Bob strum profiles - Michael Bennett

[reddyuta]

http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***...-i-see-in-michael-bennett-dt-ohio-state.html/

There is a lot to like and he will add quite a bit to a team’s defensive line. The questions are whether you want to pay the price to get him as he might be part of the answer, but not THE answer. You would need to use him properly and maybe limit his snaps to keep his energy high, but you can see that he would be a real nice fit with a team like the Cowboys who wish to have a 6-8 man rotation at all times. Under those circumstances, I would really value him. He may be somewhat redundant to the type of player Crawford is, but having them side by side on a 4-3 nickel rush is exciting

-----------
I agree with him.HE is not a dominant guy especially Vs the run but but i would definitely consider hmi @ 27 or in a trade down.

 

[unionjack8]

perfect fit imo for what this scheme needs inside, quick, plays in the backfield, penetrating, part of a rotation, seems ideal to me

 

[waving monkey]

his second round value makes him more interesting

 

[supercowboy8]

Might be a guy we have to trade up in the 2nd to get. I like him as a rotational 3 tech

 

[Idgit]

Or trade back in the first and still get. This is a player I think really makes sense for us.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Or trade back in the first and still get. This is a player I think really makes sense for us.

This is the move I'd like to make. Trade out of round 1, to the 33-38 range and take Bennett. Hopefully we can land a DE in free agency and resolve the RB situation

 

[supercowboy8]

I just don't know if I like the idea of taking a back up 3 tech DT. Crawford is out starter and I'm not saying Bennett isn't any good but he wouldn't start over crawford.

 

[supercowboy8]

I like the idea of trading back into the top of the 2nd and then trading up from 60 into the mid way of the 2nd.

If I can get a 3rd round pick in the trade back and only have to give up the late 3rd to move in to the 2nd .

 

[AsthmaField]

I like the idea of trading back into the top of the 2nd and then trading up from 60 into the mid way of the 2nd.

If I can get a 3rd round pick in the trade back and only have to give up the late 3rd to move in to the 2nd .

Not a bad idea at all.

I do like Bennett a lot in the Dallas defense and understand the reasoning behind not wanting to draft a 3-tech with Dallas' first pick. However, if you look at it as: Marinelli is going to rotate guys trying to get about 40 snaps per game each, then Bennett would make more sense.

Let's say that the opposing offense runs 75 plays and that Crawford get his 40 snaps. Bennett would then be in for the remaining 35 snaps. Remember though, Dallas would probably want both Bennett and Crawford rushing the QB when they are in their dime and nickle packages. That would mean that there would be more than 75 snaps to be split between the two. For example, if they were both in on 18 plays, then that is an additional 9 snaps added to their totals, say 7 for Bennett and 2 for Crawford. That would be 42 snaps for Crawford and 42 snaps for Bennett.

And that is if Marinelli doesn't use either player for any snaps at SDE, which he very well could for a few plays per game. In their goal line package Dallas just might want a player like Bennett or Crawford at the end position.

The key is that Crawford is going to rotate. That is a given. Marinelli insists on that happening so everyone on the DL can stay fresh. He doesn't really rotate LB's or DB's as much but his DL are going to have a rotation, period.

So then the question becomes, in the example above, do you want someone who is far below Crawford in ability to get a large chunk of playing time at the 3-tech spot? Since the 3-tech is the lynchpin of Marinelli's defense, do we really want a whole lot of snaps going to a guy who doesn't provide much pressure?

Or, would we like a player who is dynamic coming in to relieve Crawford? Would 42 snaps from a guy just as good as Crawford be worth it? Would having a dynamic player rushing from each DT spot on passing downs be worth it?

Speaking for myself, I think it would be. If the team thinks Bennett is a great player and the best available player, then I think they might feel that way too because the second team 3-tech is going to see the field a whole lot.

I don't think it is likely to happen but I can see a scenario where Dallas uses their first pick on another quick, penetrating DT.

 

[supercowboy8]

Not a bad idea at all.

I do like Bennett a lot in the Dallas defense and understand the reasoning behind not wanting to draft a 3-tech with Dallas' first pick. However, if you look at it as: Marinelli is going to rotate guys trying to get about 40 snaps per game each, then Bennett would make more sense.

Let's say that the opposing offense runs 75 plays and that Crawford get his 40 snaps. Bennett would then be in for the remaining 35 snaps. Remember though, Dallas would probably want both Bennett and Crawford rushing the QB when they are in their dime and nickle packages. That would mean that there would be more than 75 snaps to be split between the two. For example, if they were both in on 18 plays, then that is an additional 9 snaps added to their totals, say 7 for Bennett and 2 for Crawford. That would be 42 snaps for Crawford and 42 snaps for Bennett.

And that is if Marinelli doesn't use either player for any snaps at SDE, which he very well could for a few plays per game. In their goal line package Dallas just might want a player like Bennett or Crawford at the end position.

The key is that Crawford is going to rotate. That is a given. Marinelli insists on that happening so everyone on the DL can stay fresh. He doesn't really rotate LB's or DB's as much but his DL are going to have a rotation, period.

So then the question becomes, in the example above, do you want someone who is far below Crawford in ability to get a large chunk of playing time at the 3-tech spot? Since the 3-tech is the lynchpin of Marinelli's defense, do we really want a whole lot of snaps going to a guy who doesn't provide much pressure?

Or, would we like a player who is dynamic coming in to relieve Crawford? Would 42 snaps from a guy just as good as Crawford be worth it? Would having a dynamic player rushing from each DT spot on passing downs be worth it?

Speaking for myself, I think it would be. If the team thinks Bennett is a great player and the best available player, then I think they might feel that way too because the second team 3-tech is going to see the field a whole lot.

I don't think it is likely to happen but I can see a scenario where Dallas uses their first pick on another quick, penetrating DT.

They rotate players but not that often. Wouldn't you rather have the best starting 4 across the dline than a good back up DT that rotates.

When we have to put the best 4 on the line Bennett wouldn't be part of that. I just think you can get a player there that can help the defense more.

 

[xwalker]

They rotate players but not that often. Wouldn't you rather have the best starting 4 across the dline than a good back up DT that rotates.

When we have to put the best 4 on the line Bennett wouldn't be part of that. I just think you can get a player there that can help the defense more.

I believe that Marinelli basically wants primarily a 3 man rotation at DT where the top 3 get near equal snaps. Of the 3, two would be 3tech types and one would be a 1tech type. The 3tech pass rushing types will often play together in the Nickel.

 

[supercowboy8]

I believe that Marinelli basically wants primarily a 3 man rotation at DT where the top 3 get near equal snaps. Of the 3, two would be 3tech types and one would be a 1tech type. The 3tech pass rushing types will often play together in the Nickel.

I think he wants a good rotation but not having the 2 play just as much as the 1 guy.

 

[xwalker]

I think he wants a good rotation but not having the 2 play just as much as the 1 guy.

I believe if given the option, that Marinelli would spend more on the second 3tech type DT than on the starting 1tech type DT and that second 3tech type DT would get more snaps than the starting 1tech type DT.