Enter your username and password below to sign in to your PewterReport account.
x close
Quote from: NotDeadYet on January 29, 2013, 09:17:11 AM Getting a stud DT with a good bull rush will FORCE offenses to double team him, leaving McCoy singled. That in turn allows our DE's to get more sacks off the edge. W/o that push up the middle, opposing QBs easily step up to escape our rushing DE's. When the QB can't step up into his pocket to escape our DE's, he's got a major problem... Getting a 'stud' CB only improves us marginally, as he can only cover ONE receiver. Getting a stud DT improves our whole defense. Would rather see us take CBs in the 2nd and/or 3rd, even the 4th.I don't disagree with the benefits of a good DTs, but I think you've got it all wrong in terms of what CBs can do. A "stud" CB allows you to move the coverages around to help weaker links (a freak like Revis, or once greats like Champ and Aso are even more valuable).I'll give you a good example, and it doesn't even include a "stud" CB. According to Football Outsiders the reason why Talib was an important piece for them was because even though he hasn't played all that well, they could stick him on the #2 WR and leave him without much help. That allowed them to move McCourty to S, and it allowed them to shade coverage to match up with #1s.
Getting a stud DT with a good bull rush will FORCE offenses to double team him, leaving McCoy singled. That in turn allows our DE's to get more sacks off the edge. W/o that push up the middle, opposing QBs easily step up to escape our rushing DE's. When the QB can't step up into his pocket to escape our DE's, he's got a major problem... Getting a 'stud' CB only improves us marginally, as he can only cover ONE receiver. Getting a stud DT improves our whole defense. Would rather see us take CBs in the 2nd and/or 3rd, even the 4th.
Quote from: Booker Reese on January 29, 2013, 10:39:05 AMQuote from: NotDeadYet on January 29, 2013, 09:17:11 AM Getting a stud DT with a good bull rush will FORCE offenses to double team him, leaving McCoy singled. That in turn allows our DE's to get more sacks off the edge. W/o that push up the middle, opposing QBs easily step up to escape our rushing DE's. When the QB can't step up into his pocket to escape our DE's, he's got a major problem... Getting a 'stud' CB only improves us marginally, as he can only cover ONE receiver. Getting a stud DT improves our whole defense. Would rather see us take CBs in the 2nd and/or 3rd, even the 4th.I don't disagree with the benefits of a good DTs, but I think you've got it all wrong in terms of what CBs can do. A "stud" CB allows you to move the coverages around to help weaker links (a freak like Revis, or once greats like Champ and Aso are even more valuable).I'll give you a good example, and it doesn't even include a "stud" CB. According to Football Outsiders the reason why Talib was an important piece for them was because even though he hasn't played all that well, they could stick him on the #2 WR and leave him without much help. That allowed them to move McCourty to S, and it allowed them to shade coverage to match up with #1s.BR,I agree that a CB like Revis can have an impact on how defense can be aligned. But, I don't see a Revis in this draft....Milner is good, but not Revis good. A DT like Jenkins will not only effect the passing game, but will have an even bigger impact on the running game and coaches always want to make a team one dimensional and if he can tie up multiple blockers and stone them at the LOS then it will free up the LBs much like Sapp used to do for Brooks and Co. Since it seems...from what I've seen...that there is not a great deal of difference in the CBs in this draft, I would take the space eater and dare the other team to run.
Quote from: watson on January 29, 2013, 12:11:31 PMQuote from: Booker Reese on January 29, 2013, 10:39:05 AMQuote from: NotDeadYet on January 29, 2013, 09:17:11 AM Getting a stud DT with a good bull rush will FORCE offenses to double team him, leaving McCoy singled. That in turn allows our DE's to get more sacks off the edge. W/o that push up the middle, opposing QBs easily step up to escape our rushing DE's. When the QB can't step up into his pocket to escape our DE's, he's got a major problem... Getting a 'stud' CB only improves us marginally, as he can only cover ONE receiver. Getting a stud DT improves our whole defense. Would rather see us take CBs in the 2nd and/or 3rd, even the 4th.I don't disagree with the benefits of a good DTs, but I think you've got it all wrong in terms of what CBs can do. A "stud" CB allows you to move the coverages around to help weaker links (a freak like Revis, or once greats like Champ and Aso are even more valuable).I'll give you a good example, and it doesn't even include a "stud" CB. According to Football Outsiders the reason why Talib was an important piece for them was because even though he hasn't played all that well, they could stick him on the #2 WR and leave him without much help. That allowed them to move McCourty to S, and it allowed them to shade coverage to match up with #1s.BR,I agree that a CB like Revis can have an impact on how defense can be aligned. But, I don't see a Revis in this draft....Milner is good, but not Revis good. A DT like Jenkins will not only effect the passing game, but will have an even bigger impact on the running game and coaches always want to make a team one dimensional and if he can tie up multiple blockers and stone them at the LOS then it will free up the LBs much like Sapp used to do for Brooks and Co. Since it seems...from what I've seen...that there is not a great deal of difference in the CBs in this draft, I would take the space eater and dare the other team to run. Whoa. You're talking about a Kiff led defense. This defense IS predicated around the run. Schiano has said that many times, and before he even started coaching here. That "bend, don't break" philosophy does not match up with what Schiano is trying to do. He's calling gameplans that are leaving undrafted corners on an island with elite WR's. To say that CB is not important in this system is plain out silly. We know we have a few guys on the DL that are good, if not possibly great (Clayborn,McCoy,Bennett), which is obviously much more invested into than the CB core.Drafting high or trading for a DL would be fruitless within this division, where QB's simply are throwing the ball out faster than the DL could possibly get to them. We can talk about disruption, but that's about it. Even probowl worthy McCoy had only 5 sacks on the season.
I think if Dee slides you take him as soon as they announce who pick 12 is. Is he a cat the Bucs should trade up for? I don't think he is. I will be curious to see Dee and Banks at the combine.
Quote from: Benchwarmer#1 on January 29, 2013, 12:44:46 PMQuote from: watson on January 29, 2013, 12:11:31 PMQuote from: Booker Reese on January 29, 2013, 10:39:05 AMQuote from: NotDeadYet on January 29, 2013, 09:17:11 AM Getting a stud DT with a good bull rush will FORCE offenses to double team him, leaving McCoy singled. That in turn allows our DE's to get more sacks off the edge. W/o that push up the middle, opposing QBs easily step up to escape our rushing DE's. When the QB can't step up into his pocket to escape our DE's, he's got a major problem... Getting a 'stud' CB only improves us marginally, as he can only cover ONE receiver. Getting a stud DT improves our whole defense. Would rather see us take CBs in the 2nd and/or 3rd, even the 4th.I don't disagree with the benefits of a good DTs, but I think you've got it all wrong in terms of what CBs can do. A "stud" CB allows you to move the coverages around to help weaker links (a freak like Revis, or once greats like Champ and Aso are even more valuable).I'll give you a good example, and it doesn't even include a "stud" CB. According to Football Outsiders the reason why Talib was an important piece for them was because even though he hasn't played all that well, they could stick him on the #2 WR and leave him without much help. That allowed them to move McCourty to S, and it allowed them to shade coverage to match up with #1s.BR,I agree that a CB like Revis can have an impact on how defense can be aligned. But, I don't see a Revis in this draft....Milner is good, but not Revis good. A DT like Jenkins will not only effect the passing game, but will have an even bigger impact on the running game and coaches always want to make a team one dimensional and if he can tie up multiple blockers and stone them at the LOS then it will free up the LBs much like Sapp used to do for Brooks and Co. Since it seems...from what I've seen...that there is not a great deal of difference in the CBs in this draft, I would take the space eater and dare the other team to run. Whoa. You're talking about a Kiff led defense. This defense IS predicated around the run. Schiano has said that many times, and before he even started coaching here. That "bend, don't break" philosophy does not match up with what Schiano is trying to do. He's calling gameplans that are leaving undrafted corners on an island with elite WR's. To say that CB is not important in this system is plain out silly. We know we have a few guys on the DL that are good, if not possibly great (Clayborn,McCoy,Bennett), which is obviously much more invested into than the CB core.Drafting high or trading for a DL would be fruitless within this division, where QB's simply are throwing the ball out faster than the DL could possibly get to them. We can talk about disruption, but that's about it. Even probowl worthy McCoy had only 5 sacks on the season.Yea its nice to fill up the DT need and all but no matter what they do they need to address the CB position more than anything. Hopefully they make some moves in FA and that makes the draft pick flexible to a DT or BPA.
I LOVE a good passrush, but we aren't there yet and we're not going to be anytime in the near future. Brees and Ryan have seen every passrush known to man, and Cam can escape using his physicality, rather than knowledge the others use. Not too many teams are going to sack QB's in this division. Overall knowledge, quickness, or good OL play will stop that rather quickly.
Actually the problem isnt that Freeman stinks. He is average. He puts up good numbers just often enough to make you think he is better than he is. Bad and great are convincing. But mediocre makes you live with the delusion for too many years. He is just good enough to waste our time and not good enough to get us where we want to go.
Quote from: Hate on January 29, 2013, 12:19:34 AMwill be curious to see if a meaningless win to end the season causes us to miss out on himA meaningless win against the Falcons? Really! I don't think so. Anyway what are we supposed to do, throw the game?
will be curious to see if a meaningless win to end the season causes us to miss out on him