rookie linebacker question

I keep reading about how a rookie linebacker wont start in lebeaus system. did kendrell bell not start as a rookie? I think dick was here when he played

 

Indeed. He was NFL defesnive rookie of the year.

However, I beleive Lebeau was Bengals Head Coach at that point.

 

As long as Mike Tomlin and Dick Lebeau are in charge
you may as well forget about rookies/young players getting any
quality time. Why do you think Art II came out a couple years ago and said
that he would like to get young players on the fast track? It seems to have fallen
on deaf ears.Hampton over Mclendon CMon man, how about this one if spence
would not have gotten hurt.we would have still seen the Pershin dough boy at LB.
How about Cam Heyward he has lingered for three years they have totally stunted his growth.
These 2 (coach T& DL) are HOLDING BACK THE STEELERS.

 

Pretty sure most of this years rookies saw playing time.

 

but mostly because of injury. not the norm here.

 

Quite. Unfortunately, it's been long enough away from Cowher's time for people to ignore these kind of things.

 

Irrelevant. It was a different game back then. Rookies didn't start as often back then as they do now. It was just assumed that rookies would struggle and as such they needed development time on the bench. That's no longer the case. Rookies are starting more than ever and they're playing just as well as veterans in many cases.

Comparing what Tomlin does now to what Cowher did a long time ago accomplishes nothing. We need to be looking at what we're doing and whether we could be doing it better. Every time McClendon came into the game he was extremely disruptive. While Hampton played better than I expected him to, he was unimpressive most of the time. McClendon seemed to disrupt the entire play far more often than Hampton, yet he got far less snaps. He did more with less, yet he sat on the bench most of the time. I happen to think it's BS he didn't know the playbook. He sure seemed to know it just fine when he was in there. I also think it's BS that it takes players 2-3 years to learn the playbook. While some playbooks are complicated, it's not that complicated. If they truly can't grasp it until their 3rd year, then we're drafting clinical retards and should maybe start drafting more intelligent players. If I can learn Spanish in 2 years, Heyward can learn a damn football playbook in less time than that.

Teams all around the league are starting their rookies, yet we continue to make them rot on the bench for 2-3 years. That needs to change. With the salary cap situation, we can't afford to have our young guys sit for 2-3 years, play for 1 year then be looking for a new, long term deal. It's no wonder we're in salary cap hell. Keisel has been great for us for a long time, but what was the point of drafting his replacement if we aren't going to replace him? Put Heyward in, cut Keisel and use that money to pay someone else at a position we need. Same with Hampton.

 

*Hampton, I thought, played pretty damn well this year. McClendon, like Hoke was, has been servicable. I don't think Mc should have been starting over Hampton because he is younger (if that's what you're suggesting).

*You would rather have Spence over a veteran like Foote? I don't know if you noticed or not, but Foote stepped in after Farrior left and was one of the few bright spots on our defense in 2011. I would hardly have labeled him a liability this season either. Larry Foote has been on the end of more undeserved vitriol from this fan base than perhaps any other player that I can remember (or this message board, at least -- another one of those things that seems to be focused here but you don't hear discussed outside this forum).

*I don't think Cam Hewyard's growth has been stunted. I just think he sucks. I don't think he has been what they had hoped. If he was, you'd have seen him on the field more often.

 

True dat.

In fact, Cowher (and Faneca) was so panicked after Maddox went down in 2004, he apparently dialed up Neil O and begged him out of retirement rather than let that rookie kid from Miami of Ohio take the snaps.

 

heyward sucks??? really? he's #97 you know? also, how do you know spence wouldn't have outplayed foote? that's assuming alot isn't it?

 

You think Heyward has played well? Really? Lived up to his first-round pick status? I don't. I don't think Heyward has given us much of anything since he's been here. We can agree to disagree on that.

I never ASSUMED Spence wouldn't have outplayed Foote. I was alluding to the reference of Foote being a 'doughboy' that our fanbase would have been forced to watch at linebacker again. Merely pointed out that Foote hasn't been nearly as bad as a lot of people on this board have been suggesting for years.

 

THis is a total crock. Hamptom didn't start over Mclendon because of some supposed veteran bias. He didn't know the playbook and was frequently out of position. There's an interview floating around with John Mitchell talking about this exact topic. It's the same reason why Brown started off behind Ward last year. Brown is clearly more athletically gifted that Hines, but if you don't know the playbook you aren't going to start.

 

Getting back to the dough boy reference, that was Larry Foote's High School nickname of his team Pershing Dough boys.And yes Spence would have been better than Larry, but we would never have seen it because MT and DL give all the quality time to veterans. Look around at other teams they have rookies starting all over the place. Hampton had a servicable year, but in NO WAY SHOULD HE HAVE SEEN MORE TIME THAN MCCLENDON.

 

When ever I saw McClendon and Heyward out there at the same time, the O-line was going backwards, vs watching Hampton and Keisel get pushed around like broken puppets. You always knew when Heyward was out there, I think the guy is going to be a good one. he should be out there all the time, it would save the team from wasting $$$ on the has beens.

 

I get tired of hearing how complex DL's system is and how rookies can't grasp it well enough to get much playing time. Why have we heard other players from opponents talk about how it's pretty simple once it's grasped. I'm sure DL's defense is not much more complex than Mike Zimmer's with the Bengals but Burfict sure seemed to thrive this year, didn't he?

 

yea, i do think heyward played pretty well for the snaps he had. he will be fine when he starts full time.

 

Shaner I don't think it has anything to do specifically with learning the playbook but more of understanding the differing responsibilities they have on any given play. I am sure like you said the playbook isn't complicated, it is the in game stuff that is difficult to grasp the first two years. By the third some of it starts to become instinctual. It is the knowing that they are running a stretch play to the outside so if you are the DE you have to maintain your gap responsibility and don't let them push you to far to one side or the other, it is knowing that the RB is a good cut back runner so if they push you outside he could cut back into the hole, if they push you inside then they can make the cut to the outside. If you are playing MLB you have to maintain your zone can't blitz up field to quickly or they catch you out of position that happens the back goes right past you, If you are the OLB you have to seal the edge, hoping the DE takes up the double team of the TE allowing you to make the play, if not you have to tie him up and wait for the MLB or Safety to flow to the ball. All of this in a split second and hope it works. At least that is my take on the system. I started thread about month or so ago about whether or not they were too aggressive on stopping the run. You can see what I am talking about there too. Foote and Timmons would get aggressive on obvious running plays and creep up towards the box widing the zone between them and the safety coverage giving teams more than enough room to go PL and hit a TE or WR on a crossing route behind the MLB's and TImmons or Foote would be struggling to catch up and Clark would be delivering a hit to try and stop the completion. IT isn't the learning it is the getting a feeling for it and where you are in relation to everyone else.

 

I too am TIRED of this BS, football is football. These guys have been playing it
since the midgets. This isn't rocket science people. You block and you tackle
as Chuck Noll use to sat ITS REALLY THAT SIMPLE.

 

Great post explaining the on-field situational side of DL's defense. Too many people that don't understand that, or gloss it over. Yes, it comes down to fundamentals, but in this defense, there are a lot more to them.

The situational awareness part is huge. That is what makes a team look great if they have it, or look like boys vs. men if they don't. The coach as well as the players need to have it. These are professionals. If the players see a need for adjustment on the field, huddle up or communicate it to your teammates. Some coaches don't see it. Sometimes the coaches do see it, but the players don't get it. It seems that guys like Belichick put some really talented guys, and some really smart, but less-talented guys with them. They can adjust their routes/coverages in-game to exploit a weakness or just get the job done.

 

I think this year has shown that the Steelers might need to take a step back in order to take 3 steps forward. Heyward may not be as talented as Keisel right now, but I don't think the drop off would be horrible enough that Heyward should start and get some valuable experience. And I agree they should have done the same with Mclendon.

I think the one that get me is around the league you see rookie cornerbacks stepping in and having great seasons, and if not for injury you don't really see that with the Steelers...

 

Foote played good this year, not sure Spence would have been as good THIS YEAR. Surprised me.

Kiesel had a great year last year which earned him his spot over Hayward this year. Next year look for Hayward to start.

The one I just did not get was Hampton over McClendon. McClendon was clearly better. Hampton would have been a good back-up.


The d-line is not commanding double teams, which is what makes the 3-4 work. The defense was good but could have been better. The 3 man front has three tackles: two athletic and one gigantic.