Quietly our biggest draft need

[The Realist]

I simply disagree. If Wilfork doesn't fit into your D, you adjust your D.

We would take Suh, based on skillset alone, as he's a 3 tech.

I've seen way too many D's fail due to attempting to play 3 tech types all across the front line.

You have some ideas in your head that may be great in theory but they don’t match up with what is going on in reality. Wilfork only played for 3-4 base teams and went 21 in draft if I remember correctly. Ngata and Hampton drafted by 3-4 teams. Penetrating 1 gap DT’s go higher in the draft because that is a more valuable, disruptive and coveted skill set.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Personally, I think we need a CB to replace Chidobe. He's always in position but just doesn't have the length to actually make a play on the ball. We all know Kris Richard ain't going anywhere so my guess is we trade Chido and get a better scheme fit CB in the draft.

Replace a CB who's only been here 2 years, only one with a good DBs coach?

But sure, let's throw out everybody who doesn't become All Pro their first year, like Martin. Yeah, you can find those guys all day long

 

[LACowboysFan1]

There's not "a" biggest need. Need TE, OG, OT. They're all about equal in need...

 

[kskboys]

You have some ideas in your head that may be great in theory but they don’t match up with what is going on in reality. Wilfork only played for 3-4 base teams and went 21 in draft if I remember correctly. Ngata and Hampton drafted by 3-4 teams. Penetrating 1 gap DT’s go higher in the draft because that is a more valuable, disruptive and coveted skill set.

Absolutely.

However, you have some ideas in your head that are incorrect, and easily disproven. 4-3 D's also commonly use a NT.

Minny: Joseph Linval
JAX: Abry Jones
INDY: Al Woods
CINCY: Chris Baker
NE: Malcom Brown or Danny Shelton
TB: Vita Vea

For some odd reason, this idea has been passed around fans here that 4-3 D's don't use NT's. Not sure where this fallacy got started, but it isn't true.

We had talent at the NT position in TMac and our D was better. We tried w/o him and it got worse. We got talent again in Woods and we got better.

It's not that difficult.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

In the strictest sense a NT is only in a 3-4 defense. There was no "nose tackle" prior to the 3-4 defense being used extensively in the late 60's - early 70's. It's called the nose tackle because the alignment looks like a person's face, with the nose directly in the middle of the face, with one eye on either side of it, a 3-4 alignment has one tackle in the middle and two other tackles/ends on either side of him.

But it's not that strict anymore, a nose tackle now is mainly a big guy who's primary job is to occupy the middle area of the line and defend the run, and if they start with 4 d-linemen, one of the other linemen may play back a bit, drop into coverage, etc. which leaves only 3 guys on the line, so one of them becomes like the old 3-4 "nose" tackle.

And "1 tech" is strictly speaking a position, not a player, but somebody who has a good ability to play in the A gap, on either shoulder of the center, is called a 1 tech tackle, though of course he can play in the B gap, or directly over the center, but just may not be as good there.

The definitions aren't as rigid as years past...

 

[kskboys]

In the strictest sense a NT is only in a 3-4 defense. There was no "nose tackle" prior to the 3-4 defense being used extensively in the late 60's - early 90's. It's called the nose tackle because the alignment looks like a person's face, with the nose directly in the middle of the face, with one eye on either side of it, a 3-4 alignment has one tackle in the middle and two other tackles/ends on either side of him.

But it's not that strict anymore, a nose tackle now is mainly a big guy who's primary job is to occupy the middle area of the line and defend the run, and if they start with 4 d-linemen, one of the other linemen may play back a bit, drop into coverage, etc. which leaves only 3 guys on the line, so one of them becomes like the old 3-4 "nose" tackle.

And "1 tech" is strictly speaking a position, not a player, but somebody who has a good ability to play in the A gap, on either shoulder of the center, is called a 1 tech tackle, though of course he can play in the B gap, or directly over the center, but just may not be as good there.

The definitions aren't as rigid as years past...

I had never heard that, so I looked it up. From what I'm reading, the NT was used in the old 5-2 D in the 50's.

I've been reading about football for decades, and I've seen NT referred to multiple times in many different D's. In the 4-3, the DT's are referred to as the UT (under tackle) and the NT.

So, leaving semantics out of it, a big dude in the middle is a part of every great D I've ever seen.

 

[Mr_437]

I had never heard that, so I looked it up. From what I'm reading, the NT was used in the old 5-2 D in the 50's.

I've been reading about football for decades, and I've seen NT referred to multiple times in many different D's. In the 4-3, the DT's are referred to as the UT (under tackle) and the NT.

So, leaving semantics out of it, a big dude in the middle is a part of every great D I've ever seen.

That's why it was good to see Woods work out, hopefully they add another NT to tag team w/ #99. Sounds like a good draft to get that done, but also FA has some possible fits (i.e.NE: Brown n Shelton etc.).

 

[LACowboysFan1]

I had never heard that, so I looked it up. From what I'm reading, the NT was used in the old 5-2 D in the 50's.

I've been reading about football for decades, and I've seen NT referred to multiple times in many different D's. In the 4-3, the DT's are referred to as the UT (under tackle) and the NT.

So, leaving semantics out of it, a big dude in the middle is a part of every great D I've ever seen.

Doomsday in the 70's didn't have a big dude, even back then Lilly at 260 wasn't all that big. 90's Cowboys Lett was about the biggest, at 290. Bucs' 2002 SB defense had McFarland and Sapp at NT, at just over 300 lbs.

IF you can get fairly big guys with speed and moves, they can be a SB winning team, but 290-300 lb guys with moves are hard to find, so it's easier to get the 325-345 lb fireplug to play the middle...

 

[al124]

Replace a CB who's only been here 2 years, only one with a good DBs coach?

But sure, let's throw out everybody who doesn't become All Pro their first year, like Martin. Yeah, you can find those guys all day long

Don't get me wrong... I think he's a really good CB. He's actually a hometown hero for us here in San Jose, Cali but I just don't think he's a good scheme fit for what Kris Richard is trying to do. Maybe they'll keep him but I wouldn't be surprised if they bring in some CBs with length to compete with him.

 

[The Realist]

Absolutely.

However, you have some ideas in your head that are incorrect, and easily disproven. 4-3 D's also commonly use a NT.

Minny: Joseph Linval
JAX: Abry Jones
INDY: Al Woods
CINCY: Chris Baker
NE: Malcom Brown or Danny Shelton
TB: Vita Vea

For some odd reason, this idea has been passed around fans here that 4-3 D's don't use NT's. Not sure where this fallacy got started, but it isn't true.

We had talent at the NT position in TMac and our D was better. We tried w/o him and it got worse. We got talent again in Woods and we got better.

It's not that difficult.

Joseph Linval 329

Abry Jones 318

Al Woods 330

Chris Baker 320

Malcolm Brown 320

Danny Shelton 344

Vea 347

TMac 302

Woods 300

Hmmm.....I wonder what Rod is looking for.....a 1 gap penetrator who can run, or a 2 gapper?

“We had talent at the NT position in TMac and our D was better. We tried w/o him and it got worse. We got talent again in Woods and we got better.”

Yes, it’s about talent and quickness, not size that can’t run. I’m surprised you can’t see that the NT’s you listed have nothing in common with TMac and Woods.

It’s not that difficult.