Starting line up on opening day

We really don't "need" anything at this point since we've addressed our needs through free agency. If someone like DeAngelo Williams is available with our first pick, I think most people see that as the optimal solution because he's gotten more votes than Carpenter, but most of us don't expect one of those elite backs to be available, and we could obviously get much better value at LB than RB if they're not. We can then address RB depth with a solid guy like Lundy in the fourth round. And as for for what a "blue chip guy" can do for us there, look at Mark Fields circa 2002.


One RB spot:
DeShaun Foster
Eric Shelton
Nick Goings
Jamal Robertson

Three LB spots:
Chris Draft
Thomas Davis
Dan Morgan
Adam Seward
Vinny Ciurciu
Sean Tufts

 

I definitely agree that having a blue chip guy at SLB would be good - or else I wouldn't have bothered suggesting Davis there. I just don't believe it's as necessary as RB. RB isn't good value, and I did state that above - I don't want a guy like Maroney, and have some issues with taking a guy I like such as Addai that high (Lundy I'd take in the 3rd).

 

Again:

 

Man, I got to believe we go Linebacker in the first now. Nothing else seems as important AND we know Fox and Friends put their money on Defense.

 

OMG posting it again totally changes my opinion!!!!1111

Everyone knows we need two starting backs. We have two guys who could, theoretically, start, and one of which that's lesser quality. We need 3, honestly 4 LBs, and we have 3 that could easily start and one that probably could. Be nice to have one there, but I don't find it dire.

 

One RB spot:
DeShaun Foster - would surprise no one if he went down for the year in the preseason
Eric Shelton - showed nothing last year probably IRed to keep from being cut
Nick Goings - you want him as our feature back?
Jamal Robertson - special teamer emergency fill in

Three LB spots:
Chris Draft - adequate player when surrounded by talent
Thomas Davis - first round pick and looked good in situational role
Dan Morgan - probowler but typically misses six games due to injury
Adam Seward - looked good at times
Vinny Ciurciu - special teamer emergency fill in
Sean Tufts - special teamer emergency fill in

Basically the chance are 50/50 or better than we will be down that depth chart at running back very quickly and be forced to start Goings again. Compare Goings to what we have at linebacker and then decide whether or not we have a greater need at linebacker or running back. Remember we are a "run first offense" that tends to chew up running backs at a fast clip.

 

Actually we are a "feed the stud" offense that masquerades as a "run first" offense. If Goings is the RB, we are a "pass first" offense.

 

If Foster is healthy I bet we end up with a pretty good balance. We have never really had our running and passing game clicking at the same time under Fox.

 

No, we don't. If we had one guy who could stay healthy then we'd need only one. It's not as if our system is so much more brutal than every other NFL offense that is capable of using one RB. Unfortunately Stephen Davis always had some injury issues and Foster always has some serious injury issues. But if you mean that we can't count on Foster to stay healthy this season, I absolutely agree. That's why we have Shelton and Goings (and probably a mid-round RB), though. But once we finally get a durable guy who can produce, we certainly wouldn't need anyone to spell him anymore than you see in any other system with run-emphasis.

That's so stupid a comment, especially coming from someone like you who should know better, that I don't precisely know how to respond to it. It's fine to suggest that RB is a need. I don't see it to be, but we can reasonably disagree on that. Saying we only need 4 LBs, though, is absurd. We'd need more than that even if Dan Morgan didn't go down every year.


Thelt:
Goings did just fine in '04.

 

We're not cutting Foster, so that's not relevant. And when since 2003 have we not gone into the season with two starting-level guys plus Goings?

We don't have to have a mid-1st round RB, no. Just like we don't have to have a 1st competing at SLB.

Realistically, that can start? Sure. 4 LBs. 3 and a utility depth guy. 5 would be a nice luxury, and I'll take it, but that we absolutely must have 5 starting-level LBs? Who has that? I don't think it's stupid at all to suggest that one starting-type depth guy is enough. This defense isn't going to crumble with a 3rd round pick playing OLB on two downs. Luckily, I know that over-reaction is an argument tactic and nothing else, so I won't freak out as you would if I'd said that to you.