PoeticG Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 Dez Bryant is a beast. Plus we'll have Armonty Bryant back from injury. I still want to keep Sheard though, he's a monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 For some reason we have this idea engraved in stone that our NT has to be a 350lb, 2 gap, 0 tech only monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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. The former is my preferred route for the O-line. With all the starters in place they rose as a unit to excel at their job. After only one went down and multiple replacements were tried, we found that our depth was so lacking that the unit failed to approach their previous performance level. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 9, 2015 Report Share Posted March 9, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted March 9, 2015 Report Share Posted March 9, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unsympathetic Posted March 9, 2015 Report Share Posted March 9, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 9, 2015 Report Share Posted March 9, 2015 Didnt winn make that utterly stupidly ridiculously athletic play last year to block that kick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 9, 2015 Report Share Posted March 9, 2015 Didnt winn make that utterly stupidly ridiculously athletic play last year to block that kick? Yes....he did.....leapt right over the OL..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Yes....he did.....leapt right over the OL..... Right...whatever weight he was at when he did that, keep him there. That was stupid athletic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 True, but it was also one, straight ahead play. To my eye Winn showed more sustained energy and lateral movement at the lower weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Not sure how you got to that conclusion, but OK... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 All that athletic prowess and size?.....we should make Billy Winn our new Fullback.....we could call him icebox....or the cooler..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 All that athletic prowess and size?.....we should make Billy Winn our new Fullback.....we could call him icebox....or the cooler..... better yet that 3 back set that SF used in goal line. They also brought in one of their DT's as an extra road grader behind the O line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Billy by the end of last year was beginning to settle into his new weight. Not only did he have to put on that much bulk in one off season - but you then have to adjust physically to being able to play with it. The body doesn't do that overnight nor through the early goings of a season. Perhaps Winn can be more effect this year at 300 bills? I'd like to think so, but his per snap effectiveness and his ability to play as a bigger strong side end with quicks was truly his greatest asset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren15 Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Sheard to the pats as per schefter....visiting tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns_Fucking_Rule Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 This is all kind of meh to me... Sheard is alright... undoubtedly the best strong side lb on the team last year, but he isn't really all that good... doesn't say much for our lb core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoeticG Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 We have to keep Sheard. He's a beast. I hope we match whatever they offer him and then some to keep him around. He's still really young and improving. Fuck the Patriots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 We have to keep Sheard. He's a beast. I hope we match whatever they offer him and then some to keep him around. He's still really young and improving. Fuck the Patriots. He is by no means irreplaceable.....if the Browns choose to replace him. Orakpo, Worilds could do the job....and maybe any number of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.