Cushing to Move from Mike to Mo

[Heath Shuler]

"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]

Originally Posted by BCRich

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]

Originally Posted by Rey

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]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

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]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

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]

Originally Posted by Rey

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]

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/ar...6-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]

Originally Posted by Rey

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]

Originally Posted by BCRich

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]

Originally Posted by Rey

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.

Originally Posted by BCRich

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]

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]

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]

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?