Marrone on Bradham...

[X-Era]

I couldn't hear the exact question but it sounded like he was asked if Nigel would play ILB. Marrone went on to talk about the Mike and Will positions and then finally answered one of the inside linebacker positions.

I couldn't hear exactly what he was asked but:

1) Isn't the Mike and Will, 4-3 LB spots?
2) We he being asked what position Bradham would play in the 3-4?

Can someone clarify?

If he intends to play him as an ILB and feels he's one of our best LB'ers like many of us do, it's telling.

It would lean me to think OLB may be more of a target than ILB and I didn't necessarily see it that way.

[swiper]

Reminds me of the movie Airplane.


http://youtu.be/g0j2dVuhr6s

You speak gibberish? Yeah I speak gibberish.

[Yasgur's Farm]

He said he will be an ILB.

[X-Era]

He said he will be an ILB.
I think it's noteworthy. If anything it leaves WLB wide open.

Especially after this:

http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2013/03/13/what-lawson-add-means-for-bradham/

So now we need a WLB along with a later round ILB.

What's the ideal 3-4 or hybrid WLB?

Does a guy like Zaviar Gooden still fit?

[better days]

Mike = Middle

Will = Weakside

Sam= Strongside

[EDS]

Sounds like the Bills are crossing their fingers and hoping Bradham can become a Navarro Bowman type of sideline-to-sideline inside linebacker. We will have to wait and see.

[BillsFever21]

I'm not saying he will suck or be good but it doesn't take much to be the best current LB on this junk heap of a unit.

[X-Era]

Mike = Middle

Will = Weakside

Sam= Strongside
I'm well aware. the 3-4 adds an additional ILB spot. If he was asked if Bradham will play ILB in a 3-4, it leaves an OLB spot open.

[better days]

I'm well aware

OK, I thought you wanted someone to clarify.

Look at your first post. THAT is not too clear.

[X-Era]

OK, I thought you wanted someone to clarify.

Look at your first post. THAT is not too clear.
Not being sarcastic.

That's my point actually, Marrones comments weren't clear to me. In a 4-3 the Will is an OLB spot, he mentions having his LB play either the Will or Mike. In the 3-4 the Will and Mike are both inside LB spots (in some schemes). And finally he says inside LB.

So my guess is he meant that Bradham will be an ILB in a 3-4 which makes a 3-4 OLB an open position.

[Goobylal]

I'm well aware. the -34 adds an additional 3-4 spot. If he was asked if Bradham will play ILB in a 3-4, it leaves an OLB spot open.
No it doesn't. In the 3-4, Lawson will be the SLB like he was in SF (and Cincy although in a 4-3), Mario will be the WLB like he was in Houston, and the two ILB's will be Bradham and Sheppard.

[Night Train]

No it doesn't. In the 3-4, Lawson will be the SLB like he was in SF (and Cincy although in a 4-3), Mario will be the WLB like he was in Houston, and the two ILB's will be Bradham and Sheppard.

This

[Goobylal]

This
Forgot to mention that I think Bradham can be a really good ILB, and I think that Sheppard will be best-served at a 3-4 ILB. Ideally though they can sign a guy like Dansby.

[X-Era]

No it doesn't. In the 3-4, Lawson will be the SLB like he was in SF (and Cincy although in a 4-3), Mario will be the WLB like he was in Houston, and the two ILB's will be Bradham and Sheppard.Ahh. Makes sense. So it was just CB that was not clear by talking about Bradham replacing Barnett who played the Will in the 4-3 (OLB spot).

"While Lawson is a solid coverage defender in the pass game, so too is Bradham, which probably makes him a very good candidate for the weak side where Nick Barnett used to line up."

- - - Updated - - -


Forgot to mention that I think Bradham can be a really good ILB, and I think that Sheppard will be best-served at a 3-4 ILB. Ideally though they can sign a guy like Dansby.
Personally, I'd like Shepp on the bench. I'd like a legit upgrade at ILB. Bradham playing the other spot is intriguing.

[The Jokeman]

Forgot to mention that I think Bradham can be a really good ILB, and I think that Sheppard will be best-served at a 3-4 ILB. Ideally though they can sign a guy like Dansby.

One guy I'd also consider as a depth guy at ILB in a 3-4 and can play SLB or WLB in a 4-3 is Rocky McIntosh, who at his best was an ILB next to London Fletcher in Washington.

[Goobylal]

One guy I'd also consider as a depth guy at ILB in a 3-4 and can play SLB or WLB in a 4-3 is Rocky McIntosh, who at his best was an ILB next to London Fletcher in Washington.
He may be a more realistic option than Dansby.

[ServoBillieves]

Remember when we switched to the 3-4 under Buddy and drafted for that, then we got a new DC and we signed and drafted players for a 4-3, and now that those players have been drafted we're doing some hybrid system with players we will draft for and yet the ones we've drafted won't do anything for it?!

ISN'T THIS FUN?!

[The Jokeman]

Remember when we switched to the 3-4 under Buddy and drafted for that, then we got a new DC and we signed and drafted players for a 4-3, and now that those players have been drafted we're doing some hybrid system with players we will draft for and yet the ones we've drafted won't do anything for it?!

ISN'T THIS FUN?!

Outside of the Williams' and Bradham I feel most of our roster is better suited play in a 3-4. That said those three I mentioned are our best players outside of Dareus, who thankfully is equally suited to play the 3-4 or 4-3. Yet it feels we're going to be more 3-4 with Branch and Lawson in the fold.

[Goobylal]

Remember when we switched to the 3-4 under Buddy and drafted for that, then we got a new DC and we signed and drafted players for a 4-3, and now that those players have been drafted we're doing some hybrid system with players we will draft for and yet the ones we've drafted won't do anything for it?!

ISN'T THIS FUN?!
Really? Switching between a 3-4 and 4-3 means no one will do anything for it?

[Mski]

No it doesn't. In the 3-4, Lawson will be the SLB like he was in SF (and Cincy although in a 4-3), Mario will be the WLB like he was in Houston, and the two ILB's will be Bradham and Sheppard.isnt mark anderson more of a 3-4 olb than a 4-3 de?, or atleast more of the "hybrid" player that the new scheme would warrant?

[X-Era]

Remember when we switched to the 3-4 under Buddy and drafted for that, then we got a new DC and we signed and drafted players for a 4-3, and now that those players have been drafted we're doing some hybrid system with players we will draft for and yet the ones we've drafted won't do anything for it?!

ISN'T THIS FUN?!Wait. Why don't we have a pretty long list of guys that can play either scheme? If anything, isn't Lawson really the only guy that's really a 3-4 OLB?

I mean Kyle played the nose and Branch can play nose. Is there any other spot where we don't have guys that can play it?

Mario and Lawson can play rush LB as can Anderson. We have guys that can play ILB. And we have Dareus and Williams who can play DE.

I know it's good to have numbers and either another rush LB and/or a DE would be nice. But can't Carrington (DE) and maybe guys like Moats (rush OLB) do that?

DE- Dareus, Carrington
NT- Branch, Troup
DE- K Williams
OLB- M Williams
ILB- Bradham
ILB- Shepp
OLB- Lawson, Anderson

No?

[Goobylal]

isnt mark anderson more of a 3-4 olb than a 4-3 de?, or atleast more of the "hybrid" player that the new scheme would warrant?
Anderson would probably be best as a 3-4 OLB since he's not an every-down 4-3 DE. But yes he's a hybrid player.

Wait. Why don't we have a pretty long list of guys that can play either scheme? If anything, isn't Lawson really the only guy that's really a 3-4 OLB?

I mean Kyle played the nose and Branch can play nose. Is there any other spot where we don't have guys that can play it?

Mario and Lawson can play rush LB as can Anderson. We have guys that can play ILB. And we have Dareus and Williams who can play DE.

I know it's good to have numbers and either another rush LB and/or a DE would be nice. But can't Carrington and maybe guys like Moats can do that?
Lawson played SLB in a 3-4 and 4-3 with the Bengals.

[The Jokeman]

Wait. Why don't we have a pretty long list of guys that can play either scheme? If anything, isn't Lawson really the only guy that's really a 3-4 OLB?

I mean Kyle played the nose and Branch can play nose. Is there any other spot where we don't have guys that can play it?

Mario and Lawson can play rush LB as can Anderson. We have guys that can play ILB. And we have Dareus and Williams who can play DE.

I know it's good to have numbers and either another rush LB and/or a DE would be nice. But Carrington and maybe guys like Moats can do that?

Carrington grades out of what you traditional think of as a 3-4 DE. Ie bigger and more of a keep O-line away from LBs and/or run stuffers. Moats grades out as 3-4 rush 'backer but he wasn't great at early on his career but then again we tried him more inside than outside in the old regime so maybe he'll get a second chance this year or cut by the wayside if we draft someone better this year.

[psubills62]

Sounds like the Bills are crossing their fingers and hoping Bradham can become a Navarro Bowman type of sideline-to-sideline inside linebacker. We will have to wait and see.
I love seeing a Navorro Bowman reference.

[Thief]

I aint gonna lie, this thread makes me feel better about our front 7. If they get one more starting caliber CB and move last years ****ty starting CB to safety we might have something pretty damn good here. But then again, I thought the same thing last year, lol.

[coastal]

Mario should be a 3-4 DE.

[Goobylal]

I aint gonna lie, this thread makes me feel better about our front 7. If they get one more starting caliber CB and move last years ****ty starting CB to safety we might have something pretty damn good here. But then again, I thought the same thing last year, lol.
I believe that McKelvin will be the other starter, Brooks will be the nickel DB, and Williams will move to safety. I hope they draft another CB, but later in the draft.

[better days]

I believe that McKelvin will be the other starter, Brooks will be the nickel DB, and Williams will move to safety. I hope they draft another CB, but later in the draft.

Sounds like the plan to me.

[Buffalo Billy Bison]

I couldn't hear the exact question but it sounded like he was asked if Nigel would play ILB. Marrone went on to talk about the Mike and Will positions and then finally answered one of the inside linebacker positions.

I couldn't hear exactly what he was asked but:

1) Isn't the Mike and Will, 4-3 LB spots?
2) We he being asked what position Bradham would play in the 3-4?

Can someone clarify?

If he intends to play him as an ILB and feels he's one of our best LB'ers like many of us do, it's telling.

It would lean me to think OLB may be more of a target than ILB and I didn't necessarily see it that way.

I like Nigel too but what we really need is another Chris Spielman for a LB!

[jamze132]

From the PC, it sounded like Marrone had to think real hard who Nigel Bradham is. LOL

[X-Era]

I like Nigel too but what we really need is another Chris Spielman for a LB!An under the radar a bit type at ILB is Michael Mauti from Penn St. He's a known quantity and will be drafted but I say under the radar because to me he has some of the best intangibles at the ILB spot out of the whole class. He's got durability concerns and won't wow you with athleticism but the guy has great instincts, approach to the game, and nose for the ball. I won't say he's the next Spielman but he seems to have some similarities.

I really like Bostic better but I'd like a guy like Mauti with a later round pick.