Thomas Howard, former Raider and Bengal LB

[chad72]

I remember seeing Thomas Howard first when he was a member of the Raiders when Peyton played  the Raiders in 2007.  He was flying all over the place. It took an Anthony Gonzalez TD and a kickoff return TD for us to win that game. He was covering TEs all over the place, Peyton had a hard time connecting with TEs covered by him in the end zone.

 

He then signed with the Bengals for 2 years. His ACL injury did end his Bengal career in 2012. But apparently he has recovered from his ACL injury and is getting a look.

 

When healthy, he was an outstanding coverage LB, one of the best in the league. Is he worth a look?

 

I am all for making our coverage in the LB corp better and he is still unsigned, though getting a few looks. Our LB corp. could use some experience in coverage.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Howard_(American_football)

 

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2013/3/18/4118444/free-agency-2013-bengals-howard

 

 

Thoughts???

[CR91]

hes a 4-3 olb. he wouldnt fit in our 3-4. besides our LB corp is fine. we have good starters and nice depth

[PrincetonTiger]

Do we need him?

[HarassedOffTheSite]

Has he ever played in a 3/4? What's his height/weight?

[james_zeigler1994]

he is a 4-3 LB but so is Angerer and probably Freeman so whats your point.

[chad72]

He is 6'3", 245 according to this: http://www.nfl.com/freeagency

 

Yep, he has played all of his career as a 4-3 OLB but given his measurables and wingspan that helps him cover TEs, there are several LBs of his size that play in a 3-4 and we will play enough 4 man fronts in our hybrid D, hence the suggestion.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

He is 6'3", 245 according to this: http://www.nfl.com/freeagency

 

Yep, he has played all of his career as a 4-3 OLB but given his measurables and wingspan that helps him cover TEs, there are several LBs of his size that play in a 3-4 and we will play enough 4 man fronts in our hybrid D, hence the suggestion.

 

I reckon if we did not have Mathis & Walden I'd say sure. That and our $$$ situation. We're getting right up on (really past) the loose cash amount that we'd want to go into the season with.

[mvbighead]

I love the whole he is a 4-3 guy so he can't blah blah blah speak.

 

From a talent standpoint, he could be an addition, but who do you replace?  He most likely fits best as a MLB here, especially when considering his talents are in covering TEs from the LB position.  Most of our OLBs are pass rushers and edge setter types.

 

That being said, I suspect we're fairly happy with Angerer, Conner, and Freeman.  Our remaining guy ought to be someone who we can develop to replace one of those three.  I suppose that could be Howard, but I suspect we can find healthier/younger options.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

He most likely fits best as a MLB here, especially when considering his talents are in covering TEs from the LB position.  Most of our OLBs are pass rushers and edge setter types. That being said, I suspect we're fairly happy with Angerer, Conner, and Freeman.

 

Good points.

[Colts_Fan12]

We also have Sheppard from BUF so not really any room freeman and Sheppard are both a lot younger

[mvbighead]

We also have Sheppard from BUF so not really any room freeman and Sheppard are both a lot younger

 

That was the other guy I was trying to think of.  I actually think Sheppard could be a long term guy here, but that remains to be proven.  Anyhoo, I don't think we need another guy until we figure out what we have with these guys.

[Colts_Fan12]

That was the other guy I was trying to think of. I actually think Sheppard could be a long term guy here, but that remains to be proven. Anyhoo, I don't think we need another guy until we figure out what we have with these guys.

I agree I can't wait to see him out there with freeman

[ColtStrong]

No.

[Smonroe]

I love the whole he is a 4-3 guy so he can't blah blah blah speak.

 

From a talent standpoint, he could be an addition, but who do you replace?  He most likely fits best as a MLB here, especially when considering his talents are in covering TEs from the LB position.  Most of our OLBs are pass rushers and edge setter types.

 

That being said, I suspect we're fairly happy with Angerer, Conner, and Freeman.  Our remaining guy ought to be someone who we can develop to replace one of those three.  I suppose that could be Howard, but I suspect we can find healthier/younger options.

 

Good points, and you're right about how ridiculous the 4-3 speak is.  We're not strictly always playing a 3-4.  I think we were in that set less than half the time last season (I'm not sure of the exact number, but I think that's close).

 

What I'm not so sure of is that we're happy with Conner, or that Angerer will ever be 100% healthy.  Competition is always good and depth is a must.  I'm one of those 'blind trust in Grigs' guys.  I'm pretty sure he knows the team needs better than any of us.

[mvbighead]

Good points, and you're right about how ridiculous the 4-3 speak is.  We're not strictly always playing a 3-4.  I think we were in that set less than half the time last season (I'm not sure of the exact number, but I think that's close).

 

What I'm not so sure of is that we're happy with Conner, or that Angerer will ever be 100% healthy.  Competition is always good and depth is a must.  I'm one of those 'blind trust in Grigs' guys.  I'm pretty sure he knows the team needs better than any of us.

 

Oh, I agree that trusting in Grigson is pretty much what you have to do.  I don't see camp, nor have I seen camps year after year after year.  I am sure he can go in one day and see something not up to his likely, and make an effort to address it in FA.

 

As for the 4-3 / 3-4 talk, my biggest peeve is that a guy is a labeled a 4-3 guy, or a 3-4 guy.  Problem is, you could have guys likes Sidburry who were drafted into a 4-3 team and simply don't fit (or are perceived not to fit).  But because he comes from a 4-3 team, many would consider him a 4-3 guy.  The reality is, some players are quite versatile and fit many schemes.  Mathis is a good example.  Some don't do a good job of fitting anywhere.  But the perception that Thomas Howard is a 4-3 guy is just silly.  He's a 6-3 240ish pound LB who is apparently good in coverage.  If we have a guy like that, who can hang with some of the better TEs we face, he could benefit the team.  Heck, the TE position is growing year after year.  If we had a guy who could hold Gronkowski to 3-4 catches and 30 yards, that'd be awesome.

 

In any case, many guys in the league have the versatility to fit a number of spots.  Rhonde Barber played safety for a while.  Michael Huff played safety and CB.  Now if a guy is a pure pass rusher, he may fare better in one scheme or another based on his talents, but to think that a 4-3 OLB won't fit this scheme is a bit absurd.  Most of our ILB were previously 4-3 OLBs.  They may have enough skills to translate, they may not.  But I just don't see the need to label a guy as a 4-3 guy.  Mathis is a pretty darned good pass rusher, and I see no need to label him a 4-3 DE, which he played for the better part of his career.

[Kyle]

he is a 4-3 LB but so is Angerer and probably Freeman so whats your point.

  

[Ohio Colt]

Had no idea Thomas Howard was still around in football

[Gavin]

Like some have said, He would be a ILB here, He also has not played a full season in 4 years, Why? Is he healthy? If he is then he would probably be on a roster right now, The guy can play, I'd take a look at him, If he is healthy he would provide at the very least much better depth then Lutrus Scott....who's basically trying out for other teams at this point if were being honest