spikes, crowell, and ellison (1 Viewer)

[slickwillie]

after browsing a few depth charts, i noticed that ellison is listed as the wlb back up to crowell. with this in mind i noticed that he had pretty good tackle numbers last game when spikes went down. is there anyone who has any insight into whether or not he is staying wlb, while crowell is being pushed to slb ?

or am i just reading too much into the whole situation ?

 

[gregjcross]

i read somewhere that a "Mario Hagan" replaced spikes and got burned some. For what its worth

after browsing a few depth charts, i noticed that ellison is listed as the wlb back up to crowell. with this in mind i noticed that he had pretty good tackle numbers last game when spikes went down. is there anyone who has any insight into whether or not he is staying wlb, while crowell is being pushed to slb ?or am i just reading too much into the whole situation ?

 

[nortobc]

after browsing a few depth charts, i noticed that ellison is listed as the wlb back up to crowell. with this in mind i noticed that he had pretty good tackle numbers last game when spikes went down. is there anyone who has any insight into whether or not he is staying wlb, while crowell is being pushed to slb ?or am i just reading too much into the whole situation ?

When Spikes went down, Crowell moved to SLB and Ellison went to WLB. I'm guessing Crowell still got solid tackle numbers due to the fact that he plays in the nickel package.The depth chart has Mario Haggan as back up SLB, but I guess he got benched for getting burned.

 

[Jene Bramel]

after browsing a few depth charts, i noticed that ellison is listed as the wlb back up to crowell. with this in mind i noticed that he had pretty good tackle numbers last game when spikes went down. is there anyone who has any insight into whether or not he is staying wlb, while crowell is being pushed to slb ?

or am i just reading too much into the whole situation ?

When Spikes went down, Crowell moved to SLB and Ellison went to WLB. I'm guessing Crowell still got solid tackle numbers due to the fact that he plays in the nickel package.The depth chart has Mario Haggan as back up SLB, but I guess he got benched for getting burned.

Do you have a link for this or is this direct observation. I've been trying to confirm this today but haven't been able to. May be operator error on my part, but I'd like to see the context of a link if you've got one.

 

[cracKer]

AP link, via FBG Blogger

Spikes' injury would force Buffalo to reshuffle its linebacking corps, with Angelo Crowell switching from the weak to the strong side to replace Spikes. Fourth-year veteran Josh Stamer and rookie sixth-round pick Keith Ellison would then split duties on the weak side. Spikes better make a quick recovery for us Crowell owners.

 

[nortobc]

There you go Jene.

 

[Jene Bramel]

AP link, via FBG Blogger

Spikes' injury would force Buffalo to reshuffle its linebacking corps, with Angelo Crowell switching from the weak to the strong side to replace Spikes. Fourth-year veteran Josh Stamer and rookie sixth-round pick Keith Ellison would then split duties on the weak side. Spikes better make a quick recovery for us Crowell owners.

There you go Jene.

Thanks.Two thoughts.

1/ Who the heck is John Wawrow and why should he know what the heck is going on under the Washington Times banner?

2/ This is pretty stupid if true. You'll move Takeo Spikes to SLB for Crowell but not Keith Ellison? Your best option to cover McMichael is probably Whitner anyway.

Interested in Rudnicki's take on this one.

IR a vet presence like Vincent with no clear indication by test or other opinion that he'd be out an extended period of time and piss off half the team. Then jerk around Crowell who you realigned your starting LB for. I'm .

Fletcher-Baker-Smith-Cooper-Candlestickmaker value ^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Warpig]

I'd like to see Stamer win the spot outright. Screw this "splitting time" BS.

 

[msommer]

Spikes had better make a quick recovery for us Spikes owners (KFFL reports he will not play week 2). I now have a small issue:

Line up requirements 2LB, 2DB 1 Flex (I'll leave the DL out to keep it simple). The league is a keeper/dynasty hybrid. Main scoring is 2 pt per tackle (bonus 3 pt for 5 solo tackles), 1 for assist, 1 for PD, 2 for FF, 4 for sack.

Roster:

LB

Napoleon Harris

Freddie Keiaho (contract)

Antonio Pierce (contract)

Mark Simeneau

Takeo Spikes

Odell Thurman (contract)

Reggie Torbor (contract)

Kamerion Wimbley (contract)

DB

Chris Gamble (contract)

Josh Bullocks (contract)

Chris Hope

Marlon McCree

The Thurman suspension hit me hard but I believed I managed to cover it up with Harris - but he was underwhelming against PIT.

Torbor, Keiaho and Wimbley I am keeping on the hope for future production (Torbor for an eventual Arrington injury).

With Spikes out I can play:

Pierce, Harris, Simoneau, Gamble, Bullocks (or Hope) or

Pierce, Harris, Gamble, Bullocks, Hope or

Try to pick Ellison 9cost of 8% of my remaining WW funds)

Harris@ Panthers - you know they will run a lot - but maybe more for EJ

Simoneau@GB - He's no Urlacher and should be better versed in the defense by now

Bullocks - will get what the LBs let pass, plus there is alway Favre

Gamble - will be covering Troy Williamson- so should be opportunity for tackles and PD

Hope - Seems like Sirmon in the middle is not as effective - the game should be a blowout and the Chargers will run a lot so plenty of tackle opportunities

Ellison - if he will stay at WLB he might be very intriguing - but it will cost me Torbor I think

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I've been a little out of it this week after getting back from WCOFF weekend in Vegas and trying to catch up on things.

I'm not sure why the Bills keep moving Crowell around. Spikes wasn't around all preseason so they should have been prepared for his absence. As far as I could tell, Crowell was playing WLB all preseason so it seems stupid to switch him out at the last minute.

Anyway, the Bills stance all along has been that the difference between WLB and SLB is not that big in this scheme. It's possible they just wanted the more experienced guy lined up closer to Ben Watson.

 

[msommer]

I've been a little out of it this week after getting back from WCOFF weekend in Vegas and trying to catch up on things.I'm not sure why the Bills keep moving Crowell around. Spikes wasn't around all preseason so they should have been prepared for his absence. As far as I could tell, Crowell was playing WLB all preseason so it seems stupid to switch him out at the last minute.Anyway, the Bills stance all along has been that the difference between WLB and SLB is not that big in this scheme. It's possible they just wanted the more experienced guy lined up closer to Ben Watson.

Maybe the thought process was - Crowell can play both spots but Ellison can only play WLB.....

 

[Tick]

Dang, I own both Spikes and Crowell, and it looks like they've managed to be crappy even combined.

 

[msommer]

Dang, I own both Spikes and Crowell, and it looks like they've managed to be crappy even combined.

My biggest concern is: Spikes had an Achilles injury - which has a high rate of recurring. What if it is not the hammy?

 

[The Gator]

Bills | Crowell could be used in three different spots

Fri, 15 Sep 2006 17:00:28 -0700

Chris Brown, of BuffaloBills.com, reports Buffalo Bills LB Angelo Crowell will start at the weakside linebacker position provided linebackers Takeo Spikes (hamstring) and John DiGiorgio dress for the game. DiGiorgio was declared inactive last week, while Spikes is battling a hamstring injury. If Spikes is out, Crowell would likely move over to the strongside, while if DiGiorgio is inactive and something happens to LB London Fletcher-Baker, Crowell would have to move to the middle linebacker position.