Why We Need a FS More Than Anything [Archive] - Dallas Cowboys Forum

PDA

View Full Version : Why We Need a FS More Than Anything

Teague31

01-28-2005, 08:42 PM

Rack Bauer

01-28-2005, 08:47 PM

We need a FS, but not more then we need a run stuffing DT and a pass rusher.

Chuck 54

01-29-2005, 09:13 AM

Yes we need a QB, and a WR, and couple of O-Lineman and a couple of D-Linman and some linebackers and some corners but IMO our biggest need is a true FS, something we have not had since Teague left. If Roy is our best player (and I believe he is) we have to get him in his natural position. That means SS, that means no more than 5 yds from the line of scrimmage on 90% of the snaps. That means turning him loose. That means getting a FS. It does not appear there any great ones in the draft. There has to be some real Free Safeties in FA- any thoughts???

GO PATS!!!!!!!!
The number 1 need is a CB....anyone who thinks we could play with Frazier or Hunter if we had a big DT or a better pass rush is dreaming....just watch the offseason....the most important move that will open up everything else is to either sign a FA CB to free up the draft or we'll draft a CB in round 1...guaranteed.

Our starting RCB is not one of the bums on our current team....bank it.

Yakuza Rich

01-29-2005, 09:17 AM

As I've shown in some of my stats posts before, the strongest correlation to winning is the ability to sack the QB. Being in the top 10 in major sack stats and being in the bottom 10 is on average a difference of 3-4 wins a season.

Obviously, having a good DT, CB, and FS are contributors to helping sack the QB, but from timing the Cowboys pass rush they were giving QB's all day to throw. Thus, I think pass rush is the number one priority.

Rich.....................

scottsp

01-29-2005, 09:20 AM

Yes we need a QB, and a WR, and couple of O-Lineman and a couple of D-Linman and some linebackers and some corners but IMO our biggest need is a true FS, something we have not had since Teague left. If Roy is our best player (and I believe he is) we have to get him in his natural position. That means SS, that means no more than 5 yds from the line of scrimmage on 90% of the snaps. That means turning him loose. That means getting a FS. It does not appear there any great ones in the draft. There has to be some real Free Safeties in FA- any thoughts???

GO PATS!!!!!!!!

Free safety is a need. It's just not not atop the list, nor should it be.

Defensive line. And again, defensive line.

Hollywood Henderson

01-29-2005, 09:26 AM

nathanlt

01-29-2005, 09:41 AM

Josh Bullocks is the only name you need to know for FS for Dallas.

Howboutdemcowboys31

01-29-2005, 10:28 AM

It's not likely but I would love to see Keith Davis get his fair shot. I think we should get a safety and corner in the free agency though and worry about the some of the other positions like Wr, Lb, Dt etc. in the draft because we dont really need to be spending any more first round picks on the secondary half our secondary is already first round picks

MichaelWinicki

01-29-2005, 10:36 AM

I tend to agree. I think the lack of a FS that could cover totally unhinged our pass defense.

TDHND

01-29-2005, 12:02 PM

I definately think our biggest needs are in the secondary,but we need a younger QB as well.

fortdick

01-29-2005, 12:27 PM

This is where we need to improve in order to win. Mybe take someone like Adam Terry in second round, or Alex Barron if he is still there in the first. Get well on D in FA. Improving the O Line gets JJ loose, and make a fair QB good.

dargonking999

01-29-2005, 01:29 PM

Yes we need a QB, and a WR, and couple of O-Lineman and a couple of D-Linman and some linebackers and some corners but IMO our biggest need is a true FS, something we have not had since Teague left. If Roy is our best player (and I believe he is) we have to get him in his natural position. That means SS, that means no more than 5 yds from the line of scrimmage on 90% of the snaps. That means turning him loose. That means getting a FS. It does not appear there any great ones in the draft. There has to be some real Free Safeties in FA- any thoughts???

GO PATS!!!!!!!!

i think FS ranks high, but first we want to have a good DL our else Roy would become ineffective, with ellis and glover playing like pro bolwers, we just need to soldify the other part of the line and then get a FS and move roy back to SS and then .... read my sig

ghettogandhi

01-29-2005, 01:56 PM

Champsheart

01-29-2005, 02:05 PM

We have many needs, and yes FS and CB rank high on the list. But, nothing would improve this team more than a dominating DT, and DE, to compliment Glover and Ellis, if we stay in the 4-3.

If we move to the 3-4 a dominant DT, and 2 hybrid pass rushing LBers.

The key is to dominate the line of scrimmage, stuff the run, and crush the QB. If we can do that we are well on our way.

It all starts up front.

Rack Bauer

01-29-2005, 02:12 PM

Number 1 need= playmaking linebackers
give me merriman and derrick johnson in the first roun
number 2 need= cornerback
I ll take Gary baxter/ fred smoot-both tackle very well also

number 3 need=quarterback
Pipe dream but either Hasselbeck(preferably) or Bledsoe would be an upgrade

number 4 need-=free safety/speedy wide receiver to open up the field- glenn when healthy is serviceable in this role- what a steal for a 6th round pick he was-
Although I do agree with you that we do need a real free safety to help in coverage and free up Roy- I do not believe it is the difference between a poor defense and an excellent one-those two lbs at the top would make us a very good d from day one

I ll take troy williamson from South Carolina in the first instead of one of those linebackers listed above-

number 5 need= dlineman (either end to get after qb or a big fat dt to stuff the run-both would be nice)
Ellis and GLover are Pro bowlers - carson played well last year so de is not a priority-could definitely use upgrade though

number 6= NFL style attacking d coordinator- that utilizes our players skills/strengths-

why would you have one of the lightest front sevens in the nfl rely on engage and shed instead of attack and fly to the ball is beyond me

Sorry, but the game is won in the trenches. Our DL is horrible. LB is a need, but not as bad as DL. We need two DL now, if we move to a 3-4 we'll still need to DL.

I wouldn't be upset with DJ and Merriman with our first two picks though. Draft the BPA. And Merriman also helps address the pass rush. I think DJ is more of a coverage LB. Didn't see him blitz a lot in college. He's got the size and speed to be a good pass rusher though.

But we need a run stuffer in the worst way. Especially if we move to a 3-4. FS is a need, but I'd put that 3rd on the list of defensive needs.

Overall Needs:

Pass rusher (a DE if we stay in the 4-3, an OLB if we move to a 3-4)

Run stuffing DT

RT

RG

FS

Bigger LBs

Vet CB (s).

ghettogandhi

01-29-2005, 03:12 PM

Did we watch the same team all year- our weaknessssssssss on defense was 1) corners couldnt cover anyone- PI and long bombs were the way we were diced up for the first 12 games of the year-
2) our linebackers made absolutely 0 plays- no big ints, no big sacks, terrible jog tackling in space, losing speed each year as they age, and terrible job shedding blockers and making plays.
3) WE HAVE TWO PRO BOWLERS ON THE D LINE- WITH CARSON PLAYING ADEQUATELY- cannot be priority need on d-

I ll take a stud on defense at any position and I believe linebacker is the most stacked in this draft

I do agree with you- we need more pressure on the qb- but we also need playmakers at the linebacker position- we currently dont have any playmakers among them-

we dont neccesarily need bigger linebackers- what we need are better linebackers- with more and more teams focusing on the pass- fast playmaking linebackers are at a premium- along with hybrid types- such as shawn merriman and joey porter, kendrell bell- they would be nice in a cowboy uniform

If we stay 4-3 a nice pass rushing end and a fat dt would be nice- looks like 3-4 is in the forecast for next year.

Sorry, but the game is won in the trenches. Our DL is horrible. LB is a need, but not as bad as DL. We need two DL now, if we move to a 3-4 we'll still need to DL.

I wouldn't be upset with DJ and Merriman with our first two picks though. Draft the BPA. And Merriman also helps address the pass rush. I think DJ is more of a coverage LB. Didn't see him blitz a lot in college. He's got the size and speed to be a good pass rusher though.

But we need a run stuffer in the worst way. Especially if we move to a 3-4. FS is a need, but I'd put that 3rd on the list of defensive needs.

Overall Needs:

Pass rusher (a DE if we stay in the 4-3, an OLB if we move to a 3-4)

Run stuffing DT

RT

RG

FS

Bigger LBs

Vet CB (s).

VACowboy

01-29-2005, 04:22 PM

Josh Bullocks is the only name you need to know for FS for Dallas.

He's the one I'd like to see in Dallas.

FuzzyLumpkins

01-29-2005, 04:31 PM

Did we watch the same team all year- our weaknessssssssss on defense was 1) corners couldnt cover anyone- PI and long bombs were the way we were diced up for the first 12 games of the year-
2) our linebackers made absolutely 0 plays- no big ints, no big sacks, terrible jog tackling in space, losing speed each year as they age, and terrible job shedding blockers and making plays.
3) WE HAVE TWO PRO BOWLERS ON THE D LINE- WITH CARSON PLAYING ADEQUATELY- cannot be priority need on d-

I ll take a stud on defense at any position and I believe linebacker is the most stacked in this draft

I do agree with you- we need more pressure on the qb- but we also need playmakers at the linebacker position- we currently dont have any playmakers among them-

we dont neccesarily need bigger linebackers- what we need are better linebackers- with more and more teams focusing on the pass- fast playmaking linebackers are at a premium- along with hybrid types- such as shawn merriman and joey porter, kendrell bell- they would be nice in a cowboy uniform

If we stay 4-3 a nice pass rushing end and a fat dt would be nice- looks like 3-4 is in the forecast for next year.

All corners are having problems because of the rule change. A pass rush is the only thing that will help them. It is no coincidence that the Pats are successful with scrubs at the CB position with their front 7.

FS is important because Roy would be closer to the line where he can blitz and make plays against the run. My hierarchy of needs are:

DT
FS and DE/OLB are tied in my book
RT
ILB
RG
WR

One thing to keep in mind is that our defense was pretty damn good in 03 and we lost what? Our FS and our NT. That is not a coincidence. Throw a pass rusher in their and the defense will be deadly.

Rack Bauer

01-29-2005, 07:16 PM

Did we watch the same team all year- our weaknessssssssss on defense was 1) corners couldnt cover anyone- PI and long bombs were the way we were diced up for the first 12 games of the year-

You obviously haven't watched a cowboys game in 5+ years. Our weakness on defense last year is the same weakness we've had since Haley left... we can't get to the QB consistently.

Yeah just FYI, ALL CORNERS will look bad if they don't get help from DL getting to the QB.

Our Weakness is on the DL. Anyone with half an ounce of football knowledge could see that. I'm not saying we don't need a FS, but we sure as hell don't need one more then we need help on the DL. Not even close.

scottsp

01-29-2005, 08:00 PM

You obviously haven't watched a cowboys game in 5+ years. Our weakness on defense last year is the same weakness we've had since Haley left... we can't get to the QB consistently.

Yeah just FYI, ALL CORNERS will look bad if they don't get help from DL getting to the QB.

Our Weakness is on the DL. Anyone with half an ounce of football knowledge could see that. I'm not saying we don't need a FS, but we sure as hell don't need one more then we need help on the DL. Not even close.

THANK YOU, SIR.

I know this: The New England Patriots got away with mixing and matching corners this year for a reason. The two starting corners now are not the same ones that started this time last season.

Also, notice what the Pats have gone after early in the draft? Three of the last four seasons, they went defensive line in round one.

Point being, NOTHING gets done until something is upgraded up front. Nothing. Glover is a nice piece to have, but he alone is not nearly enough. Ellis is a solid end, but he will never be an impact performer off the edge. But he, ideally, should be what Tony Tolbert was.

The top organizations know how vital the defensive front is. They know that despite how much the game has changed over the years, that is the one constant for as long as they play football - great defensive fronts dictate as much as any facet.

davidyee

01-29-2005, 08:15 PM

Yes FS is our biggest need, because the pass rush can & will be fixed easily...By demoting zimmy & his ultra wussified never pressure any QB's "occupy & enage" crap!

The move to the 3-4 does that...Parcells knows zimmy has failed and is taking over on D!

Yes a VET FS will be signed in FA and perhaps a rookie drafted as well because we also need another one to groom.

...we will see what the actual answer is for this defence. Given a possible move to the 3-4 there will be very little impact of Zimmer on this defence given his newness to this system.

I suspect that our defence will not improve and the 3-4 will be more problematic than we ever hoped for because it doesn't matter which system you use. Proper athletes is the most consistent answer.

I expect that Parcells is using the Senoir Bowl to determine if the 3-4 is a possible option with draft picks and availability in free agency. If he feels comfortable we will make the switch and never look back. If "availability does not meet need" then it won't happen.

Given that the entire Cowboy nation and media writers around the league and at the bowl are talking about the Cowboys impending move to the 3-4 the number one priority is the DT, with larger LBs next.

This is a move that will be about controlling the run and applying more pressure from different angles without having to sell a blitz on every play.

Be careful overstating how easy it is to fix a defence. There's a reason why we are fans and not on the sidelines.

FuzzyLumpkins

01-30-2005, 05:40 AM

this page was intentionally left blank

Sorry misread a post and reply made no sense.

ghettogandhi

01-30-2005, 11:23 AM

DONT WE HAVE TWO PRO BOWLERS ON OUR DLINE- Your analysis is elementary- and flawed

I ve already acknowledged that we need more pressure on the qb- for two years we have been talking about the same thing-but we also need better coverage and schemes- they go hand in hand and your shortsighted analysis is increasingly evident-

1) our cornerbacks were unable to stop the deep ball, the short ball or any other ball thrown- regardless of the drop 3-5-7 step drops it didnt matter- teams were throwing deep and we had weak corners going one on one and getting beat all year.-you ve obviously watched the games but your critical analysis is severely limited. how do you explain the inability to stop the 3 step drop- no pressure would get to the qb in a 3 step drop-

2) the dline was unable to get pressure- but you must ask why- could it be because our dline is responsible for the run first on each play- which means PRO BOWLERS IN GLOVER AND ELLIS MUST ENGAGE WITH THE OLINEMAN FIRST TO HAULT THE (so our dline with two pro bowlers is the weakness?and then go to the qb- our dline is small and therefore they are initially at a lost in this type of defense- same with our smallish linebackers- we should be playing an atacking style defense with our current personel. that is the d coordinators fault

YOUR INABILITY TO SEE THE BIG PICTURE AND ALL ITS INTER RELATED PARTS IS CRIPPLING YOUR ANALYSIS- hope this cleared up your deficiencies

You obviously haven't watched a cowboys game in 5+ years. Our weakness on defense last year is the same weakness we've had since Haley left... we can't get to the QB consistently.

Yeah just FYI, ALL CORNERS will look bad if they don't get help from DL getting to the QB.

Our Weakness is on the DL. Anyone with half an ounce of football knowledge could see that. I'm not saying we don't need a FS, but we sure as hell don't need one more then we need help on the DL. Not even close.

davidyee

01-30-2005, 02:10 PM

...why don't we try looking at this in another perspective?

DONT WE HAVE TWO PRO BOWLERS ON OUR DLINE- Your analysis is elementary- and flawed

I ve already acknowledged that we need more pressure on the qb- for two years we have been talking about the same thing-but we also need better coverage and schemes- they go hand in hand and your shortsighted analysis is increasingly evident-

I can agrees on the schemes and the type of defence being a portion of the problem. There's no argument here.

1) our cornerbacks were unable to stop the deep ball, the short ball or any other ball thrown- regardless of the drop 3-5-7 step drops it didnt matter- teams were throwing deep and we had weak corners going one on one and getting beat all year.-you ve obviously watched the games but your critical analysis is severely limited. how do you explain the inability to stop the 3 step drop- no pressure would get to the qb in a 3 step drop-

On 5 -7 step drops it seemed that this d-line had alot of problem establishing consistent penetration of the opposing line. But a three step drop would meant that a WR has no more than say five steps before the QB is ready to pass. Most WRs do not cover tens yards on such a pattern.

Therefore one would probably try to control the passes on the 3 step drop and negate any completions on a 5-7 step drop. That way an offence is forced to use multiple plays on an offensive series and increases their chances of failure and turning the ball over on downs by punting.

Finding a cornerback who is sound for the first 3-5 steps of a pattern is possibly easier than finding the next Deion Sanders who can cover for 10 to 15 seconds at a time. The leap for talent is alot shorter for guys like Mario Edwards and the like who may be sound technique and postion wise in the first seven yards.

It takes a more physically gifted individual to cover guys like Harrison and Ownes when they are 15 to 20 steps into their patterns and in open space instead of being hemmed up against the sideline or chucked off the line.

2) the dline was unable to get pressure- but you must ask why- could it be because our dline is responsible for the run first on each play- which means PRO BOWLERS IN GLOVER AND ELLIS MUST ENGAGE WITH THE OLINEMAN FIRST TO HAULT THE (so our dline with two pro bowlers is the weakness?and then go to the qb- our dline is small and therefore they are initially at a lost in this type of defense- same with our smallish linebackers- we should be playing an atacking style defense with our current personel. that is the d coordinators fault

YOUR INABILITY TO SEE THE BIG PICTURE AND ALL ITS INTER RELATED PARTS IS CRIPPLING YOUR ANALYSIS- hope this cleared up your deficiencies

I agree with your assessment which is why I am also excited and intrigued by the possible shift to the 3-4. I have reservations about it being successful right out of the gate.

But back to my first point. If the CBs are responsible for the coverage on the first 3 steps of a QB's drop then a 5-7 step drop should be the territory of a d- lineman. When the play calls for a 3-5 step drop our d-line needs to be in position to provide consistent pressure.

I would argue that the CB's job is the first 1-5 steps of a drop. The D-line gets in the act from 4 and higher number of steps.

Pundits say stop the run first. I don't have stats for you, but I'm willing to bet that this is sound philosophy. Based on that and a possible shift to the 3-4 I would shore up our d-line for the run, draft/sign LBs who can engage the run and beat lineman on the edge in the pass and draft CBs who can fundamentally cover WRs for a short period of space.

Given the price that is being paid for CBs and the new rules I would spend my hard earned dollars on the d-line because they are in on all the plays run or pass. Next would be the LBs because of the same critique in on both run and pass plays and lastly on Cb's who really only make their money when the ball is thrown their way.

btcutter

01-30-2005, 02:39 PM

Free safety is a need. It's just not not atop the list, nor should it be.

Defensive line. And again, defensive line.

Couldn't agree more. Games are won in the trenches. All great Defense have very good D lines. When you can stuff the RB to cause 2nd or 3rd and long, you get to tee off with pass rusher. If you can get to the QB within 3 sec, average DB will look great.

Rack Bauer

01-30-2005, 05:14 PM

DONT WE HAVE TWO PRO BOWLERS ON OUR DLINE- Your analysis is elementary- and flawed

No, we don't have two probowlers on our DL.

Talk about "elementary" and "Flawed". You can add "CLUELESS" to your post as well.

The game is win IN THE TRENCHES.

Wait, you obviously have problems reading, let me try that again...

THE GAME IS WON IN THE TRENCHES. WE NEED A BETTER DL A HELLUVA LOT MORE THEN WE NEED A FREE SAFETY.

Comprende?

Sarge

01-30-2005, 05:26 PM

THE GAME IS WON IN THE TRENCHES. WE NEED A BETTER DL A HELLUVA LOT MORE THEN WE NEED A FREE SAFETY.

Comprende?

I'm thinking this pretty much covers it.

Yep.

Cbz40

01-30-2005, 05:46 PM

...why don't we try looking at this in another perspective?

I can agrees on the schemes and the type of defence being a portion of the problem. There's no argument here.

On 5 -7 step drops it seemed that this d-line had alot of problem establishing consistent penetration of the opposing line. But a three step drop would meant that a WR has no more than say five steps before the QB is ready to pass. Most WRs do not cover tens yards on such a pattern.

Therefore one would probably try to control the passes on the 3 step drop and negate any completions on a 5-7 step drop. That way an offence is forced to use multiple plays on an offensive series and increases their chances of failure and turning the ball over on downs by punting.

Finding a cornerback who is sound for the first 3-5 steps of a pattern is possibly easier than finding the next Deion Sanders who can cover for 10 to 15 seconds at a time. The leap for talent is alot shorter for guys like Mario Edwards and the like who may be sound technique and postion wise in the first seven yards.

It takes a more physically gifted individual to cover guys like Harrison and Ownes when they are 15 to 20 steps into their patterns and in open space instead of being hemmed up against the sideline or chucked off the line.

I agree with your assessment which is why I am also excited and intrigued by the possible shift to the 3-4. I have reservations about it being successful right out of the gate.

But back to my first point. If the CBs are responsible for the coverage on the first 3 steps of a QB's drop then a 5-7 step drop should be the territory of a d- lineman. When the play calls for a 3-5 step drop our d-line needs to be in position to provide consistent pressure.

I would argue that the CB's job is the first 1-5 steps of a drop. The D-line gets in the act from 4 and higher number of steps.

Pundits say stop the run first. I don't have stats for you, but I'm willing to bet that this is sound philosophy. Based on that and a possible shift to the 3-4 I would shore up our d-line for the run, draft/sign LBs who can engage the run and beat lineman on the edge in the pass and draft CBs who can fundamentally cover WRs for a short period of space.

Given the price that is being paid for CBs and the new rules I would spend my hard earned dollars on the d-line because they are in on all the plays run or pass. Next would be the LBs because of the same critique in on both run and pass plays and lastly on Cb's who really only make their money when the ball is thrown their way.

Great Post.............

IndianaCowboyFan

01-30-2005, 05:53 PM

I agree with THE GAME IS WON IN THE TRENCHES. I am a Purdue alumni and major fan. Last year Purdue's RT went to the NFL his Junior year. He could not be replaced with anyone they had. Last year he handled every DE he played against. That was not the case this year. That difference was so visable. Line comes first and everything else is second.

ghettogandhi

01-30-2005, 07:14 PM

excellent analysis-

I agree with most- one thing though were did our d finish with a healthy woodson- number 1 in the league- the game is definitely made easier with a good front four - we do have two very good players there- we have 0 good players at lb and our secondary is weak-
New England and Philly both have great safeties - harrison and Dawkins- two of the best in the league-

all the parts of the d are interconnected- of course if you have a all world player like freeney or deion it can change the other teams plans- our linebackers made absolutely 0 plays last year-

!) speed used to be their strength but they are aging and slowing down-

!) they cant engage and fight off blockers to make plays and

!) they are small and kill us in short down yardage -

THe teams with the great defenses can do all three-

1 get pressure on qb- NE and Philly get pressure with zone blitzing - kearse gets some by himself this year- but the philosophy is still zone blitz

2) linebackers are smart, big and make plays in space

3) corner backs dont get beat deep- j

OUr team is lacking all three- is one more important than others- in the past I would agree with you that dline and corner were the most important but in todays pass happy league- your linebackers have to be great against the run and the pass- ours are neither-

FOR RACK- we must agree to disagree
YOU STILL DONT SEE THE INTERRELATED PARTS AND YOU WANT TO USE CLICHES LIKE THE GAME IS WON IN THE TRENCHES- BUT LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE and how each part effects the other. i

HOW MANY TIMES LAST YEAR DID THE OPPOSING QB THROW THE BALL UP FOR GRABS KNOWING OUR CB"S WOULD NOT make a play.

NEW ENGLAND, PITTSBURGH, PHILLY- ALL GET PRESSURE VIA THE ZONE BLITZ- HOW DO YOU ANSWER THAT?
For rack
we do agree on somethings

1) zimmer must go
2) need improvement among the front 7( I say linebacker is biggest weakness you say dline)
3) Derrick jOhnson/ shawn merriman would be nice
4) troy williamson would be nice also

Your passion is appreciated

...why don't we try looking at this in another perspective?

I can agrees on the schemes and the type of defence being a portion of the problem. There's no argument here.

On 5 -7 step drops it seemed that this d-line had alot of problem establishing consistent penetration of the opposing line. But a three step drop would meant that a WR has no more than say five steps before the QB is ready to pass. Most WRs do not cover tens yards on such a pattern.

Therefore one would probably try to control the passes on the 3 step drop and negate any completions on a 5-7 step drop. That way an offence is forced to use multiple plays on an offensive series and increases their chances of failure and turning the ball over on downs by punting.

Finding a cornerback who is sound for the first 3-5 steps of a pattern is possibly easier than finding the next Deion Sanders who can cover for 10 to 15 seconds at a time. The leap for talent is alot shorter for guys like Mario Edwards and the like who may be sound technique and postion wise in the first seven yards.

It takes a more physically gifted individual to cover guys like Harrison and Ownes when they are 15 to 20 steps into their patterns and in open space instead of being hemmed up against the sideline or chucked off the line.

I agree with your assessment which is why I am also excited and intrigued by the possible shift to the 3-4. I have reservations about it being successful right out of the gate.

But back to my first point. If the CBs are responsible for the coverage on the first 3 steps of a QB's drop then a 5-7 step drop should be the territory of a d- lineman. When the play calls for a 3-5 step drop our d-line needs to be in position to provide consistent pressure.

I would argue that the CB's job is the first 1-5 steps of a drop. The D-line gets in the act from 4 and higher number of steps.

Pundits say stop the run first. I don't have stats for you, but I'm willing to bet that this is sound philosophy. Based on that and a possible shift to the 3-4 I would shore up our d-line for the run, draft/sign LBs who can engage the run and beat lineman on the edge in the pass and draft CBs who can fundamentally cover WRs for a short period of space.

Given the price that is being paid for CBs and the new rules I would spend my hard earned dollars on the d-line because they are in on all the plays run or pass. Next would be the LBs because of the same critique in on both run and pass plays and lastly on Cb's who really only make their money when the ball is thrown their way.