So...like...when did this happen?

you should know to take raiders.com with a grain of salt man

esp position wise.

I think Bing will definately be an LB this year. He provides quality depth there.
 
First thing that comes to mind is that may be a sign that we may be playing alot more 46 defense....

Bing would be in the Doug Plank/Dave Duerson role (basically a rover) and line up right next to one of the OLB's to give us the Bears unbalanced 4-4 set up with Huff playing back as the lone true safety... Theoritically, Moses could also move in and play at Sam Williams OLB spot in the 46 to give us more rush ability..


This may also explain the reports of Brayton working inside at DT since one of our DE's would move over and cover one of the guards in the 46.... Of course Tommy Kelly is capable of the same...
 
Wow that would kick ass. Ryan bringing out his pop's old D. The Ravens seem to have good D when they try this.
 
I love this time of year, so much speculation and trying to work things out from a photo of minicamp or an entry on Raiders.com.
 
I'm also reminded of that 4-2-5 with Gibson as the rover. Dusting off the old scheme?
 
The 4-2-5 making a comeback seems possible...but was it really necessary to move Bing back to SS? The 3rd safety in a 4-2-5 is basically just a WLB. What was the point?
 
The guy ran a 4.5 at USC's pro day, and NFL.com has him in the 4.55 range...

Thats plenty of speed for a guy who cares 225 with relative ease.

He can play the box safety easily with his size/speed combo.
 
Jack's sore libido said:
Guess they decided he couldn't handle the extra size.
Click to expand...

The switch came at Bings request.

I think that they invision Bing as the Nickel 'rover' type player that Gibby was supposed to be.

I doubt it means Schweig is on the outs, or that Bing failed as a LB.

It means the coaches realized that a college SS might be best suited playing a similiar role.
 
Bing never looked real natural to me turning and running. I really don't see him as being much more than depth or a sub-package defender.
 
most fourth rounders are depth and sub package players.

If we get more than that its all gravy.

He can chase and tackle, play in the box and hit guys...Perfect for a nickel DB/SS.
 
I dunno. I'm one who definitely looks for future starters in the 4th round. Bush, Kareem Brown, any number of guards and LBs, etc. That's a big reason why our 2nd day this year was so disappointing for me.
 
There's gonna be a logjam at safety.

I wonder if we only go with 5 LBs. Definitely a chance here for Shotwell and Ricky Brown.
 
Crow said:
I dunno. I'm one who definitely looks for future starters in the 4th round. Bush, Kareem Brown, any number of guards and LBs, etc. That's a big reason why our 2nd day this year was so disappointing for me.
Click to expand...

Your dreaming if you think teams are heading into day two of the draft to find starters and impact guys. Look up and down most rosters, and the majority of players are first day guys (Something like 70%).

For every Mike Bush that hits at the beginning of day two, you get a Carlos Francis, Junior Ioane, Dameane Douglas, Gennaro Dinapoli, Chad Levitt and Shurron Pierson.

I like Bing more than others, but Im not expecting him to supplant Schweig or Huff any time soon...I'll settle for a solid NB/Rover who can play multiple positions for us and special teams.

Thats like thinking Walter is a Franchise QB, or Fargas is a #1 back...
 
How many starting NFL O-linemen, LBs, and safeties are 2nd day picks? A lot. If you're not looking for someone with starting potential at least in the 4th round, you're wasting draft picks.

Yes, you have to look at depth, STers, and specialists on Day 2. But there's a lot more to it than just that.
 
Oh, and who's to say Walter can't be a franchise QB?
 
Well said.

And, whether we're overloaded at Safety or Linebacker is kind of irrelevant in Ryan's defensive scheme, isn't it? We're running a ton of that "big nickel" defense that puts an extra safety in the box instead of a pure LB.. so it's more or less the same thing, just a semantical difference.
 
Turo said:
Well said.

And, whether we're overloaded at Safety or Linebacker is kind of irrelevant in Ryan's defensive scheme, isn't it? We're running a ton of that "big nickel" defense that puts an extra safety in the box instead of a pure LB.. so it's more or less the same thing, just a semantical difference.
Click to expand...

Exactly, its all about the package we have in. Obviously we dont want Bing in pass coverage often. There will be plenty of times we could use him in run support or for flat out hitting people in the mouth. Goaline stops, 3 and short etc..
If we went with the three headed monster of Huff, Stu and Bing back there i think we could get more production from Huff. It also could help in the run stopping dept. Stu's tackles are like little kids tackling their dads. We need a guy who can punish anybody carring a ball. In pass coverage Bing can make recievers think twice about putting their body out there however. I really think we need an enforcer at some point. Danny Clark is really the last guy I remember in S&B consistantly laying people down. We need a Ronnie Lott type guy at safety(doesnt everyone)
 
Crow said:
http://www.raiders.com/Team/PlayerBio.aspx?id=236

They give Bing a jersey in the 50s, bulk him up, then move him back to safety? That's no good. The fugger was slow 15 pounds ago. Not feeling this move at all.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't worry about the weight. I just read somewhere that Bing admitted that he hovered around 218 last year, no matter how he tried to bulk up. That's probably a large part of the reason that (a) he was mysteriously injured last year (to give him time to bulk up) and (b) he personally requested to be moved back to safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top