Isaiah Simmons: "A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma"

[MHS831]

To understand why a player with all the tools to be successful in the NFL would bust is remarkably difficult.  While Isaiah Simmons has had a disappointing career to this point, there is a reason he is back in Carolina.  Yes, special teams are important and he does well in that role.  My intent is to examine in what situations he has been successful and develop a theory about the reason he might have experienced success in some capacity vs. the times he has flopped.  Is he a CB?  A Safety?  A LB?  An Edge?  No.  He has been all of them at some point and has yet to settle into a position.  I think the Panthers will do the same thing.  I think I know (besides special teams) how they might use him effectively on defense. 

First, think of Simmons as a unicorn. Create a position that he does not have to fit into, but one that fits into his skill sets.  I think we need to designate him as our Big Nickel, and then we need to modify that position into something of a rover, for lack of a better term.  He is a hybrid--but lets not make him the hybrid, let's make the position the hybrid. 

Isaiah Simmons has been most effective in the NFL as a Big Nickel and on special teams, specifically in sub-packages where he can leverage his elite speed (4.39 40-yard dash) without the constant physical demands of a traditional linebacker.  A big nickel is a third safety, designed to match up with the big TEs, basically, and provide better run support.  

Based on what I have read, Simmons is slowed when he has to know the Xs and Os and the position is focused on complex interpretations that may require adjustments in certain situations, etc.  He excels in special teams, for example, because he is turned loose and he simple reacts to what he sees in front of him, it seems.   I think the Panthers may create a big nickel role that turns him loose on defense.  

 

 

Simmons has been in the league for about 6 years and has been issued five playbooks.  His position has shifted in an effort to find where he could best fit in.  Getting back to basics, here is a chart that demonstrates how much more effective he was as a big nickel than a traditional LB, that required more reading blocking and run game schemes:  

 

Last season, Ransom was the big nickel, the Panthers are high on him and not looking to replace him by any means.  It is my theory that Ransom will be used alongside Moehrig in some situations.  He can also provide depth behind Moehrig.  It is also my opinion that Simmons may not be the ideal fit for every situation involving the big nickel.  Simmons could be used, for example, as a blitzing big nickel who can cover the flat and stuff the run, while Ransom may be the better lock-down TE coverage guy--I dunno.  But I see Simmons playing a bigger role on D.

  Here is a comparison between Ransom and Simmons:

• Lathan Ransom: A 2025 fourth-round pick, he is viewed as a starter candidate to provide security opposite safety Tre'von Moehrig, with the Panthers high on his potential.
• Isaiah Simmons: Recently re-signed (March 2026), Simmons has thrived as a special teams ace but is considered a prime candidate to develop into a big nickel linebacker/safety hybrid due to his unique versatility.
• Context: The Panthers' defense under Ejiro Evero requires safety depth, and both players bring different strengths to that position group.

Throw in Nick Scott, a pure free safety who just signed, it is starting to get a bit clearer.  Does this mean we will not draft a S?  Not at all.  Who do we have to give depth at FS?  Let's hope its Scott.

It is my view that Simmons needs to find one or two things he does well on this defense and focus on that and not everything else.  What are his natural talents (6'4" 238 and runs sub 4.4--who does that?  Can you not make that work for you?)  This tells me the problem is mental.  Too many cooks in the kitchen.  Instead of asking him to do everything behind the DL, let's get him to do one thing that aligns with his skill set and history of success.  A situational big nickel/rover seems to be a fit.

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by MHS831

[The Huddler]

hes a scrub

 

theres my analysis

[MHS831]

1 minute ago, The Huddler said:

hes a scrub

 

theres my analysis

Brilliant!  You should have a podcast.

[LinvilleGorge]

Elite athlete who just isn't that good of a football player. But we may have found his sweet spot as a special teamer. No thinking, no having to read the offense and make adjustments, etc. Just take your big jumbo athlete ass and go cause a car crash.

[MHS831]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Elite athlete who just isn't that good of a football player. But we may have found his sweet spot as a special teamer. No thinking, no having to read the offense and make adjustments, etc. Just take your big jumbo athlete ass and go cause a car crash.

that is it--a great athlete who has never really had to apply himself in things like preparation or developing a football I Q.  just has always been way better than everyone else.  There is a point and time when everyone around you is a great athlete.   The point here is to take the thinking away from him.  I image all the DCs who have had him have tried to "Swiss Army knife" him into a state of confusion.  A confused (as opposed to reactive) player is not running 4.39.  They get slower.  He does not have the background or acumen to be a Swiss Army knife--like you say, he needs to "see the ball, get the ball."  The point here is just that.  Give him one thing to do in some situations, and he will get faster.  I am not willing to take an athlete like that and say "he sucks" when there is a way to get the most out of him.  That is what good coaches do.  Until then, we should not label him.  That is what bad coaches do.

[rmoneyg35]

. If he can be a great special teamer and we can at least use him in special roles  on defense where he can make a big impact then I’m fine with that, I think that’s a win for a player who’s probably on a vet min deal.

If we can somehow get him to be more than that then that’s a big win. While the odds are against him, it’s very possible that he puts it together here with a different coach/system. There’s been plenty of players who’s put it together later in their careers. He was on 2 bad teams that seem to be horribly coached as well. There’s a big possibility he wasn’t coached up or used to his strengths.

 

I know people look at him as a scrub but it looks like he never missed a game in his career, playing 89 games, it looks like he started the majority of those games too. So he must not be horrible if two different teams would let him play for 3 entire seasons for them.  
 

no I’m not saying that means he’s good, but he’s at least a solid back up with lots of experience and he’s in his prime.

[rmoneyg35]

45 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

To understand why a player with all the tools to be successful in the NFL would bust is remarkably difficult.  While Isaiah Simmons has had a disappointing career to this point, there is a reason he is back in Carolina.  Yes, special teams are important and he does well in that role.  My intent is to examine in what situations he has been successful and develop a theory about the reason he might have experienced success in some capacity vs. the times he has flopped.  Is he a CB?  A Safety?  A LB?  An Edge?  No.  He has been all of them at some point and has yet to settle into a position.  I think the Panthers will do the same thing.  I think I know (besides special teams) how they might use him effectively on defense. 

First, think of Simmons as a unicorn. Create a position that he does not have to fit into, but one that fits into his skill sets.  I think we need to designate him as our Big Nickel, and then we need to modify that position into something of a rover, for lack of a better term.  He is a hybrid--but lets not make him the hybrid, let's make the position the hybrid. 

Isaiah Simmons has been most effective in the NFL as a Big Nickel and on special teams, specifically in sub-packages where he can leverage his elite speed (4.39 40-yard dash) without the constant physical demands of a traditional linebacker.  A big nickel is a third safety, designed to match up with the big TEs, basically, and provide better run support.  

Based on what I have read, Simmons is slowed when he has to know the Xs and Os and the position is focused on complex interpretations that may require adjustments in certain situations, etc.  He excels in special teams, for example, because he is turned loose and he simple reacts to what he sees in front of him, it seems.   I think the Panthers may create a big nickel role that turns him loose on defense.  

 

 

Simmons has been in the league for about 6 years and has been issued five playbooks.  His position has shifted in an effort to find where he could best fit in.  Getting back to basics, here is a chart that demonstrates how much more effective he was as a big nickel than a traditional LB, that required more reading blocking and run game schemes:  

 

Last season, Ransom was the big nickel, the Panthers are high on him and not looking to replace him by any means.  It is my theory that Ransom will be used alongside Moehrig in some situations.  He can also provide depth behind Moehrig.  It is also my opinion that Simmons may not be the ideal fit for every situation involving the big nickel.  Simmons could be used, for example, as a blitzing big nickel who can cover the flat and stuff the run, while Ransom may be the better lock-down TE coverage guy--I dunno.  But I see Simmons playing a bigger role on D.

  Here is a comparison between Ransom and Simmons:

• Lathan Ransom: A 2025 fourth-round pick, he is viewed as a starter candidate to provide security opposite safety Tre'von Moehrig, with the Panthers high on his potential.
• Isaiah Simmons: Recently re-signed (March 2026), Simmons has thrived as a special teams ace but is considered a prime candidate to develop into a big nickel linebacker/safety hybrid due to his unique versatility.
• Context: The Panthers' defense under Ejiro Evero requires safety depth, and both players bring different strengths to that position group.

Throw in Nick Scott, a pure free safety who just signed, it is starting to get a bit clearer.  Does this mean we will not draft a S?  Not at all.  Who do we have to give depth at FS?  Let's hope its Scott.

It is my view that Simmons needs to find one or two things he does well on this defense and focus on that and not everything else.  What are his natural talents (6'4" 238 and runs sub 4.4--who does that?  Can you not make that work for you?)  This tells me the problem is mental.  Too many cooks in the kitchen.  Instead of asking him to do everything behind the DL, let's get him to do one thing that aligns with his skill set and history of success.  A situational big nickel/rover seems to be a fit.

 

 

Great post. 5 different playbooks in 5 seasons then there’s the fact they wanted him to play multiple positions including edge? that’s got to be insane imagine having to have to learn basically every position on defense except DT. How can you ever focus to get good at just one position? Then on top of that he had to learn a new playbook every season?

on top of that I bet coaches dealt with a lot of uncertainty on the roster with him. Wondering where they put him, having to compete with people that only do one or two positions. I bet he was also overlooked on depth charts cause he was never decided on what position he was.

 

all those changes could really hamper a player. I’m not saying he’s going to be a star here but who knows what could happen when he stays on the same team with the same staff and playbook for more than one year.

[Cam's New Arm]

I think he'd make a good QB spy role in those mobile QB games, like Chicago. Just send him at Caleb every play.

[Cam2Ligit2Quit]

When it comes to evaluating talent, the equation is actually pretty simple. If you're elite in both the measurable traits (size, speed, strength) and the mental side (IQ, instincts), you're looking at a Hall of Fame trajectory—assuming injuries don't derail you. If you're elite in one area but just decent in the other, you can still carve out a Pro Bowl career. Decent in both? That's your typical NFL starter.

But here's where it gets tricky—and where a lot of athletes, especially the ones who dominate practices, find their ceiling. If you're not a starter and you don't excel on special teams, you won't last in this league. The roster math is unforgiving.

That "what if" game has been playing out in Carolina for a while now, especially at wide receiver. You've got guys who light it up in practice—everything looks smooth, natural, effortless. But when the lights come on and the defense throws a look they haven't seen on tape, the processing slows down. The game speeds up. And when they have to think instead of just react, they crumble.

That's the danger. Put a player like that on the field—any position, really—and expect him to process on the fly, and you're setting him up to fail. Now factor in that he was a top-10 pick, not some late-round flier or UDFA. A franchise invested everything in him. They moved pieces around, changed coaching, changed systems—tried everything to help him succeed.

But here's the reality check: if he's out there, remember that the guys lining up across from him are also getting paid millions. And their job is to find that weakness and exploit it every single snap.

[The Huddler]

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

Brilliant!  You should have a podcast.

not worth wasting my time. the world doesnt deserve my wisdom anyway

[Jon Snow]

Tools. If I hear that term used one more time I'm going to lose my damn mind.  "Tools" are meaningless if they cannot use them already. Stop looking for "tools" and find productive football players. Stop looking for combine freaks and look for guys that have produced at a high level already. Tools my ass.

[MHS831]

41 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Tools. If I hear that term used one more time I'm going to lose my damn mind.  "Tools" are meaningless if they cannot use them already. Stop looking for "tools" and find productive football players. Stop looking for combine freaks and look for guys that have produced at a high level already. Tools my ass.

I hear you and I have said the same thing at times, but blanket statements are accurate part of the time at best.  I have also coached kids who had the "tools" but they were slow and unproductive on the field--and a few adjustments to the scheme or teaching techniques, and the light comes on.  We call them "late bloomers."  Based on my limited experience, it should be called "coaching."  As a former coach, if you gave me kids with the tools and I could not get them to perform at the level of their ability, then I have failed.  The coaches know this, so their timetables to win may be shorter than the time they have to develop a player--I think a lot of talent goes down the disposal, which is why the success rate for drafted players is so low.

In my view, based on my career as a professor and researcher, my job is to produce successful people for the workplace.   I use data to identify central problems and I use my relationships with my students to strengthen weaknesses.  I have a limited amount of time to do this before a decision is made about their development.  In this case, I would look at the variables (data and the situational influences unique to this individual that may have stunted growth) and not the ineffective player as the center of the problem.  The team has already interviewed him, talked to his college coaches, measured him, etc. So I would minimize the assumption that the kid is the problem and look at his system of support and teaching strategies.  Nobody wants to admit THEY might be the problem.  To blame a first-rounder for failing, you have to admit either you did not properly identify the prospect's potential (which is your job) or you were unable to prepare that prospect (with all the tools that got him the job) to succeed (also your job).  So are we going to blame the 24-year-old kid with all the tools to succeed for sucking or are we going to take responsibility for his success as his mentors and teachers?

 

Edited 1 minute ago by MHS831