Originally Posted by MeatRock:
It just that the corner position is so barren. Unless a huge trade happens our corner position looks fucked pre-draft. No depth or big talent.
I agree. Here's to hoping for a big trade. I think Veach will get it done. When? Shit, who knows. We might be waiting till week 6.
But i do have faith that he's looking and trying. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BleedingRed:
I'm trying to think of when............ Howard? When else?
Dee Ford has 10 sacks in 2016 while Hali was gimpy all season and Houston was on IR.
Houston had to play the highest snaps of his career IIRC in 2017 while Dee Ford was hurt, Tamba was basically done, and Frank Zombo started 9 games at DE.
Houston and Ford have basically NEVER been healthy at the same time. I can understand wondering why one of them wasn't kept but keeping both of them was out of the question, regardless of salary.
Once you add in the amount of money involved, getting rid of both of them makes a metric ton more sense than trying to count on them. [Reply]
All completely hypothetical, ideal situation stuff.
The new scheme isn't like the old one where a guy has to rely on simply himself to be a difference maker. Meaning, guys are going to (again hopefully) be put in situations where they are allowed to be schemed up to be successful.
Pattern matching on the back end with a hybrid front could/should make guys look a lot better than they did in the Sutton scheme.
And I'll counter that with: His scheme, regardless of his supposed ability to create better matchups, has yielded some ugly results.
Some Sutton-like results.
That tells me he still needs talent to work with. Scheme alone will not get you out of the bottom 5.
Spags is totally capable of leading a bottom 5 D. He's done it before.
And, no one wants to talk about the fact that all these players now have to learn a new scheme. That will come with a hefty share of mistakes on its own. Couple that with limited talent?
Eeeesh. It's not a great recipe for success. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Can you give me some details on this new system? I already asked this and no one answered.
Was he asked to play more zone vs man? Because they both ran a 3-4. Do you have some sort of evidence that his assignments were so drastically different?
Or are you just going, "Hey, he was on a different team, so it was totally different!"?
Not trying to defend Breeland, but I will be fair to him
The Packers and Redskins literally have different defensive playbooks. They have different playcalls, blitzes, and checks. For all we know, the Packers may run a more complex system than the Redskins did. There are ALOT of nuances in NFL defenses. It’s why I always expect players who we sign late in the offseason to start somewhat slowly. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
And I'll counter that with: His scheme, regardless of his supposed ability to create better matchups, has yielded some ugly results.
Some Sutton-like results.
That tells me he still needs talent to work with. Scheme alone will not get you out of the bottom 5.
Spags is totally capable of leading a bottom 5 D. He's done it before.
And, no one wants to talk about the fact that all these players now have to learn a new scheme. That will come with a hefty share of mistakes on its own. Couple that with limited talent?
Originally Posted by Best22:
For all we know, the Packers may run a more complex system than the Redskins did.
And for all we know, they don't.
Is cover 2, or press different from defense to defense?
The only way that excuse works is if they play a different style of coverage more frequently, which is why i keep asking those who drum up that excuse.
Man coverage is man coverage, no matter what the front 7 is doing or the color of your jersey.
Just like WR's. A slant is a slant. Are you good at it or not? [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
O is going GIF crazy today all of the sudden. Like a 13 year old after blowing his first wad. Just can’t get enough, more more more...
The big talent on this entire defense is lacking outside of Chris Jones. Scheme alone can't make up for lack of talent I agree. I hope a trade happens for a corner. Breeland is a good signing, even if its at the worst a wash with nelson. I think Breeland tracks the ball better. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
And for all we know, they don't.
Is cover 2, or press different from defense to defense?
The only way that excuse works is if they play a different style of coverage more frequently, which is why i keep asking those who drum up that excuse.
Man coverage is man coverage, no matter what the front 7 is doing or the color of your jersey.
Just like WR's. A slant is a slant. Are you good at it or not?
Like I said, I don’t know. Chemistry and in depth knowledge of the playbook and teammates tendencies are important, even for a DB on an island. NFL football is incredibly complex and varied
But the fact is, his stats (in a new defense recovering from a foot injury) compare favorably to Steven Nelson. I am stoked about this signing.
So he’s been either at worst, slightly inferior, or at best, a better player than Nelson [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
I'm not being negative. I am re-iterating what the stats tell us.
Meanwhile, you're trying to convince me that cheaper =better.
No, better = better.
I don't think cheaper is better. But we're moving to new scheme which is a very good thing. And so far we've replaced 2.5 players with 5 and we still have $10M to break even on those 3 cuts + a 2020 second rounder. Arguably we've saved even more by refusing to re-sign Bailey and Nelson.
Veach is sending a clear message that we're building through the draft while simultaneously trying to build a passable defense right away while we have a window. Not with Sutton's guys. With as many of Spags' guys as possible. He's going for quantity, not quality. And he's going for short-term contracts, not long-term. I know it's not sexy, but I love the approach. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I don't think cheaper is better. But we're moving to new scheme which is a very good thing. And so far we've replaced 2.5 players with 5 and we still have $10M to break even on those 3 cuts + a 2020 second rounder. Arguably we've saved even more by refusing to re-sign Bailey and Nelson.
Veach is sending a clear message that we're building through the draft while simultaneously trying to build a passable defense right away while we have a window. Not with Sutton's guys. With as many of Spags' guys as possible. He's going for quantity, not quality. And he's going for short-term contracts, not long-term. I know it's not sexy, but I love the approach.
No problem with the approach. Didn't like going Nuclear, would've preferred a smoother transition, but whatever, it's all good.
At some point though they have to start adding talent. Not replacement level guys, but actual difference making talent. Otherwise you'll be spinning your wheels doing this same dance next year.
If they're not going to spend it on talent to yield better results on the field, then who gives a fuck how much cap space they have?
I sure as fuck don't care about Clark's money, do you? I want a winner. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
For what reason? Just to get rid of him? It's not like he's really getting paid enough that cutting him would make a huge difference without cutting others to go with him.
They get rid of Ford, Houston, and Berry, all of which were needed. They can't just cut everybody.