Defensive front, versus, Defensive backfield

[Whirlwin]

Can't agree. Basically, if your front is not disruptive, you need like 6 players to cover at a very high level for 6-7 seconds. Can you imagine even trying to find that many players who can mirror? Can't be done.

I was thinking of my least favorite quarterback, Patrick Mahomes, I don’t care how good your front is. He just finds a way to sneak the ball by.
Can’t stand him lol

 

[Whirlwin]

Can't agree. Basically, if your front is not disruptive, you need like 6 players to cover at a very high level for 6-7 seconds. Can you imagine even trying to find that many players who can mirror? Can't be done.

Again, can you imagine someone like on our team, BROWN or MINGO
Being covered by a linebacker,
And the quarterback, having enough time to find them

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Can't agree. Basically, if your front is not disruptive, you need like 6 players to cover at a very high level for 6-7 seconds. Can you imagine even trying to find that many players who can mirror? Can't be done.

Well... there's the other side of the coin: if secondary is trash, YOU will have an ALL-PRO-type game, as we saw many times last season.

BTW........I know the thread is more about defensive front vs secondary but it's interesting how year in and year out top pass rushers are on losing teams. Their individual stats (sacks) rarely translate to team wins/playoff.

Old poster Mountaineer (we all know him) once pointed this out. Didn't give it much thought at the time, but he was right.

 

[Whirlwin]

Well... there's the other side of the coin: if secondary is trash, YOU will get an ALL-PRO-type game, as we saw many times last season.

BTW........I know the thread is more about defensive front vs secondary but it's interesting how year in and year out top pass rushers are on losing teams. Their individual stats (sacks) rarely translate to team wins/playoff.

Old poster Mountaineer (we all know him) once pointed this out. Didn't give it much thought at the time, but he was right.

I think old school football, was definitely the pass rush in my opinion
I think with the new game, modern football
It’s more about the defensive backfield
They changed the rules, which changes the format

 

[RandyOh]

You win in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Always has been this way and always will. Doesn't mean you dont need that play makers, it just means the playmakers get used to there full capabilities. A ball hawk safety aint snagging INTs if they have to help cover for 7 seconds because the Dline has been stonewalled.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I think old school football, was definitely the past rush in my opinion
I think with the new game, modern football
It’s more about the defensive backfield
They changed the rules, which changes the format

Agree 100% .........

 

[Whirlwin]

You win in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Always has been this way and always will. Doesn't mean you dont need that play makers, it just means the playmakers get used to there full capabilities. A ball hawk safety aint snagging INTs if they have to help cover for 7 seconds because the Dline has been stonewalled.

That’s old school football, my friend
I’m not sure it’s that way anymore
But I would like it to be, you win in the trenches, can you protect the quarterback, can you get after the quarterback?

 

[RandyOh]

That’s old school football, my friend
I’m not sure it’s that way anymore
But I would like it to be, you win in the trenches, can you protect the quarterback, can you get after the quarterback?

modern strategies help counter this sure. Alot more stunts and twists and blitzing with different positional groups to help hide a Dline that cant consistently get pressure. To me i still think you need to build a foundation up front to win. Now more then ever we are seeing Guards and Centers going in the first round as well as the price to keep good guards and centers continue to go up. Used to seem like interior line players are the guys you target on day 2 and could keep for cheap. top guards almost getting paid as much as the top offensive tackles. Same for DTs vs edges. Collapsing the pocket seems to hold alot more value now a days then just throwing some space eaters in the middle and having 2 good ends screaming off the edge.

 

[xwalker]

It’s been a debate for a long time.
Which group helps the other, more often
Getting after the quarterback, so the defensive backfield doesn’t have to cover as long.
Great coverage, allowing the defensive front to get to the quarterback.

It’s like having three excellent receivers on your team, on the offensive side of the ball
Your two best receivers usually get the two best corners.

And if you have an excellent, third wide receiver, he’s usually against a nickel, corner or a linebacker

So if your defensive front can get to the quarterback, quick enough,

He doesn’t have time to go through his possession,

Personally, I prefer a superior pass, rush, over backfield coverage

Obviously, it would be nice to have both

Obviously it takes both; however, I've seen even the very best pass rushers go through lulls in production.
- I never saw Deion in his prime go though a lull...

Side Note: I think Parker wants to generate pass rush from multiple players and not just depend on Edge rushers.

 

[kskboys]

Well... there's the other side of the coin: if secondary is trash, YOU will have an ALL-PRO-type game, as we saw many times last season.

BTW........I know the thread is more about defensive front vs secondary but it's interesting how year in and year out top pass rushers are on losing teams. Their individual stats (sacks) rarely translate to team wins/playoff.

Old poster Mountaineer (we all know him) once pointed this out. Didn't give it much thought at the time, but he was right.

That's because DTs are much more important. Edge rushers are irrelevant w/o upfront disruption. The QB can simply step up in the pocket.

 

[kskboys]

That’s old school football, my friend
I’m not sure it’s that way anymore
But I would like it to be, you win in the trenches, can you protect the quarterback, can you get after the quarterback?

Disagree. The teams who are strong upfront end up in the super bowl.

 

[kskboys]

I think old school football, was definitely the pass rush in my opinion
I think with the new game, modern football
It’s more about the defensive backfield
They changed the rules, which changes the format

Opposite. The pass rush is more important than ever.

 

[nalam]

The year the Giants won the superbowl with that pass rush no one thought very highly of their secondary. Then the pass rushers got healthy and the secondary was suddenly very effective.

My theory is coverage can only last so long. Its a nearly impossible task. A strong pass rush minimizes the amount of time coverage is needed and creates chaos in general.

I was thinking the same thing, the 2 times Eli led GInts won over Pats and Brady is because of their pass rush.

As long as pressure keeps coming even Brady becomes Human.

 

[gtb1943]

Its clear you need both a pass rush and a very good secondary.

Outside of a few times when the DL overwhelmed a poor O line like happened recently with Mahomes, you are not going to get enough pressure on a QB to do the job all with pressure.

Because against good O lines, you are only going to get real good pressure maybe a third of the time.

The rest of the time the secondary has to be able to cover long enough.

 

[kskboys]

I was thinking of my least favorite quarterback, Patrick Mahomes, I don’t care how good your front is. He just finds a way to sneak the ball by.
Can’t stand him lol

Until he played vs the Eagles pass rush in the super bowl and was terrible. They were in his face the entire game.

 

[kskboys]

The year the Giants won the superbowl with that pass rush no one thought very highly of their secondary. Then the pass rushers got healthy and the secondary was suddenly very effective.

My theory is coverage can only last so long. Its a nearly impossible task. A strong pass rush minimizes the amount of time coverage is needed and creates chaos in general.

Even worse, they were playing guys off the street in their secondary.

 

[kskboys]

Its clear you need both a pass rush and a very good secondary.

Outside of a few times when the DL overwhelmed a poor O line like happened recently with Mahomes, you are not going to get enough pressure on a QB to do the job all with pressure.

Because against good O lines, you are only going to get real good pressure maybe a third of the time.

The rest of the time the secondary has to be able to cover long enough.

Absolutely. Neither is anything w/o the other.

 

[Whirlwin]

Disagree. The teams who are strong upfront end up in the super bowl.

You win in the pits
Defensive tackle, defensive tackle one more time defensive tackle, quarterback is not allowed to step up, but that’s a different situation

 

[Whirlwin]

Opposite. The pass rush is more important than ever.

And don’t ever let anybody tell you different,

 

[shabazz]

We are billion year-old carbon

A billion years to develop a product like us?

Inefficient business model......however Janet Reno came out pretty choice.