mauling front 7 v. stellar secondary? - Dallas Cowboys Forum

lostinomiya · 03-17-2011

Sure this has been discussed before but with the continued interest in trading up for PP it is worth visiting again and I would appreciate your thoughts and what it might/should mean for our draft strategy.

I have read people like Vela prioritize a dominant front 7 (comparing it to the Steelers, Packers) that get to the QB quick that means you can have a good but not necessarily great secondary. He also makes the point that OL may be why the Packers won the SB and so Smith or Carimi may be a better option than PP.

Vela link - http://www.cowboysnation.com/2011/02...uper-bowl.html

However I also hear people say that DL/DT in 3/4 are not high impact enough to take high.

(I lean towards trading down in the draft and getting Carimi for our OL , maybe getting a DL in the second and focusing on DB after that - from what I have read this seems to be the best pay off on talent and need available - but this is just a synthesis of what I read others say)

So, what is more important for you in this pass happy league (if you have to choose):
1. a killer front 7 and ok secondary or
2. a high quality secondary (and so draft PP) and "good" front seven (and so not draft the likes of Cam Jordan in the first)?

Thx.

**Idgit** · 03-17-2011

You take the front 7 every time and don't look back.

lostinomiya · 03-17-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idgit

You take the front 7 every time and don't look back.

I tend to think so too - particularly from seeing aggressive front 7s play and how much they force the QB to move around.

And, as they say, even the best DB cannot cover all day so if the front 7 is not mauling the QB he will tend to find someone (?)

MarionBarberThe4th · 03-17-2011

All things being equal I take a Ware VS lets say a Revis.

In this draft though Peterson is a way better prospect than any of the ends. And even Fairley should he fall has his question marks about maturity and work ethic. Some scouts said he may have stepped up in class competition wise but his attitude is JUCO.

Was looking at some youtubes of Cam Jordan and I can see him getting a decent amount of sacks as a 5 technique. He played a lot of DT in the clips and he was a knack for splitting doubles and generally getting push in the pocket. Something that wont show up in the stat sheet cut would help Rat and Ware out a lot. Just to have a messy pocket for QB's. Ware can do his thing all game but you can also double and the QB can always step up as well. Cam Jordan isnt exactly my 1A to Peterson or Tyron but if hes the pick in a trade down then I think it would help the D all around.

Heyward IMO looks a lot like Spears. Strong and good runs stuffer but not smooth enough to rack up sacks. You can shake him once hes in the backfield. Good solid starter if hes the pick in R2.

SDogo · 03-17-2011

Well in light of the new rule changes a stellar secondary seems have taken the lead.

casmith07 · 03-17-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDogo

Well in light of the new rule changes a stellar secondary seems have taken the lead.

Pretty much.

respectdatstar · 03-17-2011

I've always thought that if you have a relentless pass-rush, the QB will be more likely to make mistakes. You could have the worst secondary in the league and still make plays if your front 7 is making the QB throw the ball away as he is being tackled.

While having said that, I still think that if Peterson is within reach, we do everything we can to make him a Cowboy.

Deep_Freeze · 03-17-2011

I would say balance would be the best thing. Truly great Ds have both because you can make a mistake on either one. If the rush can't get there on a certain play, your screwed without balance.

Give me Haley and Deion.

TheCount · 03-17-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idgit

You take the front 7 every time and don't look back.

You are correct, Sir!

The front 7 will end up making your secondary look better anyway.

johnnyd · 03-17-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDogo

Well in light of the new rule changes a stellar secondary seems have taken the lead.

very much true, But the same could be said about the secondary . Your basically not allowed to touch a receiver anymore great coverage becomes a PI espcially late in the 4th quarter when ref's are told to make the ending exciting for ratings

Sam I Am · 03-17-2011

I take front 7 twice and 10 times on Sundays, Mondays, and Thursdays.

Even with rule changes. Whoever controls the line of scrimmage controls the game. (both offense and defensive wise) Your front seven on defense and your front five on offense.

baj1dallas · 03-17-2011

Green Bay has a pretty darn good secondary. More HoFers back there, than there is on their front anyways.

**BrAinPaiNt** · 03-17-2011

Well in an ideal world you can be black and white in your philosophy of which is more important to you and the team.

However in the draft you have to look at what is available to you and which is better value to your spot.

The draft sometimes will also play into it by having a decent class of a specific position vs a draft that will have a weak class of a position.

So many variables to consider that it is hard to stay in a black and white philosophy and stick with it every time.

I think you have to be somewhat fluid in how you approach it. Sometimes you have to let the draft come to you, sometimes you have to move around.

I just know I don't like a pure black and white philosophy on positions because that has landed us in trouble in the past for reaching for a specific position of need.

The Scouts, The coaches and Jerry do not need to try and get too cute during this draft.

No trading down a hundred times because you just keep missing a player you like. No trading up too far and giving too much away for a player you are infatuated with. Sure that might be a fine balance of getting what you want or missing...but they need to get this draft right and not try to get too cute.

AsthmaField · 03-17-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrAinPaiNt

Well in an ideal world you can be black and white in your philosophy of which is more important to you and the team.

However in the draft you have to look at what is available to you and which is better value to your spot.

The draft sometimes will also play into it by having a decent class of a specific position vs a draft that will have a weak class of a position.

So many variables to consider that it is hard to stay in a black and white philosophy and stick with it every time.

I think you have to be somewhat fluid in how you approach it. Sometimes you have to let the draft come to you, sometimes you have to move around.

I just know I don't like a pure black and white philosophy on positions because that has landed us in trouble in the past for reaching for a specific position of need.

The Scouts, The coaches and Jerry do not need to try and get too cute during this draft.

[View Full Quote]

That's true BP, and I hope to God Jerry doesn't try to trade back 5 times in round 1.

As far as secondary vs. front seven... I'd have to say the front 7 is the more important of the two. And that is coming from a guy who played SS.

Get the disruption and pass rush of a dominant front 7 and the same secondary guys we had last year would look much better.

But as you say... it isn't simply in black and white. Peterson is such a terrific prospect that if you have a chance to take him, I think you almost have to.

However, if the Cowboys have Fairley and Peterson ranked about the same and they both somehow fell to pick #9... then I'd go with Fairley. If Peterson is ranked much higher by Dallas than Fairley is, then go with the DB.

**ABQCOWBOY** · 03-17-2011

Front Seven but even before that, OL.