atljbo Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 One of my homeboys sent me thisSteve Wyche reported that Jamal may be moving to DT. And it will probably be his long term position. If he does, who'll start at LE? Moorhead, Chauncey, Bierman, Brandon Miller, or do we sign another DE? And who's going to get reduced playing time at DT? Trey Lewis or Babs? Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atljbo Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 Steve Wyche may have made a mistake because i dont see Jamaal Anderson playing DT for good......Steve Wyche said on run and passing plays....... I can see Anderson playing DT on passing downs only Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon4lifeman Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 atljbo (6/17/2008)One of my homeboys sent me thisSteve Wyche reported that Jamal may be moving to DT. And it will probably be his long term position. If he does, who'll start at LE? Moorhead, Chauncey, Bierman, Brandon Miller, or do we sign another DE? And who's going to get reduced playing time at DT? Trey Lewis or Babs? Thoughts?I WANT Bierman!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GEORGIAfan Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 he lost weight. if he was still at 282, and gained a 20LBs id believe it, but not that he is at 270. we will use him like john tuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ltstorm1 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 WOW, that has to be a misprint or misunderstanding or something. Anderson could only be put in as a DT on passing downs only. He's supposedly losing weight which would help him better at the DE position and not the DT position.I'm guessing its just because of his height and the long arms to block the passing lanes somewhat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sun Tzu 7 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Well... if this happens do we now have a need at DE?Nice.... I guess that means a few more development years for Jamaal.... since he was the #8 pick he's quickly headed to "Bust-ville."A top 10 pick should be an immediate impact player at one position.... Wait, if they're already moving him to DT does that mean the coaching staff thinks he's not going to be a quality DE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roddyyoudaman Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I actually like the idea, ON PASSING DOWNS...that way we can get kroy out the at LE and have a nice rush.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sun Tzu 7 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 GEORGIAfan (6/17/2008)he lost weight. if he was still at 282, and gained a 20LBs id believe it, but not that he is at 270. we will use him like john tuck.That worked against a pass happy team..... and Tuck had Strahan and Osi drawing attention...What happens when we play a running team? If Anderson is still learning to play DT and we play a team like that he's going to get killed.DT and DE is a bigger switch than most people realize... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobkowski Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 If it were true, my thoughts would be: Another on the loooong list of McKay busts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelerDawg6481 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 He's too tall and too lean to be a DT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaud Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Steve said on passing downs this year that we could see Jamaal at DT, but he did say that his future could most likely be as a DT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atljbo Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 SteelerDawg6481 (6/17/2008)He's too tall and too lean to be a DT.Albert Haynesworth is 6'6 so Jamaal Anderson is not to tall....... He is to lean tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiViK_OuTkAsT™ Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 You know it's funny, I said we would move JA inside on certain downs a few months ago. I also compared what we are trying to do their with what the Giants have to offer on D. Not trying to say we are like the Giants but simply trying a scheme of theirs. I said he would be used like Justin Tuck. A lot of people didn't agree with me and in so many words, insinuated I was stupid for thinking that. Go figure, funny how stuff works out some times. Got to love this board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazoo Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I would like to see EXACTLY what Steve Wyche said.....QUOTATION, as opposed to second and thrid hand accounts of what he said.My instincts tell me the thread title is misleading to wrecklessly irresponsible. Do I believe there is an element of truth to the title? Yes.....I heard that Steve said Anderson could be used like Justin Tuck. Justin Tuck is not a DT, he is still a DE that moves inside on passing downs in some situations.Do I believe the title of this thread "Jamaal Anderson playing DT for Good". No, I think that is a misrepresentation of what was said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelerDawg6481 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Shaud (6/17/2008)Steve said on passing downs this year that we could see Jamaal at DT, but he did say that his future could most likely be as a DT.Leaving him at DT would be a mistake IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sun Tzu 7 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Do I believe the title of this thread "Jamaal Anderson playing DT for Good". No, I think that is a misrepresentation of what was said.Me too.I don't think the staff would give up on him as a DE after only one year. They seem smarter than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelerDawg6481 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 atljbo (6/17/2008)SteelerDawg6481 (6/17/2008)He's too tall and too lean to be a DT.Albert Haynesworth is 6'6 so Jamaal Anderson is not to tall....... He is to lean thoBut Haynesworth is huge. Jamall isn't. Not buying it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelerDawg6481 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 sivik_outkast (6/17/2008)You know it's funny, I said we would move JA inside on certain downs a few months ago. I also compared what we are trying to do their with what the Giants have to offer on D. Not trying to say we are like the Giants but simply trying a scheme of theirs. I said he would be used like Justin Tuck. A lot of people didn't agree with me and in so many words, insinuated I was stupid for thinking that. Go figure, funny how stuff works out some times. Got to love this board.We run an entirely different scheme then the Giants. Anderson is not a DT IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sun Tzu 7 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 But Haynesworth is huge. Jamall isn't. Not buying it.Also how long has Haynesworth been playing DT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSICKxWITHxITx Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sun Tzu 7 (6/17/2008)Well... if this happens do we now have a need at DE?Nice.... I guess that means a few more development years for Jamaal.... since he was the #8 pick he's quickly headed to "Bust-ville."A top 10 pick should be an immediate impact player at one position.... Wait, if they're already moving him to DT does that mean the coaching staff thinks he's not going to be a quality DE?IF this is true maybe its not that jamaal can't play DE, but we have someone else who can play DE real well. Maybe they think jamaal can play well at DT, he did play good against the run last year. As far as him being a top 10 pick last year, they new he was going to be a work in progress. So don't say he is headed to bust-ville just yet nobody knows except for the coaching staff what is going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiViK_OuTkAsT™ Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 SteelerDawg6481 (6/17/2008)sivik_outkast (6/17/2008)You know it's funny, I said we would move JA inside on certain downs a few months ago. I also compared what we are trying to do their with what the Giants have to offer on D. Not trying to say we are like the Giants but simply trying a scheme of theirs. I said he would be used like Justin Tuck. A lot of people didn't agree with me and in so many words, insinuated I was stupid for thinking that. Go figure, funny how stuff works out some times. Got to love this board.We run an entirely different scheme then the Giants. Anderson is not a DT IMO.You aren't getting what I'm saying here, the Giants have a guy they move inside at DT (Justin Tuck) who is not a DT. They rotate a DE inside on certain downs to try and gain an advantage. Jamaal is definitely not a DT that could go every down. However, he can be useful in my opinion and tie up some extra guys on the inside which will allow whoever they bring in (IMO Biermann) on that down to try and get to the QB. That rotation is similar to that of the Giants. I don't mean their entire defensive scheme. I think moving JA inside on a few plays here and there gives us more options on the outside for rushing. This is a good move in my opinion, but not for the entire season. Only on certain plays would this be worth anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atljbo Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 Shaud just said what Steve Wyche said.... i didnt see it........ i will say this tho....... Jamaal Anderson remind me more of a Richard Seymour type player Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atljbo Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sun Tzu 7 (6/17/2008)But Haynesworth is huge. Jamall isn't. Not buying it.Also how long has Haynesworth been playing DT?Im not comparing him to Haynesworth... come on now..... I was just saying Jamaal is not to tall to play DT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiViK_OuTkAsT™ Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 SteelerDawg6481 (6/17/2008)sivik_outkast (6/17/2008)You know it's funny, I said we would move JA inside on certain downs a few months ago. I also compared what we are trying to do their with what the Giants have to offer on D. Not trying to say we are like the Giants but simply trying a scheme of theirs. I said he would be used like Justin Tuck. A lot of people didn't agree with me and in so many words, insinuated I was stupid for thinking that. Go figure, funny how stuff works out some times. Got to love this board.We run an entirely different scheme then the Giants. Anderson is not a DT IMO.Okay, let me explain this differently for you. I'm not saying we are using the entire Giants Defensive scheme. What I'm saying is that the Giants on certain downs move a DE (Justin Tuck) inside at DT to free up the outside a little bit for a pass rush. We are and should use Jamaal at this position on some passing and all 3rd downs. Moving him inside should free up the outside for I think it should be Biermann in this case. Moving JA to the inside permanently is foolish, however we can use him like the Giants use Justin Tuck. What can it hurt really, we won't be missing that much at DE and if he improves at DE this year, then that only allows us to free up the outside even more by moving him inside on certain downs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiViK_OuTkAsT™ Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sorry, had to retype my response. Didn't know my other one went through, the wireless on my laptop crashed. So ignore the second post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.