PDA

View Full Version : Did Anyone Hear Mooch on Our Linebackers This Morning?



Flasteel
10-17-2010, 06:12 PM
Mariucchi called our linebackers the best group EVER assembled (in NFL history). Sapp and Irvin seemed to [rightfully] think that was a pretty strong statement, but it was never debated. I love our linebackers and time will tell, but right now, I have to put them 3rd all-time...in our TEAM history.

These guys are incredible though. Timmons continues to blow things up and make splash plays. 9 solo tackles, 2 assists, 2 sacks, and a pick today. Harrison may have out done Timmons with 10 solos, 1 assist, 1.5 saks, 1 forced fumble, and two complete knock-outs. Woodley also had the first sack of the game and should have had a pick.

How close are these guys to becoming our best LB corps ever?

Shawn
10-17-2010, 07:03 PM
I would personally take this crew over the 94/95 crew and I considered that the best linebacking crew in Steeler history. I like Harrison and Woodley at least as well as Greene and Lloyd. I think Timmons is on a different planet than either Chad Brown or Levon Kirkland.

Chadman
10-17-2010, 07:12 PM
Gotta love Shawn's enthusiasm! :D

This group is very, very good. But it's too early to make real comparisons with previous LB groups. that said, ability-wise, they are very promising.

the Lloyd-Brown-Kirkland-Greene group was great- particularly when you had guys like Olsavsky sitting in behind them. They were tested, tried & proven.

Harrison-Timmons-Farrior-Woodley are probably a better...athletic group. More explosive in many ways.

Why compare them in the end? just sit back & enjoy... :D

stlrz d
10-17-2010, 07:16 PM
No doubt in my mind that in our 3-4 era Lloyd, Greene, Kirkland and Brown were simply the best. Better than all the rest. :lol:

BATMAN
10-17-2010, 07:23 PM
Tough for me to say because they all have their talents. If I was forced into answering this I guess I would have to go with the 94 and 95 team. Did we have a better secondary in 94 and 95 ? That helps out the linebackers in a big way too.

Crash
10-17-2010, 07:33 PM
Lambert Ham and Russell as a whole are better. Two in the Hall and Russell some say should be.

BATMAN
10-17-2010, 07:42 PM
No doubt that Ham, Lambert, Russell were better but I myself was comparing the 3/4 defensive players.

And since my last post I, can bounce back to saying that Harrison, Woodley and Farrior might be better. Farrior is the wink link in the three in my opinion....... These days anyway.


In any case, it's nice having so many great teams and players that you can't tell who the best were.

Flasteel
10-17-2010, 07:49 PM
Lambert Ham and Russell as a whole are better. Two in the Hall and Russell some say should be.

That's what I'm saying...the debate between our current group and Blitzburgh is for 2nd place.

As I stated earlier, this group has the talent to challenge. If they also happened to lead the way for this franchise to win a couple more championships, then you can start talking best all-time. I think Harrison has at least 3-4 more seasons as our starter, but Potsie may have one more at best. Foote is also in the mix with this group, so as long as he takes over as the starter, this is essentially the same corps of guys.

AngryAsian
10-17-2010, 07:57 PM
If Timmons had a better command of all the nuances of our defensive scheme, we could insert Key Fox in there in and pull Potsie. Talk about athleticism.... IMHO we would be unstoppable.

Shawn
10-17-2010, 08:10 PM
If Timmons had a better command of all the nuances of our defensive scheme, we could insert Key Fox in there in and pull Potsie. Talk about athleticism.... IMHO we would be unstoppable.

I have to agree with you about Fox. I really like how this guy approaches the game. He is very underrated as he does everything well. He is good in coverage, a solid tackler and very physical. I think in the physicality department he is an upgrade over Farrior.

SteelAbility
10-17-2010, 08:18 PM
The Saints had four linebackers one year that were ALL pro-bowl starters. When all four Steeler LBs can make it as pro-bowl starters, I'll be ready to annoint them the best LB corps ever.

AngryAsian
10-17-2010, 08:23 PM
If Timmons had a better command of all the nuances of our defensive scheme, we could insert Key Fox in there in and pull Potsie. Talk about athleticism.... IMHO we would be unstoppable.

I have to agree with you about Fox. I really like how this guy approaches the game. He is very underrated as he does everything well. He is good in coverage, a solid tackler and very physical. I think in the physicality department he is an upgrade over Farrior.


People forgot how well he produced last year when we had no Foote and Timmons was injured. The guy covered a lot of ground... loved that 80+ yard pick 6 last year.

Sugar
10-17-2010, 08:25 PM
The Saints had four linebackers one year that were ALL pro-bowl starters. When all four Steeler LBs can make it as pro-bowl starters, I'll be ready to annoint them the best LB corps ever.

The Saints are in the NFC and don't have teams like the Ravens or Jets in their conference.

SteelAbility
10-17-2010, 08:29 PM
The Saints had four linebackers one year that were ALL pro-bowl starters. When all four Steeler LBs can make it as pro-bowl starters, I'll be ready to annoint them the best LB corps ever.

The Saints are in the NFC and don't have teams like the Ravens or Jets in their conference.

The Saints had that LB corps back in the early 90s (I believe) when the NFC was the dominant conference. Think about it ... 4 PRO BOWL STARTERS ALL IN THE SAME YEAR. That's a pretty d*mn high bar.

Flasteel
10-17-2010, 08:35 PM
The Saints had four linebackers one year that were ALL pro-bowl starters. When all four Steeler LBs can make it as pro-bowl starters, I'll be ready to annoint them the best LB corps ever.

You can't put the Dome Patrol ahead of the guys behind the Steel Curtain...no way. I don't care how the NFL Network ranked them, our guys were a huge part of 4 Lombardi Trophies.

The Saints?...<crickets>

Having all 4 linebackers in the Pro Bowl is also an indictment of the competition, so I wouldn't necessarily hold that up as the barometer.

DukieBoy
10-17-2010, 08:37 PM
Ham, Lambert and Russell were amazing back in the day. They had a pretty solid D-line to play behind. And they were special against the pass as well as the run ... just no weakness there.

Just a bit off the topic, but weren't Fox and Sly dominant on ST's today !!!

stlrz d
10-17-2010, 09:06 PM
The Dome Patrol was an awesome bunch, but pro-bowls don't mean $hit. When are people gonna realize that?

JTP53609
10-17-2010, 09:28 PM
that 94 group was awesome, same with 95...kirkland was the biggest quick man I have ever seen, green was like a fine wine, just getting better with age, brown was so overrated and lloyd was lloyd. I loved olsavsky too, he was one big dude..

MaxAMillion
10-17-2010, 11:58 PM
Lambert Ham and Russell as a whole are better. Two in the Hall and Russell some say should be.

Absolutely, the best in history sounds crazy. The Giants linebackers with Taylor, Banks, and Carson were better. Lambert, Ham and Russel have to be considered first. I am not even sure these linebackers are the best Steelers unit of the last 15 years.

Steelerphile
10-18-2010, 06:50 AM
The Dome Patrol was an awesome bunch, but pro-bowls don't mean $hit. When are people gonna realize that?

Just curious, if pro bowls don't mean anything. What does? What standard do you apply, your opinion?

stlrz d
10-18-2010, 07:51 AM
The Dome Patrol was an awesome bunch, but pro-bowls don't mean $hit. When are people gonna realize that?

Just curious, if pro bowls don't mean anything. What does? What standard do you apply, your opinion?

Results. Not something that is voted on, like pro-bowls.

flippy
10-18-2010, 07:59 AM
I see this Sylvester kid flying around on ST a la Brett Keisel and have a feeling the best of our LBs is ahead of us in the near future.

Steelerphile
10-18-2010, 09:52 AM
[quote="stlrz d":29ynttn7]The Dome Patrol was an awesome bunch, but pro-bowls don't mean $hit. When are people gonna realize that?

Just curious, if pro bowls don't mean anything. What does? What standard do you apply, your opinion?

Results. Not something that is voted on, like pro-bowls.[/quote:29ynttn7]

Results? That is a standard that is also subjective. What does it mean? Team success, total tackles. Sacks, another statistic?

Pro-Bowl, All-Pro or something that is voted on takes results into account. It is not meaningless. Scurbs don't make it. It is always arguable about who gets in. Some players might not get in when that players fans feel he deserves it. Some players seem to get in on reputation. But I think it tends to even out.

I think a player who has not been in before, and is named as an All-Pro has to have results, because he doesn't have a long reputation preceding him.

papillon
10-18-2010, 09:58 AM
Ham, Lambert and Russell > Harrison, Woodley, Farrior and Timmons > Rickey Jackson, Pat Swilling, Sam Mills and Vaughn Johnson

The current group while very, very good may only be the third best in Steeler history (as of right now). :shock:

Pappy

flippy
10-18-2010, 10:59 AM
Ham, Lambert and Russell > Harrison, Woodley, Farrior and Timmons > Rickey Jackson, Pat Swilling, Sam Mills and Vaughn Johnson

The current group while very, very good may only be the third best in Steeler history (as of right now). :shock:

Pappy

It's becoming debatable. And it's hard to compare guys from different schemes.

If I rank the 7 LBs, I'd rank em as:

1a. Ham
1b. Harrison
3. Lambert
4. Timmons
5. Woodley
6. Farrior
7. Russell

And Timmons is getting closer by the minute to leapfrogging to the top of the list.

I also think in a couple years it's gonna be hard to keep Woodley @ #5 since he might be the most complete pass rusher we've seen.

I could also make the case that Harrison is the 1a to Ham's 1b.

Steelers&gt;NFL
10-18-2010, 11:08 AM
The Dome Patrol was an awesome bunch, but pro-bowls don't mean $hit. When are people gonna realize that?

Just curious, if pro bowls don't mean anything. What does? What standard do you apply, your opinion?

Being voted All-Pro carries a lot more weight than being voted to the Pro-Bowl.

The pro-bowl is a friggin joke. Just like the allstar game in MLB. JOKE!

birtikidis
10-18-2010, 12:01 PM
those saints lb'ers had some stiff competition from other NFC teams to make it to the pro-bowl.. remember, that was the cowboys, 49ers, and packers hay day. there were some damn good players in the NFC then.
i too think Potsie is the weak link, but he's still a damn good player. though it looks like we're gonna have a stud to replace him.. and i'm not talking about Fox or Foote...

SteelAbility
10-18-2010, 02:36 PM
The Dome Patrol was voted Best all-time LB corps by NFLN.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_Patrol

stlrz d
10-19-2010, 12:03 AM
those saints lb'ers had some stiff competition from other NFC teams to make it to the pro-bowl.. remember, that was the cowboys, 49ers, and packers hay day. there were some damn good players in the NFC then.
i too think Potsie is the weak link, but he's still a damn good player. though it looks like we're gonna have a stud to replace him.. and i'm not talking about Fox or Foote...

The Packers didn't get good until the mid 90s. The Dome Patrol was gone by then. The Cowboys and 49ers were all offense. Good defenses with some star players, but all offense.

The Dome Patrol was a great group of linebackers no doubt...but pro-bowls mean diddley poo.

Shawn
10-19-2010, 10:07 AM
If Timmons had a better command of all the nuances of our defensive scheme, we could insert Key Fox in there in and pull Potsie. Talk about athleticism.... IMHO we would be unstoppable.

I have to agree with you about Fox. I really like how this guy approaches the game. He is very underrated as he does everything well. He is good in coverage, a solid tackler and very physical. I think in the physicality department he is an upgrade over Farrior.


People forgot how well he produced last year when we had no Foote and Timmons was injured. The guy covered a lot of ground... loved that 80+ yard pick 6 last year.

I'm not sure why Fox doesn't get love. I mean the guy has done nothing but produce since he has been in the Burgh. He makes the most of his PT. I like his swag and his play. IMO, he is the best LB in the NFL that people haven't heard about.

papillon
10-19-2010, 10:17 AM
Ham, Lambert and Russell > Harrison, Woodley, Farrior and Timmons > Rickey Jackson, Pat Swilling, Sam Mills and Vaughn Johnson

The current group while very, very good may only be the third best in Steeler history (as of right now). :shock:

Pappy

It's becoming debatable. And it's hard to compare guys from different schemes.

If I rank the 7 LBs, I'd rank em as:

1a. Ham
1b. Harrison
3. Lambert
4. Timmons
5. Woodley
6. Farrior
7. Russell

And Timmons is getting closer by the minute to leapfrogging to the top of the list.

I also think in a couple years it's gonna be hard to keep Woodley @ #5 since he might be the most complete pass rusher we've seen.

I could also make the case that Harrison is the 1a to Ham's 1b.


I disagree, Jack Ham is in the discussion as the best OLB of all time and that includes Lawrence Taylor. Jack Lambert is in the top 5 middle linebackers of all time and probably in the top 3.

So, until, there is discussion of Harrison being the greatest of all time at his position, he isn't 1a or even #2. Ham and Lambert hold those spots until discussion begins about someone being the greatest of all time along with them.

Having 2 out of three linebackers in the greatest of all time discussion keeps the 70s group as the #1 Steeler linebacking corps of all time. This current group comes in second in front of the Greg Lloyd lead group.

And, of course, being a Steeler homer keeps both squads ahead of the Dome Patrol.

Pappy

Oviedo
10-19-2010, 10:18 AM
Ham, Lambert and Russell > Harrison, Woodley, Farrior and Timmons > Rickey Jackson, Pat Swilling, Sam Mills and Vaughn Johnson

The current group while very, very good may only be the third best in Steeler history (as of right now). :shock:

Pappy

It's becoming debatable. And it's hard to compare guys from different schemes.

If I rank the 7 LBs, I'd rank em as:

1a. Ham
1b. Harrison
3. Lambert
4. Timmons
5. Woodley
6. Farrior
7. Russell

And Timmons is getting closer by the minute to leapfrogging to the top of the list.

I also think in a couple years it's gonna be hard to keep Woodley @ #5 since he might be the most complete pass rusher we've seen.

I could also make the case that Harrison is the 1a to Ham's 1b.

Impossible to compare between eras and schemes but I would definitely put Greg Lloyd ahead of Farrior and Russell and possibly Porter and Greene ahead of Russell.

ikestops85
10-19-2010, 10:58 AM
Ham, Lambert and Russell > Harrison, Woodley, Farrior and Timmons > Rickey Jackson, Pat Swilling, Sam Mills and Vaughn Johnson

The current group while very, very good may only be the third best in Steeler history (as of right now). :shock:

Pappy

It's becoming debatable. And it's hard to compare guys from different schemes.

If I rank the 7 LBs, I'd rank em as:

1a. Ham
1b. Harrison
3. Lambert
4. Timmons
5. Woodley
6. Farrior
7. Russell

And Timmons is getting closer by the minute to leapfrogging to the top of the list.

I also think in a couple years it's gonna be hard to keep Woodley @ #5 since he might be the most complete pass rusher we've seen.

I could also make the case that Harrison is the 1a to Ham's 1b.

Impossible to compare between eras and schemes but I would definitely put Greg Lloyd ahead of Farrior and Russell and possibly Porter and Greene ahead of Russell.

Woodley reminds me a lot of Kevin Greene. A fantastic pass rusher but average against the run and average in pass defense. Wood is getting better in the pass defense area and I can see it developing into one of his strengths.

Russell, in my book, moves up the list. He was very good against the pass and almost impossible to run against. It's hard to say what his pass rushing ability was because it was rare that he was asked to blitz. With that front four why would you blitz him?

RuthlessBurgher
10-19-2010, 01:42 PM
Coming up with a top 10 Steeler LB list is exceedingly difficult. Although I am a big time Timmons fan, there is no way he makes such a list just yet. Here's what I got:

1. Ham
2. Lambert
3. Harrison
4. Lloyd
5. Porter
6. Russell
7. Farrior
8. Greene
9. Woodley
10. Kirkland

You know it's tough when you consider the list of guys who we had to leave off the list. Our "next 10" LBers (guys like Timmons, Gildon, Brown, Cole, Little, Meriweather, Hinkle, Holmes, Foote, and Olsavsky) are likely on par with many teams' "first 10" LBers.