Who's the quintessential defensive player?

Which types of defenders are the ultimate, do-it-all hybrids? Should teams play more "small ball" tactics to get more of them on the field?

One of my takeaways from reading “It’s better to be feared” by Seth Wickersham and deep diving the Bill Belichik/Tom Brady New England dynasty, was that Belichick clearly thought linebackers were the quintessential defensive football players.

I had previously noted his appreciation for sub-packages and getting loads of defensive backs on the field who could play man coverage, but I eventually found that he regarded those guys as being role players who existed to serve his main guys. His main guys were generally the two primary safeties and the top 3-4 linebackers, all of whom were consistently ultra-smart and versatile players he’d move around based on the opponent.

Generally, Belichick preferred not to get into sub-packages smaller than Dime so the Patriots could always have plenty of linebackers on the field. Those guys were always the ticket, moving around as needed to put the clamps on whatever the offense did well.

Here’s our question for today though…is the linebacker still the quintessential defensive player? Capable of beating blocks, playing coverage, blitzing, playing the run, the linebacker has to do a little bit of everything. He’s typically pretty big and imposing but is far from the biggest and most imposing guy on the field. Should the goal be to get as many of these hybrids on the field as possible?

The problem is that beating blocks and winning in the trenches is no longer how games are consistently decided. As the game becomes more skill-based in the modern era and linebackers get smaller and faster, I’m wondering if the right answer is actually the safety. Should the goal of great defense now be to develop and field as many safeties as possible?