Impact of Coverage LBs On A Defense?

by Michael Scott on Jun 21, 2009 10:01 AM PDT Comment 6 comments

I have been watching NFLN's Top Ten LBs and Top Ten defenses this weekend. There seems to be a common theme among the two. Teams that have great coverage LBs seem to have great defenses.

Granted there are other factors that go into making a great defense. I also concede that you can't just throw three coverage LBs back there and win a Super Bowl. But I wonder if fan and media nations love for the Dick Butkus style of play has contributed to the common thought that great (non-pass rushing) LBs don't impact success as much as other positions.

I take a look at the best defenses, both of all-time and recent history, and they all seem to have a guy or two that can take away 1/4 of the underneath zones while not being a negative against the run.

Am I using bad logic here? Or will Aaron Curry (if he is as good as we hope/think) make the rest of our pass defense look significantly better?

A place to bury strangers.

1 recs | Comment 6 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It would help if you listed the linebackers and the defense they played for.

by John Morgan on Jun 21, 2009 12:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, that is an important bit of information

The defenses mentioned with coverage LBs included were the Steel Curtain (Jack Ham), the Raiders (Ted Hendricks), 2000 Ravens (Ray Lewis), late 60s Chiefs (Bobby Bell), and Tampa Bay (Derrick Brooks). Other LB corps had more of an attacking style.

Others mentioned or that I thought of were the “good” recent Tampa 2 defenses. The Bears, Colts, and Bucs have all had good defenses with great coverage LBs out there (and other talented players on defense which could make this all void).

by Michael Scott on Jun 21, 2009 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wasn't NFLN defending putting the 2001 Ravens defense so low...

because they were arguing Ray Lewis and co. were mainly a spectacular rushing defense that didn’t face any elite passing offenses with the possible exception of Rich Gannon? If that’s the case, linebacker coverage wasn’t a big factor in contributing to the success of that defense.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Jun 21, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No one player will make the defense look significantly better

One player can only shore up a weak spot or improve a particular aspect of the team.
Football is a team sport. It doesn’t matter how good a player is, the defense as a whole will only do as well as the parts play together.

The only thing I’ll say is that I don’t believe Curry will weaken our defense at the spot he is playing. He may be a huge improvement as he is strong in all facets of his game.

But will our secondary be able to slow down opposing teams passing attacks? Will our D-line keep the backers clean and maintain a strong pass rush? Having a great coverage LB will only help if all other facets of the defense are not weak.

All opposing teams will do if Curry is strong and another part of the defense weak is attack that part of the defense. No one player is going to change that.

by ASeahawkfan on Jun 21, 2009 9:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Well said.

Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer

by Misfit74 on Jun 21, 2009 10:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs