ckparrothead
Premium Member
Having seen all of the guys involved play some football, here's what I'll say.
1. It isn't a matter of just "needing some work" on setting the edge for Lawrence Sidbury. He doesn't necessarily do it, and so I'm not sure why anyone would assume he will eventually. It's like looking at a kid that scored a high SAT score and saying oh he's pretty smart I bet he could be an excellent composer. Uhh, maybe. But without the history of having done been interested in it, showing gifts in it, etc...that's a bit of a leap using highly imperfect measures as your evidence. So right now, having seen Lawrence Sidbury come into his own as a pass rusher only really in that FCS Championship game, and having the nice first couple of steps, the deadly spin move, I'm going to go ahead and say weak side for now. He could grow into something else, sure.
2. To my knowledge, Sidbury has absolutely no experience working in space in coverage. So again, talking about him working in space is a a projection.
3. On the other hand, Paul Kruger has THE most experience of any one of the DE/OLB conversion guys of this draft, when it comes to starting the snap on his feet and playing in space, covering down the field. The only 3-4 OLB prospect I can think of with more experience that way is Clint Sintim, and he's not a conversion prospect...because he already plays the position.
4. Kruger's a damn fine football player, he and Sean Smith led an extremely impressive defense that went completely undefeated in 2008 and beat up on Alabama in a Bowl Game everyone thought they'd lose and would be the ultimate test of whether they belong in the championship picture or they do not. They beat Alabama and proved that they did belong in the Championship picture...and Kruger and Smith made the left side of that defense a difficult proposition for opposing offenses to gain ground on by land or air.
Everyone has their own preferences and I totally get that. But anyone who calls Kruger "terrible" in anything having to do with being an OLB prospect, just doesn't know him that well as a prospect. Kruger versus Sidbury is just the newest iteration of an age-old debate. Do you take the guy that has the better tangibles, or do you take the guy that was a better football player?
Paul Kruger amazed me in how he would stick himself into the pile every time the play went to his side and somehow, at the end of each play, when the bodies clear, Kruger's at the bottom having stuck his hands on the ball carrier somehow. He didn't get credited with every tackle, but he was in the dogpile and affecting the play on a LOT of them. He's a tough S.O.B. and if you're familiar with his background, you can see that.
On the other hand, Sidbury is a very smart and very athletic guy with ideal frame that was coached by Brandon London's dad and should absolutely be on our radar.
Incidentally, there seems to be this fundamental under-appreciation for Matt Roth as a SOLB in this scheme. He's not in it for the long term with us but it isn't because he's a terrible football player. His run stoppin is ideal and it is absolutely what you NEED at that position first and foremost. Otherwise, he wouldn't be there, it would be some guy that is supposed to be a better pass rusher. Priority #1 and #1a at that position is having a guy that sets the edge and gets his mitts on the ball carrier. After that, ideally you want a guy that can play a little bigger role in the pass rush than Matt Roth can. But it's not such a priority that you ignore #1 and #1a.
If you don't stop the run, your pass rushers are irrelevant and I don't care WHO they are. In 2007 Miami had two guys who bracketed that season with DPOY caliber performances (Jason Taylor in 2006, Joey Porter in 2008). The team had them together in one year and they sucked in pass rush. Why? They didn't stop the run for sh-t. They allowed 154 yards a game on the ground.
So when I hear people actually CHIDE prospects by calling them "a slightly better Matt Roth"...I laugh. I laugh because a Matt Roth with slightly better pass rush and slightly better coverage ability is pretty much the ideal prospect for Miami's SOLB position.
Now, if you're looking for Porter's eventual replacement...I think Sidbury comes more into the frame.
1. It isn't a matter of just "needing some work" on setting the edge for Lawrence Sidbury. He doesn't necessarily do it, and so I'm not sure why anyone would assume he will eventually. It's like looking at a kid that scored a high SAT score and saying oh he's pretty smart I bet he could be an excellent composer. Uhh, maybe. But without the history of having done been interested in it, showing gifts in it, etc...that's a bit of a leap using highly imperfect measures as your evidence. So right now, having seen Lawrence Sidbury come into his own as a pass rusher only really in that FCS Championship game, and having the nice first couple of steps, the deadly spin move, I'm going to go ahead and say weak side for now. He could grow into something else, sure.
2. To my knowledge, Sidbury has absolutely no experience working in space in coverage. So again, talking about him working in space is a a projection.
3. On the other hand, Paul Kruger has THE most experience of any one of the DE/OLB conversion guys of this draft, when it comes to starting the snap on his feet and playing in space, covering down the field. The only 3-4 OLB prospect I can think of with more experience that way is Clint Sintim, and he's not a conversion prospect...because he already plays the position.
4. Kruger's a damn fine football player, he and Sean Smith led an extremely impressive defense that went completely undefeated in 2008 and beat up on Alabama in a Bowl Game everyone thought they'd lose and would be the ultimate test of whether they belong in the championship picture or they do not. They beat Alabama and proved that they did belong in the Championship picture...and Kruger and Smith made the left side of that defense a difficult proposition for opposing offenses to gain ground on by land or air.
Everyone has their own preferences and I totally get that. But anyone who calls Kruger "terrible" in anything having to do with being an OLB prospect, just doesn't know him that well as a prospect. Kruger versus Sidbury is just the newest iteration of an age-old debate. Do you take the guy that has the better tangibles, or do you take the guy that was a better football player?
Paul Kruger amazed me in how he would stick himself into the pile every time the play went to his side and somehow, at the end of each play, when the bodies clear, Kruger's at the bottom having stuck his hands on the ball carrier somehow. He didn't get credited with every tackle, but he was in the dogpile and affecting the play on a LOT of them. He's a tough S.O.B. and if you're familiar with his background, you can see that.
On the other hand, Sidbury is a very smart and very athletic guy with ideal frame that was coached by Brandon London's dad and should absolutely be on our radar.
Incidentally, there seems to be this fundamental under-appreciation for Matt Roth as a SOLB in this scheme. He's not in it for the long term with us but it isn't because he's a terrible football player. His run stoppin is ideal and it is absolutely what you NEED at that position first and foremost. Otherwise, he wouldn't be there, it would be some guy that is supposed to be a better pass rusher. Priority #1 and #1a at that position is having a guy that sets the edge and gets his mitts on the ball carrier. After that, ideally you want a guy that can play a little bigger role in the pass rush than Matt Roth can. But it's not such a priority that you ignore #1 and #1a.
If you don't stop the run, your pass rushers are irrelevant and I don't care WHO they are. In 2007 Miami had two guys who bracketed that season with DPOY caliber performances (Jason Taylor in 2006, Joey Porter in 2008). The team had them together in one year and they sucked in pass rush. Why? They didn't stop the run for sh-t. They allowed 154 yards a game on the ground.
So when I hear people actually CHIDE prospects by calling them "a slightly better Matt Roth"...I laugh. I laugh because a Matt Roth with slightly better pass rush and slightly better coverage ability is pretty much the ideal prospect for Miami's SOLB position.
Now, if you're looking for Porter's eventual replacement...I think Sidbury comes more into the frame.