Let's talk DL

Future · Aug 8, 2019

Tyrone Crawford isn't going anywhere this year. He's a captain - which means something to this staff - and is a better player than anyone wants to give him credit for around here. My guess on the 10, assuming no Gregory:

DE - Lawrence, Quinn, Armstrong, Taco
DT - Woods, Hill, Collins, Covington
Swing - Crawford, Hyder

Jelks and Jackson to PS.

Future · Aug 8, 2019

Qcard said:
I see Saquon Barkley going for 125 yards on this bunch....unless my LBers execute a coup and takeover this defense....

Well considering the fact that he didn't even come close to that last year against basically the same group, idk why that would be a concern.

Verdict · Aug 8, 2019

Sydla said:
Jackson has shown more than Taco has, which kinda stinks because with each passing week Taco smells more and more like a bust. I think this year, possibly this camp, is when we are going to find out that Taco probably was a wasted pick.

I was hoping he'd hit this camp running and yet it looks like the same old Taco.

I never liked the pick. We forced the pick and that’s what happens when you force a pick—a reach. He was way over drafted.

You can get a developmental DE anywhere in the draft.

I am sorry to see him bust though. If he had set the world on fire we could have saved Tank’s cap hit and picked up a 3rd round comp pick to boot.

We have a very good record of drafting players, especially the first round. But we have drafted a ton of DEs high and haven’t done too well in that category. Marinelli needs to stay away from the draft room and get zero input on drafting.

Kavika Pittman, Ebeneezer Ekuban, Greg Ellis (solid but underperformer for as high as he was picked) Almost Anthony Spencer, and now Taco. I am sure I am missing a few but we need to hire a consultant help us with finding DE talent.

Ware worked out, and so did Tank, but really Tank didn’t help us much because he was hurt or suspended for much of his first contract. You can pay a guy in free agency just like we did Tank.

Sydla · Aug 8, 2019

Crawford is very likely to make the team. But I think they have a guy in Hyder who can do what Crawford does for a fraction of the cost. I'd rather slide Hyder into Crawford's role and then make a spot for Jackson if he continues to thrive in camp.

If Jackson continues to shine in camp, he might be hard to stash on the PS.

Stash · Aug 8, 2019

Sydla said:
Crawford is very likely to make the team.

I don't see a valid reason why.

But I think they have a guy in Hyder who can do what Crawford does for a fraction of the cost. I'd rather slide Hyder into Crawford's role and then make a spot for Jackson if he continues to thrive in camp.

As would I. Hyder has actually had himself an 8-sack season in this league as a defensive end. Crawford hasn't had a single sack against a starting offensive tackle for over two years. Add in the "fraction of the cost" that you accurately pointed out, and it's the smart play, no matter how much anybody might "like" Crawford. There's being a team guy and then there's actually being a football player.

Some people want to say that Crawford is underappreciated. But then they fail to actually justify their position. It's nothing more than empty words.

If Jackson continues to shine in camp, he might be hard to stash on the PS.

The word is that Marinelli and the team were shocked when he was still available in round five and didn't have the intention to draft another defensive end but felt he was too good to pass up. And now that he's making plays and catching the owner's attention, do you really want to lose the guy on waivers to keep Crawford? And overpay him to worry about finding somewhere to play him? Really?

Sydla · Aug 8, 2019

stasheroo said:
I don't see a valid reason why.

As would I. Hyder has actually had himself an 8-sack season in this league as a defensive end. Crawford hasn't had a single sack against a starting offensive tackle for over two years. Add in the "fraction of the cost" that you accurately pointed out, and it's the smart play, no matter how much anybody might "like" Crawford. There's being a team guy and then there's actually being a football player.

Some people want to say that Crawford is underappreciated. But then they fail to actually justify their position. It's nothing more than empty words.

The word is that Marinelli and the team were shocked when he was still available in round five and didn't have the intention to draft another defensive end but felt he was too good to pass up. And now that he's making plays and catching the owner's attention, do you really want to lose the guy on waivers to keep Crawford? And overpay him to worry about finding somewhere to play him? Really?

Well you and I have a different definition of "valid" than Marinelli. LOL.

And I have been one that has backed the claim that Crawford was sufficient and that if you cut him, you'd have to eat the dead money and then spend a lot to replace him which would cost what it cost to just keep Crawford around. But they actually found Hyder, got him for fairly cheap, which makes cutting Crawford viable.

If Jackson continues to impress and they try to stash him and lose him, that's gonna suck.

Qcard · Aug 8, 2019

Future said:
Well considering the fact that he didn't even come close to that last year against basically the same group, idk why that would be a concern.

Yes he did come close.... you assume I meant rushing yards but I wrote yards.

Saquon Barkley had 140 yards 12/30
108 yards 9/16

He's going to gash this bunch be on the ground or via pass. Remember Saquon had 14 rec 80 yards Week 2

Future · Aug 8, 2019

Qcard said:
Yes he did come close.... you assume I meant rushing yards but I wrote yards.

Saquon Barkley had 140 yards 12/30
108 yards 9/16

He's going to gash this bunch be on the ground or via pass. Remember Saquon had 14 rec 80 yards Week

You were talking about rushing yards. There's no reason to mention his receiving yards in a discussion about the DL.

Saquon ran for like 30 yards week 2, and then both DLaw and Crawford sat week 17.

Stash · Aug 8, 2019

Sydla said:
Well you and I have a different definition of "valid" than Marinelli. LOL.

Many of my own definitions seem to greatly differ from Marinelli's. And I think there's one more step that needs to be taken with a coach that's already been so marginalized. It's unhealthy for an organization to list him as "defensive coordinator" simply out of respect and not merit any longer.

And I have been one that has backed the claim that Crawford was sufficient and that if you cut him, you'd have to eat the dead money and then spend a lot to replace him which would cost what it cost to just keep Crawford around. But they actually found Hyder, got him for fairly cheap, which makes cutting Crawford viable.

To say nothing of the fact that the contract tide has turned and cutting Crawford now nets you nearly $6 million in cap room this year and I believe over $8 million in 2020. It's not only "viable", it's good business.

If Jackson continues to impress and they try to stash him and lose him, that's gonna suck.

Moronic would be a better term. Lose young talent for an overpriced, no position, veteran on the downside of his career? One that even if you kept this year you would be certainly looking to cut in 2020?

That makes no sense.

AshyLarry06 · Aug 8, 2019

Sydla said:
We have some interesting options along the DL, so the camp battles are going to be fun.

I was thinking if I could build my DL, and I had 10 spots to fill, I would likely go:

DE - Lawrence, Quinn, Gregory, Armstrong, Jackson
DT - Woods, Hill, Collins, Covington
SWING - Hyder

Sorry Tyrone and Taco. Well I guess one can stick around until/if Gregory gets reinstated.

Crawford is going nowhere this year. He's a vital part of this DL, i dont get why he still gets hate. Taco on the other hand? He can **** off. Dude is a worthless crying primadonna.

Qcard · Aug 8, 2019

Future said:
You were talking about rushing yards. There's no reason to mention his receiving yards in a discussion about the DL.

Saquon ran for like 30 yards week 2, and then both DLaw and Crawford sat week 17.

Actually... writing allows people to actually know what you are thinking. Don't assume...I wrote yards...I know the DL is not only primarily for stopping the run but they have pass rush responsibility too.. like I wrote clearly yards no need for assumptions bruh.

Future · Aug 8, 2019

Qcard said:
Actually... writing allows people to actually know what you are thinking. Don't assume...I wrote yards...I know the DL is not only primarily for stopping the run but they have pass rush responsibility too.. like I wrote clearly yards no need for assumptions bruh.

Well then it was a dumb point.

AshyLarry06 · Aug 8, 2019

stasheroo said:
And you're not getting it from Crawford either, unless it's manufactured by the scheme.

The fact is this. At this point, given the depth on the defensive line, even the biggest Crawford fans can't find justification to keep him. Not at the risk of cutting young talent with potential, nor any role close to justify the cost to pay him.

He's zero option at defensive end to rush the passer. So what do you do? Pay $7 million to a first down guy there?

And he's third string at the 3-tech, behind Collins for sure, and likely Hill as well.

And oh by the way, the guy hasn't yet practiced a lick in camp.

I can only hope that he's cut as soon as he's deemed medically healthy.

It's time. There are no more excuses. And there's no room for an overpriced, smallest-of-roles player and longer.

I used to think that was a negative, but heres the thing: the entire DL operates under said "scheme", and they are going to run stunts regardless of who is playing, so whats the problem? If the stunts are what helps TC (and D-law, might i add) get home, why would we not do it? Its effective and offenses have a very tough time dealing with em. So again, whats the problem?

Stash · Aug 8, 2019

AshyLarry06 said:
I used to think that was a negative, but heres the thing: the entire DL operates under said "scheme", and they are going to run stunts regardless of who is playing, so whats the problem? If the stunts are what helps TC (and D-law, might i add) get home, why would we not do it? Its effective and offenses have a very tough time dealing with em. So again, whats the problem?

The "problem" comes from relying on them because your players lack the talent to do anything on their own. This isn't a call to abandon creativity and unpredictability, it's a warning not to have to rely on it entirely. If a player has to be schemed free, he's not very good in the first place. Most any player can get pressure or a sack if he's left unblocked. Does that really take skill?

And not only did Marinelli grow overly reliant on it, but he grew predictable as well. To the point where the Rams knew what he and his Rushmen were going to do "90% of the time". And stunts by their very nature jeopardize the soundness of your basi defense. They present a measure of risk. Compound that with predictable stunts and blitzes, and the opponent uses them against you. They know what you intend to do, and where you intend to go, and are only too happy to help you get there. And then run where you're not. To the tune of 273 yards rushing.

That's the problem.

AshyLarry06 · Aug 8, 2019

stasheroo said:
The "problem" comes from relying on them because your players lack the talent to do anything on their own. This isn't a call to abandon creativity and unpredictability, it's a warning not to have to rely on it entirely. If a player has to be schemed free, he's not very good in the first place. Most any player can get pressure or a sack if he's left unblocked. Does that really take skill?

And not only did Marinelli grow overly reliant on it, but he grew predictable as well. To the point where the Rams knew what he and his Rushmen were going to do "90% of the time". And stunts by their very nature jeopardize the soundness of your basi defense. They present a measure of risk. Compound that with predictable stunts and blitzes, and the opponent uses them against you. They know what you intend to do, and where you intend to go, and are only too happy to help you get there. And then run where you're not. To the tune of 273 yards rushing.

That's the problem.

Im not saying i disagree with you at all, but my point is that i don't see that changing without a change in DC. Im curious to see what Richard can do, but the fact of the matter is Rod still has control of the DL and everything they do.

quickccc · Aug 8, 2019

xwalker said:
Good list.

Gregory has not applied for reinstatement yet.

For the initial cuts I would leave him out.

That gives an extra spot for 1 of Crawford, Taco or Jelks.

If Gregory can return during the season it's normally easier to find roster spots because some players will be out injured at some point.

If everyone is healthy as of cut day then I would move on from Crawford. I would want to identify the 3rd option at 3-tech behind Collins and Hill before cutting Crawford.

What makes this DL unit decision even more complex is the pending suspension with Gregory, as we would still have to cut someone else in some position area, IF Randy is somehow granted a reduced amount of games (which could be 2 games,.. 6 games , ..8 games ... if not the entire season)
It's gonna be very interesting to see how this pans out come final cut/regular season time.

If Crawford is made a rotational role type,(assuming Quinn will be full time RDE starter.. and Collins the starting3 tech) .. he is making quite a bit for such a backup role. (7 million?)
Is this a case where he is so liked among coaches, management that they let his salary slide THIS year?
Considering he is such a Marinelli favorite, a vocal leader among his peers, and a production rotation role player, despite his salary and limitations, i'd be shocked if the Cowboys
cut Crawford. And no one would dare trade for that kind of salary for a role player.

Stash · Aug 8, 2019

AshyLarry06 said:
Im not saying i disagree with you at all, but my point is that i don't see that changing without a change in DC. Im curious to see what Richard can do, but the fact of the matter is Rod still has control of the DL and everything they do.

Which I'm not entirely sure is a good thing.

His coaching minimizes run defense for an "up the field" pass rushing priority that has never produced the expected pass rush numbers. If you're sacrificing size, strength, and run defense for your pass rush, there should be a better payoff. To date during his time in Dallas, those numbers have never been there.

kskboys · Aug 8, 2019

stasheroo said:
And you're not getting it from Crawford either, unless it's manufactured by the scheme.

The fact is this. At this point, given the depth on the defensive line, even the biggest Crawford fans can't find justification to keep him. Not at the risk of cutting young talent with potential, nor any role close to justify the cost to pay him.

He's zero option at defensive end to rush the passer. So what do you do? Pay $7 million to a first down guy there?

And he's third string at the 3-tech, behind Collins for sure, and likely Hill as well.

And oh by the way, the guy hasn't yet practiced a lick in camp.

I can only hope that he's cut as soon as he's deemed medically healthy.

It's time. There are no more excuses. And there's no room for an overpriced, smallest-of-roles player and longer.

Crawford is a leftover from the time we were filling the DT position w/ JAG's and castoffs. Compared to the other players, he looked really good, so we missed badly on his assessment. Which is really stupid, as he doesn't possess the skillset to be the player he is paid to be. We actually mistook effort effort for talent. Ick.

kskboys · Aug 8, 2019

stasheroo said:
Which I'm not entirely sure is a good thing.

His coaching minimizes run defense for an "up the field" pass rushing priority that has never produced the expected pass rush numbers. If you're sacrificing size, strength, and run defense for your pass rush, there should be a better payoff. To date during his time in Dallas, those numbers have never been there.

Once again, there's simply no tradeoff for pure talent.

quickccc · Aug 8, 2019

Sydla said:
Jackson has shown more than Taco has, which kinda stinks because with each passing week Taco smells more and more like a bust. I think this year, possibly this camp, is when we are going to find out that Taco probably was a wasted pick.

I was hoping he'd hit this camp running and yet it looks like the same old Taco.

If a late round rookie pick, is already outplaying a former No.1 pick who is already into his 3rd year here in camp, that would be all the more disappointing.
Frankly i'd like to see more than just one good practice from Taco.

I do also wonder about if Taco's guaranteed salary for 2019, would further influence the Cowboys to keep him around this year.
If that comes into play, could that mean a promising young player could get iced out off the roster in favor of salary cap politics ?

Let's talk DL

Future

Intramural Legend

Future

Intramural Legend

Verdict

Well-Known Member

Sydla

Well-Known Member

Stash

Sydla

Well-Known Member

Qcard

Well-Known Member

Future

Intramural Legend

Stash

AshyLarry06

Well-Known Member

Qcard

Well-Known Member

Future

Intramural Legend

AshyLarry06

Well-Known Member

Stash

AshyLarry06

Well-Known Member

quickccc

Well-Known Member

Stash

kskboys

Well-Known Member

kskboys

Well-Known Member

quickccc

Well-Known Member