POLL What is position of greatest need for the draft

[Rack]

Ok, what is it called?

If you're talking about what I think you're talking about then it would be a 2 gap NG. A behemoth with the ability to control both inside gaps. Ratliff is a beast, but he's not a 2 gap NG.


2 gap DTs/NG's would be guys like Tony Siragusa, Pat Williams, Jamal Williams, Shawn Rogers (when he wants to play 2 gaps), Casey Hampton, etc..


Some guys have the power to be a 2 gapper, but also the quickness to play the 3 technique. Guys like Albert Haynesworth and Shawn Rogers (again, when he wants to).

Speaking of Rogers, we've now had 2 chances to get him but didn't.

The first time, we got Tony Dixon instead. This guy's coverage ability made Roy Williams look like Deion Sanders. The second time we didn't even attempt to trade for him (a measly 3rd round pick for a franchise worthy NG/DT).


As a NG he tied the Browns for the lead in sacks this season (with 4, which is pretty good for a NG, especially when you're teh ONLY player in their front 7 worth a crap).

Speaking of... how pathetic is it that the Browns only had 17 total sacks this year? Reminds me of the Zimmer years... only worse.`

 

[jobberone]

Technically the 3 technique is used in the 4-3 and means a smaller DT who lines up on the shoulder of the RG in the 3 gap. It's also used loosely in the 3-4 to mean playing the gap and not playing heads up. You can't compare the two defenses using the same gap control since the DTs in the 3-4 have to control all the gaps on the inside. Sorry for the confusion. I used it to mean a NT that doesn't play heads up over the center as a 2 technique NT does in the 4-3.

 

[Rack]

Technically the 3 technique is used in the 4-3 and means a smaller DT who lines up on the shoulder of the RG in the 3 gap. It's also used loosely in the 3-4 to mean playing the gap and not playing heads up. You can't compare the two defenses using the same gap control since the DTs in the 3-4 have to control all the gaps on the inside. Sorry for the confusion. I used it to mean a NT that doesn't play heads up over the center as a 2 technique NT does in the 4-3.

1. Obviously a 3 tech plays in a 3-4. The "3 technique" refers to where he's lining up.

2. A 3 technique does NOT have to be a "Smaller" DT.

3. It's not a "3 gap". Every coach I've ever played for refers to gaps (on the defensive side of the ball) in letters, not numbers.

4. Again, NT's in a 3-4 aren't a "2 technique".

 

[Clove]

1.ss
2.ilb
3.nt
4.lt
5.wr
6.qb

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

WR--no depth.

 

[big dog cowboy]

WR--no depth.

Crayton, Austin and Hurd? That isn't the position of greatest need.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Crayton, Austin and Hurd? That isn't the position of greatest need.

We need another play maker. Someone to take the pressure off of T.O. and Witten. Maybe I'm just missing a healthy Felix Jones. Oh, the thought of him being in the mix next year is exciting.

When we look back, his injury will be the one event we wish wouldn't have happened.

Here's to next year :cheers:

 

[dbair1967]

WR--no depth.

if we get rid of TO, a 4th or 5th WR that has potential to develop is a need.

otherwise I dont agree...Owens, RW11, Crayton, Austin and then the 3 or 4 guys we have battling for the 5/6 spots are plenty of "depth"

 

[dbair1967]

We need another play maker. Someone to take the pressure off of T.O. and Witten. Maybe I'm just missing a healthy Felix Jones. Oh, the thought of him being in the mix next year is exciting.

When we look back, his injury will be the one event we wish wouldn't have happened.

we did trade for Roy Williams you know.

 

[jobberone]

1. Obviously a 3 tech plays in a 3-4. The "3 technique" refers to where he's lining up.

No a 3 technique can play in a 4-3 or 5-2 or 6-1 or 2-4-5 or whatever. The 3 refers to the 3 gap. It does not mean 3 as in 3-4.

2. A 3 technique does NOT have to be a "Smaller" DT.

Nope. But that is its generic meaning although obviously not all inclusive.

3. It's not a "3 gap". Every coach I've ever played for refers to gaps (on the defensive side of the ball) in letters, not numbers.

Then you haven't played in enough defenses.

4. Again, NT's in a 3-4 aren't a "2 technique".

Well you're wrong again. They can play any gap/hole/man up from 1-3 normally. And it's not even an all-inclusive technique. Only where the defensive player lines up and not how he actually executes the play.

I can't show you the formation and the numbers as I can't keep the format. Google it for yourself.

 

[theogt]

Technique refers to how you line up.

Gap refers to the "gap" between the offensive lineman for purposes of run responsibility. It does not refer to where to line up. A linebacker can have a B-gap assignment but isn't going to line up along the line in front of the B-gap. Furthermore, a 2 technique is lined up over the head of the guard, so it wouldn't make any sense to refer to it as a "gap."

 

[jobberone]

Technique refers to how you line up.

Gap refers to the "gap" between the offensive lineman for purposes of run responsibility. It does not refer to where to line up. A linebacker can have a B-gap assignment but isn't going to line up along the line in front of the B-gap. Furthermore, a 2 technique is lined up over the head of the guard, so it wouldn't make any sense to refer to it as a "gap."

Said and demonstrated better than I could/did. Thanks. The way you line up doesn't always equate with execution of assignments but it does influence how easy it is to protect another area. They don't call heads up on the center a zero technique. And a 5 technique DE in the 3-4 doesn't line up over the T but outside.

Basically, there are two types of tackles. There's the Ted Washington type, who weighs 320 pounds before a meal and is known for his size and power, not his quickness (though many of these players are pretty quick). Then there are players like the Kevin Williams and Rod Coleman: 290-pounders who are quick enough to shoot a gap or execute a stunt. These latter players are 3-technique tackles. The Washington-types aren't called 0-technique or 1-technique tackles because they already have a better name: nose tackles.

Here's a link that explains it all better than I can: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5913846/Defensive-Line-Basics:-Mind-the-Gap. The last paragraph I stole from the article nearly verbatim.

 

[Rack]

Well you're wrong again.

No, I'm not.

Said and demonstrated better than I could/did. Thanks.

What? You were wrong, how could you say he demonstrated what you were trying to say when you were WRONG?


Your words...

No a 3 technique can play in a 4-3 or 5-2 or 6-1 or 2-4-5 or whatever. The 3 refers to the 3 gap. It does not mean 3 as in 3-4.

That is incorrect.

Theo described exactly what I was saying before.

 

[jobberone]

No, I'm not.




What? You were wrong, how could you say he demonstrated what you were trying to say when you were WRONG?


Your words...



That is incorrect.

Theo described exactly what I was saying before.

Read the article I posted Rack. No, it's not consistent with 0-1-2-3 etc. They don't call it a zero technique DT yada yada. The '3-technique' is a nebulous term esp in a 3-4. That terminology was developed before we ever saw a 'real' 3-4 defense as we know and call it. Read the article.

 

[Rack]

Technique refers to how you line up.

Gap refers to the "gap" between the offensive lineman for purposes of run responsibility. It does not refer to where to line up. A linebacker can have a B-gap assignment but isn't going to line up along the line in front of the B-gap. Furthermore, a 2 technique is lined up over the head of the guard, so it wouldn't make any sense to refer to it as a "gap."

Exactly.

I think Jobberone just got his terminology jumbled up or something.

 

[dbair1967]

assuming we have 11 picks (althought I think it may be 12 because Nate Jones may net us a 3rd comp pick) I see the picks div'ed up this way:

Safety- 2
CB-1
OLB-1
ILB-2
OL-2
DL- 2
QB-1

If we have the 12th, give me a WR...might could swap one ILB from above for a WR too

 

[JimDandy]

All of the above. Whitten and Barber and Ware seem to be the only guys on the team that have any heart.

 

[Rack]

Read the article I posted Rack. No, it's not consistent with 0-1-2-3 etc. They don't call it a zero technique DT yada yada. The '3-technique' is a nebulous term esp in a 3-4. That terminology was developed before we ever saw a 'real' 3-4 defense as we know and call it. Read the article.

1. I have never said that a 3 technique has ANYTHING to do with a 3-4.

From one of my previous posts...

... ok I see where you got that, I had a typo...

1. Obviously a 3 tech plays in a 3-4. The "3 technique" refers to where he's lining up.

The first part was typo'd. But the second sentence should have cleared it up. The "Technique" refers to where he's lining up.


2. You had the right idea, you just got the definition of "Technique" mixed up with gap responsibility.

When you say we need a 2 technique, it's incorrect. As theo and I pointed out, the "Technique" refers to where the DT lines up. In a 3-4 we don't need a "2 technique", which we be lining up head to head with the guard.

 

[jobberone]

1. I have never said that a 3 technique has ANYTHING to do with a 3-4.

From one of my previous posts...

... ok I see where you got that, I had a typo...



The first part was typo'd. But the second sentence should have cleared it up. The "Technique" refers to where he's lining up.


2. You had the right idea, you just got the definition of "Technique" mixed up with gap responsibility.

When you say we need a 2 technique, it's incorrect. As theo and I pointed out, the "Technique" refers to where the DT lines up. In a 3-4 we don't need a "2 technique", which we be lining up head to head with the guard.

You still haven't read the article. A "3-tech DT" is generally a Ratliff type. The term is used loosely but most people understand what you're talking about. There is no 0-tech at least commonly called that although someone would know exactly what you're talking about. And even though NT is generally used for the bigger guys obviously its not totally descriptive either as you can call any DT in the middle of a 3-4 a NT.

We were supposed to have both on our squad last year with Ratliff more the 3-tech guy and Tank as the 2 or NT type. That's why we need someone who can control 2 gaps. Ratliff is not a head's up NT.

 

[Rack]

You still haven't read the article. A "3-tech DT" is generally a Ratliff type. The term is used loosely but most people understand what you're talking about. There is no 0-tech at least commonly called that although someone would know exactly what you're talking about. And even though NT is generally used for the bigger guys obviously its not totally descriptive either as you can call any DT in the middle of a 3-4 a NT.

We were supposed to have both on our squad last year with Ratliff more the 3-tech guy and Tank as the 2 or NT type. That's why we need someone who can control 2 gaps. Ratliff is not a head's up NT.

Agreed. Ratliff would be an absolute BEAST in a 4-3.

No one calls it a "0 technique" but a NT/NG is the same thing.

But again, calling it a 2 technique is incorrect. In a 3-4 they line up over the center. A 2 technique is lined up directly over the guard (or one guard actually, can't line up against both of them at the same time unless you weigh like 900 lbs).

Agree with you on Ratliff though. He's a beast when he can shoot the gaps, but he can't do the things a 2 gapper can do. Having Ratliff at DE (next to Ware) would be a nightmare for opposing offense. But I don't want to move him unless we get a GOOD replacement for him at NG.