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 Morgan says Bobby > Luke


Zod

Recommended Posts

http://www.seahawks.com/news/articles/article-1/Bobby-Wagner-Luke-Kuechly-a-real-1-2-punch/f51a6e34-fa94-419d-b27f-3a19ad843404?campaign=sea:fanshare:twitter

 

 

“I’d say Bobby has a more all-around game than Luke has, as far as using his hands and being able to play off blocks,” Morgan said. “But when Luke is left free, when you don’t block him, he’s going to make the play. He just has a really good feel and instincts that help him shoot gaps.

 

“They’re both excellent football players. They’re both in the very top of their category. But they’re different players, even different body types. And the difference is that Bobby’s a better athlete where Luke is just that instinctive guy. He’s going to see it and go get it.”

 

 

 

Luke is an athletic freak of nature. Why do people assume he is just a smart player?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's much like the Willis v Beason debate.

Willis is the superior athlete; Beason wasn't far behind but had far superior instincts and football IQ.

There's no LB in the game I'd take over Luke. He's not even scratching the surface of what he can do.

 

Not really. Lets take a look at the important measurables for a linebacker from their combine performance (Wagner didn't do the combine, he did a pro day)

 

Winner in bold....

 

                                      Luke                                Bobby

 

20 yard dash                2.59                                   2.64

10 yard dash                1.56                                   1.57

Bench Press                 27                                       24

Vertical                          38                                      39.5

20 yard shuttle             4.12                                    4.28

3 cone                          6.92                                   7.10

 

 

 

As a physical prototype middle linebacker, Luke wins hand down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to derail this thread but Patrick Willis was/is the better linebacker than Beason...Beason was a top 5 lber to but the physical size speed combo Willis has is still quite unmatched.

Kuchley has the size speed thang. Bobby Wagner has it too....just be glad we got one of them.

Both are better than Dan Morgan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's not impossible to go from worst to first.  We kept Evero because anyone in there right mind knew our defense was destroyed by injuries, not the scheme.  Evero has been given a plethora of talent between free agency and the draft, not to mention getting DB back. I fully expect our defense to be very good.  I have no reason to think Jones would say something like that unless he truly felt like that.   
    • We would’ve played Florida and lost in the 1st instead of the 3rd round.  Montreal would have been the 8 seed.
    • I can't get behind a purely subjective re-draft as a method of defining "top-10 QB" status. That invites bias based on vibes/hypotheticals and can ignore actual on-field performance. You and others have said that Bryce has to be a top-10 QB to justify the pick. That's a high bar, which I'm not against, but we need a clear, consistent way to measure it. When I bring up metrics that Bryce has registered in the top-10 in like BTT%, P2S ratio, catchable deep ball rate, etc... they're waved off as either irrelevant or the expected baseline performance. Meanwhile, volume stats like passing yards or win-loss records, both of which depend heavily on roster talent, health, and coaching, are treated as definitive. That's where the inconsistency kicks in. If no performance metric ever counts in his favor and the answer is always going to be "he should be doing that," then we're not evaluating him... we're just holding him to a curve he can't win against. If this is really about performance standards, then let's define them. But if it's just about confirming prior takes based on height and weight, then let's call it what is it and stop pretending that this is a football analysis discussion.
×
×
  • Create New...