Techster
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 18,237
How do you justify “tackles” as a measure of production? If a guy makes you miss and gets a first down and you still get him by the ankles 7 yards downfield, is that production? It’d be one thing if they were flying around the field making tackles. A tackle must occur in essentially every play that doesn’t result in a score, so I just don’t understand how tackles is a positive stat for anyone playing on bad defense.
Now if there was a stat that said “tackles at an average of X yards past the line of scrimmage” then I’d be on board with that. These two guys play more snaps than most linebackers in the country, and offenses sustain drives against us. Of course they’re going to make a bunch of tackles.
"tackles" is LITERALLY a measure of production. How many LBs in the past have we had that were on the field the vast majority of defensive snaps but never registered that many tackles. You don't have to go too far back to find the answer to that. I get what you're saying that tackles shouldn't be the only measure of a LB, but at the rate our LBs are making tackles you can't ignore it either.
My point is, unless you know a player's assignment on a given play, it's hard to grade them. Obviously there are some plays where a LB makes an obvious bad run fit, or doesn't seal his gap, or a RB blows by him in coverage and it's easy to see it was on them. Most of the time, you won't know unless a coach tells you it was bad play by the LB.
IMO, Quez Jackson isn't perfect, but he's probably been our best LB we've had at GT for a long time now. Can he improve? YES...but that goes for the entirety of our defense right now.