Marinelli's theory is interesting

Dwight

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,554
Reaction score
3,412
Seattle has talent on their dline that's why it's effective. Dallas current dline (and depth) does not compare to Seattle's dline.
 

Bullflop

Cowboys Diehard
Messages
25,719
Reaction score
30,912
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
Seattle has talent on their dline that's why it's effective. Dallas current dline does not compare to Seattle's dline.

It's not simply a matter of talent. It's largely a matter of having enough fresh bodies to enable an all-out pass rush due to less snaps.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
Its not the Seahawks approach, its the Cowboys of 90s. We lost of way on in defensive philosophy and this has been the outcome. Now its have a rotating dline similar to what the Seahawks are doing which was taken from the 90s Cowboys.

It isn't like we invented the fresh bodies idea. You just have to have the depth to run it. Also it means you end up playing more starters on ST because most DL are worthless on kick coverage
 

Yakuza Rich

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,043
Reaction score
12,385
I don’t think that is Marinelli’s theory at all. Since Jimmy Johnson the philosophy with 4-3 teams that are small, but fast rely on D-Line depth. This was a big sticking point for the Eagles under Jim Johnson. That was one of the reasons why the Eagles went hard after Darren Howard despite already having 2 DE’s. They needed the depth and Howard proved he could play DT in nickel and dime packages. These days as well, your DE’s in the 4-3 have to be able to run out to the ball carrier with all of the short passes and bubble screens. So you need somebody that is fast and has a good motor. Tough to do with just one guy play all of the snaps.



YR
 

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,997
Reaction score
27,917
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I don’t think that is Marinelli’s theory at all. Since Jimmy Johnson the philosophy with 4-3 teams that are small, but fast rely on D-Line depth. This was a big sticking point for the Eagles under Jim Johnson. That was one of the reasons why the Eagles went hard after Darren Howard despite already having 2 DE’s. They needed the depth and Howard proved he could play DT in nickel and dime packages. These days as well, your DE’s in the 4-3 have to be able to run out to the ball carrier with all of the short passes and bubble screens. So you need somebody that is fast and has a good motor. Tough to do with just one guy play all of the snaps.



YR

You bet.

And with the proliferation of hurry-up offenses that are meant to wear down defensive lines especially.
 

theSHOW

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
1,146
The difference between D Ware in his prime and your average starting DE is that all game Ware would bring it while your average DE only showed up a few times but the rest of the game was neutralized

It seems Marinellis theory is that if we can't have a superstar on the DL to dominate 60 snaps a game, then get 3 guys who can dominate for 10-20 snaps a game.

This appears to be a great idea! However what worries me is that you are reliant on carrying 8-10 DL on gameday which can leave you short at other positions. Crawford can play two positions but he's still going to reach a limit on when he's past his peak. The hard part for the staff is to learn each players snap count in 3.5 months.

Then also wonder if the same is true for the LBs and CBs. We only have so many roster spots available on gameday. I guess theory it'd be great to go with 7 OL, 6 LB, 9 DL, 2 QB, 1 K, 1 P, 1 DS, 3 TE, 5 WR, 3 RB, 1 FB, 4 CB, 3 S. Is 46 the number allowed to carry?

Carrying 9 or 10 D linemen is fine in the 4-3-4 that we now run. Even you're guy Bill Parcells had 10 linebackers on the 53 man all season long when Dallas was a 3-4-4 team.
 

CyberB0b

Village Idiot
Messages
12,636
Reaction score
14,101
thats what seattle does, thats why they get pressure almost all the game even though they dont have a "superstar" in their DL

What are you talking about? Clemons, Bennett, Avril, Irvin were all highly productive.
 

wick

Well-Known Member
Messages
939
Reaction score
278
It's a fine theory, but comparison with the '90s Cowboys is not apt. Dallas had good to elite players who were rotated, not career JAGs. Haley, Tolbert, Jeffcoat, Maryland, Casillas, Lett, Hennings. These guys were much better individually than anything we have on the roster right now.
 

rags747

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,231
Reaction score
8,702
I think we will be better on d line this yr, I kinda like the fresh bodies attitude, all try hard high motor dudes that will be kinda starting something new. Much more to look forward to than just having Ware around for another year...we made the right move in letting Ware go, he can come back for the ROH.
 

CyberB0b

Village Idiot
Messages
12,636
Reaction score
14,101
none of them are pro-bowlers or all pros thats my point lol when did i say they werent productive?

OK, but all those guys are vastly superior than anyone on our defensive line right now. A scrub is still a scrub, even with limited playing time.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,202
Reaction score
64,708
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
OK, but all those guys are vastly superior than anyone on our defensive line right now. A scrub is still a scrub, even with limited playing time.

Not really. In the Super Bowl years of the early nineties, they had players like Jimmie Jones who were terrific backups but was a scrub when he was signed by another team as a starter.
 

CyberB0b

Village Idiot
Messages
12,636
Reaction score
14,101
Not really. In the Super Bowl years of the early nineties, they had players like Jimmie Jones who were terrific backups but was a scrub when he was signed by another team as a starter.

Well, if you don't agree that Avril/Bennett/Clemons/Bryant is a better combination than Mincey/Lawrence/Selvie/Crawford, I don't really know what to tell you.
 

ConstantReboot

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,405
Reaction score
10,074
It isn't like we invented the fresh bodies idea. You just have to have the depth to run it. Also it means you end up playing more starters on ST because most DL are worthless on kick coverage

Not saying that we did. However, the Seahawks have gone on to say that they did emulate the Cowboys of the 90s theory of rotating their Dline. We had that philosophy in place almost two decades ago. Yet our team got cute and thought we can recreate the wheel by trying out defensive philosophies that ended in failure.

Marinelli also has gone to state in public that he also wanted to dline rotation similar to what the Seahawks implement. Thus the reason for our focus on drafting and signing a bunch of Dline in this draft.
 

DFWJC

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,981
Reaction score
48,729
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
I don't think approach at all excludes getting stars at some point....especially at RDE and DT3.
What this does is give you a chance to be competitive sooner in a tight salary cap situation.
 

sbark

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,213
Reaction score
4,407
I think part of the thing with waves.........Teams OLineman cant just prepare for and study the heck out of 1 guy and his tendencies, his under pressure moves, his game speed.........they need to prep for maybe 3 or even 4 guys as they rotate, and Crawford switches between 3 spots, the Oline, as they tire, forget and confuse who tendencies are what and where.................dang hard to prep and then remember as the game wears on the Olineman physically and mentally---and that is when the journeyman DLineman can find an opening...........ala Seattle vrs. Denver.
 

Cowboy06

Professional Positive Naysayer
Messages
1,444
Reaction score
585
I've been saying to my friends that it looks as though we are taking a Seahawks approach. Fresh legs almost every down. Not a bad idea at all. Really, considering it will take at least 1 to 2 more years to stack the defense, it's a smart move. Use what you have and play your players to their strengths.

Love this post. You build the line and the depth...it will make the LBs and the Secondary look like rock stars.
 

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,874
Reaction score
15,971
1st lets tap all kinds of brakes... because we are a long way from the 90's Cowboys DL.

The 90s Cowboys had elite level DL. They had a bunch of them but guys like Tolbert, Haley(when remotely healthy), Lett weren't playing any 20 plays.

The Seattle DL is a bunch of average to above average guys.
They do use this technique of playing hard every down because there are so many of them.
And it helps they have the best coverage unit in football behind them.
All 7of those guys can play pass coverage and two of them are arguably the best in the league at their positions.

I am not against having good DL depth but anyone thinking 3 spares replaces Demarcus Ware is insane.
Ware is an older guy and a shell of himself at his very peak but he's still quite good and better than any DE we have atm.
 

Cebrin

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,966
Reaction score
4,041
1st lets tap all kinds of brakes... because we are a long way from the 90's Cowboys DL.

The 90s Cowboys had elite level DL. They had a bunch of them but guys like Tolbert, Haley(when remotely healthy), Lett weren't playing any 20 plays.

The Seattle DL is a bunch of average to above average guys.
They do use this technique of playing hard every down because there are so many of them.
And it helps they have the best coverage unit in football behind them.
All 7of those guys can play pass coverage and two of them are arguably the best in the league at their positions.

I am not against having good DL depth but anyone thinking 3 spares replaces Demarcus Ware is insane.
Ware is an older guy and a shell of himself at his very peak but he's still quite good and better than any DE we have atm.

I wouldn't say he's better in his current state. I believe Spencer, if healthy can easily come back and be just as viable as Ware. Anyone that has watched Spencer and Ware work on this team over the years will tell you, he was always a step behind Ware. That's still a fine lineman. Ware is a HOF talent. Not that I think we've suddenly fixed our defense. I'm just saying, I don't see how we can't be excited about the depth we have, considering where we left off last season. It will still take a few years to get where we want. I believe we've a roster that is better than last years. That's my opinion. Add to the fact that we've an even better O Line to run the ball thru, you're reducing the amount of time your D is on the field. ALSO what Seahawks do to keep their D fresh. We were 26th in time of possession last year, which is a large reason why it didn't matter that we scored 28ppg. Our battered defense stayed on the field too much.

{Edit}: In hindsight, that's a coaching fail. Garrett needs to learn to see the big picture of the game and not just the scoreboard in front of him.
 
Top