18 replies to this topic

[NWebster]

I saw last week that Justin Smith was named 1st team Defensive Tackle on the 2011 AP All Pro team. This is interesting for a few reasons, first - he isn't a DT but a 3-4 DE. Maybe more interesting, it appears that he made 2nd team as a Defensive End. Are there any other examples of players being all-pro at two different positions (not one regular position and one special teams)? It seems that there could be some legitimate reason for this if a player is used truly flexibly in a scheme, but i'd assume more often than not is would have to reflect media mis-understanding the scheme an individual is playing in.

[JWL]

I discussed this with Reaser through e-mail. He wrote that the 49ers list him as a RDT. I classify him as a 3-4 end, but if the SF outside linebackers are on the line often, then Smith is a tackle. It is a technicality maybe. I guess some voters consider him an end and others look at him as a tackle.

You know somebody someday will look at the 2011 All-Pro team and wonder what position Smith actually played.

[NWebster]

I discussed this with Reaser through e-mail. He wrote that the 49ers list him as a RDT. I classify him as a 3-4 end, but if the SF outside linebackers are on the line often, then Smith is a tackle. It is a technicality maybe. I guess some voters consider him an end and others look at him as a tackle.

You know somebody someday will look at the 2011 All-Pro team and wonder what position Smith actually played.

Very similar to the Ravens' use of Ngata this year . . . is he a DE or a DT? It really depends what down it is, whether he's covered on the outside by Suggs, is suggs in a two or a three point stance, etc.? Seems an issue most likely to pop up with 3-4 DE's and OLB's. A few years ago Carnell Lake had an excellent season switching between S and CB, but that was an injury replacement switch (not play to play) and i believe he made the Pro Bowl at CB.

[Reaser]

I discussed this with Reaser through e-mail. He wrote that the 49ers list him as a RDT. I classify him as a 3-4 end, but if the SF outside linebackers are on the line often, then Smith is a tackle. It is a technicality maybe. I guess some voters consider him an end and others look at him as a tackle.

You know somebody someday will look at the 2011 All-Pro team and wonder what position Smith actually played.

Yup, 3-4 end, though the 49ers own website lists him as a RDT...the Ravens usually list a DE, a NT and a DT...while 49ers list two DTs and a NT....similar to what NWebster pointed out, if the Ravens were in charge of saying what positions the 49ers d-line were, they'd call Smith a DT (like they do with Ngata...though the 49ers don't have a "Suggs" so Ngata plays DT more than Smith does in SF)...while McDonald would be listed a DE like Redding...

John and I also discussed the Suggs DE/OLB position...what I said is, just going on the "eye test" of watching all Baltimore's games, he had his hand in the dirt more than he was stand up this year, but probably not that far off from 50/50...not sure that even matters, I consider him an OLB this season, while last year I would have said he played more as a DE...but his real position is "rush"...hand down or stand up, he usually has the same responsibilities...the Ravens have a Sam, Will and Mike and Suggs just has his own "hybrid" position...I think that makes Ngata correctly listed as a DT. While the 49ers have two ILB's and two OLB's....though like I told JWL, a lot of times both OLB's are on the line, which if they put their hands down it would function as a pre-snap 5 man d-line and depending on the play, post-snap as well...which means that Smith plays on the "inside" a lot of each game and is essentially functioning as a DT...though he also functions as a DE also, so...

For All-Pro purposes though, I'de rather they went with the "official" position...sure 3-4/4-3 DE/DT and DE/OLB is "tough" but then what, what about TE's that are always split out or the ones who are or can be just giant slot receivers, what happens when say Finley has an all-pro season, are they going to list him as "WR" because "that's what it looked like" in the handful of games the majority of the AP voters actually watch?...

[John Turney]

Now you have to consider what a 3-4 end is. Many NFL playbooks list that position as tackle. They have a nose and two tackles and no ends, but that is playbook nomenclature. It goes to the question: Do you have to have a DE in a defense? Do you have to have a tackle?

If you ask Howi Long what position he played, he will tell you "tackle". But, wait, Howie, you were listed a a DE. He'll say Ted Hendricks and Rod Martin were the ends and he was a tackle and Kinlaw/Pickell were the nose. He's also say half the time when they were in nickle or dime he was a right tackle in a 4-man line.

So, can a DE stand up? Does here have to be a DE.

You mention TEs, but how often are they slots? Wes Welker is a slot, which traditionally is a substitution for a TE or FB . . . but these days the 3rd WR can be a starter.

Lots of hybridization of the traditional positions these days.

[Reaser]

Now you have to consider what a 3-4 end is. Many NFL playbooks list that position as tackle. They have a nose and two tackles and no ends, but that is playbook nomenclature. It goes to the question: Do you have to have a DE in a defense? Do you have to have a tackle?

If you ask Howi Long what position he played, he will tell you "tackle". But, wait, Howie, you were listed a a DE. He'll say Ted Hendricks and Rod Martin were the ends and he was a tackle and Kinlaw/Pickell were the nose. He's also say half the time when they were in nickle or dime he was a right tackle in a 4-man line.

So, can a DE stand up? Does here have to be a DE.

You mention TEs, but how often are they slots? Wes Welker is a slot, which traditionally is a substitution for a TE or FB . . . but these days the 3rd WR can be a starter.

Lots of hybridization of the traditional positions these days.

For the TE's I was thinking guys like Finley, Graham, NE puts their two TE's there also (ironically during times when Welker is actually out as a WR instead of slot, which is another all-pro quandary, the slot position that is...)

I agree with all you're saying and your point.....in the end I guess I "know" for my own purposes because I watch the games, as for "listing" it though, I like to be accurate/official as much as necessary...

Really this all goes back to the all-pro team, and maybe we should go back to the all-pro team being 11 players, try to keep it "realistic" as if players were going both ways (i.e. pick only one QB) but that way can just pick the best combined 11 players, best 5 lineman, o or d, and maybe that way players like Sproles could be considered (hypothetically...)

[John Turney]

For the TE's I was thinking guys like Finley, Graham, NE puts their two TE's there also (ironically during times when Welker is actually out as a WR instead of slot, which is another all-pro quandary, the slot position that is...)

I agree with all you're saying and your point.....in the end I guess I "know" for my own purposes because I watch the games, as for "listing" it though, I like to be accurate/official as much as necessary...

Really this all goes back to the all-pro team, and maybe we should go back to the all-pro team being 11 players, try to keep it "realistic" as if players were going both ways (i.e. pick only one QB) but that way can just pick the best combined 11 players, best 5 lineman, o or d, and maybe that way players like Sproles could be considered (hypothetically...)

Less and less is there a "right" answer. These days, what is "realistic"? I don't know. It just goes to show that listing is not really official or accurate anymore. Too many sets, too many motions. Like Dr. Z would always say, you have to watch the games. And for those of us who do, it's not an issue and why it is good there are writers/historians who can answer the questions for those who don't watch. I sure need theri help when it comes to things in the 1920s, 30s, 40s, etc . . . the writers served to explain certain anomolies. And in the future, someone will do an internet search to find out what Justin Smith was. They will ask was he a defense end or tackle? And the answer will be "Yes".

[Reaser]

Less and less is there a "right" answer. These days, what is "realistic"? I don't know. It just goes to show that listing is not really official or accurate anymore. Too many sets, too many motions. Like Dr. Z would always say, you have to watch the games. And for those of us who do, it's not an issue and why it is good there are writers/historians who can answer the questions for those who don't watch. I sure need theri help when it comes to things in the 1920s, 30s, 40s, etc . . . the writers served to explain certain anomolies. And in the future, someone will do an internet search to find out what Justin Smith was. They will ask was he a defense end or tackle? And the answer will be "Yes".

I'm on board with that and again, I agree....

all I'm meaning by "official/accurate" is in specific regards to the All-Pro team...written or conversation form, when talking with others that know football, the answer being "yes" to DE or DT, exactly, I agree, in two different e-mail conversations with PFRA members I pointed out that he's technically "both"....but when it comes to AP teams, and to each his own on level of "care" about all-pros but for whatever reason it's always been of interest to me, not the #1 thing I'm worried about by a long shot, but I do "care" and would like it for future generations, when they want to know who was the "best" any given season, for quick reference (as opposed to going to the tape, which will always be #1 way to truly know for yourself) but for quick reference, they should be able to go to the all-pro team(s) for any given year and see that yes, so and so was the best whatever in year whatever....

Perhaps I was leading to a suggestion that they should list the eligible players positions to the AP voters? ... because what would have happened if Justin Smith's votes had truly been split, he got 44 combined votes (35 at DT and 9 at DE), what if it was 22 at each? and the extra votes at DT had gone to Geno Atkins (making it 22 for him, but for argument sake lets give him 23 so this hypothetical makes sense...)...so Smith ends up 2nd team DE and 2nd team DT, when in reality his combined votes were more than all DT's and all but one DE, and he was clearly of 1st team quality...sure being 2nd team at two positions is an accomplishment, but he's a 1st team player, he deserves that, and that it's setup to where he could be, for lack of a better word, screwed out of that, I view it as a flaw in the process...

That's where I was going with my "official/accurate" position rambling...in the past Michael Turner got a vote at FB, that's one less vote he got at RB (didn't matter in the outcome, but it "could" matter is what I'm pointing out...) same with Suggs as OLB/DE, he has his own defined position, but it's not a position on the all-pro teams, so how do "we" define the position so he's getting "votes" at the one spot he "should"...others are probably more inclined to trust the AP voters than I, but it's a valid question I believe and do I really trust that they can figure it out?...to be honest, no. (and that's not to discredit ALL voters, but I suppose guilty by association to a point here.)

Hopefully that makes sense, reading the above I'de respond to myself with "is it really that important?" but sure, doesn't seem to be asking too much to want valid and accurate all-pro team(s) each season...

[JWL]

Perhaps I was leading to a suggestion that they should list the eligible players positions to the AP voters? ... because what would have happened if Justin Smith's votes had truly been split, he got 44 combined votes (35 at DT and 9 at DE), what if it was 22 at each? and the extra votes at DT had gone to Geno Atkins (making it 22 for him, but for argument sake lets give him 23 so this hypothetical makes sense...)...so Smith ends up 2nd team DE and 2nd team DT, when in reality his combined votes were more than all DT's and all but one DE, and he was clearly of 1st team quality...sure being 2nd team at two positions is an accomplishment, but he's a 1st team player, he deserves that, and that it's setup to where he could be, for lack of a better word, screwed out of that, I view it as a flaw in the process...

They could simply vote guys as linemen and drop the specific designations of end and tackle. It looks silly that Smith is a 1st team tackle and 2nd team end even if he does play both positions.



I was without Sunday Ticket in 2011. I flat out missed almost the entire NYG-SF game (the one NFL Sunday afternoon I passed on football to take my wife shopping and to church) and was busy with other stuff for the PIT-SF game. In other words, I have not seen the 49ers much at all this season. I imagine Smith is a 5 technique end in the San Francisco 3-4 base packages. If that is the case, then he is an end even if Aldon Smith is right next to him in a rush stance. When the 49ers go with a 4-man line, Smith truly goes inside and plays a tackle position from what I understand. Like many teams these days, the 49ers might go with a 4-man line as often as they use a 3-man line. Therefore, Smith might be an end 50% of the time and might be a tackle 50% of the time.

Still, it is weird having him on the All-Pro team at two spots. Are the voters trying to tell us that Smith was exceptional at tackle but slightly less than exceptional at end? Is the average AP-voter savvy enough to notice a difference in Smith's performance as an end compared to his performance as a tackle?

[John Turney]

They could simply vote guys as linemen and drop the specific designations of end and tackle. It looks silly that Smith is a 1st team tackle and 2nd team end even if he does play both positions.



I was without Sunday Ticket in 2011. I flat out missed almost the entire NYG-SF game (the one NFL Sunday afternoon I passed on football to take my wife shopping and to church) and was busy with other stuff for the PIT-SF game. In other words, I have not seen the 49ers much at all this season. I imagine Smith is a 5 technique end in the San Francisco 3-4 base packages. If that is the case, then he is an end even if Aldon Smith is right next to him in a rush stance. When the 49ers go with a 4-man line, Smith truly goes inside and plays a tackle position from what I understand. Like many teams these days, the 49ers might go with a 4-man line as often as they use a 3-man line. Therefore, Smith might be an end 50% of the time and might be a tackle 50% of the time.

Still, it is weird having him on the All-Pro team at two spots. Are the voters trying to tell us that Smith was exceptional at tackle but slightly less than exceptional at end? Is the average AP-voter savvy enough to notice a difference in Smith's performance as an end compared to his performance as a tackle?

Again, it depends on what the 49ers coaches terminology is. If it is the classic numbering system, like I think Fangio uses (like Bill Belichick) and the older guys, then the head-up technique on a tackle is a 4 technique. Recenlty, some younger coaches are using a consecuritve number system and that is what Mike Mayock uses, then he's a 5. So, it depends on the verbiage. I don't know for sure, so we don't even know if he's a "5" or a "4" technique in the base defense. We do know he lines up on a tackle when they are in a 3-4. So, when they do sub packages, wither ncikle or dime, A. Smith comes in and J. Smith rushes over a guard.

But, J.Smith, who in their base lines us over an offensive tackle does not necessarily make him and end. There is no rule that says a defense has to have a defensive end. The 49ers playbook could be taken from the old school verbiage. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, the 3-4 defense was usually called "Okie". And that was 3 guys with their hands on the ground and had a nose (over the center) and two tackles (over the offensive tackles) and 2 DEs on the TE on the strong side and over air on the weak side. That would make J. SMith a tackle and the stand-up guys the defensive ends.

As I mentioned, Howie Long did about the same things, he was head-up on a tackle in the base and in the nickle he was over a guard. He thought and said he was a tackle in the base (2 tackles and a nose) and also a tackle in the nickle. He considered Ted Hendricks a DE. They called thier 3-4 "Okie".

So, there is no right answer, but to an extent, I would agree that the voters should maybe decide what he is for voting purposes, so there are not votes at two positions, but I didn't really care that much in that I've seen this a lot. Dewey Selmon and Harry Carson both have been honored at erroneous positons on the AP All-pro team. the Sporting News does not even have ILBers or OLbers anymore . . . and have not for a while.

So, it's just an anomoly IMO, and we've had them before.

[JWL]

What position do Aldon Smith and Terrell Suggs play?

Basically, if the guy on the edge is standing before the snap I call him an outside linebacker. Lawrence Taylor was referred to as an outside linebacker. Thus, players like him are outside linebackers one would think.

With the 4 linebackers in a 3-4 the middle two will almost always be behind the line of scrimmage.
The two outside ones might be very close to the line of scrimmage. When they are right at the line of scrimmage that is where the DE vs OLB issue pops up. What is the correct label for such a player at that position?

[John Turney]

What position do Aldon Smith and Terrell Suggs play?

Basically, if the guy on the edge is standing before the snap I call him an outside linebacker. Lawrence Taylor was referred to as an outside linebacker. Thus, players like him are outside linebackers one would think.

With the 4 linebackers in a 3-4 the middle two will almost always be behind the line of scrimmage.
The two outside ones might be very close to the line of scrimmage. When they are right at the line of scrimmage that is where the DE vs OLB issue pops up. What is the correct label for such a player at that position?

What position do they play according to who? According to tradition, you're correct, LT was called a LBer and that is how it was listed. However, LT himself called himself a "rushbacker" and said Parcells allowed him to begin playing that, rather than LBer where he played his first 2-3 years. So, in his own mind he was a rushbacker. Leonard Marshall, in his book, said he was a tackle (even though listed as end) and that Lawrence Taylor was a defensive end (although listed as OLBer). Again, there is the Howie Long comments. He considers himself a tackle, both in the 3-4 and when eh was in the nickle.

Suggs is a hybrid player and has been for a long time. I have seen him, and have video captures, of him as a OLBer in the base and as a DE in the base defense, both in 3-4 and 4-3 defenses, and also in their nickle. With Suggs, he is called both by the media. Sometimes he is called a DE sometimes a linebacker. He was franchised a few years back and the team said he was a linebacker, Suggs said he was a DE. (There was a difference in the amount of the franchise tags) so, they ended up compromising, splitting the difference.

Suggs is a combination DE/LBer. A. Smith is the same, more a DE than LBer because I've not seen him much in the base defense.

So, IMO, there is not always a correct label for a position. Sometimes both are correct. With Justin Smith, I think he's a 3-4 DE who rediced to DT in the nickle. But, the 49ers list him as a tackle . . .and they have no DEs. I am suggesting that may be because of the names used in the playbook. They may be using old school techniques and he may be listed as a 4-technique. And they may consider that a DT.

Another one was Richard Seymour when he was a Patriot. He was listed as a DE but considered himself a tackle because they were usually a 3-4 and when he was in that he was on the tackle, but they also used a 4-3 a lot and when they did that he was on the guard.

Look at the RBs now. When there is a "fullback" like Moose Johnston and a "RB" like Emmitt Smith, it was assumed Emmitt was the "halfback". But that is not the case. He was a tailback. Chuck Noll said these formations a the fullabck offsense and that really, Emmitt Smith was the fullback and Moose was the halfback. Think about it, traditionally, the halfback is halfway back . . . the fullback all the way back. Where did Smith line up? Where did Johnston line up? So, things change and tradition meanings change. Were are in an era where defenses are hybrids, teams us multiple fronts, guys move around, and correct answers might differ from team to team.

[JWL]

I agree on the running back labels.


As for the Suggs types it was a question for anybody on the board. Is it a personal perference type of thing? Like maybe Reaser would call L. Taylor an end but someone else might say that Taylor was a linebacker.


You wrote that the Raiders called their 3-4 "Okie." You wrote they had a nose tackle, two other tackles and two ends. How is that a 3-4? Seems to me that is a 5-2. The first number always refers to the number of linemen. Maybe it doesn't?

[Reaser]

I agree on the running back labels.

As for the Suggs types it was a question for anybody on the board. Is it a personal perference type of thing?

Also agree on RB "labels"...

Suggs, depends to who I'm talking to, to me his position is "rush," or you could say hybrid DE/OLB...for all-pro purposes I go by what they "play" more and/or responsibilities, based off "traditional" definitions I suppose, and I guess that makes it personal choice, for example 2010 Suggs I'de "vote" at DE, 2011 Suggs I'de vote as OLB...2010 is easy, 2011 it's near 50/50 DE/OLB but he was either rushing or dropping in coverage, which he did more (compared to 2010) so I lean OLB for all-pro purposes...

[conace21]

Also agree on RB "labels"...

Suggs, depends to who I'm talking to, to me his position is "rush," or you could say hybrid DE/OLB...for all-pro purposes I go by what they "play" more and/or responsibilities, based off "traditional" definitions I suppose, and I guess that makes it personal choice, for example 2010 Suggs I'de "vote" at DE, 2011 Suggs I'de vote as OLB...2010 is easy, 2011 it's near 50/50 DE/OLB but he was either rushing or dropping in coverage, which he did more (compared to 2010) so I lean OLB for all-pro purposes...

I recall a story, whose accuracy I cannot vouch for, regarding Howie Long. Al Davis supposedly listed him as a DE for Pro Bowl voters; After 1986, Long's sack numbers were about average for a DT, but below average for a DE, and this hurt him in garnering Pro Bowl votes. Long still went to 8 Pro Bowls, despite several injury-plagued seasons, and I don't know why Davis would do something like that, unless Long had a bonus coming for being selected to the Pro Bowl.

[John Turney]

I agree on the running back labels.


As for the Suggs types it was a question for anybody on the board. Is it a personal perference type of thing? Like maybe Reaser would call L. Taylor an end but someone else might say that Taylor was a linebacker.


You wrote that the Raiders called their 3-4 "Okie." You wrote they had a nose tackle, two other tackles and two ends. How is that a 3-4? Seems to me that is a 5-2. The first number always refers to the number of linemen. Maybe it doesn't?

A 3-4 and a 5-2 are the same. When the Bills ran it in the 1960s they simply stood up a DE. When Bum Phillips ran it it was the same. Defense ends in the 5-2 are stand-up DEs. Among the early adopters was the Patriots with Chuck Fairbanks. Once he got guys who could play it he ran the "Okie", where did he come from? Oklahoma Sooners.

There are no "always" things. Sure, you can say 3-4, but with the Okie, the DEs are on two legs, but are primary run-stppers and pass rushers, are the linebackers? So, sure, you could say the Oilers and the Pats of the 1970s ran a 5-2. It was the same defense as the one used in Oklahoma . . . I am sure with plenty of modifications for coverage, as it was the NFL and not the Big 8. So, yeah, in Howie Long's eyes it was a 5-2 with 2 standup DEs-Hendricks and Martin. The srand-up DEs or LBers, whatever they are called, played the same technique, usually a 7-tech.

As far as Suggs, he's bothj a linebacker and a defensive end. It depends on the defense they are in. He plays both in the base defense (and they use both a 3-4 and 4-3 as a base) and he usually is a DE in the nickle, but not always.

He's both a DE and a linebacker.

[John Turney]

I recall a story, whose accuracy I cannot vouch for, regarding Howie Long. Al Davis supposedly listed him as a DE for Pro Bowl voters; After 1986, Long's sack numbers were about average for a DT, but below average for a DE, and this hurt him in garnering Pro Bowl votes. long still went to 8 Pro Bowls, and I don't know why Davis would do something like that, unless Long had a bonus coming for being selected to the Pro Bowl.

Pretty sure is was Al LoCasalle who did that. LoCasalle said "uou have to have and end, someone at the end of the line". It was his old-school thinking. Long wanted to be listed as a tackle, since he felt he was a tackle and that the DEs were pass rushers and he took pride in being an all-aound DE. LoCasalle would not budge. The opposite thing is happening for Smith. The team lists him as a DT, whe he plays the same thing as Long did. Who is right? Both. or neither. Howie did get to 8 Pro bowl, but the last two were as replacement and as a need player. He was the 1st alternate both times, 1992 and 1993. So, he was happy he got his 8, which was his goal. Early in his career he saw Art Shell went to 8, so that was his goal. He got it. It was in the the 1988-93 era where Howie really felt more that ever, he was a DT. The Raiders even started him a DE in the 4-3 even though he'd spend most of the game at DT and Anthony Smith, would would not start, would play a lot of LDE.

Greg Townsend was "moved" to OLB in late 1980s. He still considered himself a DE. He said "When I drop in coverage, then, I'll consider myself a LBer". So, he was getting votes and making an All-AFC team as a LBer, he was playing DE in his mind. He would rush from two-point stance and also from a 3-point stance, only once in a blue moon dropping into coverage.

It is a age of hybridization . . . some labels just don't fit. Some of these guys are square pegs and the All-Pro/Pro Bowl ballots are round holes.

[JWL]

I was looking at the Ravens-Jets gamebook from 2010 and Suggs was listed as "RUSH" in the starting lineup.

[John Turney]

I was looking at the Ravens-Jets gamebook from 2010 and Suggs was listed as "RUSH" in the starting lineup.

Back in the 1990s, for a couple of seasons Derrick Thomas was "Falc" in Chiefs lineup card. Not sure if the gamebooks reflected that or not.