Tukuafu a possibility LB?

Aug 25, 2010 at 2:00 AM

SanFranAddic
Veteran
Posts: 3,418

That may be a ridiculous thought, but could it work? He's only a rookie so he has time to learn.

Watching his highlight reel and the way he runs made me think of Levon Kirkland from the Steelers. He was huge and fast and played LB, so why couldn't Tukuafu could be used the same way?

Could he play in the middle on running downs and outside on passing downs?

Does he have the wheels to cover a TE or RB? How hard is it to learn?

You may proceed with the flamings.

Aug 25, 2010 at 2:18 AM

BrianGO
Veteran
Posts: 10,300

Originally posted by SanFranAddic:
That may be a ridiculous thought, but could it work? He's only a rookie so he has time to learn.

Watching his highlight reel and the way he runs made me think of Levon Kirkland from the Steelers. He was huge and fast and played LB, so why couldn't Tukuafu could be used the same way?

Could he play in the middle on running downs and outside on passing downs?

Does he have the wheels to cover a TE or RB? How hard is it to learn?

You may proceed with the flamings.

We actually tried to stand Soap up a few years ago for certain defensive formations at OLB. It didn't really work because, although guys like him look pretty quick, they can't change direction laterally or move their hips like a smaller linebacker can. Although some defensive linemen look athletic enough to play linebacker, they really aren't.

Kirkland was a rare exception.

Aug 25, 2010 at 2:24 AM

OregonDuckNiner
Veteran
Posts: 6,385

it could work, hes athletic enough

Aug 25, 2010 at 2:36 AM

solidg2000
Veteran
Posts: 17,320

hes playing good at DE why change him

Aug 25, 2010 at 3:17 AM

BasharCali49
Veteran
Posts: 378

Originally posted by solidg2000:
hes playing good at DE why change him

Exactly it makes no sense when we have plenty of LBs already. On top of that we need depth at DE and he looks like he's a great fill in so far. Is Seattle really that stupid to cut that guy? He looks way more productive than Balmer ever was.

Aug 25, 2010 at 3:55 AM

MRNINESEVEN
Veteran
Posts: 10,730

NO way lol. he's a D Lineman. If you get the chance to watch the Vikes game again look at him on everyplay he's in. He dogged/slacked off on a couple of plays, and his speed is not a LB speed at all especially on a couple of run plays, he showed better pursuit speed in the indy game

Aug 25, 2010 at 9:52 AM

znk916
Veteran
Posts: 4,285

He's got nice quickness and agility for a lineman...would like to keep and develop him on the PS as a situational pass rusher like Ray Mac, whose contract is up after this year, and has a long injury history too.

Aug 25, 2010 at 10:39 AM

SanFranAddic
Veteran
Posts: 3,418

Originally posted by wailers15:
NO way lol. he's a D Lineman. If you get the chance to watch the Vikes game again look at him on everyplay he's in. He dogged/slacked off on a couple of plays, and his speed is not a LB speed at all especially on a couple of run plays, he showed better pursuit speed in the indy game

I'm surprised to hear he appeared to be slacking. He seems like a high-motor/fiery guy who gets after it. I'll re-watch the game. He may have looked faster at Indy because of the turf.

Aug 25, 2010 at 10:55 AM

SanFranAddic
Veteran
Posts: 3,418

Originally posted by solidg2000:
hes playing good at DE why change him

There was an article that questioned Bowman's ability to replace Spikes and knock back linemen like Spikes can. Spikes is a big dude.

That got me thinking about Tukuafu's size and speed, ability to shed blockers and track down ball carriers in traffic. Just wondered if that was at all realistic or possible for him to be effective as an inside linebacker.

Aug 25, 2010 at 4:16 PM

#10

AKfanster
Veteran
Posts: 2,827

Quick, somebody try this out on Madden!

Aug 25, 2010 at 4:19 PM

#11

YungAce
Veteran
Posts: 46,915

tukuafu my tongan brotha! he looked real quick and fluid as a DE, but i'm not so sure how he would transition as an OLB. it's worth a shot in preseason

Aug 25, 2010 at 4:20 PM

#12

Kilgore_Trout
Veteran
Posts: 2,150

Originally posted by BasharCali49:
Originally posted by solidg2000:
hes playing good at DE why change him

Exactly it makes no sense when we have plenty of LBs already. On top of that we need depth at DE and he looks like he's a great fill in so far. Is Seattle really that stupid to cut that guy? He looks way more productive than Balmer ever was.

He is too small for Seattle's DL. Seattle was enthralled to get Balmer because of his size and if he can stay healthy, I expect to see him playing a lot for Seattle, if not starting.

Aug 25, 2010 at 4:26 PM

#13

bret
Veteran
Posts: 1,167

Originally posted by Kilgore_Trout:
Originally posted by BasharCali49:
Originally posted by solidg2000:
hes playing good at DE why change him

Exactly it makes no sense when we have plenty of LBs already. On top of that we need depth at DE and he looks like he's a great fill in so far. Is Seattle really that stupid to cut that guy? He looks way more productive than Balmer ever was.

He is too small for Seattle's DL. Seattle was enthralled to get Balmer because of his size and if he can stay healthy, I expect to see him playing a lot for Seattle, if not starting.

Isn't he only about 265? I thought it was strange they weren't auditioning him at LB, since the 3-4 linemen tend to be bigger. He's definitely looked more active than Balmer.

Aug 25, 2010 at 8:14 PM

#14

SanFranAddic
Veteran
Posts: 3,418

Originally posted by bret:
Originally posted by Kilgore_Trout:
Originally posted by BasharCali49:
Originally posted by solidg2000:
hes playing good at DE why change him

Exactly it makes no sense when we have plenty of LBs already. On top of that we need depth at DE and he looks like he's a great fill in so far. Is Seattle really that stupid to cut that guy? He looks way more productive than Balmer ever was.

He is too small for Seattle's DL. Seattle was enthralled to get Balmer because of his size and if he can stay healthy, I expect to see him playing a lot for Seattle, if not starting.

Isn't he only about 265? I thought it was strange they weren't auditioning him at LB, since the 3-4 linemen tend to be bigger. He's definitely looked more active than Balmer.

From Oregon Scouting Report: Height: 6-4 | Weight: 272 | 40-Time: 5.15

Slow as molasses when timed.

Must play faster and take good angles cause he sure seems to get to the ball.

Aug 25, 2010 at 8:39 PM

#15

kidash98
Hall of Fame
Posts: 26,621

BUT... BUT..... IT WORKED ON MADDEN!!!!

- 98