Seattle has talent on their dline that's why it's effective. Dallas current dline does not compare to Seattle's dline.
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.
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
Yeah sure. Clemons and Avril are basically nobodies.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.