PDA

View Full Version : Cushing to Move from Mike to Mo


HOU-TEX
07-25-2012, 03:39 PM
Hmm, I always believed if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But, eh, I reckon I'll trust SonofBum

Nick Scurfield‏@NickScurfield

Brian Cushing will move from Mike (strong inside) to Mo (weak inside) LB in 2012. Coaches say it'll free him up to make more plays

From the .com
http://www.houstontexans.com/news/article-3/2012-Texans-Season-Preview-Linebacker/9f398a16-47d3-4740-a92b-136be61f51ee

Bradie James enters training camp as a projected starter after signing from the Dallas Cowboys in free agency. James, 31, played for Phillips and linebackers coach Reggie Herring in Dallas from 2007-10, leading the team in tackles each season. He will call the Texans’ defense from the Mike position on the inside.


“All four of those guys are challenging each other every day,” Herring said. “They’re competitive. They’re spirited. They’re what I would call an excellent, excellent group of linebackers. All of ‘em are pros, accountable. They demand the best from each other, and the chemistry is unlike I’ve ever been around. That gets you excited as a coach.”

That's pretty cool

IDEXAN
07-25-2012, 05:12 PM
Mike & Mo are descriptions for Line Backers in the 4-3, and since Wade runs a base 3-4 I'm a little puzzled by this terminology ? Conner Barwin & Brooks Reed were the OLBs in Wades defense last year with Cushing playing inside: I doubt that Cushing will replace Barwin or Reed, though rookie Mercilus might ?

MeLoveTexans
07-25-2012, 05:16 PM
Mike & Mo are descriptions for Line Backers in the 4-3, and since Wade runs a base 3-4 I'm a little puzzled by this terminology ? Conner Barwin & Brooks Reed were the OLBs in Wades defense last year with Cushing playing inside: I doubt that Cushing will replace Barwin or Reed, though rookie Mercilus might ?

To my understanding the 4-3 LB have always been termed Mike (Middle) Sam(Strongside) and Will(Weakside).

This is the first I have heard the term Mo, but i would like to know where it would fit in the 4-3, since Mike is the universal term for Middle LB in that particular defense.

EllisUnit
07-25-2012, 05:18 PM
They want his production to drop so he will be cheaper to resign :kitten:

HOU-TEX
07-25-2012, 05:19 PM
Mike & Mo are descriptions for Line Backers in the 4-3, and since Wade runs a base 3-4 I'm a little puzzled by this terminology ? Conner Barwin & Brooks Reed were the OLBs in Wades defense last year with Cushing playing inside: I doubt that Cushing will replace Barwin or Reed, though rookie Mercilus might ?

Sam, Mike and Will are 4-3 backers. Mike and Mo are inside backers in the 3-4, with the Mike usually being the QB and run stopper. The Mo is used in many ways. As a roamer, pass rusher, coverage, etc.

Terminology can vary by DC. I've heard of a Mike and a Mac in a 3-4 too

Pollardized
07-25-2012, 05:25 PM
They are doing this to solidify the fact that:

Brian Cushing is one Bad MO-FO


http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2011/1110/nfl_a_cushing_576.jpg

Hervoyel
07-25-2012, 05:25 PM
http://crotchgroin.info/galleries/74/moehoward.jpg

They should make Brian get the haircut. He'd be the most pissed off linebacker in all the NFL.

And remember, Mo was the one who was always hitting everybody. Sounds like Cushing to me.

GP
07-25-2012, 05:36 PM
Should Bradie get injured, or if he's not cutting the mustard...Cushing will resume that position.

As it stands, right now, we have a very niiiiice problem on our hands: Our middle LB is being moved to weak side because we possibly have an even better middle LB in James...and if Cushing feasts at weak side, brother oh brother are we going to be a fun defense to watch in while new ways we cannot even imagine right now.

Brandon420tx
07-25-2012, 05:38 PM
As long as Cushing stays in during Nickle Packages

pbat488
07-25-2012, 07:01 PM
Sam, Mike and Will are 4-3 backers. Mike and Mo are inside backers in the 3-4, with the Mike usually being the QB and run stopper. The Mo is used in many ways. As a roamer, pass rusher, coverage, etc.

Terminology can vary by DC. I've heard of a Mike and a Mac in a 3-4 too

if this is the case and we had cushing as the mike and demeco as the mo last year, i'd think they'd have been better off being switched since cushing is a much more dynamic backer than demeco is post injuries.

drs23
07-25-2012, 07:08 PM
As long as Cushing stays in during Nickle Packages

He's not going away on the nickel package. 'Cept after the bad guys. And he will pounce upon them!:specnatz:

badboy
07-25-2012, 08:01 PM
I think Demeco's injuries was part of reason, Cush took over Qb of LBs. I think Bradie will do fine and our LBs will be even better.

Rey
07-25-2012, 08:40 PM
Great move. Less thinking, more action for Cush.

powda
07-25-2012, 09:22 PM
In a 3-4 the mike is typically on the strong side and the mo is on the weakside (both inside). In some 3-4s you can think of the mo the same as a will backer in a 4-3 under. Scheme wise he's the most protected player from blocks. He's given the best opportunity to flow to the ball. Think of the tampa bay weak side backers a few years back who regularly put up sick tackle numbers. If you applied some of that to a 3-4 front the mo gets the best uncontested tackle opportunities. This is a good move. Think of the mike as the defense's full back.

Why didnt we hear about this sooner?

Rey
07-25-2012, 11:01 PM
In a 3-4 the mike is typically on the strong side and the mo is on the weakside (both inside). In some 3-4s you can think of the mo the same as a will backer in a 4-3 under. Scheme wise he's the most protected player from blocks. He's given the best opportunity to flow to the ball. Think of the tampa bay weak side backers a few years back who regularly put up sick tackle numbers. If you applied some of that to a 3-4 front the mo gets the best uncontested tackle opportunities. This is a good move. Think of the mike as the defense's full back.

Why didnt we hear about this sooner?

I don't understand your sig....The quotes don't match the post...

powda
07-25-2012, 11:50 PM
I don't understand your sig....The quotes don't match the post...

I love my sig, and it has nothing to do with this post.

JamesBill
07-26-2012, 10:13 AM
Why didnt we hear about this sooner?

Writing was on the wall as soon as they got Bradie James. They obviously like him and his familiarity with the defense. Hopefully this is MORE about freeing up Cush and less about Bradie James calling plays.

Vinny
07-26-2012, 10:38 AM
Why didnt we hear about this sooner?
sooner than what? We aren't even in camp yet. "during the off-season" not soon enough? Perhaps they should have said something during the Pro Bowl?

The Medic01
07-26-2012, 10:46 AM
I just realized this. Our linebacker corps is the second coming of the killer B's.
Barwin Brooks Bradie and Brian.

eriadoc
07-26-2012, 10:51 AM
I think it's a good move. I never thought Cushing was a perfect fit for the mike. He's a good enough player to excel at any LB position, but the mike has too many responsibilities. A guy like Cushing needs to have a lot more latitude to go out there and make plays. He's not so much a QB of the defense as he is the Arian Foster of the defense. I think he'll truly excel if the reins are loosened.

powda
07-26-2012, 11:14 AM
sooner than what? We aren't even in camp yet. "during the off-season" not soon enough? Perhaps they should have said something during the Pro Bowl?

OTA's when the defense was on the field and media was present...or within a couple of weeks of signing Bradie James. I dont think wade came to this decision overnight and since cush is one of our marquee players i'd expect to hear about it sooner then a couple days before camp. Maybe thats not reasonable or maybe it's been a long offseason...

Vinny
07-26-2012, 12:08 PM
OTA's when the defense was on the field and media was present...or within a couple of weeks of signing Bradie James. I dont think wade came to this decision overnight and since cush is one of our marquee players i'd expect to hear about it sooner then a couple days before camp. Maybe thats not reasonable or maybe it's been a long offseason...
or if we had reporters that knew what they are looking at.

thunderkyss
07-26-2012, 12:22 PM
Hopefully this is MORE about freeing up Cush and less about Bradie James calling plays.


First, We all (figuratively speaking) looked at Cushing's move to MLB as a promotion, a good thing, for Cushing. We thought it said something about his ability to manage the defense as well as make plays. To be consistent, we've got to be honest & say that Bradie James is just better than Cush at that position. Being that Bradie lost this spot to Shaun Lee (sp) last year, I think it raises questions.


In the early days, pre-Wade, I thought our defense had trouble recognizing plays & making the right adjustments. You could tell the OL was thinking run when the Down & Distance almost dictated a passing situation. Maybe it was formation & the original action after the snap, but our team would "sell out" on the run fake & get burned like nobody's business. They need to be smart enough to know they've got to stop the run, but they've got to play honest & cover the fake as well. This has nothing to do with Cushing, because the era I'm talking about was way before he was the MLB. Just an observation I wanted to throw out there.

Vinny
07-26-2012, 12:33 PM
First, We all (figuratively speaking) looked at Cushing's move to MLB as a promotion, a good thing, for Cushing. We thought it said something about his ability to manage the defense as well as make plays. To be consistent, we've got to be honest & say that Bradie James is just better than Cush at that position. Being that Bradie lost this spot to Shaun Lee (sp) last year, I think it raises questions.


In the early days, pre-Wade, I thought our defense had trouble recognizing plays & making the right adjustments. You could tell the OL was thinking run when the Down & Distance almost dictated a passing situation. Maybe it was formation & the original action after the snap, but our team would "sell out" on the run fake & get burned like nobody's business. They need to be smart enough to know they've got to stop the run, but they've got to play honest & cover the fake as well. This has nothing to do with Cushing, because the era I'm talking about was way before he was the MLB. Just an observation I wanted to throw out there.he's faster than Bradie and Bradie is more equipped to take on Guards head up, play after play, so this is the biggest reason for the switch.

drunkcookie
07-26-2012, 01:19 PM
I just realized this. Our linebacker corps is the second coming of the killer B's.
Barwin Brooks Bradie and Brian.

Dude...that's effin awesome... But you left one of the front-seven out:

Brantonio Smith

I think it has to be the last name to be technical. I remember Brad Lidge having to be "Blidge" to make the cut, though his first name began with a B..

But screw technical...love it!

Blake
07-26-2012, 02:40 PM
Still dont understand why they refer to the other MLB as Mo.

JB
07-26-2012, 02:49 PM
Still dont understand why they refer to the other MLB as Mo.

Cuz some coach at some time was being witty and the term stuck

The Pencil Neck
07-26-2012, 03:21 PM
Still dont understand why they refer to the other MLB as Mo.

The position coach who came up with the term was a Blues fan and named it Mo in honor of Keb' Mo'.

Mr. White
07-26-2012, 04:29 PM
In a 3-4 the mike is typically on the strong side and the mo is on the weakside (both inside). In some 3-4s you can think of the mo the same as a will backer in a 4-3 under. Scheme wise he's the most protected player from blocks. He's given the best opportunity to flow to the ball. Think of the tampa bay weak side backers a few years back who regularly put up sick tackle numbers. If you applied some of that to a 3-4 front the mo gets the best uncontested tackle opportunities. This is a good move. Think of the mike as the defense's full back.

Why didnt we hear about this sooner?

I think this (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/41668981/ns/sports-player_news) article from last year explains it pretty well also.

The Texans will use DeMeco Ryans at "Mo" linebacker in their new 3-4 defense, the weak-side 'backer on the inside.

Brian Cushing will have to play over the tight end and fight through more "trash," so Ryans will remain the favorite to lead Houston in tackles. He's got bigger concerns than his position, however, as Ryans tries to come back from a torn Achilles' tendon. He'll be an injury risk entering the 2011 campaign.

The Pencil Neck
07-26-2012, 04:39 PM
I think this (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/41668981/ns/sports-player_news) article from last year explains it pretty well also.

Soooo... last year Cush, playing the Mike, had to fight through traffic to make tackles while Demeco's tackles should have been easier to come by? Is that right?

And Cush led the team with 81 tackles. Demeco had 46 (granted, with fewer snaps overall.)

If BRADIE is now the guy having to fight through trash and Cush is free to roam without as much interference and cause wanton destruction and grievous pillaging...

OK.

:popcorn:

Dutchrudder
07-26-2012, 04:44 PM
I just realized this. Our linebacker corps is the second coming of the killer B's.
Barwin Brooks Bradie and Brian.

They also have Bryan Brahman in rotation! Whitney Mercilus doesn't fit, so we will need to come up with a B nickname for him. If he starts tearing it up, maybe BAMF? :D

The Pencil Neck
07-26-2012, 04:47 PM
They also have Bryan Brahman in rotation! Whitney Mercilus doesn't fit, so we will need to come up with a B nickname for him. If he starts tearing it up, maybe BAMF? :D

I like BAMF. It has a Nightcrawler ring to it.

We could also go with Bhitney Mercilus.

b0ng
07-26-2012, 05:48 PM
Different DC's call that position and the WOLB different names. Mo, Ted, and others have all been used and the responsibilities vary from system to system. I like this move as I think the less thinking Brian Cushing has to do, the better off we probably are.

The Medic01
07-26-2012, 05:51 PM
Different DC's call that position and the WOLB different names. Mo, Ted, and others have all been used and the responsibilities vary from system to system. I like this move as I think the less thinking Brian Cushing has to do, the better off we probably are.

You know if Cushing saw all of us saying this none of us would wake up in the morning tomorrow.

BCRich
07-26-2012, 05:55 PM
They also have Bryan Brahman in rotation! Whitney Mercilus doesn't fit, so we will need to come up with a B nickname for him. If he starts tearing it up, maybe BAMF? :D

How about Badd Ass Mother F..

Oh, I get it. :fingergun:

powda
07-26-2012, 07:15 PM
You know if Cushing saw all of us saying this none of us would wake up in the morning tomorrow.

Lol.

Cush will still call plays in a dime. Not sure if bjames will be on the field in a nickle...so cush may still have plenty to think about.

BCRich
07-26-2012, 07:19 PM
Lol.

Cush will still call plays in a dime. Not sure if bjames will be on the field in a nickle...so cush may still have plenty to think about.

Cush will probably call all the plays. James being Mike is probably more about position than pre-snap responsibility. It would be too complicated to have Cush changing helmets everytime Bradie leaves the field.

powda
07-26-2012, 07:41 PM
Cush will probably call all the plays. James being Mike is probably more about position than pre-snap responsibility. It would be too complicated to have Cush changing helmets everytime Bradie leaves the field.

Everything i've seen and read this offseason suggested james would call the plays...I hadnt thought about helmets in nickle/dime. Interesting point bc. Welcome to the board by the way.

NCTexan
07-26-2012, 08:33 PM
Everything i've seen and read this offseason suggested james would call the plays...I hadnt thought about helmets in nickle/dime. Interesting point bc. Welcome to the board by the way.

My guess is Cush will wear the dot on his helmet and relay what the coaches say to Bradie and Bradie will do with that what he will/audible.

b0ng
07-26-2012, 08:46 PM
Pretty sure one of our safeties also had a radio in case Cushing wasn't in on a particular down.

Mr. White
07-26-2012, 09:13 PM
Soooo... last year Cush, playing the Mike, had to fight through traffic to make tackles while Demeco's tackles should have been easier to come by? Is that right?

And Cush led the team with 81 tackles. Demeco had 46 (granted, with fewer snaps overall.)

If BRADIE is now the guy having to fight through trash and Cush is free to roam without as much interference and cause wanton destruction and grievous pillaging...

OK.

:popcorn:

I don't know if it ended up being "right" or not. I'm just quoting an article that helped me get some context about what the hell a Mo is.

steelbtexan
07-26-2012, 09:27 PM
This move should make the defense better.

Cush having moe freedom = great things.

If he can stay healthy.

HOU-TEX
07-26-2012, 09:34 PM
Still dont understand why they refer to the other MLB as Mo.

Wade answered me on Twitter. He said Bingham was called the MEG with the Oilers. Bingham didn't like MEG, so they called him MO. Sorry, I'm on my phone and can't figure out how to quote balloon it

@sonofbum: @HOU_TEX -the two inside linebackers in the 3-4 were called Mike and Meg- we changed to Mike and Mo

@sonofbum: @HOU_TEX -Bingham was Meg w/Oilers he wanted to be called Mo rather than Meg

HOU-TEX
07-26-2012, 09:37 PM
BTW, Wade has replied to me on multiple occasions. Just more proof of how good of a dude he is

Mr. White
07-26-2012, 09:41 PM
Wade answered me on Twitter. He said Bingham was called the MEG with the Oilers. Bingham didn't like MEG, so they called him MO. Sorry, I'm on my phone and can't figure out how to quote balloon it

@sonofbum: @HOU_TEX -the two inside linebackers in the 3-4 were called Mike and Meg- we changed to Mike and Mo

@sonofbum: @HOU_TEX -Bingham was Meg w/Oilers he wanted to be called Mo rather than Meg

Glad he answered. I wouldn't have known what a Meg is either.

The Pencil Neck
07-26-2012, 11:34 PM
Glad he answered. I wouldn't have known what a Meg is either.

That means that last year, Demeco was MEG Ryans.

Mr. White
07-27-2012, 10:16 AM
That means that last year, Demeco was MEG Ryans.

Well played sir.

Blake
07-27-2012, 11:37 AM
That means that last year, Demeco was MEG Ryans.

Well played sir.

lol yeah man. I got a chuckle out of that one.

76Texan
07-27-2012, 04:12 PM
Some of this is just coach talk.
No matter how they line up, it depends on the actual play calls that allow a certain player more opportunity to make play.

You look at Wade's defense over the year; there were no discernable stats that can show whether the MIKE or the MO made more plays.

James, for example, consitently made more plays pretty much every year he was with Wade than the guy playing next to him.

Sometimes, the designation is just in name only.
I pulled up the first Cowboys game in 2010 against the Redskins as a reference.
James could line up as a MIKE or a MO.
More often than not, when he lined up as a MIKE, he didn't switch when the TE went into motion to the other side (thus he became the MO).
On the other hand, when he lined up as the MO, when the TE went into motion to the other side, he bacame the MIKE.

At other times, it doesn't even matter as Wade designated the SS to spy on the TE the whole way on those particular plays.

How the defense schemes for various defenders to attack is really the key, and not how the players line up.

Rey
07-27-2012, 08:42 PM
Some of this is just coach talk.
No matter how they line up, it depends on the actual play calls that allow a certain player more opportunity to make play.

You look at Wade's defense over the year; there were no discernable stats that can show whether the MIKE or the MO made more plays.

I don't know if all your observations are true or not, but the weakside defenders tend to be the playmakers in every defense.

Wade was not giving coach speak. Yeah, there are going to be times when Cushing will have strong side responsibilities, but more often Brady will be the lb taking on the fb or the lead guard and Cushing will be the clean up man.

BCRich
07-27-2012, 08:52 PM
Some of this is just coach talk.
No matter how they line up, it depends on the actual play calls that allow a certain player more opportunity to make play.



Didn't Merriman play the strong side in Wade's "system" ? Everybody... that's not precisely accurate. A lot of people want to make a big deal about the WOLB position. The position Ware played when Wade was in Dallas. The position they had Mario at.

Speaking of which, look at this post (http://forums.chargers.com/showpost.php?p=3799870&postcount=121), tell me what you think.

On the strongside, you usually look for a bulkier, stronger guy that is better against the run, but not always as good rushing the passer. Look at Whitney Mercilus, I have been saying he fits at LE only. What I mean by that, if I don't think he has the tools to be a dominant pass rusher and line up against LTs. He needs to add a lil bulk, improve against the run, and he will be one of the top 4-3 LEs in the game.

Rey
07-27-2012, 09:11 PM
Didn't Merriman play the strong side in Wade's "system" ?

Everything I've seen and based off what I remember says merriman was listed as a rolb which is usually the weakside lb.

infantrycak
07-27-2012, 09:17 PM
Don't know why Merriman and Ware are being brought up. Cushing is remaining an ILB. Barwin and Reed are the OLB's.

Rey
07-27-2012, 09:26 PM
Don't know why Merriman and Ware are being brought up. Cushing is remaining an ILB. Barwin and Reed are the OLB's.

I didn't bring them up but they are relevant because whether you are talking about a 43 or 34 the two players on the backside tend to be considered more of your playmakers. Only difference is in a 43 it's the rde and Rolb and in the 34 it's the wilb and wolb.

BCRich
07-27-2012, 09:32 PM
Don't know why Merriman and Ware are being brought up. Cushing is remaining an ILB. Barwin and Reed are the OLB's.

People were talking about the move to Mo will help Cushing make more plays. The discussion then turned to a bit of bickering about which ILB is set up to make the most plays.

76 said it doesn't really matter the position, Wade will set up his playmaker to make plays.

I agreed & used Merriman, who played SOLB in Wade's system as the play-maker, even though he (Wade) used Ware at WOLB to make plays. Wade has even gone so far as to say his system is set up for the WOLB to rush the passer practically every down. But again, Merriman was the playmaker of Wade's Charger defense, he played SOLB, he thrived with Wade.

So I'm basically agreeing with 76...... Cushing may be the Mo, or the Jack, but he'll probably still be the primary playmaker from the ILB position.

Rey
07-27-2012, 11:25 PM
People were talking about the move to Mo will help Cushing make more plays. The discussion then turned to a bit of bickering about which ILB is set up to make the most plays.

76 said it doesn't really matter the position, Wade will set up his playmaker to make plays.

I agreed & used Merriman, who played SOLB in Wade's system as the play-maker, even though he (Wade) used Ware at WOLB to make plays. Wade has even gone so far as to say his system is set up for the WOLB to rush the passer practically every down. But again, Merriman was the playmaker of Wade's Charger defense, he played SOLB, he thrived with Wade.

So I'm basically agreeing with 76...... Cushing may be the Mo, or the Jack, but he'll probably still be the primary playmaker from the ILB position.

1) "people" werent talking about anything. That's a quote directly from wade.

2) merriman was the wolb and Phillips was the solb.

So you can agree with 76 here if you want, but I think I'll go with wade on this one that the move will allow Cushing to make more plays.

It's actually pretty basic football that the backside tends to be free to make more plays.

BCRich
07-28-2012, 05:27 AM
1) "people" werent talking about anything. That's a quote directly from wade.

Yes they were, quote or no quote.

2) merriman was the wolb and Phillips was the solb.

No he wasn't.

So you can agree with 76 here if you want, but I think I'll go with wade on this one that the move will allow Cushing to make more plays.

Wasn't this the same reason he was moved Inside last season?

It's actually pretty basic football that the backside tends to be free to make more plays.

Merriman played SOLB, CM III Played SOLB, Strahan played LDE,

It's pretty basic football really. Playmakers make plays.

76Texan
07-28-2012, 09:12 AM
1) "people" werent talking about anything. That's a quote directly from wade.

2) merriman was the wolb and Phillips was the solb.

So you can agree with 76 here if you want, but I think I'll go with wade on this one that the move will allow Cushing to make more plays.

It's actually pretty basic football that the backside tends to be free to make more plays.

What's the quote?

Rey
07-28-2012, 10:39 AM
No he wasn't.
.

Ummm, yeah he was.

He was the rolb which is considered the weakside most times.

Phillips was the Lolb.

A quick google search will tell you that.

And yes play makers make plays. That has nothing to do with anything. The point is that being in certain positions frees guys up more than others.

It's almost like arguing that a NT and 5 technique have the same opprotunity to make plays. No they don't. Their roles are different. Yeah wilfork is going to make plays regardless because hes that good, but that doesn't mean he's the one that's actually in a better position to make plays. It just means he's that much better than the guys around him.

BCRich
07-28-2012, 10:54 AM
Didn't Merriman play the strong side in Wade's "system" ? Everybody... that's not precisely accurate. A lot of people want to make a big deal about the WOLB position. The position Ware played when Wade was in Dallas. The position they had Mario at.

Speaking of which, look at this post (http://forums.chargers.com/showpost.php?p=3799870&postcount=121), tell me what you think.


If anyone is interested, please follow the link in the above post. It will take you to a Chargers' fan board, much like this one. The post linked is written by a pretty knowledgeable fan. He talks about Merriman's role when he was on the team, what they did to compensate for his absence & the difference between the SLOB, which Barwin seems to fit. & the WOLB. Very good post.

Merriman played WOLB his first two years(Foley played SOLB until he was shot). In 2007, he played almost exclusively SOLB(while SP95 lined up on the weakside and faced the LT). He often had to beat the TE, and a chipping RB because Castillo(3-4 LE) was occupying the RT.

The point is it didn't matter what side he played on, Merriman made plays.

Then he has a little bit about Mercy
On the strongside, you usually look for a bulkier, stronger guy that is better against the run, but not always as good rushing the passer. Look at Whitney Mercilus, I have been saying he fits at LE only. What I mean by that, if I don't think he has the tools to be a dominant pass rusher and line up against LTs. He needs to add a lil bulk, improve against the run, and he will be one of the top 4-3 LEs in the game.


I don't know that I necessarily agree, but it was interesting.

BCRich
07-28-2012, 11:26 AM
Now, my original point in this thread, was that last year the talk was moving Cushing to the Mike was going to allow for him to make more plays. Here's a post (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1716054&postcount=12) (a quote from an internet article) from last year, that pretty much says as much.

. Note, however, that in the past the left ILB on teams with Wade Phillips as defensive coordinator have seen higher sack numbers than you might expect.


These were Herring's thoughts (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1654757&postcount=15) on Cushing at Mike:
We’ve got to take advantage of what we see in Brian Cushing as a tremendous anchor on the tight end side as far as securing the box physically in the run game, and then using him in our package to pressure and blitz him on the inside. At Dallas, Bradie James, same position, led the NFL in inside linebackers in sacks. He had eight in one year in this package from blitzing inside. So the numbers are there, the opportunities will be there.

Rey
07-28-2012, 11:35 AM
Now, my original point in this thread, was that last year the talk was moving Cushing to the Mike was going to allow for him to make more plays. Here's a post (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1716054&postcount=12) (a quote from an internet article) from last year, that pretty much says as much.



These were Herring's thoughts (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1654757&postcount=15) on Cushing at Mike:


What does any of that have to do with the weakside generally being more free to make plays?

Do you know why herring used the word "anchor"?

That should have been a big clue as to what cushings role was in the run game last season. In the 34 the silb is usually the guy that takes on blockers while the wilb plays clean up.

This season James will be playing the "anchor" role while Cushing is more "free" to make plays.

Really, just to be blunt, you don't know what you're talking about. Making plays in the running game and being in a good position to blitz inside on passing plays is not the same thing and you appear to be confusing the two.

The job of the silb against the run is to first take on the lead blocker and close off the lane. Wilb is supposed to clean it up and ideally make the tackle.

Not saying that is always going to happen, but that's how it looks when you draw it up. Sometimes you have players that are so good that they can play on the strong side and *gasp* still be productive. They can take on the extra blockers how they are supposed to and still get to the ball carrier.

But again, just because you make plays doesn't mean you are in the better position to make plays.

Just because your LDE that is ligned up against TE's and tackles and extra blockers all the tine makes more plays than the rde that is facing less blockers doesn't mean the LDE is in a better position.

What it means is he either feels more comfortable lined up there or he's just that much better than the other guy who is in better playmaking position but not making as many plays.

76Texan
07-28-2012, 11:46 AM
Rey, I still don't see any quote from Wade (or even Herring) that says the MO is more free to make play in Wade's scheme.

76Texan
07-28-2012, 11:55 AM
It doens't matter the defensive scheme, as a former O-lineman, you ought to know the offense draws up blocking schem to take into account all the defenders that are in the running path.

Occasionally, they will option a defender by trying to draw him toward the QB instead.

We even see team running against 8 men in the box, or against more defenders than blockers.
In these instances, very often, the offense may pull a guard or a tackle and/or option the back-side contain man to run to the other side.

It could be on the weak side or the strong side.

BCRich
07-28-2012, 12:07 PM
What does any of that have to do with the weakside generally being more free to make plays?

This thread is not about the weakside generally being free to make plays. This thread is about Cushing moving from Mike to Mo.

The weakside argument is more of a side argument that I addressed in another post. The post you quoted clearly states in the opening line, back to my original point.

I think we call that a segue (sp).

Really, just to be blunt, you don't know what you're talking about. Making plays in the running game and being in a good position to blitz inside on passing plays is not the same thing and you appear to be confusing the two.

All I said was that Merriman made plays from either side. CM III makes plays from the Strong side, Strahan made plays from the Strongside.

I did not challenge your argument about the weakside players. Maybe that's where you are confused.

Sometimes you have players that are so good that they can play on the strong side and *gasp* still be productive. They can take on the extra blockers how they are supposed to and still get to the ball carrier.

So sometimes, it's not about the position, it's the player? Like moving Merriman from the weak side to the strong side, Cushing from Sam to Mike to Mo, Mario Williams from LDE to WOLB...

But yeah, the way you said it sounds much better. :kitten: & I don't have a clue what I'm talking about.

But, you are right. In Wade's system Merriman was Wade's WOLB, he switched to the Strongside after Wade left.

Rey
07-28-2012, 12:13 PM
:ok:

76Texan
07-28-2012, 12:56 PM
BTW, I had gone back and watched the first 2 games of 2011.

Against the Colts, Cushing actually lined up as a MO a whole lot more than at MIKE.
(on a balnce 1 back, 2 TE set, I consider the side with Dallas Clark the strong side).
Even when on the strong side, Cushing was not in coverage hardly, and never covered Clark.
He played mostly in the forward mode; this is how the D scheme for him to be a playmanker while the other guy was in coverage more.

Against Miami, Cushing lined up more at the MIKE (about 60/40), but only because the offense sent a man into motion away from Cushing a few more times (turning him form a MO into a MIKE - in name only).
Again, very seldom does Cushing drop into coverage; and he was on Fasano only once.

He did play a lot at the MIKE against the Saints; there are various reasons for this, but I didn't rewatch the game closely enough to name them.

In summary, we've already seen Cushing playing both positions; similar to James (when he was with the Cowboys), there were times when he lined up at one position and did not switch when the offense sent a man into motion to the other side.

MIKE or MO is really just a designation on paper.

Rey
07-28-2012, 01:05 PM
BTW, I had gone back and watched the first 2 games of 2011.

Against the Colts, Cushing actually lined up as a MO a whole lot more than at MIKE.
(on a balnce 1 back, 2 TE set, I consider the side with Dallas Clark the strong side).
Even when on the strong side, Cushing was not in coverage hardly, and never covered Clark.
He played mostly in the forward mode; this is how the D scheme for him to be a playmanker while the other guy was in coverage more.

Against Miami, Cushing lined up more at the MIKE (about 60/40), but only because the offense sent a man into motion away from Cushing a few more times (turning him form a MO into a MIKE - in name only).
Again, very seldom does Cushing drop into coverage; and he was on Fasano only once.

He did play a lot at the MIKE against the Saints; there are various reasons for this, but I didn't rewatch the game closely enough to name them.

In summary, we've already seen Cushing playing both positions; similar to James (when he was with the Cowboys), there were times when he lined up at one position and did not switch when the offense sent a man into motion to the other side.

MIKE or MO is really just a designation on paper.

There is so much wrong with this post.

You can't just consider the side with Clark on it the strong side in a two TE set. That's ridiculous.

If you look back at my post I continuously used the word "usually". No it's not the same every play, but there is a difference between the two positions and there is a reason they are switching Cushing and putting James where he is at.

80tothezone
07-28-2012, 01:06 PM
Sam, Mike and Will are 4-3 backers. Mike and Mo are inside backers in the 3-4, with the Mike usually being the QB and run stopper. The Mo is used in many ways. As a roamer, pass rusher, coverage, etc.

Terminology can vary by DC. I've heard of a Mike and a Mac in a 3-4 too

And i like cushing in that role i think he will have another monster year. You free him up to just play football. He doesn't have to worry about adjustments etc all he has to do is go crush qb's and destroy anything that comes near him. I like it.

76Texan
07-28-2012, 02:25 PM
There is so much wrong with this post.

You can't just consider the side with Clark on it the strong side in a two TE set. That's ridiculous.



Pretty simple, really.

Look at the first Colts games.
When they were in a balanced 2-TE set, you can be cure to find Quin on that side.

- Check the gamebook, you will see that Quin was designated as the SS.

There were 3 instances in the first half where (from Cover 2), Quin came down to take Clark or to play the run. If Clark release, Quin stays with Clark.

Texans_Chick
07-28-2012, 03:37 PM
I asked about this today after people were done asking questions about Veganism and Barwin's haircut:

(on communicating in the headsets with ILBs Brian Cushing or Bradie James) “They can both do it. Brian did it a lot last year because Brian’s a three-down player. DeMeco (Ryans) was on the field first, second down, so Brian did make a lot of calls. Those guys have to be interchangeable, but they’ll both be able to make it.”



(on if you have two headsets on defense) “No, you can only have one, one on the field at a time offensively and defensively. We’ll have to make a decision, but Bradie (James) and Brian (Cushing) are going to be out there at the same time, so we’ll have to lock in to one of them. We’ll have to see how that goes.”

Most media I've ever seen at a practice so it was hard to get questions in but I figured this one was important enough to be pushy about it.

powda
07-28-2012, 03:46 PM
Thanks tc.

BCRich
07-28-2012, 04:13 PM
I asked about this today after people were done asking questions about Veganism and Barwin's haircut:



Most media I've ever seen at a practice so it was hard to get questions in but I figured this one was important enough to be pushy about it.

If Bradie James is a true LB, meaning that he can actually cover a TE, I suspect we'll rarely be going to Dime. So it may be a moot point. However, I'm glad you asked & didn't settle for the original answer.

NCTexan
07-28-2012, 06:08 PM
If Bradie James is a true LB, meaning that he can actually cover a TE, I suspect we'll rarely be going to Dime. So it may be a moot point. However, I'm glad you asked & didn't settle for the original answer.

So you see Cush and James as both being in in the nickle? Who do you suggest comes out then?

BCRich
07-28-2012, 06:43 PM
So you see Cush and James as both being in in the nickle? Who do you suggest comes out then?

Cody

Rey
07-28-2012, 09:16 PM
Cody was already rarely in when we went nickle.

BCRich
07-28-2012, 10:55 PM
Cody was already rarely in when we went nickle.

Right.

NCTexan
07-28-2012, 10:56 PM
Right.

You still have one extra player on the field. Whheard the 11 you would field in nicklel?

BCRich
07-28-2012, 11:06 PM
You still have one extra player on the field. Whheard the 11 you would field in nicklel?

4 LBs & 2 DL, your front 7 is now 6

5 DBs (nickel)

5+6 = 11

We did it all last year when we went to nickle.

Demeco came off the field alot because we went with 6 DBs (dime) a lot. We'd add McCain & Nolan (or Demps) and remove Cody & Ryans.

It is my belief, we did that because we didn't have a true LB that was any good in coverage. Adding an extra safety & taking Demeco off the fied allowed Quin to operate like a LB covering the TE or Slot Reciever...... nothing wrong with a safety covering a TE or Slot Reciever, but LBs generally participate more in pass Defense than our LBs did in 2011.

HOU-TEX
07-30-2012, 12:45 PM
Straight from Cushing's mouth. From this I gather Bradie will be coming off the field more times than not during Nickle and Dime situations

(on if he would like to rush more) “I think I rush a good amount. I definitely think I will more this year, now being the MO and being the MIKE on third downs. So I’m excited for my opportunities of getting after the quarterback this year.”

http://www.houstontexans.com/news/article-2/Quotes-Saturday-Camp-Practice/88acb156-c43d-41e8-b92e-e1578b57f671

Heath Shuler
07-30-2012, 05:33 PM
"Not much. I might be a little more active." - @BrianCushing56 on difference playing Mo linebacker this season vs. Mic linebacker last yr.

Houston Texans ‏@HoustonTexans

76Texan
07-31-2012, 03:02 PM
4 LBs & 2 DL, your front 7 is now 6

5 DBs (nickel)

5+6 = 11

We did it all last year when we went to nickle.



Wade 3-4 is really flexible.
We could have gone to the nickle packages with 3 DLs easily, but for the most part, we stayed with basically the same concept of 4 DLs as most Texans players had seen in the past under Richard Smith.

This can be seen in different Cowboys games when Wade was there in Dallas as well.

There would be 2 interior linemen; Cody normally went out, but not all the time.
The two end men (Mario, Barwin, Reed) played mostly in the 3-pt stand (ie., just as they were 4-3 DEs).
However, one or both of them can also play standing up as an OLB.
The distribution, in my estimate, is about 70% as a 4-3 DE.

As Wade said last year when he answered the question 4-3 DE or 3-4 OLB, it was just a matter of taking a hand off the ground and vice-versa.

Put a hand down, and you can be more explosive off the stance by pushing off.
With no hand down, you're able to move to either side more quickly.

On the other side of the ball, if you notice it, there will be times when the OT play with hands off the ground just the same.

It's a cat and mouse game.
What do you think you can do to outplay the guy you're facing.

Back to the nickel package, I assume that this coming year, with the players having a year under their belts, we will see more different sub-packages.

The sub-packages that I saw in a certain Wade's playbook were not used last year may very well come to life this year.

Having a guy like James, who had seen it all, to call plays in those packages should facilitate the execution.
In the meantime, I hope that Cushing will be the one calling plays in the dime packages where he will be the lone ILB on the field (with James as a subsitute in those plays).

What I think we can expect is a more complex defense by design.
It should still be a defense in which Wade allows defensive players to play to their ability and not to have to think too much.

76Texan
07-31-2012, 03:30 PM
That should have been a big clue as to what cushings role was in the run game last season. In the 34 the silb is usually the guy that takes on blockers while the wilb plays clean up.

This season James will be playing the "anchor" role while Cushing is more "free" to make plays.


The job of the silb against the run is to first take on the lead blocker and close off the lane. Wilb is supposed to clean it up and ideally make the tackle.

Not saying that is always going to happen, but that's how it looks when you draw it up. Sometimes you have players that are so good that they can play on the strong side and *gasp* still be productive. They can take on the extra blockers how they are supposed to and still get to the ball carrier.

But again, just because you make plays doesn't mean you are in the better position to make plays.



Sorry, Rey.

I watched more games (the two play-off games), concentrating on the ILBs, taking into considerations the different things you said, I have to disagree.

The position does not matter anywhere as much as the player himself.

The offense can, and did run at the MO, and they will take him out.

Both Cushing and Ryans (who was playing with an injury) had their chances at either position.

There was no design to make the MO the clean-up guy while the MIKE take on the lead blocker.

When the opponent runs at you, they will try to take you out whether you're the MIKE or the MO.

Rey
07-31-2012, 05:36 PM
Sorry, Rey.

I watched more games (the two play-off games), concentrating on the ILBs, taking into considerations the different things you said, I have to disagree.

The position does not matter anywhere as much as the player himself.

The offense can, and did run at the MO, and they will take him out.

Both Cushing and Ryans (who was playing with an injury) had their chances at either position.

There was no design to make the MO the clean-up guy while the MIKE take on the lead blocker.

When the opponent runs at you, they will try to take you out whether you're the MIKE or the MO.

76, to put it bluntly you don't know what you're talking about. I won't debate indivicual points....really don't feel like it....

But the coaches don't make a position change if it doesn't matter and Cushing doesn't come out and talk about playing one position on running downs and the other position on passing downs if it's the same thing anyways.


You sound like a guy that has learned about football on paper and not through experience. JMO. There is nothing wrong with that as it serves it's place, but you are wrong here. And I'll just leave it at that.

BCRich
07-31-2012, 08:00 PM
The offense can, and did run at the MO, and they will take him out.

Both Cushing and Ryans (who was playing with an injury) had their chances at either position.

There was no design to make the MO the clean-up guy while the MIKE take on the lead blocker.

When the opponent runs at you, they will try to take you out whether you're the MIKE or the MO.

That's the way I see it. The play may be set up to run to the strongside. But if they notice they have you outnumbered on the weak side, they can call an audible at the line & you'd never know it. Or, the running back can read his blocks & cut back.....

So I can buy the idea that defenses are designed to free up particular players. Speed rushers, quick twitch guys are usually put on the weakside. Marlon Greenwood got a lot of tackles (5 yards downfield) because of his position.

But gap control is gap control, if the play is to the Mo's side, he's "effectively" the MIke, or the guy who's going to take the FB on first.... or an OG.

Back in Cush's rookie season, you could see he had a variety of moves & techniques to free himself up, the stutter step, the swim, a punch..... he'd avoid that lead blocker & get the ball carrier.

Either way, when I say sometimes it's more about the player, I'm not denying what Rey says. That's they way they draw it up, you know. But if you look at our offense. It looks good with Ben Tate. It's on another level with Arian Foster.

Same scheme. Same design. Special player.

76Texan
07-31-2012, 08:30 PM
76, to put it bluntly you don't know what you're talking about. I won't debate indivicual points....really don't feel like it....

But the coaches don't make a position change if it doesn't matter and Cushing doesn't come out and talk about playing one position on running downs and the other position on passing downs if it's the same thing anyways.


You sound like a guy that has learned about football on paper and not through experience. JMO. There is nothing wrong with that as it serves it's place, but you are wrong here. And I'll just leave it at that.

Rey, please get off the high horse and shows me what you mean.

Vivid colors don't lie; especially when a person applies them to the playbook they learn.

Last year, a lot of people were thinking how Cushing should have been at OLB in this scheme; very few had the confidence I did for him to play ILB.

I've made consistent calls on different players throughout the years; what I learned between papers and videos, at the least, are good applications.

Last year, when I started a thread about Wade's defense throughout the years, I was able to watch his defenses in action and compare them (as well as his playbook).

I learned each position in his defense, how he moved them around from year to year.

I saw how he employed the big NTs vs the smaller ones.
I saw how a certain guy moved from OLB to ILB.
I saw how a certain guy moved from MIKE to MO.

I know what I'm talking about, Rey!

You're a a good football guy, but you don't know everything.
Playing the game qualifies you with certain knowledge, it doesn't mean that you know everything about football.

It certainly doesn't qualify you to that say somebody else doesn't know what he's talking about (this is a card that you have played quite a few times to different people; I honestly think you should refrain from using that card).

Sorry if it sounds harsh; you're one of the board members I have high regards about football matters.
But you aren't squat if you can't prove your take.

If you choose to read into the players' words, I need to remind you about a couple of things:

1. What Cushing said about the change of "position" was "not much", and he repeated it again "not much". Maybe you can dwelve deeper into that?

2. Do you know that basically on "passing downs" Cushing was really playing like a MO? Did you take the time to watch and see how he was used?
In dime packages, he's the only LB on the field and by "designation" he's called a MIKE; but by the way he lined up he was really a MO and that was how he played in those packages when Quin (mostly) was on the TE.

3. Show me instances where the MIKE take on the lead blocker more often than the MO.

Rey
08-01-2012, 12:10 AM
Tbh I didn't read a word of your post. You don't have to read mine either, but here is herring talking about

Demeco and Cushing last year:

Herring on Ryans: “When you talk about the Mo position, basically you’re talking about production, playmaking, an instinctive player, and that’s where we see DeMeco Ryans at, as being a productive instinct, run-hit football player. Loves the game, he’s smart, he’s intelligent. We’ll look to him to set the huddle; be one of our leaders, especially out in front of the huddle as a captain of our defense; to make all the adjustments and checks; to be a tempo setter; to be a productive guy using his instincts and his play production, his ability to get to the football, his nose for the football. That’s what we look for in our Mo, as well as blitz capabilities and then the weakside coverage in the passing game. We see him as an all-around instinctive football player that we expect a lot of production out of. And the smartness comes into play as far as his knowledge of football schemes and his ability to set the defense and be a leader in that manner.”


Herring on Cushing: “Boy, if there was ever a coach’s dream of a Mike linebacker. Great physical presence. Big, strong, fast, got a lot of tenacity, a lot of want-to as far as how you play the game full-speed with great effort on every play. With his physical stature and his physical play by nature, he ought to dominate that box physically as far as taking on linemen or lead blockers, and then dropping in coverage to the tight end side and controlling that short zone area and controlling the run. He’s a big run-hit guy, and then also has ability to blitz vertically through the line. You put him inside and you give him a chance to be even more productive than what he’s been. It puts him in a position where he can make plays all over the field instead of lining up at outside on one side. As far as Mike linebackers go ability- and size-wise, he’s top of the line. I mean, you normally would like ‘em 6-2 on average, 250 pounds. Well, he’s, 6-3, 265, and can run.”

http://www.houstontexans.com/news/article-3/2011-Position-Preview-Linebacker/66d2212b-1a0e-4d3b-9356-b330f9fd73d5


I'll say it again. You don't know what you are talking about.

The weakside lb's are almost always viewed as your playmakers.

Does it work out like that on every play? No and I feel like I shouldn't even have to say that.

Seriously, this is very fundamental stuff and IMO your arguments here are just showing your ignorance.

Problem with playing Cushing at wilb last year is that ryans just wasn't healthy or sturdy enough to basically be the shut off man all year long.

One more time. The reason Cushing is moving to the wilb position is so he can be more free to make plays.

Now if teams line up and run iso's towards the weakside a majority if the time it's not going to work out like that, but "in theory" (and most likely) teams are going to run towards the strong side most of the time which means Cushing will be free to make plays without having to intentionally take on blocks.

The slb (or playside lb) is taught to take on blocks while the backside guy is basically taking an angle towards the ball carrier and avoiding blocks.

Strong side guy can't avoid blocks because it opens up the hole.

Look, this'll be my last post and you guys can believe whatever the hell you wanna believe. And if you see something different on film its because you don't know what you are looking at/for.

Herrings words are explaining the differences between the two spots. If you want to debate it further you can continue the conversation with him.

BCRich
08-01-2012, 03:56 AM
Herrings words are explaining the differences between the two spots. If you want to debate it further you can continue the conversation with him.

Who made more plays on our defense last year? The MO or the MIKE?

Rey
08-01-2012, 08:13 AM
Who made more plays on our defense last year? The WOLB or the MIKE?

Sigh.

I'll go over this one more time, and seriously that is it.

Yes Cushing made more plays than Demeco last year. That was mostly due to Cushing bring the better player and seeing far more snaps.

Please stop being so dense.

Moving Cushing to the weakside should ideally free him up even more than last year...in theory.

Doesn't mean he will make more plays, but he will likely be more free to just attack the ball carrier on average than he was last year.

Seriously, if you can't understand that then I don't know what to tell you. This really isn't a difficult concept at all. Again, you guys arguments are showing your lack if football understanding. I posted direct quotes from herring discussing what they want out of the two positions.

The op posted something from this off season saying the coaches moved him there to free him up.

If there was no distinction between the positions there wouldn't have been a position change. Cushing wouldn't be talking about going from one position to the other and you wouldn't have herring talking about what they look for from each position.

And you guys are still arguing this? Your clueless here and that's just the truth.

Seriously, I'm done.

Edit: just noticed you put wolb. If that was on purpose it further shows your confusion. You can't compare a wolb's stats to a silb. Their jobs are completely different. If you meant to put wilb then see my response above.

BCRich
08-01-2012, 10:05 AM
Sigh.

I'll go over this one more time, and seriously that is it.

Yes Cushing made more plays than Demeco last year. That was mostly due to Cushing bring the better player and seeing far more snaps.


I don't know why you think I'm disagreeing with you.

I haven't said one thing in this entire thread to try to disprove what you are saying. All I've said is exactly what I've quoted you saying right here.

That's it, nothing more, nothing less. Saying so does not make your point any less valid.




Either way, when I say sometimes it's more about the player, I'm not denying what Rey says. That's they way they draw it up, you know. But if you look at our offense. It looks good with Ben Tate. It's on another level with Arian Foster.

Same scheme. Same design. Special player.

76Texan
08-01-2012, 10:45 AM
First, here are some numbers:

Falcons

2002
Keith Brookings (MO) 111 tackles 29 asssists in 16 games
Combo of Chris Draft and John Holecek (MIKE) 97 tackles 26 assists in 16 games

2003
Keith Brookings (MO) 126 tackles 18 asssists in 16 games
Chris Draft (MIKE) 105 tackles 21 assists in 16 games

Chargers

2004
Donnie Edwards (MO) 105 tackles 46 asssists in 16 games
Randall Godfrey (MIKE) 68 tackles 19 assists in 15 games

2005
Donnie Edwards (MO) 114 tackles 40 asssists in 16 games
Randall Godfrey (MIKE) 56 tackles 21 assists in 14 games

2006
Donnie Edwards (MO) 100 tackles 42 asssists in 16 games
Randall Godfrey (MIKE) 42 tackles 16 assists in 13 games

Dallas

2007
Bradie James (MO) 64 tackles 37 asssists in 16 games
Akin Ayodele (MIKE) 36 tackles 21 assists in 14 games

2008
Bradie James (MO) 80 tackles 36 asssists in 16 games
Zach Thomas (MIKE) 65 tackles 29 assists in 14 games

2009
Bradie James (MO) 80 tackles 33 asssists in 16 games
Keith Brookings (MIKE) 75 tackles 31 assists in 16 games

2010
Bradie James (MO) 81 tackles 37 asssists in 16 games
Keith Brookings (MIKE) 73 tackles 24 assists in 16 games

76Texan
08-01-2012, 10:54 AM
The numbers, obviously, don't tell the whole story.

Because, like I said, James also saw plenty of snaps on the weakside.

Similarly, Cushing also saw plenty of snaps on the weakside.
If you count ALL of his snaps, it might be close to 50/50

(In their dime packages where the Texans mostly brought Quin up, he played a similar role as the MIKE while Cushing played as the MO).

The opponents ran to the weak side when Ryans was the MO quite often, so he was the one who saw the trash quite a bit as well.

All these facts add together to render the differentiation between the two positions rather meaningless (or not very meaningful).

Cushing may see the weak side an additional 5-10% more snaps at MO this upcoming year; I don't expect to see any more than that.

76Texan
08-01-2012, 11:05 AM
As far as Herring goes, it was just more coach speak.

Can't you read between the lines?

Regarding Cushing at MIKE, he said: "It puts him in a position where he can make plays all over the field".

What does that mean to you?