Jamall Johnson to play middle LB?

Excellent take D&P and solid takes across the board!

Didn’t realize Hebert has been moved down to WILL within MTL’s D. That’s an excellent move. He’ll be fantastic in that spot. Funny, when he was here in Hamilton for the last few games of the 2010 season, I was really hoping to see him back in 2011 in B&G! But I guess his services weren’t in as much demand here with JJ & Markeith established and Rey Williams on his way. Injuries to the former could not have been predicted. I also heard through the grapevine that he was a little in-between positions upon his return to Canada due to his increased size & strength & weight to play specials with the Bengals. But KH is perfect as a WILL in this game. Look out!

Yup, some of us were clamoring for moving him to Will and it’s nice to see Thorpe thought the same thing. I think the timing wasn’t right for Hebert in Hamilton with all the talented guys you had at linebacker and using (I believe) a NI at safety. He also had to work his way back into the right weight for the CFL, as you mentioned.

Re: JJ, the man is a hit machine, which is what you want in a middle linebacker. He may not be tattooing the QB as much due to formation (he’d have to stunt to come free off the edge), but he’ll be putting the big stick on running backs and most likely causing his share of fumbles.

JJ reminds me an awful lot of Jackie Mitchell and Reggie Hunt.

Question ...

When Marcellus Bowman is 100% healthy & ready to return to play ... What do you think Steinhauer will do? What would you do with respect to the lineup?

Bowman comes in as MLB & you move JJ back to WILL & Markeith to SAM & Colclough to CB/DB?
Bowman comes in as MLB & you move JJ back to WILL & trade Markeith with Colclough staying @ SAM?
Bowman comes in as MLB & you trade JJ keeping Markeith @ WILL & Colclough staying @ SAM?
Bowman comes in as MLB & you trade both JJ & Markeith & play Lawrence @ WILL & Colclough @ SAM?

Or do you wait and see ... If the D is playing well by the time Marcellus is ready to dress, you don't fix what ain't broke. But then how do you get any value from a FA you signed that other GM's are wanting to see if he's healthy?

In this scenario, could you not play Colclough at safety? With his ability to both support the run and the pass equally well as demonstrated in the last exhibition game, you could bring him up for the blitz and his range could make him another DB or a 4th linebacker in certain situatuons.

Or am I out to lunch???

been a while since our FS has been "somebody" or more accurately, "SOMEBODY!!" (exclamation points intended) (same deal for MLB actually...)

maybe it was just my childish worldview at the time but growing up Hitch was the immovable object, concussion alley, the place where poorly thrown passes went to die and be reborn as defensive touchdowns

now safety just seems to be, who fits? who's lost a step at DB, where semi-star cornerbacks go to die (well... get cut)...

Safety has seemingly become an afterthought or an unstaffable position, is this why we haven't had a "for-realsy" defense in the last ten years? could be...

(ps realize this started as a LB thread... must be rusty....)

This is one of the reasons why I would like to see Colclough as a safety. I like his speed as a DB and his ability to hit like a linebacker, both qualities that should be required for the position. Plus his versatility would make the defense less predictable.

Yes…
IMO you don’t take a talent like Colclough with his coverage skills and move him to safety where those skills will be called upon much less often. Play him where he will have the greatest impact for the Defense.
As stated by an earlier poster, “…teams are looking to spend their resources and deploy their best players at earlier lines of Defense.”

I hear you, Seymour. But, I think Colclough’s greatest talent is his versatility, and I think that is as rare as the coverage skills he offers. Why not use that versatility to its greatest advantage? Part of an effective defense is its unpredictability and making him more free range could be a way of adding to that dimension.

Matter of opinion I guess. I just think his coverage skills would be mostly wasted at safety.
Bottom line: Colclough will pose a much bigger problem for offenses if he is used at DB/CB as opposed to safety.

Yes, I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree.

I appreciate your point, Seymour. That’s the beauty of having Colclough on the roster. It’s a great problem to have!!