A New Linebacker Issue

[PDub80]

(03-10-2017, 11:11 AM)jeremydc Wrote: I'd rather have him on the team. My point is, his tackles were a product of his snap count and incompetence of the likes of Rey. 

(03-10-2017, 03:16 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I wasn't trying to argue that he was great, just showing that he wasn't "garbage".  Leading the team in tackles does have meaning.  If it is a LB, then he's doing a fine job.  If it's a member of the secondary leading the team in tackles, it means that your LB corps is garbage.

I wasn't saying Dansby was a bad player. Not at all. I was just saying that he compiled a bunch of tackles in an unspectacular fashion. That's virtually all he did and since someone gets tackled on almost every play I think someone else on the Bengals would have made those exact same plays if Dansby wasn't on the field. The thing that will make a large contribution and denote a special, meaningful player would be if an LB had an incredible amount of tackles, a lot of passes defensed, INTs, sacks, or forced fumbles.

Here is a page of Bengals stats (defense is towards the bottom). http://www.nfl.com/teams/cincinnatibengals/statistics?team=CIN

NOTE: Burfict played in 5 less games yet only trailed Dansby by 13 tackles, had more SOLO tackles, more sacks, and more fumbles.

Burfict is a monster to be able to do that with 30% less games played.


I guess I just feel like Dansby did his job adequately, but I'm fairly certain someone else (younger) could do the same job just as adequately or better.