Cowboys D-line is similar to the 2013 Seattle D-line

[cern]

if we can make the comparison after game 16, fine. until then, just speculation.

 

[millennial_legend]

You can talk to Jstopper about how our secondary compares to the legion of boom. I have no interest. It is insult to the legion of boom which some might argue is the best secondary of all time.

I'm sorry, did I insult your team or something?

Oh well, at least you guys still have Russell Wilson, who is good at escaping the pocket and throwing -27 yard passes. Unless it's Aaron Donald, who happens to play in his own division, rushing him -- then, whelp, he has no chance. Oh well... at least you still have your offensive line, that just failed to punch the ball into the endzone from inside the one-yard line on three straight inside zone runs against the 29th ranked run defense in the NFL, ultimately conceding a fumble and a touchback. Oh well... at least you have a shiny new 1st round running back, the third-round graded talent who just suffered a pretty bad injury. Oh well... at least you guys have an elite GM, who managed to trade away 5 of your last 8 first- and second-round picks for overrated players that busted and are no longer on the team. Oh well... at least you guys have an elite HC, who made the worst goal-line mistake in NFL Super Bowl history. Oh well... at least you have nice weather; two to three months of mild to humid summer, followed by 9 months of rainy, dreary cold. Oh well... at least you guys have affordable food and living prices- well, nevermind on that.

Enjoy going 2-14 this year. Go Cowboys!

 

[stiletto]

I like the front 7. But the strength of that defense was the legion of boom secondary. We have nothing close to that.

He did say D-LINE..... I am not so sure on that one either. We have the chance to be good but not sure about 2013 Seattle dominant good upfront. The backend is ANOTHER subject entirely but I don't think we need to be declaring ANY similarities to that defense yet. I've seen some stuff I like and I DO think the defense will be better but I need to see a lot more before getting overly excited. If we bring in ET to solidify the secondary a little more, I'd be more excited...but alas we're getting the "We like our guys" mantra...as usual.

 

[CowboyRoy]

He did say D-LINE..... I am not so sure on that one either. We have the chance to be good but not sure about 2013 Seattle dominant good upfront. The backend is ANOTHER subject entirely but I don't think we need to be declaring ANY similarities to that defense yet. I've seen some stuff I like and I DO think the defense will be better but I need to see a lot more before getting overly excited. If we bring in ET to solidify the secondary a little more, I'd be more excited...but alas we're getting the "We like our guys" mantra...as usual.

Oh no, I have guys on here declaring our secondary as the legion of boom. Its good for a laugh though.

 

[aria]

Some of these were written awhile ago but here’s a little fodder to get some of you riled up. The Cowboys aren’t even mentioned in most of them. Beware, the last link is the worst.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ine-rankings-jaguars-eagles-rams-top-the-list

https://247sports.com/nfl/carolina-...admits-he-thinks-Jerricho-Caught-It-120835573

Dlaw is the only one mentioned here

https://athlonsports.com/nfl/nfl-defensive-linemen-rankings

Here we come in at 8 but that is largely dependent on Irving and Taco which isn’t good.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-nfl-pass-rush-rankings-all-32-teams-entering-2018

Ouch! The good news, we’re in the same category as the Patriots!

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/06/nfl-rankings-defenses-units-vikings-jaguars-eagles-rams

 

[stiletto]

Oh no, I have guys on here declaring our secondary as the legion of boom. Its good for a laugh though.

Definitely laughable. I long for a top 5 or even top 10 defense. Been so long and it will give us a chance to be competitive in the post season but against good passing teams, our secondary will burn us in the end without a doubt. Woods/Heath are below average players. OK against the likes of mediocre teams but no way good enough to get the defense over the hump.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

It is an interesting comparison, especially when looking at DT. Seattle didn't have a ton invested in their DTs either - couple of third rounders, a 7th rounder and a UDFA. And they were very effective up the middle.

This is true, and we have the chap that made the Legion of Boom what it became in the secondary as our secondary coach.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Definitely laughable. I long for a top 5 or even top 10 defense. Been so long and it will give us a chance to be competitive in the post season but against good passing teams, our secondary will burn us in the end without a doubt. Woods/Heath are below average players. OK against the likes of mediocre teams but no way good enough to get the defense over the hump.

I completely agree. And certainly Thomas, the third corner is regular burnt toast. Probably plays on 70 of the downs. Im sure an improved pass rush will help and if we can get nice leads that will help even more. But like you said, against the best teams they will not hold up.

 

[millennial_legend]

Some of these were written awhile ago but here’s a little fodder to get some of you riled up. The Cowboys aren’t even mentioned. Beware, the last link is the worst.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ine-rankings-jaguars-eagles-rams-top-the-list

https://247sports.com/nfl/carolina-...admits-he-thinks-Jerricho-Caught-It-120835573

Dlaw is the only one mentioned here

https://athlonsports.com/nfl/nfl-defensive-linemen-rankings

Here we come in at 8 but that is largely dependent on Irving and Taco which isn’t good.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-nfl-pass-rush-rankings-all-32-teams-entering-2018

Ouch! The good news, we’re in the same category as the Patriots!

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/06/nfl-rankings-defenses-units-vikings-jaguars-eagles-rams

Patriots (and Packers, who are a poor man's Patriots from the top down) employ a BBDB defense which is consistent with a passing offense that is centered around having a great to legendary QB. In this system, TOP is balanced by the short pass game mixed with occasional runs to keep the defense honest, with the trust that the QB will make a lot of great decisions and the offense will score relatively quickly putting the pressure on the other team's offense to be near perfect in order to have a chance to beat them (which the Eagles did in the SB). However, with this system, a +TOP net is less important to establish, especially in the first 3/4 of games when the score is even somewhat close.

Cowboys should employ the opposite setup right now, given the makeup and composition of the current team. As of the past few years, they have been employing a frankly weird combo of run-first offense paired with BBDB defense -- which is a somewhat dubious pairing in the NFL and rarely leads to much success. They've been skating by on the greatness of their offensive line and some of the vestiges from the Romo passing era, but those are pretty much gone now.

Now, the Cowboys need to employ the 2012-2014 Seattle model of pounding the football on offense, relying on the mobile QB to make plays and striving for as high of a +TOP margin as possible in the flow of the game. Virtually, the opposite philosophy of the Patriots/Packers way. This will keep the defense fresh for when we do need them most. Since our defense is talented enough now, we must convert from BBDB to aggressive (if we haven't done so already -- as evidenced by the first half of the Cincy game).
We need to force three-and-outs and get tough before the other team gets in FG range. If we occasionally give up a big play sandwiched by multiple three-and-outs or gentleman's three-and-outs? SO WHAT?!? Yes, the other team might have scored once, but the more important thing is: they were barely on the field, meaning our defense was barely on the field, and their already-tired defense had very minimal opportunity to rest. Thus, when we feed Zeke on the ensuing drive, chances are we can get the score back without too much difficulty. Then, we go back to playing our aggressive philosophy on defense, rinse and repeat. We win big time on TOP, and the scoreboard (usually -- there's always a few weird games like Carolina losing in Chicago last year, but those are oddities).

NUTSHELL:
- BBDB defense: Consistent if you have a great to legendary QB and passing attack on offense, and less talent on defense. Don't need to have an elite running game.

- Aggressive defense: Consistent if you have a great running game on offense, and more talent on defense. Don't need to have an elite QB or passing attack.

Those are the 2 combos that win. The other 2 combos, or any other sort of combos, and you're probably a middling or worse team.

 

[aria]

Patriots (and Packers, who are a poor man's Patriots from the top down) play a BBDB defense which is consistent with a passing offense that is centered around having a great to legendary QB. In this system, TOP is balanced by the short pass game mixed with occasional runs to keep the defense honest, with the trust that the QB will make a lot of great decisions and the offense will score relatively quickly putting the pressure on the other team's offense to be near perfect in order to have a chance to beat them (which the Eagles did in the SB). However, with this system, a +TOP net is less important to establish, especially in the first 3/4 of games when the score is even somewhat close.

Cowboys should employ the opposite setup right now, given the makeup and composition of the current team. As of the past few years, they have been employing a frankly weird combo of run-first offense paired with BBDB defense -- which is a somewhat dubious pairing in the NFL and rarely leads to much success. They've been skating by on the greatness of their offensive line and some of the vestiges from the Romo passing era, but those are pretty much gone now.

Now, the Cowboys need to employ the 2012-2014 Seattle model of pounding the football on offense, relying on the mobile QB to make plays and striving for as high of a +TOP margin as possible in the flow of the game. Virtually, the opposite philosophy of the Patriots/Packers way. This will keep the defense fresh for when we do need them most. Since our defense is talented enough now, we must convert from BBDB to aggressive (if we haven't done so already -- as evidenced by the first half of the Cincy game).
We need to force three-and-outs and get tough before the other team gets in FG range. If we occasionally give up a big play sandwiched by multiple three-and-outs or gentleman's three-and-outs? SO WHAT?!? Yes, the other team might have scored once, but the more important thing is: they were barely on the field, meaning our defense was barely on the field, and their already-tired defense had very minimal opportunity to rest. Thus, when we feed Zeke on the ensuing drive, chances are we can get the score back without too much difficulty. Then, we go back to playing our aggressive philosophy on defense, rinse and repeat. We win big time on TOP, and the scoreboard (usually -- there's always a few weird games like Carolina losing in Chicago last year, but those are oddities).

Is that not what we did in 2016, which is why we were ranked as #1 against the rush?

 

[millennial_legend]

Is that not what we did in 2016, which is why we were ranked as #1 against the rush?

That proves my point. We were ranked #1 against the rush and bottom half against the pass for a couple key reasons.

1) The 2016 Cowboys knew they couldn't stop run and pass with less defensive talent, so they employed a classic BBDB defense. BBDB defenses usually rank well against the run because the emphasis is to avoid getting gashed in both aspects of the game when their offense is significantly better than your defense. They focused on stopping the run and played off receivers in coverage, even on early downs. They were willing to give up short first downs through the air as long as the DBs "kept everything in front of them". Their belief was that, ultimately the QB will make a mistake and/or they'll try to run it and get stuffed. Bad strategy against the GBs or NOs or NEs of the league.

2) The 2016 Cowboys (13-3) were usually playing with decent to large leads in second halves of games, discouraging opponents from running the ball and burning valuable time off the clock. The Cowboys were content with the other team marching the ball downfield on easy short passes toward the middle and hooks of the field, taking 5-7 minutes off the clock, even if their drive resulted in a touchdown. With Zeke and the offensive line, the Cowboys were confident that they would be able to burn even more time off the clock with their ground game, regardless of whether they scored, kicked or ultimately punted.

 

[kuyyo_morro]

Legion of clap

 

[MarcusRock]

Except for that D-Law >>> Big mouth Bennett, everyone is comparable and the big thing is that both are founded on great depth.

Crawford = Red Bryant... base DE who dominates against the run, not a pass rusher from the edge. Can provide some pressure from interior on pass downs.

Gregory = Cliff Avril... weak side speed DE who can provide quick rush and is most effective coming in to rush on passing downs.

Jaylon Smith = Bruce Irvin... very athletic OLB who can cover, stop the run, blitz and rush the passer.

Sean Lee = Bobby Wagner... extremely solid and experienced tackling and overall LB.

LVE = KJ Wright... bigger, young LB who can cover, run and hustle.

Joe Thomas = Malcolm Smith... important backup quicker coverage LB who can make clutch plays down field and collect turnovers if necessary.

We also have plenty of solid DTs in Collins, Irving, and NT Woods to mirror the depth of the old Seattle DTs... I think Collins is very comparable to Brandon Mebane and Irving provides a lot of the same things as Clint McDonald did, the interior pressure with some splash plays against the run.

But most importantly, we have depth like they did. Charlton and Armstrong are as good if not better than Seattle's 4th and 5th DE's that year. We are loaded in the front seven.

This is ambitious at most. We don't even know what Gregory, LVE, and Joe Thomas will do for us once the lights come on. That Seattle defense was legendary. 3 potential HOFers.

 

[xwalker]

Except for that D-Law >>> Big mouth Bennett, everyone is comparable and the big thing is that both are founded on great depth.

Crawford = Red Bryant... base DE who dominates against the run, not a pass rusher from the edge. Can provide some pressure from interior on pass downs.

Gregory = Cliff Avril... weak side speed DE who can provide quick rush and is most effective coming in to rush on passing downs.

Jaylon Smith = Bruce Irvin... very athletic OLB who can cover, stop the run, blitz and rush the passer.

Sean Lee = Bobby Wagner... extremely solid and experienced tackling and overall LB.

LVE = KJ Wright... bigger, young LB who can cover, run and hustle.

Joe Thomas = Malcolm Smith... important backup quicker coverage LB who can make clutch plays down field and collect turnovers if necessary.

We also have plenty of solid DTs in Collins, Irving, and NT Woods to mirror the depth of the old Seattle DTs... I think Collins is very comparable to Brandon Mebane and Irving provides a lot of the same things as Clint McDonald did, the interior pressure with some splash plays against the run.

But most importantly, we have depth like they did. Charlton and Armstrong are as good if not better than Seattle's 4th and 5th DE's that year. We are loaded in the front seven.

A reasonable comparison.

Mebane played 1tech in 2013 but had played 3tech in some previous years.

Collins similar but opposite in that he played both but is a natural 3tech compared to Mebane being a natural 1tech.

Tony McDaniel was the other starter at DT but Clinton McDonald played about as much as McDaniel.

Irving at his best is better than McDaniel or McDonald but they were steady and dependable.

Obviously the sides are flipped with DLaw/Crawford vs Bennett/Avril but it a similar concept.

My only concern on defense is depth/experience at Safety.

 

[millennial_legend]

A reasonable comparison.

Mebane played 1tech in 2013 but had played 3tech in some previous years.

Collins similar but opposite in that he played both but is a natural 3tech compared to Mebane being a natural 1tech.

Tony McDaniel was the other starter at DT but Clinton McDonald played about as much as McDaniel.

Irving at his best is better than McDaniel or McDonald but they were steady and dependable.

Obviously the sides are flipped with DLaw/Crawford vs Bennett/Avril but it a similar concept.

My only concern on defense is depth/experience at Safety.

Crawford is almost exactly a Red Bryant type player. They used him at base RE quite a bit in 12 and 13 for the same reason we've been putting Crawford there... on running downs to push the LT back off the snap and tackle or clear a path to tackle the runner in the backfield on any leftward run plays. In nickel, Bryant was either off the field or on the inside.

Gregory is an Avril type player. Less effective against the run but a very quick first step and finesse moves, can get to the QB very fast on passing downs.