This is my first fanpost and I just joined a few weeks ago, so I apologise in advance if I'm breaking any MCM etiquette (they use an 's' instead of a 'z' for many words that end in 'ize' here in NZ; don't know why but it's become habit for me now).
Looking at Nole's scouting report on Zaviar Gooden has me really excited for our young LB corp, and has gotten me thinking about unit strength vs overall strength.
I think our O-Line and LBs (assuming McCarthy is healthy), and maybe WRs are dominant groups. I'm curious what you guys think about having a team that is overall pretty good at every position (balanced) versus a team that is average at some positions but exceptional at others (top heavy).
What do you think is more likely to lead to success. I've always believed balance is great in everything in life, but when it comes to football, I'm not so sure. I think a team with great receivers, dominant D-Line and great secondary can compensate for weaker units in a pass happy NFL vs a team that is more balanced but with no game-breaking unit (depending somewhat on your division).
In the case of the Titans, I know we are not dominant in any of the 'key' groups, but I think our strengths are a great fit for what we are trying to do. Our great Oline and receivers really help both the RBs and Locker and our speedy linebackers can both cover and will help out on the rush when called upon. (To be clear, I don't think our other units are scrubs by any means; they just aren't as strong, yet...!)
Thoughts? Any of you stat-ninjas got anything that points to a conclusion?
Edit: Just thought about McCourty, Verner and Wreh-Wilson. Are our CBs a dominant group? I think we are borderline, depending upon how Blidi pans out and if they resign Verner.