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!

     

Thomas Davis should be used elsewhere


ladypanther89

Recommended Posts

Here is what I think. We obviously seem set at LB, even though Davis might be better than Anderson, my Stats class taught me that Davis has a larger chance to get injured if we use him more often.

Make sense so far?

So here is what I propose RR..

Use Davis in special packages as a safety/linebacker hybrid, kind of what he came in to do when he was a rookie.

Remember we basically drafted him to spy on Vick and it worked (to some extent).

There is no doubt Davis still has speed so why not use it to our full advantage. Because lets face it, Davis will not make it 16 games as a three down linebacker, call me whatever you want, a non-fan, a cynical betch, but this is what I believe and my pre-med background backs me up.

And he MUST be used on ST...remember his rookie year he ended someones career on kickoff coverage. Not that we are looking for that, but you get the point.

I just think we should prolong him as a player and get some benefit out of it...and Martin could use the rest too ; )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't want TD on special teams. that sort of defeats the purpose of limiting his on-field exposure.

also i don't have the link but i remember reading an article on trending defenses and one of them was a package involving what amounts to three safeties in a nickel package where the nickelback is actually replaced by the third safety, and the archetype for someone in that position is a run-stopper who can lay wood against the run but has the speed to keep with receivers if necessary like a safety should. tweener types would work here, and i've heard nakamura's name mentioned for this role. thomas davis is a possibility as well, if our LBer depth remains solid.

intriguing possibilities all around and i will not be surprised to see plenty of exotic looks under rivera/mcdermott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is what I think. We obviously seem set at LB, even though Davis might be better than Anderson, my Stats class taught me that Davis has a larger chance to get injured if we use him more often.

Make sense so far?

So here is what I propose RR..

Use Davis in special packages as a safety/linebacker hybrid, kind of what he came in to do when he was a rookie.

Remember we basically drafted him to spy on Vick and it worked (to some extent).

There is no doubt Davis still has speed so why not use it to our full advantage. Because lets face it, Davis will not make it 16 games as a three down linebacker, call me whatever you want, a non-fan, a cynical betch, but this is what I believe and my pre-med background backs me up.

And he MUST be used on ST...remember his rookie year he ended someones career on kickoff coverage. Not that we are looking for that, but you get the point.

I just think we should prolong him as a player and get some benefit out of it...and Martin could use the rest too ; )

Wow so even when your stat class teaches you that if we use Davis more often, the higher the chance of him getting injure, and you want him to play ST? I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kickoff coverage is running straight down the field. With his speed he will barely have to cut at all...would you prefer him on the bench?

there are still moves required in pursuit that will exact torsion on the joint. in theory he would only run straight but it's not a safe bet.

the front office has made enough roster moves in the ST phase that if we have to resort to plugging in thomas davis we are probably screwed no matter what we do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think there actually has been some discussion about him playing some special teams, though i doubt it's very much. as i've said before, tho, i don't expect him to be on the field for more than 20-25 snaps per game. one or two downs a series is about it and that's all it should be...just situationally. keeps his legs fresher and lessens exposure to injury.

also, we've added enough ST studs this offseason who are solid in coverage and we also shouldn't have half of the ST guys we depend on have to quit playing on STs because they are getting promoted to starter b/c of injury to another guy. davis just won't be all that needed on STs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow so even when your stat class teaches you that if we use Davis more often, the higher the chance of him getting injure, and you want him to play ST? I guess

It makes sense because as a linebacker he has a much higher chance of tearing his knee up again, whereas on ST he still has a chance but a lower chance.

I should have said this before but I deff think we should have cut him this offseason. Hurney has a problem of holding on to players too long (Dan Morgan). I thought we would stop when Fox left but guess not.

So back to out argument....Would I rather have him play 16 games at ST or 4 games at LB...you know my answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't think Dave touches the defense. That might be a mark against him but definitely a huge red flag for evero. He refuses to run anything other than soft zone and when you don't get pressure that's an awful scheme
    • You don't have to convince me. I think not picking up the option should absolutely be firmly on the table but I just do not see Tepper and Morgan doing that for previously stated reasons. Therefore I'm not going to bother entertaining the notion. Just hoping we actually get real viable competition. If that doesn't happen at the minimum then my perception of that is complete and utter professional malpractice.
    • It was absolutely a catch, and I can’t believe how many folks were stating, before the NFL’s apology, that the overturn was the right call.  The ultimate question in this case is this: can a player complete a catch with only one hand? Of course, we all know the answer to that question, and it is an emphatic “Yes.” T-Mac maintained complete control with one hand (believe it was the right) while the other came off when the ball hit the ground. The ball was in the same position in the one hand (watch T-Mac’s fingers in relation to the NFL shield on the ball) after touching the ground as it was when it first went to the ground. Going back to the question above, if one hand can establish control, then there was no need for the other to stay on the ball, so long as the ball doesn’t move in that one hand that stays on it   It blew my mind that they overturned this in the first place. This should not be a “We got it wrong on the replay because there wasn’t clear and convincing evidence.” This should have been, “That was absolutely a catch.”
×
×
  • Create New...