Sean Lee may be out for year.

[Superman]

HAHA partner in "QB" crime? A guy who has never had double digit sacks, averages around 3 sacks a year and only had 3 all last year. Yea, Qb crime alright...

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand even if he had 17 sacks, there would be idiots on here saying that's not his role on the defense.

 

[Vader]

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand even if he had 17 sacks, there would be idiots on here saying that's not his role on the defense.

You're are correct. LeBeau uses the Cross fire zone blitz. So only an idiot would say that's not Timmons role. But he has never even sniffed 17. He's never even hit double digits.

 

[SteelBuckeye]

You're are correct. LeBeau uses the Cross fire zone blitz. So only an idiot would say that's not Timmons role. But he has never even sniffed 17. He's never even hit double digits.

However, his best season for sacks (7 in '09) is better than either Foote's (4 in '06 and '12) and Farriors (6.5 in '07). His second best season (6 in '12) ties Farriors second best (6 in '10). Career sack numbers? Foote: 23 sacks in 12 years. Farrior: 35.5 sacks in 15 years. Timmons: 26 sacks in 7 years. So, compared to his compatriots, who were used in the same scheme, the kid has been doing pretty good.

 

[Vader]

However, his best season for sacks (7 in '09) is better than either Foote's (4 in '06 and '12) and Farriors (6.5 in '07). His second best season (6 in '12) ties Farriors second best (6 in '10). Career sack numbers? Foote: 23 sacks in 12 years. Farrior: 35.5 sacks in 15 years. Timmons: 26 sacks in 7 years. So, compared to his compatriots, who were used in the same scheme, the kid has been doing pretty good.

And people on here blasted both those guys. Foote was slow and needed to be replaced. Farrior was old and needed to be retired. Timmons has similar stats to 2 guys that people wanted replaced.

 

[Litos]

And people on here blasted both those guys. Foote was slow and needed to be replaced. Farrior was old and needed to be retired. Timmons has similar stats to 2 guys that people wanted replaced.

He gave you career totals of farrior, not his final couple of years so at least refute the thing with something better than false arguments.
Please explain why farrior isn't a good linebacker to compare and to expect a similar performance from Timmons

 

[Vader]

He gave you career totals of farrior, not his final couple of years so at least refute the thing with something better than false arguments.
Please explain why farrior isn't a good linebacker to compare and to expect a similar performance from Timmons

I never said Timmons wasn't a good LBer. That's the thing that Timmons lovers can't get through their heads. He either has to be a great LB that should be in the pro-bowl or he is ****. There is no middle ground with you people. Farrior was a good Lb but not great. Foote was not as good as Farrior. They have similar stats as Timmons but somehow Timmons is suppose to be a dominant pro-bowl caliber LB while Farrior and Foote were average/ below average.

 

[SteelBuckeye]

I'm not saying Timmons is great. That would be an overstatement. As would be saying that Timmons has similar stats to Foote and Farrior. Actually, his career stats to date (after only 7 years) say that if he plays 12-15 years, he will end up with way better stats than Foote or Farrior. But, as of yet, his "body of work" is incomplete.

 

[Wingman]

During those times I would suspect that Farrior was not in on the Blitz all that much because Harrison and Woodley were both rushing the passer I believe they were getting close to 10 a peace for a few years there. Add in some of the other anomalies that get tossed in and it would not be surprising to see lots of quick throws or throw aways by the opposition. Also in that span I believe both Troy and Harrison were DPOY once each so that will shift some of the stats to other players as well.

 

[Vader]

I'm not saying Timmons is great. That would be an overstatement. As would be saying that Timmons has similar stats to Foote and Farrior. Actually, his career stats to date (after only 7 years) say that if he plays 12-15 years, he will end up with way better stats than Foote or Farrior. But, as of yet, his "body of work" is incomplete.

Remember that Farrior played 5 years with the Jets who played him out of position. Then he came to the Steelers who played him first at RILB then finally moved him to LILB. I'd say they are similar players. Hell people are talking about Shazier and Timmons as the best ILB due in the league. That's just crazy talk. One is a rookie who hasn't even taken a snap yet and the other is a faster version of Farrior that still makes huge mistakes (see the Pryor run).

 

[antdrewjosh]

Who you calling you people??? Lmao

 

[SteelBuckeye]

Remember that Farrior played 5 years with the Jets who played him out of position. Then he came to the Steelers who played him first at RILB then finally moved him to LILB. I'd say they are similar players. Hell people are talking about Shazier and Timmons as the best ILB due in the league. That's just crazy talk. One is a rookie who hasn't even taken a snap yet and the other is a faster version of Farrior that still makes huge mistakes (see the Pryor run).

Ok, let's take Farrior's first 7 years with the Steelers. He put up 19 sacks and went sackless two years out of those seven. Remember that at that time he was a veteran linebacker and walked into a starting role. Unlike Timmons who came in as a rookie backup and has 26 sacks in his first 7 years and went sackless one year (rookie year of '07). Jury's still out on Shazier, he's just a rookie. But, as far as Timmons goes, I see him as a solid, not great, linebacker who performs at least as well as his immediate predecessors and more than likely on a level above them (just not on a H.O.F level). Some folks act like EVERY LB that suits up for the Steelers has to be a H.O.F.er or they are a bust (not saying you).

http://www.nfl.com/player/jamesfarrior/2500597/careerstats

http://www.nfl.com/player/lawrencetimmons/2495762/careerstats

 

[Vader]

Ok, let's take Farrior's first 7 years with the Steelers. He put up 19 sacks and went sackless two years out of those seven. Remember that at that time he was a veteran linebacker and walked into a starting role. Unlike Timmons who came in as a rookie backup and has 26 sacks in his first 7 years and went sackless one year (rookie year of '07). Jury's still out on Shazier, he's just a rookie. But, as far as Timmons goes, I see him as a solid, not great, linebacker who performs at least as well as his immediate predecessors and more than likely on a level above them (just not on a H.O.F level). Some folks act like EVERY LB that suits up for the Steelers has to be a H.O.F.er or they are a bust (not saying you).

Totally agree with that.

 

[Litos]

There is no middle ground with you people

neither am I saying he's an all pro ILB, I'm saying he's pretty good and owns good sack and interception numbers.

Hell people are talking about Shazier and Timmons as the best ILB due in the league

nope, people said they can become the best tandem the Steelers had in a long while

 

[Litos]

Who you calling you people??? Lmao

I think he refers to us latin Steelers fans

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

The "great" Ray Lewis, who every pundit agrees is a hall of famer, had 19.5 sacks his first 7 years.
the "great" Patrick Willis, who many pundits agree is one of the best LBers in the NFL, has 20.5.

Timmons has 26, despite not starting his first year, which the other two did (Lewis 13 games, Willis, a full 16.)

 

[Litos]

The "great" Ray Lewis, who every pundit agrees is a hall of famer, had 19.5 sacks his first 7 years.
the "great" Patrick Willis, who many pundits agree is one of the best LBers in the NFL, has 20.5.

Timmons has 26, despite not starting his first year, which the other two did (Lewis 13 games, Willis, a full 16.)

**** facts, he's a bust!
Honestly, I think many here have realized they were wrong about him, just won't recognize it publicly

 

[Vader]

The "great" Ray Lewis, who every pundit agrees is a hall of famer, had 19.5 sacks his first 7 years.
the "great" Patrick Willis, who many pundits agree is one of the best LBers in the NFL, has 20.5.

Timmons has 26, despite not starting his first year, which the other two did (Lewis 13 games, Willis, a full 16.)

And each of them play a different version of the 3-4. Dobre posted the difference on the other board. But don't let facts get in the way. You think Farrior (who has similar stats to Timmons) is better than Lewis? Or Foote?

 

[Vader]

**** facts, he's a bust!
Honestly, I think many here have realized they were wrong about him, just won't recognize it publicly

Nope. He is exactly what I thought he'd be. He gets blocked by RBs easily, struggles to understand where to be in certain defenses and can make "what the **** was that?" plays at times like the Pryor run. He is a good RILB along the lines of Farrior but not a great LB.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

And each of them play a different version of the 3-4. Dobre posted the difference on the other board. But don't let facts get in the way. You think Farrior (who has similar stats to Timmons) is better than Lewis? Or Foote?

Not the point. The point is for some reason you're hanging your hat on stats and claiming that 26 sacks in 7 years is unimpressive.

No team in the NFL plays the exact same defense. The fact remains that players like Lewis, Willis, and Timmons are compared all the time. Timmons measures up favorably to both, yet is still behind the curve compared to veterans on the team he's outperformed? That is the definition of impossible to meet expectations. Something's gotta give.

 

[Vader]

Not the point. The point is for some reason you're hanging your hat on stats and claiming that 26 sacks in 7 years is unimpressive.

No team in the NFL plays the exact same defense. The fact remains that players like Lewis, Willis, and Timmons are compared all the time. Timmons measures up favorably to both, yet is still behind the curve compared to veterans on the team he's outperformed? That is the definition of impossible to meet expectations. Something's gotta give.

Total bullshit. Ask any football player, ex football player, coach etc.. who would you rather have, Ray Lewis or Timmons? If you had to take one who would you take? I was looking at stats FROM THE SAME TEAM. See they play the EXACT same defense. Willis and Lewis DON'T.

Again do you think Willis or Lewis are in the same class with Farrior?

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Total bullshit. Ask any football player, ex football player, coach etc.. who would you rather have, Ray Lewis or Timmons? If you had to take one who would you take? I was looking at stats FROM THE SAME TEAM. See they play the EXACT same defense. Willis and Lewis DON'T.

Again do you think Willis or Lewis are in the same class with Farrior?

I never said anything about Timmons being better than Ray.

What I said was that Timmons compares favorably to Lewis and Willis (Pro bowl caliber players) in the stat that you brought up. Timmons also compares favorably to Foote and Farrior whom you also brought up. Since you consider sacks a paramount, and Timmons has eclipsed both players (Foote and Farrior) in their first seven years on the team, what in your opinion does Timmons need to do to be a pro bowl caliber player? So far the only intimation i've gotten from you is double digit sacks which no inside LBer I can think of in recent memory either on the team or on another has ever accomplished. Please feel free to point to to one I may have missed.

 

[Wingman]

I actually thought Farrior in his prime was better than Lewis. Lots of Lewis stats were pile jumping. Farrior led the defense and called the plays. Many times he had the top overall defense in the league. Willis from what little I have seen him play is just a rare talent. Lewis was a great player but not do it all player of Farrior in his prime.

 

[Vader]

I never said anything about Timmons being better than Ray.

What I said was that Timmons compares favorably in the stat that you brought up. Timmons also compares favorably to Foote and Farrior whom you also brought up. Since you consider sacks a paramount, and Timmons has eclipsed both players (Foote and Farrior) in their first seven years on the team, what in your opinion does Timmons need to do to be a pro bowl caliber player? So far the only intimation i've gotten from you is double digit sacks which no inside LBer I can think of in recent memory either on the team or on another has ever accomplished. Please feel free to point to to one I may have missed

How about getting his fellow players to vote for him? How about not being out of position? How about not taking 7 years to set the defense? How about not getting block easily by a RB?

Also you have issues with understanding the difference in defenses. The rats and 49ers play a different version of the 3-4. So using just stats to compare players isn't correct. Which is why I used the stats from the SAME team to compare Timmons, Farrior and Foote. It would be like comparing Ninkovich who plays in NE 3-4 version and had 8 sacks and Chandler Jones who had 11 sacks with Heyward who had 5 sacks and Keisel who had 4 sacks. Wow the Steelers DE suck right? Nope, they are asked to do different things.

 

[Supersteeler]

Some folks act like EVERY LB that suits up for the Steelers has to be a H.O.F.er or they are a bust (not saying you).

He only has to be H.O.F. material if they hated the pick and bitched about it at the time. If they loved the pick right off the bat, being an average player is perfectly acceptable. Those folks stick out like a sore thumb.

 

[SteelBuckeye]

Not the point. The point is for some reason you're hanging your hat on stats and claiming that 26 sacks in 7 years is unimpressive.

To be fair to Vader, IIRC, I was the one who brought up the stats. Not to trash Timmons, but to show that he has performed better (marginally so, some will say) than Foote/Farrior. And also to point out that he has done so in only 7 years compared to 12 and 15 years for Foote/Farrior.