While we're at it, we might as well move John Moffitt to his natural position.

Which is a Hooter's waitress.

_________________

As far as I've heard, it's just this^

_________________
"It wasn't just a dimb coincidence lik you probably tgought. They tested what makes you a fat slov and those colors won just like Emerald is telling you what happens be t...... next!" -- jamsomatic

My 2013 adopt-a-rookie: #humblethug

We need a giant banner somewhere at the top of the site with the quote from Schneider saying they try not to move pro bowl players to another position so this stuff doesn't come up.

i could see it situationally as well.. but hopefully we replace Hill with a more than capable pass covering LB...

_________________
On to the Next Episode

Yup apples and oranges though, Barron was such a talented player that had he fallen to the Hawks they would take him just because they had him rated so highly. I think that had more to do with the team seeing Barron as a future All-Pro at safety then it did as any dissatisfaction with Chancellor.

Chancellor could be better against the pass but the Seahawk's scheme does a lot of things which allow him to play underneath and in the box (which are his strengths).

I must have posted that quote ten times in the past week.

_________________
Give me some damn skittles...

While it's true that JS admitted He had Barron and Keuchly as the only D players above Irvin, it's not necessarily true that he WOULD have taken him, but that is what was implied. Even so, I don't understand how you guys act like you know everything in your infinite wisdom. Is it likely to happen? NO. Is it possible? Definately, given JS's remarks.

_________________


"We all we got, we all we need"

Ehhh....UNGER can play at guard and center if needed!

Percy Harvin could start at RB if needed actually...


Would say in this NFL if you can get another DB on the field to cover a "move TE". Or jam him of the line in obvious passing downs? Why not?

In fact...you can have roster flexibility and by having flexible players as far as multiple positions? Salary cap and depth!! Get game time reps as well if possible...disguise coverages? If say why not?

Having players who can play other positions in a pinch is a good thing, it adds to the depth of the team, but that's a far cry from moving players out of their position to see if it will work

Unger IS our starting center (And an all-pro), and that is where he is needed and serves our team best. He ain't moving either. Carpenter, Moffit, Sweezy and McQuisten are all going to take over at guard before you would move Unger out of desperation. You're scenario is injury based, not which player should start at "X" position 1st string.

This FO has done a pretty bang up job finding LBs, no need to switch a pro-bowler like Kam when you know how to draft LBs.

Seriously, just leave our best players at their native positions.

_________________
Give me some damn skittles...

Kam got his first defensive snaps basically playing LB when we ran the bandit package in passing situations. The bandit was a 6-7 DB formation designed to create a variety of blitzing opportunities while leaving fewer liabilities in coverage than the usual blitz. We didn't have the DB depth or the offense to make this a staple back then, but it still offered a role which Kam played well enough to become the starting SS. If our pass rush still isn't there, Kam COULD play a similar position if this is the route we go for addressing the issue, even if only in certain situations.

The bandit is a defense with More DBs and less LBs on the field. The defense is played differently than the standard defense would be, so Kam isn't playing LB in that defense, he's still playing Safety. Playing a Bandit defense when it's called for is NOT the same as moving a safety to LB

The quote you're referring to is about changing players' positions on a full-time basis.

I swear to God I'm starting to miss the QB controversy already

HAHAHAHA. True. I need the draft talk to heat up. But with my luck it will be about finding a CB so Browner can move to SS and Kam can switch to LB because it worked in Madden.

That reminds me. We should switch Irvin to WR. Look how well it COULD work!!!

_________________
Give me some damn skittles...

not confident on his ability to take on o-linemen on an every down basis.

That's just a difference in semantics. You're basically saying if a SS lines up at LB, he's still a SS, but I think of Kam as a LB when he lines up at LB. I'm happy to debate but this one seems a bit silly, now doesn't it?

Not really, because talking Kam at LB in a standard 4-3 defense and Kam playing in the Bandit Defense are two different discussions. This thread started discussing playing Kam at the 4-3 Linebacker position. Playing 5, 6 or 7 DB's is not even close to the same thing

Guy sucked the few times we've seen him.

Kam is one of the top 4-5 safeties in the conference. You don't move him.

_________________
<A>
<IMG></A>