Is saftey play finally coming into it's own?

[Joe a Cowboys fan]

"One draft trend that should be noted is NFL teams have begun appreciating safeties more. Nine safeties were chosen on Day 1 -- almost as many as the 11 corners taken. And three safeties were off the board before the second corner was selected.

What gives? Says one general manager who picked a safety on the first day: "Teams want more speed at safety so they don't have to be subbing all the time."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_y...g=furtherreviewdraftaftert&prov=tsn&type=lgns

Dan Pompei

A few years back and after some heart in the throat trade downs Dallas picked a safety high in the first round. A real good one. While I still believe in building the O & D lines first, did Dallas miss an opportunity here? Will our FS play suffer because we are platooning instead of geting a dominant FS?

(Please note I did want either a OT or a WR as a first rounder with a FS my third choice in this years draft.) Opinions please about safteys not a review of who we did take.

 

[Ashwynn]

"One draft trend that should be noted is NFL teams have begun appreciating safeties more. Nine safeties were chosen on Day 1 -- almost as many as the 11 corners taken. And three safeties were off the board before the second corner was selected.

What gives? Says one general manager who picked a safety on the first day: "Teams want more speed at safety so they don't have to be subbing all the time."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_y...g=furtherreviewdraftaftert&prov=tsn&type=lgns

Dan Pompei

A few years back and after some heart in the throat trade downs Dallas picked a safety high in the first round. A real good one. While I still believe in building the O & D lines first, did Dallas miss an opportunity here? Will our FS play suffer because we are platooning instead of geting a dominant FS?

(Please note I did want either a OT or a WR as a first rounder with a FS my third choice in this years draft.) Opinions please about safteys not a review of who we did take.

I dont know, call me optomistic, but I think Pat Watkins will become an above average saftey. Certainly average at WORST. By average I mean NFL standards, not cowboys standards. Our free safteys have really sucked since Woody left us. Watkins could be the next real deal there. Maybe not woody type good, but good enough to forget about the Keith Davis's and Willy Pile's of the world. Use them as rotation guys to blow Watkins, but watkins should be good enough to play 80% of the downs, or more.

 

[RiggoForever]

I think the theory is taking away the middle of the field is of premium importance. After all you can have the best two cover corners in the game, but if safety play is weak the middle can be pounded with TEs and slot WRs.

Many SS's play and hit like hybrid linebackers these days. In fact a number of SS's are converted linebackers from college. Adam Archuleta and Boulware of Seattle come to mind as fitting that category.

Good safeties can help a team disguise blitzes and coverages better as well, whereas the role of a cornerback is more one-dimensional.

 

[ravidubey]

Disguising looks has become the order of the day on both offense and defense. Ergo more 3-4 defenses and elevation of natural hybrid positions like TE's and safeties. Are TE's receivers or blockers? Are safeties cover guys, tacklers, or blitzers? The more versatile your players the harder it is for any particular formation to get taken advantage of by the other side.

I slightly disagree with Riggo though as the edges of the field are of premium importance to defend. The middle is catching up though as offenses look to exploit it with TE's, slot WRs, and receiving backs. Still the best of the best play on the edges.

 

[the_h0wey]

"One draft trend that should be noted is NFL teams have begun appreciating safeties more. Nine safeties were chosen on Day 1 -- almost as many as the 11 corners taken. And three safeties were off the board before the second corner was selected.

What gives? Says one general manager who picked a safety on the first day: "Teams want more speed at safety so they don't have to be subbing all the time."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Au_Ft.oba41nyuCBtR1RI9hDubYF?slug=furtherreviewdraftaftert&prov=tsn&type=lgns

Dan Pompei

A few years back and after some heart in the throat trade downs Dallas picked a safety high in the first round. A real good one. While I still believe in building the O & D lines first, did Dallas miss an opportunity here? Will our FS play suffer because we are platooning instead of geting a dominant FS?

(Please note I did want either a OT or a WR as a first rounder with a FS my third choice in this years draft.) Opinions please about safteys not a review of who we did take.

It's very interesting isn't it? I am overjoyed we have a plethora of Safeties to choose from going into training camp. It will hopefully be a position we no longer have to worry about with the addition of a veteran presence in Coleman an young guys like Davis, Beriault, and Watkins on the team. God forbid if Roy were to go down with an injury we finally have a young guy like Davis who has a year at Safety under his belt now. I know he wasn't playing SS last year, but it's pretty obvious Keith Davis skills are much more utliized at SS than FS. With a veteran guy like Coleman teaching Watkins the ropes at FS we have at last patched up a position that gave us so much trouble in years past.