Awesome Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 because he is DONE. In fact, he was done last year. He has lost all his speed and explosiveness off the ball. He once was a game-changing DE; a consistent pro bowler who helped his team to a ton of postseason berths, and subsequent victories; one of the best to have played the position, if not the best, and a sure HoF inductee the moment he's eligible. But he's old, real old. He has become a non-factor. He rushes upfield every play and teams can and have exploited that. He's still got perfect technique and can almost always get around the corner on any OT, but he's always a step behind, reaching the QB just after the release. He tires very quickly and should only be used on third and long. I don't know if Ladarius is the answer, but at least he brings some MUCH needed speed to the front four. Anyone notice how well Ladarius played yesterday? Was Bruce in on that five minute drive to end the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuckinIA Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 The frustrating thing is that he gets himself out of position to get his precious sack record. Especially considering if doesn't seem like he making any progress in achieving the record.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins57 Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 When is Otis Leveratte(sp?) due back? why not put him at DE and use Bruce on 3rd downs and move Arrington back to LB and blitz him from there? Just my thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 I have to agree. At one point on the sidelines, I swear he looked 65 dude is to old and slow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Leverette's been playing, at least he did on Monday night last week. Bruce needs to be in on passing downs only. I like what I've seen so far from Jackson and Powell off of the edge. We need to develop our young talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Unfortunately, he does look pretty tired out there. The trouble is that our run-stuffer on the other side, Wynn, just looks invisible. He had 1 tackle and 1 assist. Ugly. It's pretty bad when Armstead is notching 17 tackles. On the plus side, Gardener looks good. Trotter looked decent in coverage, and so did Lavar. Champ and Smoot stepped up their games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Originally posted by MRMADD Unfortunately, he does look pretty tired out there. The trouble is that our run-stuffer on the other side, Wynn, just looks invisible. He had 1 tackle and 1 assist. Ugly. It's pretty bad when Armstead is notching 17 tackles. On the plus side, Gardener looks good. Trotter looked decent in coverage, and so did Lavar. Champ and Smoot stepped up their games. I live in jacksonville. Wynn is a joke. He did nothing for 4 years with the jags. I can't believe he is a DE. He has no rush skills. And played dt for most of his time in jax, and seemed to get run over alot. Gardener, I thought looked like a major force to be reconded with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddha Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Perhaps Bruce got winded from chasing backs and receivers in pass coverage. What was that supposed to be, some kind of half-@ssed zone blitz??? Ideally, you want Bruce playing half the snaps and just rushing the passer. Unfortunately, Leverette isn't ready, L. Jackson is a liability against the run, and Carl Powell has had to play super sub filling in at DT. So you leave him in all game to have some run defense on that side of the field and sacrifice any pass rush that he might have been able to muster. I would like to see a breakdown of which side of the field the Niners gained the most yards in running the ball. It seemed to me that they were hitting the off-tackle play between Wynn and Big Daddy all day, but ran infrequently at Bruce's side of the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Actually, we want our LB's to be racking up tackles. What we're hoping, however, is that when they tackle, they're facing the offensive team's backfield, not their own goalposts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Buddha - Take a look at the game play-by-play on ESPN. It's all there. The 49ers went to their right side a great deal. It was obvious it was gameplanned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowboykilla Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 I think the thing that is doing Bruce in is his position. Compare him to Darrell. The defensive end position creates MUCH more wear and tare on the body than a more spacious position such as corner back. No one is complaining about darrell becuase he's still able to perform the duties of cornerback. Bruce needs to let it go. The DE is too compromising on the body for him to be playing still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 And dont forget, he played END in a 3-4 Defense for most of his career, and he is certainly light for that duty. He took quite a pounding throughout his years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 The right side for the Niners is our left side and that was Arrington for the most part. Smith has moments where he generates really good pressure. I do think it would help us if he would just get 15 to 20 fewer snaps. He has a very slippery ability to get into the backfield and I think he's still an ok player. He's just not Bruce Smith of old. He's got a lot to live up to. I'll be willing to bet he gets 7 or 8 sacks this year and has a moderately productive season if he stays fully healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCS:BraveCaringSoul Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 Bruce is an old dog and lewis is trying to "learn him" some new tricks like this one here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 23, 2002 Share Posted September 23, 2002 part of the Redskins problems on the line stem from a talent gap at certain spots, admittedly. but one can also see that fitness has a part to play in all this as well. Smith missed the entire camp and preseason. So did Daryl Gardener. On offense, Chris Samuels missed the last month of the summer and is still nicked. Loverne was also injured during camp and didn't play with the starting unit until the very last preseason game. You add that in with the fact these two units have very little chemistry and it is no surprise they are being overpowered. Oh, and you can throw in that Brendan Stai had all of ONE week here before the opener to learn our offense :mad: But you are right that with a 39 year old starting RDE and a hole at RDT after Lang signed in Cleveland, the Redskins should have addressed the DL in early free agency and in the draft. They failed to do so and now we are living with the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.