Recent debate with an analyst on the Cowboys need for a LB led to the following discussion. My outlook was that I would take Vea at 19 if still there but depending on who was still on the board there were two LB’s that I would consider at 19 (again depending on who was there and who was gone). I am only pasting the analyst part. Let me know if you agree with him. If you do, I’m missing something…may be that age has got the best of me,
LB being the least important of the 3 position groups on a D is a WIDELY recognized fact.
I’m not sure why this is so controversial. The fact that the LBs coach here before couldn’t get anyone else ready to play doesn’t mean it’s the group that makes a D tick
I’m not talking about the Cowboys lens here. I’m talking about the game of football.
Literally teams all across the NFL and CFB are figuring out ways to take LBs off the field…
Meanwhile your favorite team is preparing to spend a top 35 pick on one for the 2nd time in 3 yrs
Here’s the thing every team, even DAL is playing 70-75-80% of their snaps w/ 2 or fewer LBs on the field.
If a team plays 65 snaps on D per game, that’s 1,040 snaps.
That means there’s only about 200-300 plays with 3 LBs on the field…
So if you draft a LB @ 19, that guy, if healthy is likely to get all of those snaps, and then split the 2 LB snaps w/ 54.
If we assume they play something like 10-15% of their snaps w/ 1 LB that knocks 100-150 snaps off the total. So that leaves like 600 snaps to be split.