Go Back   Dallas Cowboys Forum - CowboysZone.com > Other Forums > Archive Forums > 2004 Archives

Cowboys Chat: 0 user(s) online


Home  |  Fan Zone  |  News Zone  |  Draft Zone  |  Off-topic Zone  |  Forum Rules  |  Chat  |  ** Change Graphics **

 
 
Display Modes Thread Tools
Old 06-07-2005   #46
jterrell
Penguinite
 
jterrell's Avatar
Years Donated
2004, 2005, 2006
 
Joined:
Apr 2004
Posts:
16,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Are you saying Shanle will have more impact than Glover?

Is Fowler better than Ellis?

Is James better than Ferguson?

This move is being made out of embarrassment and pride, it is stupid to sit a pro bowler to play a scrub.

We have enough quality depth to rotate in a 4-3, I'd still much rather have Canty coming off the bench than see a couple of UDFA at LB.
Shanle is better than Singleton. At least by last season's play.
When we won SBs here in the 90's we rotated linemen. It didn't mean Larry Brown was a better player than Leon Lett. It meant Leon rotating made Leon a better player.

Glover is a very small DT. He has a speed and quickness advantage that is removed if he is tired.

Shanle and Fowler may very well be good players. Did Everson Walls suck just because he wasn't drafted high? LBs do not have to be high picks.
But I still don't know what any team saw Thursday night that would have made them comfortable with waiting a round or two for the offensive lineman they wanted. ---Todd McShay
We just converted half our LB to DL. We have a 30m starting DL, it better be pretty friggin good.
jterrell is offline  
Old 06-07-2005   #47
blindzebra
Senior Member
 
blindzebra's Avatar
 
Joined:
Apr 2004
Posts:
8,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jterrell
Shanle is better than Singleton. At least by last season's play.
When we won SBs here in the 90's we rotated linemen. It didn't mean Larry Brown was a better player than Leon Lett. It meant Leon rotating made Leon a better player.

Glover is a very small DT. He has a speed and quickness advantage that is removed if he is tired.

Shanle and Fowler may very well be good players. Did Everson Walls suck just because he wasn't drafted high? LBs do not have to be high picks.
And we have the depth to rotate those lineman again, in a 4-3.

The 3-4 is all about Parcells being embarrassed last year.

Shanle did not play until Singleton got hurt.
blindzebra is online now  
Old 06-07-2005   #48
jterrell
Penguinite
 
jterrell's Avatar
Years Donated
2004, 2005, 2006
 
Joined:
Apr 2004
Posts:
16,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
And we have the depth to rotate those lineman again, in a 4-3.

The 3-4 is all about Parcells being embarrassed last year.

Shanle did not play until Singleton got hurt.
We have what 6 good DL? Thats not enough to rotate in a 4-3. We used 8/9 under Jimmy.

And who cares when Shanle got to play? I guess I missed your point there. A lot of very good players didn't start until someone else got hurt. Not saying Shanle is very good but he did outplay Singleton in his limited exposure. He was not some unknown loser. He was a very good backer in college.

And you can pretend to read minds and tell us why we changed defenses but its just your opinion, nothing more. The stated reason is BP wanted us to get bigger and be able to apply more pressure.

This team is built to run a 3-4. We have been adding parts toward that cause for 2 years and this draft cemented it. Canty, Ratliff, Ferguson, Burnett, James, Thornton, Shanle are all ideal 3-4 guys. Ellis is essentially a prototype 3-4 DE even if folks don't realize that yet, they will soon enough. He's a run first 280 pound effort DE that has been handling double teams for years.

But I still don't know what any team saw Thursday night that would have made them comfortable with waiting a round or two for the offensive lineman they wanted. ---Todd McShay
We just converted half our LB to DL. We have a 30m starting DL, it better be pretty friggin good.
jterrell is offline  
Old 06-07-2005   #49
Alexander
What's it going to be then, eh?
 
Alexander's Avatar
 
Joined:
Feb 2005
Posts:
18,538
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jterrell
That is simply not true because of the 3 and 4 WR sets.
You are acting as if the Ravens will run the 46 exclusively and that all opposing teams are capable of running 3 and 4 WR sets to exploit. That is a negative in both cases.

If you acquire the correct personnel, you can run that defense against anyone. It can be beaten if you do not have corners who can cover man to man. But so can every defense if you don't have the vital cogs to make it work, just as you need a nose tackle who can occupy blockers in the 3-4.

Quote:
The 46 is a run stuffing, pressure defense. It was killed by the fast release WCO. And it is very dead in all but run situations.
The Bears won with that defense in the prime days of the Niner WCO. So it is not like that style of offense brought on it's extinction. Ryan's Eagle defenses won frequently with it. Houston ran a moderately successful variant.

It's goal is not to exclusively stuff the run as general principle. It is to rush the passer and as you alluded to, create fear of passing the ball in addition to running it.

The key is personnel and creating mismatches through disguising where the blitz is coming from. But it is far from a dead scheme. If what you are saying is totally correct, you appear to know alot more about the NFL than Rex Ryan and should apply for his job in Baltimore.
Alexander is offline  

 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2004-2012 CowboysZone.com