Defensive philosophy question

i just hope we trade up for Derwin James or one of the top 2 lb's. We need playmakers on this defense so badly.
 
my imagination runs wild just thinking of the matchup nightmares with a Vea next to Irving with Tank on the outside and the rotation of Ealy/Taco/Gregory and if Crawford stays hes depth.that line would be something close to the old Giants lines that help them beat NE Twice@! one could only hope..

That DL would could be as good as the SB DL's we had. other than Haley but if a combination can get the production close to Haley, then that is a very formidable DL.
 
That DL would could be as good as the SB DL's we had. other than Haley but if a combination can get the production close to Haley, then that is a very formidable DL.
Lol why cuz their names. Other than Dlaw who on that line has had any significant production?
 
Lol why cuz their names. Other than Dlaw who on that line has had any significant production?

Because they all at some point shown they can make plays...did you think back when Jimmy brought in all his players they was going to suck or going to shine. Did you think oh great, we got Haley, or did you think, dang, he is a trouble maker what in thew heck is Jimmy and Jerry doing.

Well if it was a failure, Jerry would be blamed, but since it was a success Jimmy gets the credit...it is the way our many fans roll.
 
That DL would could be as good as the SB DL's we had. other than Haley but if a combination can get the production close to Haley, then that is a very formidable DL.
thats true and think about the average DBs and safetys we were able to carry on those teams because we were 2 deep on starter rotations on the line and a great LB core..they simply didnt have the time to throw to WRs because that line and LBs just blew plays up early and rushed QBs..that helps the DBs A LOT! so if im a FO Cowboy scout im looking at young DBs and Safetys and say how can we simply help them while they are growing, easy VEA and a loaded DL..
 
Ok. Disregard them if you want. See what you want to see.
That seems a strange response. I don't think it is I who am seeing what I want to see since people are concluding that Marinelli is leaving due to a report by one media person that he was thinking about it before Eberflus left. I appreciate the links--I really do--but I didn't see any actual evidence that he is planning on (let alone thinking about) leaving after this next year. Fisher tells us all the time things will happen that don't, and I don't have any reason to believe Engel knows something everyone else doesn't.
 
That seems a strange response. I don't think it is I who am seeing what I want to see since people are concluding that Marinelli is leaving due to a report by one media person that he was thinking about it before Eberflus left. I appreciate the links--I really do--but I didn't see any actual evidence that he is planning on (let alone thinking about) leaving after this next year. Fisher tells us all the time things will happen that don't, and I don't have any reason to believe Engel knows something everyone else doesn't.

Ok. Thanks for appreciating the links.
 
With Marenelli supposedly retiring after this season. And Kris Richard on board now. And many including myself think he can be the next DC.

Will they gear the draft toward a defensive style he likes, though they are supposed to be similar already, From comments made a few years back, that Marenelli wanted to be like a Seattle style D.

So does Richard have an influence on the draft geared to more his style, or do they give it one more go with Rod's way. Can Richard influence them to get a true 1 Tech high in the draft.
I think they will gear their draft to the offense.

I like what I have heard about Richards but its no guarantee of success with us.

different HC and owner.

That's a big change.

they should not telegraph whatever they think..the team and owner that is.

plus you would think you have to see how Richards does this season first.

then they will know what is needed next draft.

We have to remember Richards left on shakey terms I understand.

until we hear that stuff..

hard to tell.
 
yeah, I agree Hennessey. I was looking at stats on the 70's defenses and 90's. The biggest difference isn't number of sacks (of course sacks weren't official until the tail end of the Doomsday defenses) but what stood out to me was take aways. interceptions, fumble recoveries. Not sure how you teach that, after all CB's are just WR's who never excelled at WR yet we expect them to catch the ball when it's in their head lights. When the ball is on the ground it seems like it's charged and repelled by our guys. It's pretty sad when Barry Church or Jeff Heath are your turn over machines. Do we just draft ball hawk secondary players? I've often read that more pressure on the QB results in poor throws and take aways. I see very little proof of that recently. Conversely I've read that good coverage makes the QB hold the ball longer and leads to more sacks and pressure. Maybe we just have to go with the latter and hope the turn overs come. We do seem snake bit when it comes to interceptions and fumble recoveries.
Interceptions were easier to come by back in the day. DBs could get away with a lot more.

DBs could also destroy receivers causing plenty of hesitation.

Don't know for sure, but I'd guess interception totals for all teams went into decline from back then.

The only factor that would offset that would be that pass attempts have also gone up a lot since then as well.
 
Interceptions were easier to come by back in the day. DBs could get away with a lot more.

DBs could also destroy receivers causing plenty of hesitation.

Don't know for sure, but I'd guess interception totals for all teams went into decline from back then.

The only factor that would offset that would be that pass attempts have also gone up a lot since then as well.

Yes, could be a factor for sure
 

Forum statistics

Threads
474,209
Messages
14,521,420
Members
24,208
Latest member
CowboysQC
Back
Top