Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 835365">This gets to the heart of the matter and the problem with this guy's and your terminology.So, here you have a writer who calls that DB-looking guy with a DB number who might be identified on the roster sheet as a DB a "dime LB".  He he's lined up in an off-the-ball LB position but not over a TE.  PFF might count that as an off-the-ball OLB snap because he's a shade outside the OT.  I'd call it an ILB position given there are only two off-the ball guys in the box.  Regardless, if you're going to call that guy a "dime LB", then what do you call the classic "dime ILB", a Joe Thomas or a Martinez or a Jones or a Burks or whoever, dropping into the middle zone with 6 other guys playing DB position?  That guy is classically designated a "dime ILB".So, if you subscribe to this guy's terminolgy you have a problem.  You've described two different defenses with the same term ("dime"), and you've called two different players doing very different things "dime LB".If instead you call what is illustrated here nickel, with a DB-like guy playing an ILB position, you have differentiated what are two different things.If you want to call this a dime, which you yourself agreed involves 6 DBs, then why would you call that 6th. guy a LB at all?  Now you have only 5 DBs?!  The terminology used in these examples muddies the water and is not at all useful.</blockquote>

Total: 96 (members: 1, guests: 95)