Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Dan conner or James anderson?


morgan55

Recommended Posts

The strong side of the offensive line is the side that the tight end lines up on or in the case of an unbalanced line where the most personnel are lined up. Usually the SAM lines up across from the TE and usually will be called on to tackle the running back who is following the TE block. He is usually the strongest linebacker as he has to shed blocks and fight off the TE or FB blocking the backside of a passing play. He has to be able to play the TE in passing situations in man to man situations and has to be to read the play and drop in coverage..

The Will is usually the fastest of the 3 linebackers as he is often called on for pass coverage and chasing the play from the backside. They don't usually have to fight off as many blocks from linemen unless one is pulling. He often has to cover the running back in man coverage and defends the weak flat and curl/hook routes in zone coverage. He also is expected to blitz more than the Mike or Sam.

Anderson is quicker that Connor but not as sturdy or able to shed blocks. He has better lateral quickness and can chase the play with his speed. He is more of a natural Will than Connor who isn't as quick laterally but very good going straight ahead or back and fending off blockers to make the tackle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of points:

1) Tackle numbers vary widely and are not particularly reliable as a firm number for evaluation. The reason you get differing numbers is that the NFL stats are determined as the game plays out live, without benefit of replay, while team tackle numbers are derived after the coaches watch tape and get a closer look at who actually made the tackle.

2) Also, in the cover 2, plays are funneled to the WLB, so naturally the numbers are going to skew favorable to whoever plays that spot.

So while Anderson did well in place of Davis, his responsabilities were different than what he would face at SLB. And if anyone remembers, Anderson struggled mightely at MLB when he had to sub there a year or two ago, so I wouldn't just assume he can easily transition to the strongside. Personally, I think Connor's skillset better fits the mold of a SLB in our defense, and would prefer to keep Anderson at WLB where he has proven he can do well when called upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anderson will start. I have always seen potential since watching him his rookie year. Now with experience he seems like he can be a good starter for years to come. I think Connor is more of a MLB more than any other LB position but Beason has that on lock, I think we could use Connor as a back up and let Anderson, Beason and Davis start. My question is will Davis change spots or will Anderson become the back up and Connor take Diggs place or will we get a new line backer via draft/trade/fa?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anderson played the same game and had 9 tackles. Beason had 16.

So if you look at the tackles from the LB position it's Beason 16, Anderson 9, Connor 8.

Connor had 3 solo ST tackles so game tackles are Beason 16, Connor 11, Anderson 9.

Solo tackles from LB are Beason 9, Anderson 6, Connor 5.

Our defense funnels runners to the weak side, which is why Thomas Davis' numbers were insane at the beginning of the year. Check out the WLBs in Meeks' schemes at Indy, they always have high numbers.

Look at Connor's numbers versus Diggs' instead, that's the comparison that needs to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone has to remember, or maybe you don't know...Anderson has not signed his tender. He is holding out to see who else may be interested in him. His agent is giving him some indication that he may be able to do better. He also is not liking the fact that he feels that Connor is getting the push from the organization to play and be a spotlight on the team. He is at off season training this week, but not under any pay/insurance/guarantees.

Anderson is 100 times a better athlete than Connor. He tested a team best in Vertical/top 5 in 40 (of the players that ended up on the roster/and top 5 in the pro agility. He has had little to no injury and has proven to be quality with his experience.

Connor is broken (acl/labrum tears), average athleticism (at best), and silent. I have had very extensive contact with both of these players on the field and they are apples and oranges in every single aspect. I do not know much about the tactics of the position, but I do know everything about the physical/mental side and Anderson is one of the tops on the team in this aspect.

Just a perspective

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question.

Why do people keep saying Connor has 'the size' whereas Anderson does not. I have news for you, they are almost identically sized. Connor is a shade broader, but they are the same height and Anderson is a bit heavier.

The difference is that Anderson is VERY athletic whereas Connor is not. Soooooooo, why would Connor be starting over him? He may have the smarts, but Anderson showed he can play too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hoping it's Anderson. A lot of people on this board are stilled shaded by the fact that Connor was supposed to be a 1st rounder that slipped to the third round. Since then, he's exactly how he was before. This system entirely favors Anderson. Fast linebackers who can contain and tackle.

Also, tackles are a HORRIBLE way to measure how good someone is. A tackle at the line is far better than a shoe string tackle where the runner fell forward and got extra yards. Both show up as tackles on the stat sheet. It has nothing to do with positioning, containment. This is why the Coaching staff uses a scoring system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...