
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105 |
Quote:
The first that jumps to mind is James Harrison. Wasn't he a UDFA from Kent State who didn't do anything until Year 4? and was in the Pro Bowl last year?
touche...
But wouldn't he be the exception to the rule since I have ten names to your one? And I didn't even include franchise players who's first years were a decade ago.
T_
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Another Cleveland boy London Fletcher Keith Bulluck Will Witherspoon Tedy Bruschi my classmate Mike Vrabel the list goes on and on and on........and many of these really are top eschelon players. i could go on if you want. i get your point but i think it's more 50/50 than you do. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Keith Brooking Adalius Thomas .......... ok I'm done now unless you want more examples. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105 |
Quote:
Another Cleveland boy London Fletcher
Keith Bulluck
Will Witherspoon
Tedy Bruschi
my classmate Mike Vrabel
the list goes on and on and on........and many of these really are top eschelon players. i could go on if you want.
i get your point but i think it's more 50/50 than you do.
Um... Witherspoon and Bruschi played right away. Albeit Tedy was more a quality back up, he still had 4 sacks in each of his first two years.
As far as 50/50 check your numbers.
T_
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105 |
Quote:
I'm just throwing this out there, and please feel free to correct me.
Maybe what we're building is a type of defense similar to the Pats when RAC was there. Their LB corps was solid, to say the least. However, I'm not really sure I'd call any of the guys they had "superstars" on the level of a Ray Lewis or a Brian Urlacher.
Instead, IMO, they had a lot of guys who played their position 100% solid. They went where they had to be, did what they were supposed to do, and made tackles.
I'd be perfectly content with never having a single person go to the Pro Bowl, but we were bringing home wins because they did the right things. Yeah, once they start doing that, they start getting some notoriety. And, yes, perhaps the guys we have aren't quite up to the level we need (we'll find out soon enough).
All I'm saying is that maybe we're putting together a defense with a lot of truly solid players with a few bona fide studs mixed in (Wimbley if he can improve on the low points in his game, Wright if he continues to improve, Shaun Rogers if he lives up to potential).
What did Savage say a couple years ago? You need a few true playmakers and then you build around them?
JMHO
Those Pats had Willie Mac who's the all-time postseason sack leader. And Bruschi was clearly the bell cow of those teams. He was always picking the ball off or sacking the quarterback at the most opportune times.
Heck we had trouble getting of the field on third downs last year. Teams showed us such disrespect, they'd draw us on third downs and still get the first.
T_
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Wimbley is a great athlete. He showed me more as far as pass rushing ability than anyone else.
From what I saw in Hall in drills.......
He has the look. Easily can add some bulk to that from without losing a step. Looks very tall. Seemed quick, nice first step off the snap. Coming from such a small school, it'll take him time to adjust to the speed and understand the game. I didn't see him in 11 on 11 because it was across the other field, and the coaching staff was on the sideline blocking a lot of my view. Definitely athletic.
Athletic doesn't always mean football player, but take it for what it's worth.
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Quote:
You're going to have to give me examples because the recent trend amongst linebackers is for the impact players to show up ready from day one.
I'm not sure what else you want me to tell you. There are dozens of examples of linebackers who weren't ready from Day 1 that turned into impact players after their rookie year or beyond. I don't want to put in any more time to disprove you....my limited examples, spending about 10 minutes for research, should do the trick. If anyone else wants to pick up the torch be my guest.
Wimbley will be fine. He really took the league by surprise with his flexibility move to the outside his rookie year inflating his sack total. He actually played better and was a more complete LBer in my opinion Year 2 and was an impact player especially considering how many fumbles he forced. Personally I hope they disguise their pass rush a little more and bring more heat inside rather than having Wimbley head up field 80% of the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
And I'm sure Crennel would agree with you. He was asked that very question the other day- whether Wimbley improved last year even though his sacks were down- and Crennel said yes.
"The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105 |
I like Wimbley a lot too but he hasn't been anything to crow about thus far. On a better D, he's a complementary player.
can he become an impact player? A guy who makes plays that stop an opponent's momentum or that puts points on the board almost directly?
It remains to be seen. I think his ceiling's high but he's a long way from being an elite defender. I dare not say who he reminds me of...
T_
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Here's the thing though...
Can we really judge Wimbley or DQ based on our pathetic DL the past two years?
I'm not so sure.
Think about it.
'05 Alvin McKinley Jason Fisk Orpheus Roye (only worthwhile starter)
'06 Alvin McKinley Ted Washington Orpheus Roye (none of them worthwhile starters)
'07 Robaire Smith (only worthwhile starter) Ted Washington Orpheus Roye
When Robaire Smith is your best linemen out of the past three years, you know there's issues. He's a guy who will benefit most from having Corey Williams and Shaun Rogers with him. If a D-lineman was doubleteamed last year it was most likely Robaire.
I'm leaving out Shaun Smith because I'm still not sure what to make of him. He seemed more comfortable as the year progressed.
All I know is, if we drop back with a 3 man rush this year, while I don't expect us to collapse the pocket like we would on a blitz or a 4 man rush...I don't expect a QB to have literally all day to sit back there and pick the D apart.
Supposedly two of these guys (Rogers and Williams) command doubleteams. That should open up a lot for the OLB's.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
There's an article on the OBR regarding players standing out at camp, and the man pictured is Hall. The article is for insiders, though.
Like you said, you can't always look at a guy in year 1 or 2 and say he'll never be anything. Harrison did come from Kent St. and did take a while to start playing well.
"The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 284
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 284 |
Bart Scott 4th year productivity
Gary Brackett 3rd year productivity
Keith Brooking 4th year productivity (1 year was injury)
Donnie Edwards 2nd year prod
James Farior 5th year prod
London Fletcher 3rd year prod
Adalius Thomas 3rd year before productivity
Larry Foote 3rd year prod
just to name a few, however, it's kind of a difficult point to debate, since there are so many variables that go into what can be determined as productive. the rb position, for example seems to have similar types of situations. still, you are correct that studs are studs, but i also feel you can't say a player isn't a blue-chipper, just bc they weren't dominant right away
some players become dominant in the right scheme, with different combinations of players around them. and speaking of players around them, some of the lb'ers you listed such as merriman, ware, greenway, beason play on defenses that have other quality players that teams must game-plan for. also, this would allow "rookie mistakes" to be less magnified.
as quoted in an article, wimbley was singled out, because he was identified as a player to contain in order for the opposing offense to succeed.
i'd like to see what he can do now that it seems we have more quality players around him, especially on the defensive line.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 385
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 385 |
I'd throw Michael Boley from Atlanta in there as well as a guy that took time to develop.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105 |
I'm just saying: historically. Impact players have shown up right away dedspite their teammates' shortcomings.
I haven't seen the same heat being brought from Wimbley and DQ as the guys who are legitimate forces.
Just because Wimbley and DQ are better than the other players we've had at their positions in the past, doesn't mean they're more than what they are.
Sure there'll be some trickle down if the D-Line makes as big an impact as we're expecting. But we'll still lack a force at LB unless the light really comes on for Kam or D.
My point about playmakers making plays right away was more directed at Bell and Alex Hall- two guys drafted to fill holes in our lb unit. Does it take time for guys to adjust to the league sometimes? Yes. But the great players are forces right away, be it on special teams (James Harrison and Adalius Thomas), situational roles (Tedy Bruschi and Karlos Dansby), or starting right way (numerous others).
T_
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,524
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,524 |
Quote:
Do we normally keep 5 OLBs? That sounds like too many.
Wimbley, McMillan, Peek, McGinest, Thompson (who could have played both).
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 284
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 284 |
and he was a 2nd day pick, where as most of the "studs" were 1st day picks. i think if someone were to take the time, you could find a def. correlation to immediate productivity vs. time to develop. some guys just take time. hopefully bell is a stud right away 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
Quote:
Can we really judge Wimbley or DQ based on our pathetic DL the past two years?
Yes and no. How's that for making a stand.
The fact that last year team seemed to scheme around him makes him look less effective then he could have been if we had at least an average line.
Things like him getting himself taken out of plays (paticularly running plays) and not shedding blocks well can be be determined regardless of how the others are playing.
I figure he will look much better overall this season for two main reasons. He will be entering his third year in his new position, and the rest of the defense should be vastly improved. Someone else pointed out the fact that QBs will have a much harder time stepping up to avoid him. If Rodgers turns out to be the beast most of us are expecting, I think his numbers will actually be somewhat inflated due to QBs backing up to avoid being hit.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 647
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 647 |
an assembly line defense in a sense, just like the Giants in the '80s. Granted, with a superstar in LT. So it's not quite the same--but the defenses were more basic then with NYG like they are now with Cleveland and didn't require much blitzing either. The Pats, even pre-Belichick, had the same deal that Cle has now--no really big LB studs that could single-handedly take down an offense. Ted Johnson or Vincent Brown, anyone?  But seriously, even the Belichick Pats didn't have superstar LBs--I wouldn't call Bruschi or Vrabel stars on the lines of a Merriman, Urlacher, Ware. Vrabel and Bruschi are very good--like Wimbley with more experience--but I think they're system LBs. You know how they have system QBs? I think the same deal is with LBs and defenders. Adalius Thomas was good last year, but I think he was overshadowed by the other LBs in the spotlight. Even when BB was with Cleveland we had good defenders--especially DL and LB. But would you call Mike Johnson or David Brandon or even Cedric Figaro a superstar? They were Wimbleyesque--very good but not quite superstars. But within their defined SYSTEM they were very effective.
Go Browns!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
Yup, that's what I'm saying. You build up the defense to have a couple of true studs, then you fill in with guys who are, at worst, not going to hurt you and, at best, going to overachieve.
Do we have that now? I don't really know. I hope so.
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Wimbley still has the potential to explode. I'm good with that, I guess. Especially if he turns in a Pro Bowl year this year. 
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hfMNC7T.jpg) "I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,086
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,086 |
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Let's talk outside linebacker
opposite Wimbley
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
