Resign Sheard and pay Taylor
-
For some reason we have this idea engraved in stone that our NT has to be a 350lb, 2 gap, 0 tech only monster.
-
With the exveption of suh...we should really make some offers to players on that list. Phil needs a running mate. We cant fold on the middle if he gets hurt again
We still have Billly Winn and The Sausage King (John Hughes) no? Do you not consider them Phil's running mates?
We still have Billly Winn and The Sausage King (John Hughes) no? Do you not consider them Phil's running mates?
well Winn to me is a DL, not a NT. He can play NT but he's not the anchor Phil is. Hughes is for sure, but he doesn't compare to those guys on the list. Don't think you can argue that Wilfork and Taylor are more of the same cut.
-
I think we're ok at nose tackle with Phil Taylor and John Hughes. We need to focus on getting another versatile DE to solidify our front 7
I agree that Taylor and Hughes looked good(our 2 best DL, actually), though they are our DE's....not NT......(personally, I like putting Taylor back at NT)
I think we're good at the 5 tech, imo, with the Bryant's.
Hmmm.....not sure Im there yet....AB showed a little flash in preseason, but Im not ready to anoint him yet....and Desmond really struggled and was one of our main issues with stopping the run.....yeah, he got a few sacks, but thats about it.....personally, Im hoping AB steps up and takes his job....coaches should know if this is likely or not.....
100% agree with this. I was at that game and seen first hand just how much of a disruption big phil was to that offense. Wasnt anywhere close to 100% and every time i saw him he was fired up and talkin shit and smashing someone. I remember thinking to myself what a force he could of been last year of he woulda stayed healthy.
I think he played great too.....no problems with what he's brought to our run D.....
I will say he was THE ONE who failed the preseason conditioning drills.....so, hearing he showed up out of shape, then spent the season on the injury list, just makes you wonder......
We still have Billly Winn and The Sausage King (John Hughes) no? Do you not consider them Phil's running mates?
Billy Winn?......eh.....very replaceable
I agree that Taylor and Hughes looked good(our 2 best DL, actually), though they are our DE's....not NT......(personally, I like putting Taylor back at NT)
Hmmm.....not sure Im there yet....AB showed a little flash in preseason, but Im not ready to anoint him yet....and Desmond really struggled and was one of our main issues with stopping the run.....yeah, he got a few sacks, but thats about it.....personally, Im hoping AB steps up and takes his job....coaches should know if this is likely or not.....
AB is more a prototype 4-3 end for sure, i'm very surprised how good he is playing 5 tech. Desmond is more the proto 5 tech than AB. Between them though I do think we're straight on the end....and I'll stay with that sentiment until Bosa declares
-
Your choice of the following, Mud:
Leave my Billy alone!
or
Don't you go disrespectin' my Billy!
I'm in tia's camp, Billy needs to slim back down a tad. I thought he was much more effective as a 290-ish DE for Horton than a 305-ish DE for Pet/ O'Neal. The added weight seemed to rob him of the angle-producing quicks his motor churned out two years ago.
Do agree with you on Phil tho. I love him head up on the Center.
Your choice of the following, Mud:
Leave my Billy alone!
or
Don't you go disrespectin' my Billy!
I like Billy and his motor.....and was a good find for where we picked him.....can leap an OL in a single bound, but.....
For some reason we have this idea engraved in stone that our NT has to be a 350lb, 2 gap, 0 tech only monster.
Pettine likes em fat.....wants 350 lbs in the middle and 300+ on the ends.......I love Pettine, but our D seems like a classic example of trying to fit the players to a system.....using a 4-3 roster, to play a 3-4 D......
Id prefer Sheard & the Bryant(s) at the ends, with Hughes/Winn/Taylor at inside DT's.......
I wish Pettine would listen to me....just once....
AB is more a prototype 4-3 end for sure, i'm very surprised how good he is playing 5 tech. Desmond is more the proto 5 tech than AB. Between them though I do think we're straight on the end....and I'll stay with that sentiment until Bosa declares
I will say you and I are on the same page with the 4-3 vs 3-4 talent thing.....our players dont really fit the scheme that well....but Im curious, because I know you've been having fits all year about how terrible our run D was.....yet, you're happy with Bryant in there???
Does everyone(and not you Clevefan, cause I know you're thinking it's more on the LB's) think it's all on NT only?......
So.....my question is IF our D line was so bad(and it was)......was it injury or talent?.....or both? Cause if it was injury, then it isn't the HUGE need everyone claims it is. We just get healthy and play with the guys we have.......
But if it's talent, then some of them have to go......right?.......so which ones should it be?....Rubin? Winn? Bryant? Robertson? Kruger?
With all that said, Im pretty much convinced most of our DL problems were injuries, combined with a new system, just creating a clusterfuk up front.....and the panic to draft "run stoppers" is just that......panic......
As an aside & according to PFF, our 4 worst run stoppers were Rubin, D. Bryant, Fua & Winn......so, wouldn't it make sense that these guys are the ones on the bubble????
And our #1 rated player against the run was?......Jabaal Sheard....(who's about to get cut loose)(maybe?)
-
Your choice of the following, Mud:
Leave my Billy alone!
or
Don't you go disrespectin' my Billy!
I like Billy and his motor.....and was a good find for where we picked him.....can leap an OL in a single bound, but.....
For some reason we have this idea engraved in stone that our NT has to be a 350lb, 2 gap, 0 tech only monster.
Pettine likes em fat.....wants 350 lbs in the middle and 300+ on the ends.......I love Pettine, but our D seems like a classic example of trying to fit the players to a system.....using a 4-3 roster, to play a 3-4 D......
Id prefer Sheard & the Bryant(s) at the ends, with Hughes/Winn/Taylor at inside DT's.......
I wish Pettine would listen to me....just once....
AB is more a prototype 4-3 end for sure, i'm very surprised how good he is playing 5 tech. Desmond is more the proto 5 tech than AB. Between them though I do think we're straight on the end....and I'll stay with that sentiment until Bosa declares
I will say you and I are on the same page with the 4-3 vs 3-4 talent thing.....our players dont really fit the scheme that well....but Im curious, because I know you've been having fits all year about how terrible our run D was.....yet, you're happy with Bryant in there???
Does everyone(and not you Clevefan, cause I know you're thinking it's more on the LB's) think it's all on NT only?......
So.....my question is IF our D line was so bad(and it was)......was it injury or talent?.....or both? Cause if it was injury, then it isn't the HUGE need everyone claims it is. We just get healthy and play with the guys we have.......
But if it's talent, then some of them have to go......right?.......so which ones should it be?....Rubin? Winn? Bryant? Robertson? Kruger?
With all that said, Im pretty much convinced most of our DL problems were injuries, combined with a new system, just creating a clusterfuk up front.....and the panic to draft "run stoppers" is just that......panic......
As an aside & according to PFF, our 4 worst run stoppers were Rubin, D. Bryant, Fua & Winn......so, wouldn't it make sense that these guys are the ones on the bubble????
And our #1 rated player against the run was?......Jabaal Sheard....(who's about to get cut loose)(maybe?)
I like Billy and his motor.....and was a good find for where we picked him.....can leap an OL in a single bound, but.....
Pettine likes em fat.....wants 350 lbs in the middle and 300+ on the ends.......I love Pettine, but our D seems like a classic example of trying to fit the players to a system.....using a 4-3 roster, to play a 3-4 D......
Id prefer Sheard & the Bryant(s) at the ends, with Hughes/Winn/Taylor at inside DT's.......
I wish Pettine would listen to me....just once....
I will say you and I are on the same page with the 4-3 vs 3-4 talent thing.....our players dont really fit the scheme that well....but Im curious, because I know you've been having fits all year about how terrible our run D was.....yet, you're happy with Bryant in there???
Does everyone(and not you Clevefan, cause I know you're thinking it's more on the LB's) think it's all on NT only?......
So.....my question is IF our D line was so bad(and it was)......was it injury or talent?.....or both? Cause if it was injury, then it isn't the HUGE need everyone claims it is. We just get healthy and play with the guys we have.......
But if it's talent, then some of them have to go......right?.......so which ones should it be?....Rubin? Winn? Bryant? Robertson? Kruger?
With all that said, Im pretty much convinced most of our DL problems were injuries, combined with a new system, just creating a clusterfuk up front.....and the panic to draft "run stoppers" is just that......panic......
As an aside & according to PFF, our 4 worst run stoppers were Rubin, D. Bryant, Fua & Winn......so, wouldn't it make sense that these guys are the ones on the bubble????
And our #1 rated player against the run was?......Jabaal Sheard....(who's about to get cut loose)(maybe?)
Good enough on Billy... apology accepted.
I'd been on the 4-3 bandwagon since Horton dragged us back to the 3-4. However, I gave up the cause last year under Pet. Truth is I look at what he does out of his base D and see a 4-3 with a LE (Krugs) in a two-point.
On run-stop... I think it's depth and talent level. There are two paths to upgrading depth:
- add bench talent to back up starters; and
- add starting talent to move former starter(s) to the bench creating.
Rx: Add quality depth... especially to the interior of the line.
On the other hand the latter is my preferred route for the D-line. Multiple injuries required multiple grouping changes in the rotation with all producing roughly the same, substandard results.
Rx: Add depth by upgrading starters.
Anyway... that's the way Dr. T sees it.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
I like Billy and his motor.....and was a good find for where we picked him.....can leap an OL in a single bound, but.....
Pettine likes em fat.....wants 350 lbs in the middle and 300+ on the ends.......I love Pettine, but our D seems like a classic example of trying to fit the players to a system.....using a 4-3 roster, to play a 3-4 D......
Id prefer Sheard & the Bryant(s) at the ends, with Hughes/Winn/Taylor at inside DT's.......
I wish Pettine would listen to me....just once....
I will say you and I are on the same page with the 4-3 vs 3-4 talent thing.....our players dont really fit the scheme that well....but Im curious, because I know you've been having fits all year about how terrible our run D was.....yet, you're happy with Bryant in there???
Does everyone(and not you Clevefan, cause I know you're thinking it's more on the LB's) think it's all on NT only?......
So.....my question is IF our D line was so bad(and it was)......was it injury or talent?.....or both? Cause if it was injury, then it isn't the HUGE need everyone claims it is. We just get healthy and play with the guys we have.......
But if it's talent, then some of them have to go......right?.......so which ones should it be?....Rubin? Winn? Bryant? Robertson? Kruger?
With all that said, Im pretty much convinced most of our DL problems were injuries, combined with a new system, just creating a clusterfuk up front.....and the panic to draft "run stoppers" is just that......panic......
As an aside & according to PFF, our 4 worst run stoppers were Rubin, D. Bryant, Fua & Winn......so, wouldn't it make sense that these guys are the ones on the bubble????
And our #1 rated player against the run was?......Jabaal Sheard....(who's about to get cut loose)(maybe?)
Good enough on Billy... apology accepted.
I'd been on the 4-3 bandwagon since Horton dragged us back to the 3-4. However, I gave up the cause last year under Pet. Truth is I look at what he does out of his base D and see a 4-3 with a LE (Krugs) in a two-point.
On run-stop... I think it's depth and talent level. There are two paths to upgrading depth:
- add bench talent to back up starters; and
- add starting talent to move former starter(s) to the bench creating.
Rx: Add quality depth... especially to the interior of the line.
On the other hand the latter is my preferred route for the D-line. Multiple injuries required multiple grouping changes in the rotation with all producing roughly the same, substandard results.
Rx: Add depth by upgrading starters.
Anyway... that's the way Dr. T sees it.
On the other hand the latter is my preferred route for the D-line. Multiple injuries required multiple grouping changes in the rotation with all producing roughly the same, substandard results.
Rx: Add depth by upgrading starters.Anyway... that's the way Dr. T sees it.
Which is fine with me......but that pushes the back ups off the roster and, at end, that means Billy(or one of the Bryants).....which takes me back to my original "but"....
So, if we chop an end....who?.....if not Billy....
-
Your choice of the following, Mud:
Leave my Billy alone!
or
Don't you go disrespectin' my Billy!
I like Billy and his motor.....and was a good find for where we picked him.....can leap an OL in a single bound, but.....
For some reason we have this idea engraved in stone that our NT has to be a 350lb, 2 gap, 0 tech only monster.
Pettine likes em fat.....wants 350 lbs in the middle and 300+ on the ends.......I love Pettine, but our D seems like a classic example of trying to fit the players to a system.....using a 4-3 roster, to play a 3-4 D......
Id prefer Sheard & the Bryant(s) at the ends, with Hughes/Winn/Taylor at inside DT's.......
I wish Pettine would listen to me....just once....
AB is more a prototype 4-3 end for sure, i'm very surprised how good he is playing 5 tech. Desmond is more the proto 5 tech than AB. Between them though I do think we're straight on the end....and I'll stay with that sentiment until Bosa declares
I will say you and I are on the same page with the 4-3 vs 3-4 talent thing.....our players dont really fit the scheme that well....but Im curious, because I know you've been having fits all year about how terrible our run D was.....yet, you're happy with Bryant in there???
Does everyone(and not you Clevefan, cause I know you're thinking it's more on the LB's) think it's all on NT only?......
So.....my question is IF our D line was so bad(and it was)......was it injury or talent?.....or both? Cause if it was injury, then it isn't the HUGE need everyone claims it is. We just get healthy and play with the guys we have.......
But if it's talent, then some of them have to go......right?.......so which ones should it be?....Rubin? Winn? Bryant? Robertson? Kruger?
With all that said, Im pretty much convinced most of our DL problems were injuries, combined with a new system, just creating a clusterfuk up front.....and the panic to draft "run stoppers" is just that......panic......
As an aside & according to PFF, our 4 worst run stoppers were Rubin, D. Bryant, Fua & Winn......so, wouldn't it make sense that these guys are the ones on the bubble????
And our #1 rated player against the run was?......Jabaal Sheard....(who's about to get cut loose)(maybe?)
I will say you and I are on the same page with the 4-3 vs 3-4 talent thing.....our players dont really fit the scheme that well....but Im curious, because I know you've been having fits all year about how terrible our run D was.....yet, you're happy with Bryant in there???
Which Bryant? For the most part though i'm happy with both of em. I thought at the beginning of the season I saw frankly our whole D line doing an adequate job of standing up their assignment and letting the LB'ers free range to the ball carrier, and promptly miss the tackle or fill the wrong gap. I'm amiable to chalking our poor run D up to scheme change. Even though I "thought" I was seeing a basic lack of fundamentals in run stopping and since I can't always see what's going on 10 yds downfield pre snap...i'll give em that Pettine is asking now different things from the front 7 than Horton was. If this run D is this bad again next year than we pretty much have to fire sale the LB'ing corp or just fucking run a 4-3 for fuck sake.
-
On the other hand the latter is my preferred route for the D-line. Multiple injuries required multiple grouping changes in the rotation with all producing roughly the same, substandard results.
Rx: Add depth by upgrading starters.Anyway... that's the way Dr. T sees it.
Which is fine with me......but that pushes the back ups off the roster and, at end, that means Billy(or one of the Bryants).....which takes me back to my original "but"....
So, if we chop an end....who?.....if not Billy....
Which is fine with me......but that pushes the back ups off the roster and, at end, that means Billy(or one of the Bryants).....which takes me back to my original "but"....
So, if we chop an end....who?.....if not Billy....
Don't make me warn you about Billy again...
End of 2103 I'd have said Dez... End of 2014 I'd say Armonty...
Now? Armonty. He only saw the field 5 times last year and he'll always be a tweener in Pet's system. Now he's a tweener with an injury history.
-
Which is fine with me......but that pushes the back ups off the roster and, at end, that means Billy(or one of the Bryants).....which takes me back to my original "but"....
So, if we chop an end....who?.....if not Billy....
Don't make me warn you about Billy again...
End of 2103 I'd have said Dez... End of 2014 I'd say Armonty...
Now? Armonty. He only saw the field 5 times last year and he'll always be a tweener in Pet's system. Now he's a tweener with an injury history.
Now? Armonty. He only saw the field 5 times last year and he'll always be a tweener in Pet's system. Now he's a tweener with an injury history.
Even though I think Kruger would be vastly better in a 4-3, he's damn good enough as a Jack 3-4 OLB'er that he's not the reason I'm clamoring for the 4-3...it's Armonty. Armonty is imo our most technically gifted edge rusher. He's long, rangy and "strong"..as evidenced that he can hang as a 3-4 5 tech. I just get movement when I think about our possible 4-3 DE rotation "if" Sheard stays....Kruger, Sheard, Armonty and Mingo. With other guys like Des and Winn able to fill spot duty at those end spots. Last year Kruger and Sheard spent "WAY WAY WAY" too much time on the field. I really think it diminished their productivity. But who else could we line up at those edges in the 3-4 system? Our rotation just seems like it would be utter boss in a 4-3. The only thing i'm not sure of is the LB'ers even though I suspect Robertson and Mingo would look "a lot" better in the 4-3. Not sure how Kirk or Dansby would do as the Mike. Dansby strikes me as a guy who really needs that 2nd ILB'er.
-
Now? Armonty. He only saw the field 5 times last year and he'll always be a tweener in Pet's system. Now he's a tweener with an injury history.
Even though I think Kruger would be vastly better in a 4-3, he's damn good enough as a Jack 3-4 OLB'er that he's not the reason I'm clamoring for the 4-3...it's Armonty. Armonty is imo our most technically gifted edge rusher. He's long, rangy and "strong"..as evidenced that he can hang as a 3-4 5 tech. I just get movement when I think about our possible 4-3 DE rotation "if" Sheard stays....Kruger, Sheard, Armonty and Mingo. With other guys like Des and Winn able to fill spot duty at those end spots. Last year Kruger and Sheard spent "WAY WAY WAY" too much time on the field. I really think it diminished their productivity. But who else could we line up at those edges in the 3-4 system? Our rotation just seems like it would be utter boss in a 4-3. The only thing i'm not sure of is the LB'ers even though I suspect Robertson and Mingo would look "a lot" better in the 4-3. Not sure how Kirk or Dansby would do as the Mike. Dansby strikes me as a guy who really needs that 2nd ILB'er.
Even though I think Kruger would be vastly better in a 4-3, he's damn good enough as a Jack 3-4 OLB'er that he's not the reason I'm clamoring for the 4-3...it's Armonty. Armonty is imo our most technically gifted edge rusher. He's long, rangy and "strong"..as evidenced that he can hang as a 3-4 5 tech. I just get movement when I think about our possible 4-3 DE rotation "if" Sheard stays....Kruger, Sheard, Armonty and Mingo. With other guys like Des and Winn able to fill spot duty at those end spots. Last year Kruger and Sheard spent "WAY WAY WAY" too much time on the field. I really think it diminished their productivity. But who else could we line up at those edges in the 3-4 system? Our rotation just seems like it would be utter boss in a 4-3. The only thing i'm not sure of is the LB'ers even though I suspect Robertson and Mingo would look "a lot" better in the 4-3. Not sure how Kirk or Dansby would do as the Mike. Dansby strikes me as a guy who really needs that 2nd ILB'er.
If you have any type of 4 down look, its going to be only under rare circumstances that you'd have Des or Billy on the outside. Only option for Winn would be to trim back down to 280. Des is and will always be that 3-5 gap penetrating big man in your base or subpackages. Having him as a rush end is taking away the advantage of having his quickness against interior lineman.
For the most part our base defense consists of having a 1i, a 3 tech, a 5 tech and Kruger in a 2 point. Honestly its like having 4 down but your 2nd DE is really standing up. I think we're too hung up on this board believing there exists massive differences between these two systems.
Craig would look a lot like what he does now, a Mike/Buck/Mack backer. Mingo isn't your classic "43" Will by any stretch and the danger in having him with his hand in the ground full time is being a liability against the run. Dansby would be just fine as well.
-
Even though I think Kruger would be vastly better in a 4-3, he's damn good enough as a Jack 3-4 OLB'er that he's not the reason I'm clamoring for the 4-3...it's Armonty. Armonty is imo our most technically gifted edge rusher. He's long, rangy and "strong"..as evidenced that he can hang as a 3-4 5 tech. I just get movement when I think about our possible 4-3 DE rotation "if" Sheard stays....Kruger, Sheard, Armonty and Mingo. With other guys like Des and Winn able to fill spot duty at those end spots. Last year Kruger and Sheard spent "WAY WAY WAY" too much time on the field. I really think it diminished their productivity. But who else could we line up at those edges in the 3-4 system? Our rotation just seems like it would be utter boss in a 4-3. The only thing i'm not sure of is the LB'ers even though I suspect Robertson and Mingo would look "a lot" better in the 4-3. Not sure how Kirk or Dansby would do as the Mike. Dansby strikes me as a guy who really needs that 2nd ILB'er.
If you have any type of 4 down look, its going to be only under rare circumstances that you'd have Des or Billy on the outside. Only option for Winn would be to trim back down to 280. Des is and will always be that 3-5 gap penetrating big man in your base or subpackages. Having him as a rush end is taking away the advantage of having his quickness against interior lineman.
For the most part our base defense consists of having a 1i, a 3 tech, a 5 tech and Kruger in a 2 point. Honestly its like having 4 down but your 2nd DE is really standing up. I think we're too hung up on this board believing there exists massive differences between these two systems.
Craig would look a lot like what he does now, a Mike/Buck/Mack backer. Mingo isn't your classic "43" Will by any stretch and the danger in having him with his hand in the ground full time is being a liability against the run. Dansby would be just fine as well.
If you have any type of 4 down look, its going to be only under rare circumstances that you'd have Des or Billy on the outside. Only option for Winn would be to trim back down to 280. Des is and will always be that 3-5 gap penetrating big man in your base or subpackages. Having him as a rush end is taking away the advantage of having his quickness against interior lineman.
For the most part our base defense consists of having a 1i, a 3 tech, a 5 tech and Kruger in a 2 point. Honestly its like having 4 down but your 2nd DE is really standing up. I think we're too hung up on this board believing there exists massive differences between these two systems.
Craig would look a lot like what he does now, a Mike/Buck/Mack backer. Mingo isn't your classic "43" Will by any stretch and the danger in having him with his hand in the ground full time is being a liability against the run. Dansby would be just fine as well.
Actually as I think I mentioned before the vast majority of our formations last year were two DL and Kruger/Sheard standing on the edges. I intensely dislike that package, not sure if it was done that way out of necessity due to injuries...but I hate it regardless. Having two jack OLB'ers on the field at the same time play after play is Retarded. If we stay in a 3-4 we absolutely have to have 3 down lineman on every play unless it's some long down situations. I prefer the way NE used Vrabel or how they used Ninkovich when they ran the 3-4. Even Belichich figured out that sometimes your roster is better suited to something else. I'm convinced it was Ninkovich that prompted Belichick to realize that it was probably best just to keep him down all the time and occasionally stand him up and drop him.
And I only mentioned Win and Des as possible DE's in a 4-3 as backups "at most". They're plenty capable of filling in at the DE spots, you just wouldn't want them there full time. The statement was made to showcase our D line depth.
I agree with you that Mingo would not do well full time with his hand in the ground, I've said repeatedly in numerous threads he's a situational 4-3 DE. I disagree though that he wouldn't make a fantastic 4-3 olb'er. He already has the cover stuff down, now he just needs to learn to stop the run better...which I think he would do much much much better not lined up at the line where an OL could get his hands on him more quickly. The more time you give him to react to the play "before" an OL is on him..the better. I also think he'd be unblockable blitzing from a couple yds deep.
-
If you have any type of 4 down look, its going to be only under rare circumstances that you'd have Des or Billy on the outside. Only option for Winn would be to trim back down to 280. Des is and will always be that 3-5 gap penetrating big man in your base or subpackages. Having him as a rush end is taking away the advantage of having his quickness against interior lineman.
For the most part our base defense consists of having a 1i, a 3 tech, a 5 tech and Kruger in a 2 point. Honestly its like having 4 down but your 2nd DE is really standing up. I think we're too hung up on this board believing there exists massive differences between these two systems.
Craig would look a lot like what he does now, a Mike/Buck/Mack backer. Mingo isn't your classic "43" Will by any stretch and the danger in having him with his hand in the ground full time is being a liability against the run. Dansby would be just fine as well.
Actually as I think I mentioned before the vast majority of our formations last year were two DL and Kruger/Sheard standing on the edges. I intensely dislike that package, not sure if it was done that way out of necessity due to injuries...but I hate it regardless. Having two jack OLB'ers on the field at the same time play after play is Retarded. If we stay in a 3-4 we absolutely have to have 3 down lineman on every play unless it's some long down situations. I prefer the way NE used Vrabel or how they used Ninkovich when they ran the 3-4. Even Belichich figured out that sometimes your roster is better suited to something else. I'm convinced it was Ninkovich that prompted Belichick to realize that it was probably best just to keep him down all the time and occasionally stand him up and drop him.
And I only mentioned Win and Des as possible DE's in a 4-3 as backups "at most". They're plenty capable of filling in at the DE spots, you just wouldn't want them there full time. The statement was made to showcase our D line depth.
I agree with you that Mingo would not do well full time with his hand in the ground, I've said repeatedly in numerous threads he's a situational 4-3 DE. I disagree though that he wouldn't make a fantastic 4-3 olb'er. He already has the cover stuff down, now he just needs to learn to stop the run better...which I think he would do much much much better not lined up at the line where an OL could get his hands on him more quickly. The more time you give him to react to the play "before" an OL is on him..the better. I also think he'd be unblockable blitzing from a couple yds deep.
Actually as I think I mentioned before the vast majority of our formations last year were two DL and Kruger/Sheard standing on the edges. I intensely dislike that package, not sure if it was done that way out of necessity due to injuries...but I hate it regardless. Having two jack OLB'ers on the field at the same time play after play is Retarded. If we stay in a 3-4 we absolutely have to have 3 down lineman on every play unless it's some long down situations. I prefer the way NE used Vrabel or how they used Ninkovich when they ran the 3-4. Even Belichich figured out that sometimes your roster is better suited to something else. I'm convinced it was Ninkovich that prompted Belichick to realize that it was probably best just to keep him down all the time and occasionally stand him up and drop him.
And I only mentioned Win and Des as possible DE's in a 4-3 as backups "at most". They're plenty capable of filling in at the DE spots, you just wouldn't want them there full time. The statement was made to showcase our D line depth.
I agree with you that Mingo would not do well full time with his hand in the ground, I've said repeatedly in numerous threads he's a situational 4-3 DE. I disagree though that he wouldn't make a fantastic 4-3 olb'er. He already has the cover stuff down, now he just needs to learn to stop the run better...which I think he would do much much much better not lined up at the line where an OL could get his hands on him more quickly. The more time you give him to react to the play "before" an OL is on him..the better. I also think he'd be unblockable blitzing from a couple yds deep.
Having two OLB's on the field in a 2 point is the whole premise of our 245 and 236 packages. If a team comes out in 11 personnel, we're going to come out in our nickel or dime 95% of the time.
I don't have the numbers in front of me, but in today's NFL I'd be willing to bet teams spend less than 35% of the time in their base defense. However getting back to the point of Sheard and Kruger sharing the field in that sub package. The opposing team can still call a run or check to a run. Sheard is our best DE/OLB at run stopping, at least... much superior to Mingo. Hense why he gets the nod over Kiki quite a bit. The problem with the Ninkovich comparison is that when Rob is in a 2 point, you know he's dropping into coverage. Makes it that much easier to identify which linebacker(s) are coming at you and what coverage shell you may be in. You could see in more obvious passing situations you'd get Mingo in there, with Krugs and occasionally Sheard aligned more towards the interior.
The only real issue having both Jabaal and Paul on the field simultaneously is that neither are natural nor fluid in dropping into coverage. So you essentially have the same player on each end. Its just no bueno when you don't have complimentary components.
As for Mingo and his position switch - yeah, he's done alright in coverage. Is he as fluid as Keuchly, Davis, Bowman, Wright, Levy etc etc? Nope. Right now, Kiki is primarily limited to the boundary and tracking backs. Give him increased responsibility and I think you'd see him have problems in coverage.
-
I was in the first row in Baltimore last season.. Winn looked like he was carrying at least 20 extra pounds.
Either Ngata or Fairley would be good use of FA money.. they're both available.
-
Didnt winn make that utterly stupidly ridiculously athletic play last year to block that kick?
-
Didnt winn make that utterly stupidly ridiculously athletic play last year to block that kick?
Didnt winn make that utterly stupidly ridiculously athletic play last year to block that kick?
Yes....he did.....leapt right over the OL.....
-
Didnt winn make that utterly stupidly ridiculously athletic play last year to block that kick?
Yes....he did.....leapt right over the OL.....
-
True, but it was also one, straight ahead play.
To my eye Winn showed more sustained energy and lateral movement at the lower weight.
True, but it was also one, straight ahead play.
To my eye Winn showed more sustained energy and lateral movement at the lower weight.
yeah but getting your feet up high enough to clear offensive lineman who are starting to come out of their stances...that has to translate into good lateral mobility. Just a stupid athletic move that surely has to translate.
-
Not sure how you got to that conclusion, but OK...
well think about the movement. If you're a big lumbering oaf who doesn't have good sideways mobility you're not gonna pull a gymnastics move and vault two other large men. He tucked his knees into his chest in midair to clear his feet over their shoulders. I dunno maybe i'm wrong. It just seems like if you're gonna make that athletic of a move, you've got some overall athleticism to you.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login