Today's NFL is turning some positions into endangered species

[DrunkBomber]

Middle linebacker

 

Despite NFL Films' efforts to turn Brian Urlacher into Dick Butkus or Mike Singletary, the fact is Urlacher plays a completely different position than those former Monsters of the Midway.

 

The "Mike" has always traditionally been a big, strong, tackling machine whose primary responsibility was defending the run. Urlacher certainly has some of those qualities. He can pop the ball carrier with the best of them. But the MLB also has to be able to play laterally and display enough speed to stretch outside runs to the sideline. It's not a tackle-to-tackle job anymore. The MLB is expected to drop into deep middle coverage; when he can't do that, he becomes a situational role player at best.

 

The emergence of the Cover Two defense, and empty-set backfields have also made the MLB position a key to pass coverage. Urlacher again is the ultimate example of this -- a player with speed, range, coverage skills and good hands. In the Cover Two, the Mike is asked to drop deep in zone coverages without sacrificing his ability to defend the draw or trap play, but also must have enough man cover skills to run with the tight end or the running back out of the backfield.

They talk about other positions like SS and TE/FB but this one applied to the Bears better. They did use AA as an example for SS but as you can imagine it wasnt saying he is a good fit for the new types of safeties. Sounds to me like theyre saying Singeltary and Butkus cant do what Urlacher can and would be situational players in this era (Dont blame me, I just post the articles)

[azbearsfan]

They talk about other positions like SS and TE/FB but this one applied to the Bears better. They did use AA as an example for SS but as you can imagine it wasnt saying he is a good fit for the new types of safeties. Sounds to me like theyre saying Singeltary and Butkus cant do what Urlacher can and would be situational players in this era (Dont blame me, I just post the articles)

 

 

Well it all depends on the defense. But with how athletic players are at every position I have to agree that alot of the old school guys would have trouble in todays NFL.

[DrunkBomber]

Well it all depends on the defense. But with how athletic players are at every position I have to agree that alot of the old school guys would have trouble in todays NFL.

Teams are probably gonna just start drafting raw athletes and create positions and roles for them. That was all the buzz on Vernon Gholsten sp? this year because of the new Ware, Merriman, Suggs hybrid position. It almost seems that most teams exclusively have a 3-4 or a cover 2.

[azbearsfan]

Teams are probably gonna just start drafting raw athletes and create positions and roles for them. That was all the buzz on Vernon Gholsten sp? this year because of the new Ware, Merriman, Suggs hybrid position. It almost seems that most teams exclusively have a 3-4 or a cover 2.

 

 

It really does. I suspect it will be like that until the next "cool" defensive scheme comes out.

[Mongo3451]

They talk about other positions like SS and TE/FB but this one applied to the Bears better. They did use AA as an example for SS but as you can imagine it wasnt saying he is a good fit for the new types of safeties. Sounds to me like theyre saying Singeltary and Butkus cant do what Urlacher can and would be situational players in this era (Dont blame me, I just post the articles)

Totally disagree on Butkus. He was a freak of nature athlete.(just like Url) He was as big as the OL and fast. That's like saying Wilt Chamberlain couldn't play in todays NBA. Singletary, on the other hand, was a somewhat a liability in pass coverage. He had the tremendous benefit of only having to cover someone for 1.5 seconds.

[DrunkBomber]

Totally disagree on Butkus. He was a freak of nature athlete.(just like Url) He was as big as the OL and fast. That's like saying Wilt Chamberlain couldn't play in todays NBA. Singletary, on the other hand, was a somewhat a liability in pass coverage. He had the tremendous benefit of only having to cover someone for 1.5 seconds.

Im not doubting it but Ive never seen him play so I cant say for sure. That was just the impression I got from the article. I dont think the Chamberlain comparison is accurate though because of the difference between the two sports. A super athletic center would have success in the NBA in any era where a linebacker might not.

[Mongo3451]

Im not doubting it but Ive never seen him play so I cant say for sure. That was just the impression I got from the article. I dont think the Chamberlain comparison is accurate though because of the difference between the two sports. A super athletic center would have success in the NBA in any era where a linebacker might not.

Butkus was 6'3" 245LB (legit) and was a sideline to sideline player. It wasn't acceptable at all to run out of bounds back then. But, kinda like kicking away from Hester, teams started letting their backs run out of bounds so they didn't get murdered. Plus, for the benefit of all I looked up stats. He had 22 int's and 25 fumble recoveries in his 9 year carreer. I only wished they kept stats on forced fumbles back then. He'd probably still own the NFL record. Urlacher in eight years has 15 int's. I couldn't find fumble stats. I just know he forced zero fumbles last year. Butkus was truly the scariest most intimidating player of all time. I could only imagine what his carreer would have been with todays medical, nutrition and conditioning staffs.

[DrunkBomber]

Butkus was 6'3" 245LB (legit) and was a sideline to sideline player. It wasn't acceptable at all to run out of bounds back then. But, kinda like kicking away from Hester, teams started letting their backs run out of bounds so they didn't get murdered. Plus, for the benefit of all I looked up stats. He had 22 int's and 25 fumble recoveries in his 9 year carreer. I only wished they kept stats on forced fumbles back then. He'd probably still own the NFL record. Urlacher in eight years has 15 int's. I couldn't find fumble stats. I just know he forced zero fumbles last year. Butkus was truly the scariest most intimidating player of all time. I could only imagine what his carreer would have been with todays medical, nutrition and conditioning staffs.

All I said is I wouldnt doubt it because I never saw him play. I was agreeing with you, I was just saying the Chamberlain point is a bad example. I didnt write that original article I just posted it.

[azbearsfan]

Totally disagree on Butkus. He was a freak of nature athlete.(just like Url) He was as big as the OL and fast. That's like saying Wilt Chamberlain couldn't play in todays NBA. Singletary, on the other hand, was a somewhat a liability in pass coverage. He had the tremendous benefit of only having to cover someone for 1.5 seconds.

 

 

Sorry man. No way Butkus could play middle linebacker in the cover two. No way he covers that deep middle.

[Mongo3451]

name='azbearsfan' date='May 18 2008, 08:29 PM' post='39138']

Sorry man. No way Butkus could play middle linebacker in the cover two. No way he covers that deep middle.

Put down the crack pipe man. Butkus had 22 int's in a 9 year carreer. Url would need 7 this year to match that. Butkus could run. Old guys on the board, chime in!

[azbearsfan]

Put down the crack pipe man. Butkus had 22 int's in a 9 year carreer. Url would need 7 this year to match that. Butkus could run. Old guys on the board, chime in!

 

 

No crack bro. Butkis could not run like URl. How many of Butkis' ints were thirty yards downfield in the deep middle third?

[Mongo3451]

name='azbearsfan' date='May 19 2008, 12:29 AM' post='39148']

No crack bro. Butkis could not run like URl. How many of Butkis' ints were thirty yards downfield in the deep middle third.

 

http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.jsp?player_id=39

 

I hope this link works for you. It's Butkus' writeup in the Hall of Fame. Please make special notes to the speed quickness and agility part. I'm getting weary of explaining it. The man was big cat. Just like Url, just nastier.

[azbearsfan]

http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.jsp?player_id=39

 

I hope this link works for you. It's Butkus' writeup in the Hall of Fame. Please make special notes to the speed quickness and agility part. I'm getting weary of explaining it. The man was big cat. Just like Url, just nastier.

 

 

lol No need to get weary, my man, but just saying he had speed doesn't mean he could play in today's game. I'm sure he was plenty fast to play back in the day. But in general the athletes are bigger, stronger, and faster now a days.

 

If you would like to give me some 40 times and 20 times then we can compare Butkus and Url. But my point remains valid. Butkus would not be as successful in the Tampa 2 as Url. Butkus would be moved to Sam or Will in this defense. He compares more to Briggs than Url.

[madlithuanian]

Could very well be...

 

They are all very different eras...

 

You used to be able to clothesline guys, bump WR's, etc...now it's all quite different.

 

They talk about other positions like SS and TE/FB but this one applied to the Bears better. They did use AA as an example for SS but as you can imagine it wasnt saying he is a good fit for the new types of safeties. Sounds to me like theyre saying Singeltary and Butkus cant do what Urlacher can and would be situational players in this era (Dont blame me, I just post the articles)

[madlithuanian]

No arguement here...

 

Totally disagree on Butkus. He was a freak of nature athlete.(just like Url) He was as big as the OL and fast. That's like saying Wilt Chamberlain couldn't play in todays NBA. Singletary, on the other hand, was a somewhat a liability in pass coverage. He had the tremendous benefit of only having to cover someone for 1.5 seconds.

[madlithuanian]

C'mon...

 

Besides the the size,etc...there's the intangibles. Butkus was overloaded with them. He was a intimdator, a vicious tackler and a smart field general.

 

Url and Butkus are very different. I'm not sure you'd want to go with a cover 2 with Butkus. Heck, I don't really even want us to be a cover 2 team! When Chicao was here, we mixed it up more and got better results.

 

lol No need to get weary, my man, but just saying he had speed doesn't mean he could play in today's game. I'm sure he was plenty fast to play back in the day. But in general the athletes are bigger, stronger, and faster now a days.

 

If you would like to give me some 40 times and 20 times then we can compare Butkus and Url. But my point remains valid. Butkus would not be as successful in the Tampa 2 as Url. Butkus would be moved to Sam or Will in this defense. He compares more to Briggs than Url.

[Lucky Luciano]

lol No need to get weary, my man, but just saying he had speed doesn't mean he could play in today's game. I'm sure he was plenty fast to play back in the day. But in general the athletes are bigger, stronger, and faster now a days.

 

If you would like to give me some 40 times and 20 times then we can compare Butkus and Url. But my point remains valid. Butkus would not be as successful in the Tampa 2 as Url. Butkus would be moved to Sam or Will in this defense. He compares more to Briggs than Url.

 

butkus could play in any era, period. he had football instincts and drive. he was a freakin terminator.

 

was he as fast as url? no but not many in the history of the nfl were/are.

 

if speed means that much in this discussion, why are we even considering bringing back mike brown? for that matter why was he even on this team? how fast was ronnie lot, singletary, ray lewis etc.

 

if you have a killer player you build your defense around him not the other way.

[Mongo3451]

name='azbearsfan' date='May 19 2008, 09:48 AM' post='39157']

lol No need to get weary, my man, but just saying he had speed doesn't mean he could play in today's game. I'm sure he was plenty fast to play back in the day. But in general the athletes are bigger, stronger, and faster now a days.

 

If you would like to give me some 40 times and 20 times then we can compare Butkus and Url. But my point remains valid. Butkus would not be as successful in the Tampa 2 as Url. Butkus would be moved to Sam or Will in this defense. He compares more to Briggs than Url.

 

Plain and simple, fast is fast. And no your point will never be made because it is flat out wrong. Get out of Urlachers jock and realize he could never carry #51's, period, in any defense. You give Butkus the same nutrition, medical and conditioning as Url, he's lining up with the best of them. Oh wait, they are still lining up to catch him. Hell, back then the coaches would withhold water from you in practice because they thought it would make you tougher. You did a couple of stretches and deep knee bends and you were ready to go. Science made these athletes what they are.

 

Blasphemy on putting Butkus at Sam or Will in any defense! Who are you the ghost of Ray Nitschke? You should go on a self imposed timeout for putting that visual in our heads. Shame, shame, shame.

[ChileBear]

lol No need to get weary, my man, but just saying he had speed doesn't mean he could play in today's game. I'm sure he was plenty fast to play back in the day. But in general the athletes are bigger, stronger, and faster now a days.

 

If you would like to give me some 40 times and 20 times then we can compare Butkus and Url. But my point remains valid. Butkus would not be as successful in the Tampa 2 as Url. Butkus would be moved to Sam or Will in this defense. He compares more to Briggs than Url.

AZ, never actually saw Butkus play, did you? If you had, you would understand that the guy was just flat out dominant in the game. He was always on the ball and brutalized the opponents. I remember a few years back when Url was run over by one of the Steelers backs on his way to a TD. Hell, 51 would have knocked that guy flat.

Athletes are athletes, and Butkus would be the MLB on the team today if he were here and Url would be playing Hilly's spot.

[azbearsfan]

AZ, never actually saw Butkus play, did you? If you had, you would understand that the guy was just flat out dominant in the game. He was always on the ball and brutalized the opponents. I remember a few years back when Url was run over by one of the Steelers backs on his way to a TD. Hell, 51 would have knocked that guy flat.

Athletes are athletes, and Butkus would be the MLB on the team today if he were here and Url would be playing Hilly's spot.

 

lol Yeah I saw him play. Never said he wasn't great for his time. But the simple fact is that they didn't have the athletes they do today. The players were smaller and slower. Shoot I bet Butkus was as big as some of the offensive linemen he played against. He wouldn't be close in today's NFL.

 

Butkus would not be at MLB in our defense. He would be playing Sam or Will.

[azbearsfan]

Plain and simple, fast is fast. And no your point will never be made because it is flat out wrong. Get out of Urlachers jock and realize he could never carry #51's, period, in any defense. You give Butkus the same nutrition, medical and conditioning as Url, he's lining up with the best of them. Oh wait, they are still lining up to catch him. Hell, back then the coaches would withhold water from you in practice because they thought it would make you tougher. You did a couple of stretches and deep knee bends and you were ready to go. Science made these athletes what they are.

 

Blasphemy on putting Butkus at Sam or Will in any defense! Who are you the ghost of Ray Nitschke? You should go on a self imposed timeout for putting that visual in our heads. Shame, shame, shame.

 

 

You seriously need to calm down. I'm not in Url's jock.

 

And no fast is not fast. There are degrees of fast. And Butkus was not as fast as Url is today.

 

Blame it on science or whatever, but todays players are bigger, faster , and stronger. Not saying Butkus would not be good, but he would start at MLB in our defense. Move over Dick!!!!!!

[nfoligno]

Just to chime in w/ some thoughts.

 

1. Butkis was far more athletic than many realize. W/ that said, I agree he would likely not be a MLB in "our" defense. He very well could be a MLB for an NFL defense today, but our defense demands a greater level of speed and athleticism. But look at Baltimore. Ray Lewis is athletic, but does not have close to the speed of Urlacher. Butkis could be a MLB there. For us, I can easily see him playing Briggs spot. Frankly, if you think about it, the WLB for us is more like the traditional MLB. Briggs is our primary man against the run.

 

2. Frankly, I am not sure I totally get the argument in general. The game has changed so much in terms of size it is not even funny. In years past, your OL were the size of LBs today. As great as they were, how would our '85 OL fair against todays defenders. How about the DL, who were in the low to mid 200s in terms of weight, going against todays OL were 300 is the standard, w/ many well over that.

 

I just think it is near impossible to talk in terms of putting old players in todays systems.

[madlithuanian]

Chile,

 

I believe you are spot on. I never was able to see Butkus play in person, but my dad went to college with him and followed his entire college and pro career.

 

No way a back mows over Butkus...

 

Your points are 100% spot on!

 

AZ, never actually saw Butkus play, did you? If you had, you would understand that the guy was just flat out dominant in the game. He was always on the ball and brutalized the opponents. I remember a few years back when Url was run over by one of the Steelers backs on his way to a TD. Hell, 51 would have knocked that guy flat.

Athletes are athletes, and Butkus would be the MLB on the team today if he were here and Url would be playing Hilly's spot.

[madlithuanian]

Well said...

 

Let's also not forget Butkus played at 6'3" and 245 lbs. Odds are he'd be bulkier given today's training. He's right in line with today's LB's size and shape.

 

It is a very apples to oranges comparison...but Butkus is the odd individual (like a short list of other HoF'ers that could play now).

 

Just to chime in w/ some thoughts.

 

1. Butkis was far more athletic than many realize. W/ that said, I agree he would likely not be a MLB in "our" defense. He very well could be a MLB for an NFL defense today, but our defense demands a greater level of speed and athleticism. But look at Baltimore. Ray Lewis is athletic, but does not have close to the speed of Urlacher. Butkis could be a MLB there. For us, I can easily see him playing Briggs spot. Frankly, if you think about it, the WLB for us is more like the traditional MLB. Briggs is our primary man against the run.

 

2. Frankly, I am not sure I totally get the argument in general. The game has changed so much in terms of size it is not even funny. In years past, your OL were the size of LBs today. As great as they were, how would our '85 OL fair against todays defenders. How about the DL, who were in the low to mid 200s in terms of weight, going against todays OL were 300 is the standard, w/ many well over that.

 

I just think it is near impossible to talk in terms of putting old players in todays systems.

[nfoligno]

Can you see Butkis playing 20 yards deep? Can you see Butkis shadowing athletic QBs like Vick, McNabb or Young? Can you see Butkis covering speed backs and faster TEs in routes?

 

To me, if the question is whether Butkis could be an NFL LB today, the answer is yes. If the question of whether he would be a MLB in a cover 2 defense like ours, the answer is no. While I think he would be similar to Ray Lewis, I do not think he would fit our scheme.