Brooks over Ulbrich

Originally posted by fanmusclecars:
1. Does not fit the scheme and strictly a Tampa Two guy. That's why no other team has picked him up.

2. Really long in the tooth. Makes Spikes look like a youngster.

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
We're going to carry four ILB's . . . Willis, Spikes, McKillop & Ulbrich . . .

end of thread

brooks is an OLB

McKillop is a hell of a player and could be a player in the NFL if givin a chance. I dont like Ulbrich much though and i would love to see brooks play again.. i took for granted his LB skills.

Originally posted by RuudReliable:
McKillop is a hell of a player and could be a player in the NFL if givin a chance. I dont like Ulbrich much though and i would love to see brooks play again.. i took for granted his LB skills.

i agree he should start when spikes retires or leaves the team he has a good heart and tries his hardest has good IQ and is a tackling machine hell do good next to willis

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by RuudReliable:
McKillop is a hell of a player and could be a player in the NFL if givin a chance. I dont like Ulbrich much though and i would love to see brooks play again.. i took for granted his LB skills.

i agree he should start when spikes retires or leaves the team he has a good heart and tries his hardest has good IQ and is a tackling machine hell do good next to willis

AHAHAHAHA i get what you're trying to say but these qualities are not what you want in an NFL linebacker. We want "Chews nails and glass to start his day" "Wrestles african lions in the off season" "Killed a man to watch him die" "Is the unholy spawn of a Mako shark and an 800lb gorilla"

I do agree that it was encouraging to hear he had the headset while willis was out. Good backup, I doubt he can play at TKO's level yet though.

From what was said in the past Ulbrich apparently is like a coach on the field. The current coaches definitely think he has a future in coaching ( kinda like Trent dilfer was viewed) and I think that maybe the reason he is still around. I followed Ulbrich from when he was at Hawaii but he has definitely lost a step and I think when the tiem comes to release him he would be an excellent coach but right now I think the coaches still view him as an asset to the team and he will probably make one of the last ILB spots.

Originally posted by matt49er:
Why keep Jeff Ulbrich when Derrick Brooks is out there? I know it's not something that would put us over the top but if we're going to keep an old backup LB why not make t Brooks?

one simple question answers this. will derrick brooks play STs if he joins this team? i think no, so why bring in someone to be a backup, who will not play STs?

uh i hate my computer right now. anyways.....

dude WTF???? i did two posts, when i went back and checked if it actually posted, and it didn't so i reposted it. and sure enough all of the sudden it is posted.

Originally posted by strickac:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by strickac:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by strickac:
Why keep Ulbrich, when we have McKillop and Marques Harris? Ulbrich is expendable.

McKillop is a natural TED in the 3-4 defense, and Ulbrich's natural position is behind Willis.

Harris is an OLB in our defense, although somewhat underweight for that position.

I don't see any additional value for getting Derrick Brooks and cutting Ulbrich, who happens to be one of the longest tenured 49ers on our team and accepted a pay cut to remain on the roster.

Don't f**k around with his loyalty and locker room presence.

McKillops isn't really a natural TED. He's a kind-of soft 240-245lbs. The knock on him was his ability in coverage and not being able to shed blockers. He's more a traditional MLB. He'll be a very nice replacement for Takeo, down the road, but even this early in his career, he can do anything that Ulbrich can.

Harris is very familiar with Manusky's system and Manusky is very familiar with Harris' abilities. He rotated him around in SD, which is why he's able to line up at OLB here. He can play either inside or out. He fits the system better than Ulbrich.

Remind me, why is Ulbrich playing in our 3-4?

NFL.com:

Quote:

Analysis

Positives: Productive, instinctual player who sorts through the trash to get to the ballcarrier, seems to have an innate sense of how and when to slide through oncoming blockers. ... Very good backfield awareness, always seems to know where the ball is. ... Recognizes tight ends going out on delayed routes. ... Breaks down well in space and makes secure tackles in the open field. ... Can get to the outside to meet the back at the edge. ... Drops quickly and hustles to meet receivers in intermediate routes. ... Gets a good hit on slot receivers to knock them off their route. ... Knows where the sticks are and tries his best to keep underneath receivers from getting there. ...

CNNSI.com:

Quote:
ANALYSIS: McKillop comes off two outstanding seasons as one of the nation's top tacklers. He's a good football player, yet a marginal athlete and a linebacker who may be limited to certain systems. He would be best on the inside of a 3-4 alignment or could be used as a middle linebacker taken off the field on passing downs. While he lacks the great upside, McKillop also has limited downside risk to his game.

Sounds like a natural 3-4 TED to me.

Sounds like a MIKE to me, but anyway, I can do that too...


Scott Wright (Draft Countdown):

Quote:
Adequate size...Great instincts and awareness...Good tackler...Decent range and moves well laterally...Is super tough...Competitive and intense...Has a terrific motor...Smart with an outstanding football IQ...A hard worker and team leader...Was extraordinarily productive.

Weaknesses:
Not a great athlete...Average speed...Needs to get stronger...Struggles when forced to take on and shed blockers...Lacks fluid hips...Takes some poor angles...Sub par hands and ball skills in coverage...Can be too aggressive at times ... Is not a great pass rusher ...Upside is limited.

McKillop is a solid football player, who has a nose for making tackles. He could step in from today and back up Willis and be more productive than Ulbrich.

Look, I'm a huge fan of McKillops and I think he's going to develop into an excellent TED for us; however, just because he's being groomed for the position doesn't mean that he couldn't back up Willis at MIKE, if needed. We also have Ahmad Brooks who could fill in as TED if needed. My point is that Ulbrich is expendable. He doesn't really fit the 3-4, IMO. If he were released, the LB corps wouldn't miss a beat.

At this point Ulbrich's value is in his knowledge of our scheme and his acceptance of his role on our team, and then the performance in that role .

Would a guy like Brooks accpet that he is ONLY a backup, MUST perform well on ST's and has NO shot at ever being a regular contributor unless due to injuries, and at Ulbrich's pay? I seriously doubt it.

I mean lets be honest. The team doesn't actually envision ever using Ulbrich on the regular D unless a worse case scenario, so why waste the time/effort/money on a guy who really won't bring anything new to the table?

I'd get a another OLB/PR type guy(the Eagles just dumped the perfect guy).. I'd then dump Ulbrich, and have Ahmad Brooks play a reserve ILB and OLB role. That way we dont cut anybody that actually contributes in lieu of Ulbrich.. This guy is garbage, and I dont see how he continues to stay on this team !

He is a 4-3 guy, not well suited for our system at all.

Looks like someone fired up Madden 10 and saw Derrick Brooks was available. "But he's rated SO much higher than Ulbrich!"....