derekshank Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Pollack is gone, but it we have pretty decent depth for SSLB, and Pollack hasn't really been on the field much anyway. Jeanty seems to be pretty instinctual... and we know that Landon can play the position well. But Pollack was one of our most promising pass-rushers. This offseason we put a lot of our hopes in him as the solution to our pass-rush problems.Might Ahmad Brooks be able to play the role that Pollack played last year? Pollack basically went in only in obvious passing situations to get pressure on the QB. With Brooks' size, speed and strength, he should be more than adequate at providing a pass rush from the strong side. Does anyone think he might perform in that capacity before season's end? I'd like to see him get on the field at some point... and it isn't rocket science to rush the QB. Pollack had to take baby steps as a LB, but he could get in the game as a pass rusher. Brooks was active in week 1, so even though he didn't play at all, the fact that he was active must mean the coaches have some faith in him. Maybe he'll develop fairly quickly, and a combination of Jeanty and Brooks will make up for what we lost in Pollack. What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasher Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Brooks is listed in the game notes for this week as 2nd behind Jeanty, for whatever that is worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GapControl Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 maybe the question is brooks conditioning and not his playmaking ability. i seem to recall him dropping weight before getting picked up in the supplemental draft. there were also comments about brooks not being in "football shape" during the late preseason games. still, he could come in on key passing down situations and wreak havoc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted September 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 That's pretty much what I was thinking. Even if it's a bit later on in the season. He's still a freak physically... and if he is truly backing up Landon Johnson, that says to me that he's not that far.He's so fast and aggressive... he could really be what we're looking for in that role. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I asked the same thing in another thread, and was shouted down and ignored, so, I give this thought my approval.Yeah, with Brooks' skill-set, I see no reason why he can't back up Jeanty and be told to go "go and kill that guy" as the coaches point at the quarterback on passing downs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted September 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I asked the same thing in another thread, and was shouted down and ignored, so, I give this thought my approval.Yeah, with Brooks' skill-set, I see no reason why he can't back up Jeanty and be told to go "go and kill that guy" as the coaches point at the quarterback on passing downs. Yep. As dominant as he was in college, there's no reason to think that he doesn't have the smarts to go hit the QB. In fact... I'd pretty much trust Forest Gump to perform the role if he had Brooks' physical tools. Yep... I'm all for it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlainThePain Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Am I the only one that likes the idea of Jeanty starting? I think he could turn some heads this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted September 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Am I the only one that likes the idea of Jeanty starting? I think he could turn some heads this season.Yeah... he's definitely a surprise. I certainly didn't expect him to have the kind of impact he's had thus far... and it looks like he'll fill Pollack's shoes quite well in a lot of ways.Still... he'll never be the pass-rusher that Pollack was (hopefully still will be), so I'd love to see Brooks get the chance. Also, maybe I'm the only one who noticed... but he took a couple really bad angles to get to Droughns on Sunday. I doubt Pollack would have made those same mistakes. There's is no denying that the loss of Pollack hurts... but we have enough adequate depth that it shouldn't kill us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I don't mind Jeanty starting, but all I asked on the other thread and Derek asked here was if Brooks wouldn't be a nice opiton as back-up SSLB/pass rush guy.And, I think he would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalboomer7 Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I thought the same thing but for odell when he returns. Mainly just because I want to keep Landon on the field. I think Landon has performed better at WSLB than Simmons does, and I think Simmons has performed better at MLB than he did at WSLB, and even though i think he's in Marvin's doghouse and will have to work his way back up, Odell will be needed way before this season ends. And i like rashad jeanty, i think he'll perform well. But that's 4 LB's for three spots. Rotate jeanty and odell in passing rushing situations, rotate Simmons to SSLB, Odell at MLb and Landon at WSLB in pass coverage situations, and you can rotate all four in running situations. This calls for three of these guys to know multiple positions though. i have confidence Simmons and landon does, and Odell being a MLB he should know where everyone is anywaysJust a thought I sort fo posed in another thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I just think it's crazy good when we have a starter go down and our depth is more than solid to fill the hole !!!WHODEY !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I think it will work, i also think brooks will be fine conditioning wise by now . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 Agreed, Kaz. I don't think Brook's physical condition is the reason he hasn't seen the field. He missed a full season of college football, and will have to adapt to a much faster NFL game as he is getting back into football form. I think he could start making a bigger impact later in the season, but for now his contributions will be minimal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.