Wrangler87;3721992 said:I just don't think Sense got terrible over night. I think a lot of the struggles of our secondary is directly related to Ball, whether players are trying to cover for his deficiencies or he is not in the right spot and the other DB's are playing differently than they normally would.
I would never draft a FS in the first round to fix this problem. Almost all rookie DB's struggle at least one year in the NFL, if not more. I do not want a repeat of this season with a new name while he learns the ropes.
I think you pay the money and sign the best available youg FS on the market. I think Sense will improve next year, and even some of the corner might play better with a good FS back there.
You use the draft for O-line, LB, and CB depth.....and maybe a kicker.
The problem was that we won the games in which Ball played last year, even if the defense noticeably underperformed when Ball was starting. Winning glosses over a lot of things.realtick;3722124 said:I really think that's where Jerry blew it this offseason by going cheap and not acquiring a veteran free safety. I would have loved picking up Antrel Rolle, he would have been perfect for this secondary; he's a leader, very smart, likes to hit and can tackle and he has ball skills.
The contract the Giants gave him was exorbitant, so it's halfway understandible why Jerry was reluctant.
I liked how Sensabaugh played last year, but that may have been due to the fact our strong safety play had been so awful the previous couple of seasons. Now I see a guy who is often caught out of position and whiffing on tackles.
newnationcb;3721974 said:You say the ILBs don't cover well and in the same breath say Brooking needs to be replaced when in fact he's had very good coverage all year and might be our best coverage LB, even at his age.
Hypocritical much?
newnationcb;3721974 said:You say the ILBs don't cover well and in the same breath say Brooking needs to be replaced when in fact he's had very good coverage all year and might be our best coverage LB, even at his age.
Hypocritical much?
jobberone;3721950 said:I mostly agree with the OP. Newman has been hurt and has just not been himself. Jenkins has regressed. And the two safeties are marginal. Also the DBs have poor coaching IMO. This is a big deal. We need competition at DB. We mostly do need a better pass rush. The ILBs don't cover well and don't blitz well. Brooking needs to be replaced. We need a nickel LB. We need another pass rusher and Spencer needs to be taught well or replaced.
jamesdojr;3722196 said:marginal? I'd be doing backflips if they were AT LEAST marginal. The worst tandem in the league by far. Can't play the run, can't play the pass, can't tackle, can't catch, and neither one if them is ever where they are supposed to be on any given play.
Cutting them today would not impact the team at all. That's how bad they are. McCray and Church couldn't possibly be as bad so play them.
_______________________________
realtick;3722177 said:Do you have any idea of what you're writing?
How is he be "hypocritical?"
You're the one saying Brookings is good in coverage not him.
newnationcb;3722242 said:I don't know what games you guys are watching to say Brooking has been bad in coverage.
One on one with TEs, he's had tight coverage all year. Even balls that have been completed have been done in extremely tight coverage. That's been apparent in the last 2 weeks against Pettigrew and Thomas.
And the hypocritical part comes from wanting to improve our coverage by replacing our best ILB in coverage. Except you want to argue that Brooking hasn't been our best LB in coverage?
....or draft Patrick Peterson and move Scandrick to free safety.Manwiththeplan;3722358 said:Draft a d-lineman with our first rounder and roll with
newnationcb;3722242 said:I don't know what games you guys are watching to say Brooking has been bad in coverage.
One on one with TEs, he's had tight coverage all year. Even balls that have been completed have been done in extremely tight coverage. That's been apparent in the last 2 weeks against Pettigrew and Thomas.
And the hypocritical part comes from wanting to improve our coverage by replacing our best ILB in coverage. Except you want to argue that Brooking hasn't been our best LB in coverage?
theogt;3722365 said:....or draft Patrick Peterson and move Scandrick to free safety.
Double Trouble;3722589 said:Our CBs aren't "alright". Newman is getting old and Jenkins is struggling.
There really is no position in the draft (if there is one) or in free agency that the Cowboys can ignore.
realtick;3722384 said:Hey genius, I never said Brooking was bad in coverage, so save your strawmans for someone who cares.
The original poster who you claimed was a "hypocrite" never said Brooking was great in coverage and then turn around and said cut him. That would hypocritical.
No, he said Brooking (both ILBs) was bad in coverage. YOU said Brookings is good in coverage. That means you have a difference of opinion.
That doesn't make him a hypocrite.
What it does make you is a complete bonehead for not understanding the meaning of the word and application.
Ignorant much?
newnationcb;3722696 said:You're the one being a freaking idiot for butting in with a rebuttal without knowing what I was implying.
Saying we need to improve our ILB coverage and saying we should replace our best LB in coverage (even though he didn't say Brooking was; I'm deducing that) will be hypocritical. Wouldn't it?
I don't have to use words in their most stringent forms. Crazy you'll be on the offensive here when you throw "strawman" in every single argument.
Why would I even take you seriously when you try to come off as the most esoteric of posters but join the masses in saying that Brooking has been bad in coverage? LOL