Shea: LB or DE?
I know it's been looming on everyone's mind but what do you guys think with this new Urlacher injury, and the fact he may be done.
He has clearly not been able to get any consistent rush as a 7tech, so do we try him at MLB? Lets remember he WAS a 70/60 LB at Boise state for the most part?
Personally I think that this would not be a bad move, or move roach over and let him play the other OLB. (I know it's not Tampa 2 we love but the idea of sending him in some blitz packages, and not having a large angry tackle mauling hom is where I see his true potential)
But what do you guys think, IMHO I think he has better chance of success as some kind of LB (could add a few wrinkles to our d as well)
What scares me about the whole scenario -- and I'm saying we don't move him, is that all of a sudden we would be in need of 2 very high priced players. DE and LT.
Yes, but judging from watching him play as a 7 and as a stand up pass rusher (becoming more common now) he looks more effective and comfortable as a LB
Originally Posted by bearsinhouston
All in all I just don't want to see the no 19 pick wasted
oh, I agree. But with the continued need for a good LT, having to go back and add an expensive DE is not good for us. Like I said, I'm not saying I disagree. It's just a lousy situation. I'm not sure that his DE stay is over with though. I really wanted to see him develop next year. The new LB issue puts a kink in that whole scenario.
Originally Posted by Grizzblue
Like I've said -- this is going to be an interesting off-season.
he is clearly a 4-3 defensive end...he could be a rush linebacker in a 3-4, but the idea of him replacing urlacher is not a good one...just look at him trying to make an open field tackle on the last play sunday...
nothing about mclellin says linebacker...i don't know why this idea persists...
Either way, our d-line gets winded by the end of the season a lot. We need to keep getting guys. Hope to god we get a dt, as none of them are half as good as our de's.
I'm so tired of the Bears doing "mad scientist" moves, playing players out of positions - and then we wonder why the moves end up with mediocre play, or worse, from the moved player. Yes, I understand Urlacher was a safety in college, and THAT move worked out. But I've lost count over the Lovie Smith era, on our failed "experiments" moving players around like chess pieces.
We need a stud LB. Draft one or pony up the big bucks for a FA.
There is no magic pixie dust for LB's any more than there was for oline players. In the end, if you want a quality player, you have to go out and get one.
QFT. He's a good 4-3 DE for a rookie. He'll get better with experience, coaching, and plenty of work in the weight room. He needs to add strength, but has not played poorly. Even Bruce Irwin, who we probably would have selected had he been on the board at #19, is primarily a situational DE right now. It would be a monumental mistake to experiment with him at LB.
Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99
Exactly. To me, it's like trying to use a screwdriver for a hammer. If you need a hammer, then get a hammer. It's like drafting Hester as a dback, and then believing we'll make him a stud WR. He's never, ever, ever going to be worth squat as a WR. But we wasted years trying to make him one (and at one point trying to pretend he was a true #1 wide receiver).
Originally Posted by Rakk
But the Bears love to make hammers out of screwdrivers. Tap, tap taping on that nail.
if anything, I can see Hardin being converted to a MLB. Would need to draft another DE again. Don't see Shea as possible MLB. If anything, he is a OLB in a 3-4
He just needs a bit more time and experience at DE
I do like DeCicco and I think Hardin could work as MLB. Just need some luck that we find the next great MLB out of a player we don't expect it