[McWeagle]

I was going to cite Will Herring as a good comparison for Bates, but I couldn't be more wrong. Dude is listed at 241 on the Saints roster...

[TrumanCrockett]

mcgufcm, on 22 February 2012 - 02:29 PM, said:

Look, if you have freaks of nature like we had in 2002 (starting LBs: Karlos Dansby, Mark Brown, and Dontarrious Thomas), then yeah, you'd love to have big guys that are just as fast as the smaller guys, but the reality is: those guys are rare. There's a reason all three guys were All-SEC. There's a reason all three played a number of years in the NFL. There's a reason Dansby and Thomas were first and second round picks, respectively. Most of the time, you aren't trotting out 1st and 2nd rounders in a group together.

Can we also stop using Alabama as a benchmark? Different defense, different personnel requirements. As Mikey pointed out, comparing 43 and 34 LBs is just a ridiculous exercise. It's as dumb as comparing 43 DEs to 34 DEs. The body type and skill set you're searching for is completely different.

If we all accept that every LB isn't going to be 230+ pounds while maintaining cat-like quickness and top-end speed (in other words, they can't all be Dansbys and Spikeses), you're often going to compromise between size and speed. Give one to get the other. If I have to choose, I'm with Tommy Tuberville. Speed and fundamentals are better than bulk. I can teach a small guy to tackle, but I can't make a big guy run faster. Sure, you can compensate for lack of top-end speed with smarts and positioning (see: Ray Lewis for the last 4 years), but in college, you're far more likely to succeed in an effort to instill proper fundamentals to a smallish LB than you are to come across a football savant like Ray Lewis.

In the end, I'd rather have a Daren Bates or A.T. Williams than Kevin Sears or someone like that (bulky but slower). I think you can be more consistently successful with the former than the latter. Obviously, I'd rather find Karlos Dansby, but that just isn't going to happen most of the time. Daren Bates is plenty big enough to succeed if he plays fundamentally sound football (as he did the last six or seven games of the year). He'll be even better if the front four does their job (apply pressure and hold the point of attack against the run), but he's good enough to succeed even without a great front four, which is exactly what he did this year.

Well said.

[JB33]

McWeagle, on 22 February 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

I was going to cite Will Herring as a good comparison for Bates, but I couldn't be more wrong. Dude is listed at 241 on the Saints roster...

Plus, I think he's about 6'3." He's a big dude, in any case.

This post has been edited by JB33: 22 February 2012 - 04:58 PM

[Mikey]

McWeagle, on 22 February 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

I was going to cite Will Herring as a good comparison for Bates, but I couldn't be more wrong. Dude is listed at 241 on the Saints roster...

Yes, but he wasn't anywhere near 240 when he was playing at Auburn.

[tgr4lfe]

mcgufcm said:

1329935767[/url]' post='800125']
Those guys won a LOT of games (including starting for one of the best defenses in the history of the football program). They played on defenses that were always stout, and stout against the run. I don't know what knocks people had on the dudes on that list, but they all played top-level SEC quality football.

Also, "if he would just wrap up"? Seriously, did anyone watch the second half of the season? He was sound and consistent every Saturday. He was by far the best LB on the team from the midway point of the season until the final horn at the bowl game.

I think an argument could be made for how Freeman played the 2nd half of the season? Bates did very well also! I think it is best for Bates to stay at LB.

[kingfish]

I'm with Van Gorder ... bigger thicker is better.

[Tiger]

Good points all around, in my opinion, although the "knock" I refer to is the weakness. Yes, Auburn won alot of games with those smallish linebackers, but look at, say, Houston Nutt's power-run Arkansas teams, people sometimes tried to pin the 'mismatch' on Tubs being from Arkansas and having a hard time playing them, etc, but it was the matchup -- a power run game vs smaller, faster defense. You can get to the ball, but it won't mean a damn thing if a smaller frame bounces off the ballcarrier. Thats all I'm saying, those LBs were very good for Auburn and I'm glad they all played. And its true, not all linebackers can have Dansby/Thomas size/speed combination, so generally you pick your style. But BVG seems to like bigger linebackers.

Also, interesting, none of the guys listed by mcgufcm made an impact on the professional level -- or even highly regarded enough by professionals to be taken high in the draft. Not knocking those guys, but I personally am in the crowd that would rather have guys that are going to be pros than be system college players. Helps in recruiting, the bottom line talent level is higher, the physical attributes would be 'better', etc.


There is no REAL right or wrong answer, Auburn had won the SEC West, SEC, and should have won a national championship with smaller linebackers who could run, but in a perfect world we find a little bit better balance in the speed/size ratio. I guess my thought process is, I'd much rather you beat me running a spread offense, because as a defense there are things you can do schematically to minimize the effect of the spread. But if a team is pounding you down the middle and you're not stopping them, thats just man-on-man football, there isn't much you can do to combat that. It can be will-breaking. Just a warning, I love to play devil's advocate and explore every angle of situations.

This post has been edited by Tiger: 23 February 2012 - 09:32 AM

[mcgufcm]

I don't have any problem debating the choice between size and speed, but your Arkansas analysis is lacking.

Go back and look at the years they "ran over" us. In 2001, a scat back named Fred Tally ran for 200+ yards primarily on a delayed draw run game. They wasn't power football. That was a jitterbug taking advantage of a defense playing out of position. In 2002, Matt Jones gouged us with the option. Frankly, we didn't prepare for it, and if we did, our preparation didn't show. Jones was a new starter, and again, it wasn't like they just pounded the ball down our throat. The next three years, we won and controlled the run game.

2006 is the only season they just ran it down our throat. That's the whole list. They hit a big pass early and ran the ball however they wanted after that. Then again, that run game included Darren McFadden, Felix Jones, and Peyton Hillis in the same backfield. Maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't have mattered who the hell we trotted out there.

In the end, I think the run defense numbers in 2004, 2005, and 2006 speak for themselves. We shut it down with smaller players. Not that you're making this effort, but it seems crazy to me to argue that small linebackers don't cut it in the SEC when we've seen it work in the recent past.

As for what we should prepare for, I think you have to prepare for what you're going to see more often. The SEC is running counter to the country. It's getting less spread (or at least less Spread-only), instead of more. Alabama, LSU, Florida, Georgia, and Arkansas all run primarily pro-style offense (if you can call what LSU runs an offense). Auburn will be less spread. South Carolina runs a run-heavy version of the fun n gun. I think we SHOULD get bigger because there aren't many teams that will exploit a lack of speed in the way spread teams might, but I don't think we should force it. Bates is a LB. He's the best LB on the team, and it's his best position. You don't move a guy out of position and weaken your LB corp just to fit a philosophy. That's silly. You coach the guys you have and tweak the system until you're able to recruit the guys you want to fit your system. Then, you can switch to what you want to be 100%.

[bigsixfive]

JB33, on 22 February 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

McWeagle, on 22 February 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

I was going to cite Will Herring as a good comparison for Bates, but I couldn't be more wrong. Dude is listed at 241 on the Saints roster...

Plus, I think he's about 6'3." He's a big dude, in any case.

He wasn't 241 at Auburn, but he was bigger, stronger, and generally more athletic than Bates. Plus, he was (and is) very smart, especially when it comes to football. Chizik has said Herring was the smartest player he's coached.

[Tiger]

mcgufcm, on 23 February 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

I don't have any problem debating the choice between size and speed, but your Arkansas analysis is lacking.

Go back and look at the years they "ran over" us. In 2001, a scat back named Fred Tally ran for 200+ yards primarily on a delayed draw run game. They wasn't power football. That was a jitterbug taking advantage of a defense playing out of position. In 2002, Matt Jones gouged us with the option. Frankly, we didn't prepare for it, and if we did, our preparation didn't show. Jones was a new starter, and again, it wasn't like they just pounded the ball down our throat. The next three years, we won and controlled the run game.

2006 is the only season they just ran it down our throat. That's the whole list. They hit a big pass early and ran the ball however they wanted after that. Then again, that run game included Darren McFadden, Felix Jones, and Peyton Hillis in the same backfield. Maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't have mattered who the hell we trotted out there.

In the end, I think the run defense numbers in 2004, 2005, and 2006 speak for themselves. We shut it down with smaller players. Not that you're making this effort, but it seems crazy to me to argue that small linebackers don't cut it in the SEC when we've seen it work in the recent past.

As for what we should prepare for, I think you have to prepare for what you're going to see more often. The SEC is running counter to the country. It's getting less spread (or at least less Spread-only), instead of more. Alabama, LSU, Florida, Georgia, and Arkansas all run primarily pro-style offense (if you can call what LSU runs an offense). Auburn will be less spread. South Carolina runs a run-heavy version of the fun n gun. I think we SHOULD get bigger because there aren't many teams that will exploit a lack of speed in the way spread teams might, but I don't think we should force it. Bates is a LB. He's the best LB on the team, and it's his best position. You don't move a guy out of position and weaken your LB corp just to fit a philosophy. That's silly. You coach the guys you have and tweak the system until you're able to recruit the guys you want to fit your system. Then, you can switch to what you want to be 100%.

Thats fair, 2001 was over a decade ago, so I can't truly recall the fashion in which we lost but giving up almost 250 yards to Talley was in my mind for sure. You make a great point about the 2006 game as well, due to all NFL backfield they had at the time. Although in 2007, they had the same backfield and Auburn held the Jones-McFadden-Hillis combo to a combined 85 rushing yards so that pokes holes in my argument. Basically, we've seen both tactics work, with the right amount of experience, good coaching, fundamentals any system will work. Ask any coach, "if we execute our gameplan we should win"...classic coach mentality.

And I agree, the SEC is getting more pro-style than spread, hence why we need bigger LBs, as you said. I also completely agree with Bates, he needs to stay at LB, it'll do Auburn's Safety and Linebacker play a disservice to move him at this point in his career. And yes, some of Auburns best defenses the past decade+ were using small/fast linebackers. Love the discussion though, I really enjoy your breakdowns.

[mcgufcm]

By the way, I just re-read my post. I came off as a jerk. I didn't mean to be. I really do think it's a fun discussion, and I'm actually on-board with Van Gorder's viewpoint in the long-term. In the short-term, I just think we should play our best players in the positions where they are most likely to be successful. For Bates, that is unquestionably LB. He was iffy in pass coverage as a Safety. Now, he's bigger and hasn't played the position in two years but he's suddenly going to be better? If you thought Neiko Thorpe had a penchant for giving up the big play, you don't want any part of a bulkier, less experienced (in the passing game) Daren Bates back there.

At LB, he's got enough size and tackling ability to hold up against the run, and he can absolutely give you an edge in pass coverage with his above average speed on WLB. I don't see what the advantage of playing him at Safety is. I suppose it would make us bigger (if you assume we have bigger, game-ready options at LB, which is a dubious assumption), but at what cost? Demetruce McNeal, Erique Florence, and Ryan Smith should all play. If you move Daren back, you're pushing McNeal to backup (or Bates is a backup) and Smith is playing slightly out of position at Free Safety.

I think we have more valid options at Safety than we do at LB. Right now, we have three rotations spots all but assured. We need to find one more guy. One option is moving T.Bell to Free Safety. He started his career there, and Neiko made the same transition last year. That would allow us to play more of our best DBs (Davis, Mincy, Bell, and Whitehead could all be on the field together with McNeal or Florence).

At WLB, who is the replacement? Evans and White are clearly Strongside players. Holland is a Mike all the way. Frost could play in the Middle or on the Weakside. That's one. That still leaves two spots to fill between WLB and MLB (if you assume Bates moves back). Are we banking on Cassanova AND Justin Garrett working out? And if so, we have to stay healthy. The better set-up is to play Bates/Holland/Evans with White/Frost/Player X. That leaves Garrett, Swain, and McKinzy to sort out the rotation and provide depth.

[Tiger]

No sir, I didn't think you were being a jerk at all. But yes, our LB unit needs help and removing Bates from there will only make the LBs weaker as a unit. Can't wait for the season to start!

[Raven_tiger]

If our DL (sans Lemonier) play doesn't improve, it may not matter what size our LBs (or DBs for that matter) are...

[mcgufcm]

I don't say sans Lemonier. For most of the year, he was a one-trick pony. He's not sound against the run, and he's got the body to be a complete DE. He's a young guy so I'm not surprised he has stuff to improve, but he needs to get a lot better. Sack numbers aren't everything.

[WarEagleReedle]

I have always thought Bates to be a fairly solid Cornerback or Safety I like the prospect of him becoming a "Kodi Burns" (sidenote: Kodi is 6'2 208lbs) on the defensive side & helping to shore things up in the secondary.