PDA

View Full Version : Morlon Greenwood - why the negativity?


gtexan02
01-28-2007, 10:50 PM
Whats the deal with all the negativity towards Morlon Greenwood? Why do people want to cut him? Why do I seemingly always see his name on the same list as many of our old and busted "cap saving" hits out there?

Let me say these things about Greenwood:
Is he being paid too much? Yes, absolutely. But we are VERY thin at OLB, he is a very consistant producer, and he has steadily increased his big play ability every year.

I mean, why is everyone disapointed? He is doing BETTER here than he did in Miami! We have a young guy, who is a solid, but not spectacular, OLB who can make the occassional big play.

This year he had 109 tackles (1 more than his best season at Miami), 1 sack, 1 INT, 2 FFs, and 3 fumble recoveries. Those are all either career highs or close to career highs.

So hear me out: He's young, he's solid, and he plays a position we sorely need help out. Why is there so much talk about cutting him?

TexanFan881
01-28-2007, 10:52 PM
I don't know. I like Morlon Greenwood and feel the same way. I think he's been solid for us and wouldn't mind having him start for us for awhile.

gtexan02
01-28-2007, 10:52 PM
PS: Just to compare, Shantee Orr, our other OLB this season, finished with a whopping 32 tackles and 1.5 sacks.

mexican_texan
01-28-2007, 10:53 PM
It's all about the Benjamins.

gtexan02
01-28-2007, 10:55 PM
It's all about the Benjamins.

It would be if we had other people to come in and play. But at this point, giving up proven members of our team to save a few million to sign unproven players doesn't make any sense.

baba ganoush
01-28-2007, 11:08 PM
yes, he's young...restructure his contract, give him less money and more years, but he can still have the oppurtunity to make bug money...as long as he stays consistant he's okay in my book...

Scooter
01-28-2007, 11:17 PM
greenwood is our current version of jay foreman. sure his stats are decent but he's getting his tackles well behind the LOS and is always behind the play. he (like foreman) also cant cover for squat. he isnt much of a pass rusher. besides the flaws in his game, his salary is way out of line.

sure we're thin at the position, but if it's going to benefit us in the future to cut him now, i'm all for it. if we can pay him less to play as a backup or spot starter until we're stronger at LB, that would be fine with me.

TEXANRED
01-28-2007, 11:23 PM
B/C in my opinion an OLB should be able to get sacks and cover. Both of which Greenwood is unable to do.

Is he better than Orr? Yes.

Would Greenwood be a second or third stringer for any of the other 31 teams, absolutely.

TheOgre
01-28-2007, 11:28 PM
I think people are still going off of his 2005 performance and are not aware that he was solid this year. He is definitely overpaid, but he is one of the only five on defense (Mario, Weaver, Demeco, and Dunta are the other four) that will most definitely start in 2007.

mexican_texan
01-28-2007, 11:32 PM
It would be if we had other people to come in and play. But at this point, giving up proven members of our team to save a few million to sign unproven players doesn't make any sense.
As in we're giving him too much as compared to his play.

SF49erFaithful
01-28-2007, 11:36 PM
An honest question here......so what is the deal with his contract? He is being payed a bundle, but why?

TEXANRED
01-28-2007, 11:37 PM
An honest question here......so what is the deal with his contract? He is being payed a bundle, but why?

Casserly.

Hervoyel
01-28-2007, 11:41 PM
Morlon Greenwood was another in a long line of "bad fits" signed by the previous administration here. He was an ok (as usual) 4-3 LB who was signed by the Texans for too much money (as usual) who was then asked to play out of position (as usual). I swear sometimes it's like our old front office went out of it's way to find ways to set guys up to fail.

So in 2005 he comes in and doesn't live up to his salary or billing. Nobody with a clue is surprised by this. He draws a mountain of criticism and enters the 2006 season as a lot of peoples new "Phillip Buchanon". I guess that was mainly because you can only get upset about Buchanon for so long and then you just start to not care, but I digress....

So he plays better in 2006 but there are still people who think he needs to go. The fact is he doesn't need to go and he's probably going to be more effective next season than he was this year. Shantee Orr (as much as I like the guy) is the one who needs to go. If we could have Greenwood, Ryans, and Wong playing at his "career best" we'd be fine at LB. Sadly we have Wong post-injury so we need someone new to step into Orr's spot.

Greenwood however is fine. They should leave that man alone and let him get truly comfortable in this defense at that spot. Then he'd be an overpriced free agent signing that actually paid off instead of one more guy who cashed his Texans checks and then went on to play well somewhere else. We have too many of those out there already.

t_flare
01-28-2007, 11:44 PM
He is just plain average. I really dont hear neg stuff about him but he is average in coverage and average in stopping the run. Orr is below average but he gives energy. I say Orr is a bigger problem than Greenwood. He is not a pass rusher but average everywhere else

Scooter
01-29-2007, 06:41 AM
So he plays better in 2006 but there are still people who think he needs to go. The fact is he doesn't need to go and he's probably going to be more effective next season than he was this year. Shantee Orr (as much as I like the guy) is the one who needs to go. If we could have Greenwood, Ryans, and Wong playing at his "career best" we'd be fine at LB. Sadly we have Wong post-injury so we need someone new to step into Orr's spot.

better doesnt mean good, and we hope everyone is more effective next season after having a full year and an offseason to adjust to style & system. greenwood's problem is his aggression. when he drops into zone, he finds his mark and sits there, not bothering to shade TE's and receivers ... he's also much worse than both orr and ryans at moving blockers. the plays he makes are the ones that land in his lap, just like foreman. shantee orr is very high on my keep list, not because he's great (because he's not), but because he's good at what he does and comes with intensity. orr's a backup lb making next to minimum, is a strong pass rusher (having more sacks in 05 than greenwood's entire career), and a good special teamer. i'm not sure i've seen anyone recommend that orr be a starter, because he shouldnt. greenwood is the equivelant of baseball's utility backup. he's not good enough in any area to be a starter, but he's not terrible at anything. since we're thin at the position, greenwood fits, but not at his price. at a severe discount, he'd be a good backup that can spot start or backup either OLB position without hurting the team.

the player noone's mentioning is wali rainer who during last offseason was receiving the highest of praises as defensive team leader until the injury. i'd be much more inclined to start wong, rainer, and even give troy evans a shot over greenwood. what is certain though is that we need to find atleast 1 more solid player to add depth or start at OLB, and with smith/kubiak's work last season i think we'll be able to do that relatively easily.

dbspi
01-29-2007, 06:46 AM
His play is nothing more then average yet he is getting paid like top 5 OLB. Texans need to restructure his contract or need to cut him. This just goes to show you how ineptitude our previous administration were. Till this date we are paying the price for their mistakes.

gtexan02
01-29-2007, 08:48 AM
Half of the people on this post are proving my point perfectly. Unfounded criticism for a solid performance this year.

1) He racks up tackles well behind the LOS --
Do you have proof of this, or are you going on last years stats? It was true last year, with stats to back it up, but you don't rack up 110 tackles as an OLB if you just sit way back. You never heard a complaint from the coaches, I never saw him backpedaling before a tackle, and frankly you don't rack up 110 tackles as an OLB in a 4-3 if you just wait for the guy to get there.

2) He brings no energy --
How in the world are you suggesting this? Just because he doesn't get called for a lot of encroachment penalties or roughing the passer calls, don't misinterpret it as a lack of energy.

3) He's always behind the play --
Always? Really? Making tackles from behind is incredibly ineffective, and as thus, how in the world do you make 110 tackles as a 4-3 OLB?

4) He can't cover worth squat --
Again where is this coming from? Do you have a quote from coaches, particular game film, or is this just a hunch of yours? Last season I saw him knock off 6 passes, and this season he bumped 2 and picked one off. TEs didn't kill us like they normally do, either. And how do you know his defense isn't being called by the team? Just because he's not set to man up on a RB or TE, and may be in a spy or short zone to watch for the draw doesn't necessarily mean he's not good at coverage. IMO, unless you know for certain what his defensive assignment is, or hear the coaches say that he is poor in coverage, watching the games isn't going to be enough evidence.

5) Shantee Orr should be kept because of his energy or his 05 production --
Guess what Orr did this year? Nothing. His production was because of the 3-4 defense. He proved this year he is awful in a 4-3 setup. He didn't tackle well, he didn't rush the passer well. Unless we have some data to indicate that the opposing offenses ran to the weak side 3x more often than the strong side I don't think I would feel comfortable with him being anything more than 2nd or 3rd string.

I think people are scapegoating Greenwood based on 05s performance. The fact of the matter is that he had almost career numbers in every category. He played better this year than he did throughout his entire career at Miami. And he was part of a very good Miami LB corp.

yourfavoritetexan42
01-29-2007, 10:25 AM
I think he is a good role player. Someone who we can have there and just get the job done. However he is overpaid. We should keep him as long as he performs, if he starts to slide or gets a big injury, than cut him, other than that it doens't hurt to have him around. We don't really have the luxury of cutting healthy players because they are overpaid, because we don't have anyone else to fill in.

Scooter
01-29-2007, 10:46 AM
prove your own point. what outside of espn.com can you say good about greenwood? tackles? jay foreman racked up 140+ tackles in 02 with no offense, send him to the probowl. you're asking for proof but arguing subjective points, please provide your own proof. he had his best season as a pro behind a line of walk ons, lead by 2 rookies? i need more proof than that. with any luck TK saved some games and will let us diagnose some play by play.

greenwood is an after-the-fact player. i cant prove this (i lost my DVR with every game recorded about 3 weeks ago ... i'm pretty aggrivated about that), but from what i can recall he was hiding behind demeco and sitting aimlessly in short-intermediate zone coverage. when we blitzed the right side it had very little effect and greenwood was stoned any time he was touched while ryans instinctively found holes.

orr is no example to favor greenwood because orr is a situational backup and special teamer ... get back to me after comparing salaries & roles. noone's saying he should start so dont reach for a crutch. as a pass rusher, orr has proven that he's able to get to the quarterback ... racking up 10.5 sacks in 2.5 years compared to greenwood's 6 in 6 years. shantee orr is the linebacker version of antwain peek, greenwood is the 4-3 version of jay foreman. he does the job eventually but is essentially a lump IMO and shouldnt be a starter ... receiving top tier money for a utility backup is poor management.

TexanAddict
01-29-2007, 12:15 PM
Morlon Greenwood was another in a long line of "bad fits" signed by the previous administration here. He was an ok (as usual) 4-3 LB who was signed by the Texans for too much money (as usual) who was then asked to play out of position (as usual). I swear sometimes it's like our old front office went out of it's way to find ways to set guys up to fail.

So in 2005 he comes in and doesn't live up to his salary or billing. Nobody with a clue is surprised by this. He draws a mountain of criticism and enters the 2006 season as a lot of peoples new "Phillip Buchanon". I guess that was mainly because you can only get upset about Buchanon for so long and then you just start to not care, but I digress....

So he plays better in 2006 but there are still people who think he needs to go. The fact is he doesn't need to go and he's probably going to be more effective next season than he was this year. Shantee Orr (as much as I like the guy) is the one who needs to go. If we could have Greenwood, Ryans, and Wong playing at his "career best" we'd be fine at LB. Sadly we have Wong post-injury so we need someone new to step into Orr's spot.

Greenwood however is fine. They should leave that man alone and let him get truly comfortable in this defense at that spot. Then he'd be an overpriced free agent signing that actually paid off instead of one more guy who cashed his Texans checks and then went on to play well somewhere else. We have too many of those out there already.

I agree with most of what is said here. Greenwood was not a good fit in the 3-4 and in 2005 made all his tackles 5 yds or more down field. Last year, he still had trouble keeping containment, but did make most of his tackles closer to the line of scrimmage and did help create some big plays and turnovers. He seems to be a much better fit in his current role and is by far not the weakest starter on our defense, or even in the LB corps for that matter. That distinction goes to Orr, who didn't do much of anything last year.

Orr was consistently fooled by play-action and play fakes, blocked inside, lost containment, and very often was not near the play when it was over with. He was a better fit in the 3-4 and showed he was a decent pass rusher from that position. However, the LB position should not be measured by sack numbers alone, especially when most of those sacks came from a defensive system we are no longer using. I agree that Greenwood is currently over-paid, but his production last year was solid, and we need upgrades at several other spots on defense before WLB, and in order they are...FS, SLB, CB.

Please_Evolve
01-29-2007, 01:06 PM
Half of the people on this post are proving my point perfectly. Unfounded criticism for a solid performance this year.

1) He racks up tackles well behind the LOS --
Do you have proof of this, or are you going on last years stats? It was true last year, with stats to back it up, but you don't rack up 110 tackles as an OLB if you just sit way back. You never heard a complaint from the coaches, I never saw him backpedaling before a tackle, and frankly you don't rack up 110 tackles as an OLB in a 4-3 if you just wait for the guy to get there.

2) He brings no energy --
How in the world are you suggesting this? Just because he doesn't get called for a lot of encroachment penalties or roughing the passer calls, don't misinterpret it as a lack of energy.

3) He's always behind the play --
Always? Really? Making tackles from behind is incredibly ineffective, and as thus, how in the world do you make 110 tackles as a 4-3 OLB?

4) He can't cover worth squat --
Again where is this coming from? Do you have a quote from coaches, particular game film, or is this just a hunch of yours? Last season I saw him knock off 6 passes, and this season he bumped 2 and picked one off. TEs didn't kill us like they normally do, either. And how do you know his defense isn't being called by the team? Just because he's not set to man up on a RB or TE, and may be in a spy or short zone to watch for the draw doesn't necessarily mean he's not good at coverage. IMO, unless you know for certain what his defensive assignment is, or hear the coaches say that he is poor in coverage, watching the games isn't going to be enough evidence.

5) Shantee Orr should be kept because of his energy or his 05 production --
Guess what Orr did this year? Nothing. His production was because of the 3-4 defense. He proved this year he is awful in a 4-3 setup. He didn't tackle well, he didn't rush the passer well. Unless we have some data to indicate that the opposing offenses ran to the weak side 3x more often than the strong side I don't think I would feel comfortable with him being anything more than 2nd or 3rd string.

I think people are scapegoating Greenwood based on 05s performance. The fact of the matter is that he had almost career numbers in every category. He played better this year than he did throughout his entire career at Miami. And he was part of a very good Miami LB corp.

Nice points but sadly there are fans that somehow think that we have to have pro bowl players at EVERY POSITION. These are the same fans that prolly quietly wanted Morlon because he was a big name that year in free agency.

edo783
01-29-2007, 02:06 PM
There are only about 6 posters on here that actually know what they are talking about (I'm not one) regarding football and the rest mostly just throw up on their keyboards, spitting out what they have heard elsewhere/saw on ESPN etc, so given that I don't doubt that Greenwood be under appreciated as he had a marginal season in 05 and it was roundly repeated here and in the local fishwrap. 06 on the other hand seemed to go fairly well IMO.

Texan in Japan
01-29-2007, 02:15 PM
Morlon Greenwood is a solid, if unspectacular OLB. He plays his WLB role well and should be retained. Yes, he may be a tad expensive, but given he signed w/ the Texans would do you expect. I was pleased with his effort and production in the 11 games I watched this year.

BradK10
01-29-2007, 02:33 PM
I made a post back early in the season about Greenwood, and when you watch games, sure you hear his name making a tackle, but tackles are probably the most overrated stat. Rarely did you see he making plays or forcing mistakes...that's what Ryans did.

TexanAddict
01-29-2007, 02:46 PM
Rarely did you see he making plays or forcing mistakes...that's what Ryans did.

Then what do you call his 1 INT, 2 forced fumbles, and 3 fumbles recovered last season?

BradK10
01-29-2007, 03:23 PM
Then what do you call his 1 INT, 2 forced fumbles, and 3 fumbles recovered last season?

I don't put a lot of stock into FF, and especially FR. Ever heard of "right place right time?" That's a FR. Many would say the same of Mario's first sack.

Forcing mistakes come in manners more than measured turnovers. You can watch a game and see...did a player force a quick throw, a dropped pass, or missed block/hole? These are the "mistakes" I'm talking about. Ryans is disruptive...I just don't see the same from Greenwood.

TexanAddict
01-29-2007, 03:51 PM
I don't put a lot of stock into FF, and especially FR. Ever heard of "right place right time?" That's a FR. Many would say the same of Mario's first sack.

Forcing mistakes come in manners more than measured turnovers. You can watch a game and see...did a player force a quick throw, a dropped pass, or missed block/hole? These are the "mistakes" I'm talking about. Ryans is disruptive...I just don't see the same from Greenwood.

Forcing turnovers is nothing but "forcing a mistake". And while recoving a fumble is being in the "right place right time", a player does have to have the awareness about them to make the recovery. What these stats do show is that Greenwood is around the play and is opportunistic when given the chance. I will agree that Greenwood is not disruptive and he has his flaws, and no one will say that he is one of the best LBs in the league, but he did a solid job in his role last season, and as I said, there are far greater weaknesses on this team. Besides, I will take a defensive player that creates turnovers and gets my offense back the ball any day.

Please_Evolve
01-29-2007, 03:54 PM
I made a post back early in the season about Greenwood, and when you watch games, sure you hear his name making a tackle, but tackles are probably the most overrated stat. Rarely did you see he making plays or forcing mistakes...that's what Ryans did.

Just the same as hits in baseball is overated or fgs made in basketball? Sorry i am not usually like this...but that is a braindead assesment.

cuppacoffee
01-29-2007, 04:01 PM
I made a post back early in the season about Greenwood, and when you watch games, sure you hear his name making a tackle, but tackles are probably the most overrated stat. Rarely did you see he making plays or forcing mistakes...that's what Ryans did.

I don't put a lot of stock into FF, and especially FR. Ever heard of "right place right time?" That's a FR. Many would say the same of Mario's first sack.


Makes tackles....overrated stat?.:lightbulb:...

is in the right place at the right time.:hmmm:

I'm convinced. Get rid of the bum. :rolleyes:

:coffee:

Scooter
01-29-2007, 04:21 PM
Then what do you call his 1 INT, 2 forced fumbles, and 3 fumbles recovered last season?

please detail these big plays. i have a very creative memory, so hopefully someone without spending 2 days googling can reminisce on greenwood's stats for me. if up to my imagination (no DVR as i've said ... i could be wholly wrong), the INT was a tipped lob against jacksonville, one FF should've gone to a DB, one sack was untouched and the other should've been a 1/2 yard rush loss (again, i'm very fuzzy) and the FR's i dont remember. i'm still waiting on more than an espn.com arguement.

the arguement that i see is "he doesnt suck". i'm fully aware of the texan's history, but the "good enough" C&C players like this should be removed at first opportunity.

TexanAddict
01-29-2007, 04:37 PM
please detail these big plays. i have a very creative memory, so hopefully someone without spending 2 days googling can reminisce on greenwood's stats for me. if up to my imagination (no DVR as i've said ... i could be wholly wrong), the INT was a tipped lob against jacksonville, one FF should've gone to a DB, one sack was untouched and the other should've been a 1/2 yard rush loss (again, i'm very fuzzy) and the FR's i dont remember. i'm still waiting on more than an espn.com arguement.

the arguement that i see is "he doesnt suck". i'm fully aware of the texan's history, but the "good enough" C&C players like this should be removed at first opportunity.

This was in response to the statement that Greenwood doesn't foce mistakes, when that is exactly what these stats are indicative of. And although you seem unwilling to admit it these are big plays. Yes the INT was off a tipped pass and not a acrobatic, one-handed mid-air snag, but it got the Jags off the field and gave our offense back the ball. And while he didn't hurdle a blocker to get to the QB it still counts as a negative play for the opposing offense. Also, his first FR came in our endzone which not only got the O the ball back, but saved a TD. The argument is who "sucks" more at their position, and at this point Greenwood may not even be in the bottom quarter of our current starters. You must shore up the weakest areas of the team before cutting players that aren't spectacular, but are still doing the job asked of them.

Scooter
01-29-2007, 04:39 PM
Makes tackles....overrated stat?.:lightbulb:...

is in the right place at the right time.:hmmm:

I'm convinced. Get rid of the bum. :rolleyes:

:coffee:

143 tackles and top 5 in the league in 2002 ... name that stud (he hasnt landed a starting job in since 03). yes, tackles can be very overrated, especially when hiding behind the star LB picking up leftovers and on an offensively challanged team. tackles are one of the most obvious areas where stats can be misleading.

gtexan02
01-29-2007, 06:17 PM
143 tackles and top 5 in the league in 2002 ... name that stud (he hasnt landed a starting job in since 03). yes, tackles can be very overrated, especially when hiding behind the star LB picking up leftovers and on an offensively challanged team. tackles are one of the most obvious areas where stats can be misleading.

First off, tackles are misleading if you are an MLB in a 3-4 defense. Playing weak side linebacker and racking up tackles should be not be misleading.

Secondly, I don't remember off the top of my head, but he was the one who tipped the ball in the Miami game that kept the 2 point conversion from going through. Thats pretty big right there

Scooter
01-29-2007, 06:28 PM
Secondly, I don't remember off the top of my head, but he was the one who tipped the ball in the Miami game that kept the 2 point conversion from going through. Thats pretty big right there

that was mario :mario:

Scooter
01-29-2007, 06:29 PM
This was in response to the statement that Greenwood doesn't foce mistakes, when that is exactly what these stats are indicative of. And although you seem unwilling to admit it these are big plays. Yes the INT was off a tipped pass and not a acrobatic, one-handed mid-air snag, but it got the Jags off the field and gave our offense back the ball. And while he didn't hurdle a blocker to get to the QB it still counts as a negative play for the opposing offense. Also, his first FR came in our endzone which not only got the O the ball back, but saved a TD. The argument is who "sucks" more at their position, and at this point Greenwood may not even be in the bottom quarter of our current starters. You must shore up the weakest areas of the team before cutting players that aren't spectacular, but are still doing the job asked of them.

name one play that a rookie wouldnt have made. since stats work apparently, greenwood has 1 INT in 6 years (same as troy evans, in 5 years with minimal playing time). he has 6 sacks in 6 years (orr has 10.5 in 2.5 years). he has 2 FF's in 6 years (orr has 4 in 2.5). he isnt even in foreman's league as far as tackles. the only area greenwood's winning on is fumbles recovered ... right place, right time.

i'd love to hear the diagnosis though. what has greenwood done to earn any praise that cant be read off of a stat sheet? playmaker? pass rusher? great in coverage? solo tackle leader? help me here. if i'm criticizing 05, what are you praising?

gtexan02
01-29-2007, 06:33 PM
name one play that a rookie wouldnt have made. since stats work apparently, greenwood has 1 INT in 6 years (same as troy evans, in 5 years with minimal playing time). he has 6 sacks in 6 years (orr has 10.5 in 2.5 years). he has 2 FF's in 6 years (orr has 4 in 2.5). he isnt even in foreman's league as far as tackles. the only area greenwood's winning on is fumbles recovered ... right place, right time.

i'd love to hear the diagnosis though. what has greenwood done to earn any praise that cant be read off of a stat sheet? playmaker? pass rusher? great in coverage? solo tackle leader? help me here. if i'm criticizing 05, what are you praising?

What? Bringing in career stats into this makes no sense. Everyone has admitted Greenwood didn't have a good year last year. The fact of hte matter is we are comparing our two OLBs, playing in our new 4-3 system.

Orr may have done well as a 3-4 LB and pass rusher but he was terrible as a 4-3 OLB

Greenwood had a solid year.

Therefore there is zero incentive for me to want to keep Orr, whatever his salary, because he doesn't fit the scheme. Greenwood on the other hand showed continual improvement throughout the season.

gtexan02
01-29-2007, 06:35 PM
that was mario :mario:

Thats what I remembered originally, but all the media reported it was Greenwood. Anyone have video evidence either way?

gtexan02
01-29-2007, 06:37 PM
PS: This is getting to be a dumb argument.

You claim Greenwood had a poor year becuase he was lost in coverage, racked up cheap tackles off Ryans, and was an all around sub par player. The only way you can prove this is through detailed video analysis, which you don't have.

I claim Greenwood had a much better year than last year, was always around the ball, and deserves a starting spot next year no questions asked. I cited his stats in comparison to the rest of the NFL and his own past, but this was shot down as inconclusive. The only way I can convince you is through detailed video analysis, which I don't have.

Therefore unless someone cares to cite a bunch of specific plays, this isn't worth continuing for too much longer.

Scooter
01-29-2007, 06:45 PM
Thats what I remembered originally, but all the media reported it was Greenwood. Anyone have video evidence either way?

someone on this site should have the video because it was being combed over for hours after the game and even the sunday sports report confirmed that it was mario.

agreed ... it's not really an arguement that can be won.

BradK10
01-29-2007, 07:31 PM
Playing weak side linebacker and racking up tackles should be not be misleading.


NEWSFLASH...just because it's the "weakside" doesn't mean that plays aren't ran at that side at an inequal rate. That would be called "too predictable"

Besides, tackles ARE overrated. Take former TTech LB'er Lawrence Flugence. I believe he lead the Bix XII in tackles like two or three years....where is he now? No where.

gtexan02
01-29-2007, 08:40 PM
NEWSFLASH...just because it's the "weakside" doesn't mean that plays aren't ran at that side at an inequal rate. That would be called "too predictable"

Besides, tackles ARE overrated. Take former TTech LB'er Lawrence Flugence. I believe he lead the Bix XII in tackles like two or three years....where is he now? No where.

Just because a few tackle heavy people didn't make names for themselves doesn't prove anything though. Look at the top 10 list for tackles. Most of those guys arer monsters.

As for the weakside comment, I was implying he's not a MLB, which naturally funnels the tackles in. Plus weakside on our team is Mario's side, which supposedly was "rarely" run on

BradK10
01-29-2007, 10:17 PM
I will say this though, maybe it was the switch to a 4-3, but Greenwood was improved in 2006...still not worth the coin C&C gave him.

run-david-run
01-29-2007, 11:34 PM
Just because a few tackle heavy people didn't make names for themselves doesn't prove anything though. Look at the top 10 list for tackles. Most of those guys arer monsters.

As for the weakside comment, I was implying he's not a MLB, which naturally funnels the tackles in. Plus weakside on our team is Mario's side, which supposedly was "rarely" run on

Mario was on the strongside more then the weakside, which would further relate with Orr having all of 35 tackles on the season.

TexanAddict
01-30-2007, 10:09 AM
What? Bringing in career stats into this makes no sense. Everyone has admitted Greenwood didn't have a good year last year. The fact of hte matter is we are comparing our two OLBs, playing in our new 4-3 system.

Orr may have done well as a 3-4 LB and pass rusher but he was terrible as a 4-3 OLB

Greenwood had a solid year.

Therefore there is zero incentive for me to want to keep Orr, whatever his salary, because he doesn't fit the scheme. Greenwood on the other hand showed continual improvement throughout the season.

Exactly

gtexan02
01-30-2007, 10:23 AM
Mario was on the strongside more then the weakside, which would further relate with Orr having all of 35 tackles on the season.

Wherever Mario was (and I honestly doubt opposing teams ran away from Mario, hence the ""s), having 35 tackles on the season as a starting OLB is pretty sub-par

TexanAddict
01-30-2007, 10:30 AM
what has greenwood done to earn any praise that cant be read off of a stat sheet? playmaker? pass rusher? great in coverage? solo tackle leader? help me here. if i'm criticizing 05, what are you praising?

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that Greenwood should have gone to the Pro Bowl this year. The arguement I'm making (as well as others) is:


Greenwood had a much improved 2006 and is showing to be a much better fit in the 4-3 as opposed to the 3-4
While not a game-changer, Greenwood showed that he is often around the ball and is capable of supplying some big plays on occasion
Greenwood's game is not without flaws, he will lose containment and take bad angles
Orr is currently a worse fit at SLB, than Greenwood is at WLB
WLB is not the most pressing position that needs to be addressed on our defense. That distinction goes to FS, followed by CB, and then probably SLB
Yes, Greenwood does make too much money at this point. You can thank the former FO


The question is what should be done to shore up our defense in the shortest amount of time? Using a draft pick or signing a FA for the WLB spot would not make as much of an impact as addressing the deficiencies at FS or even SLB, not to mention the cap hit we would accrue if we release Greenwood and sign a FA to take his place. The point is that Greenwood contributes more at his position than Brown or Orr currently do at theirs, so he should not be replaced before they are.

El Amigo Invisible
01-30-2007, 10:42 AM
We did not draft Derrick Johnson because we picked up Morlon Greenwood. Nuff said!