Richard Seymour or Marcus Spears?

[Galian Beast]

Spears is younger and will be cheaper, but Richard Seymour is definitely more of a catalytic player, even with his age.

Increases our pass rush out of the base 3-4. And I'm sure that Seymour can fit in the middle in the nickel.

But what do I know. I'd still want Wilfork or Hampton to replace Pro Bowl NT Ratliff so we could move him to the outside.

 

[Hostile]

I think Spears is better against the run and with our OLBs and Ratliff being the primary pass rusher threats I prefer the DEs be run stuffers. Familair, good character, and cheaper.

I'll take Spears if his price is reasonable.

 

[The Realist]

Draft a college DT who can be a back up 3-4 DE and get up the field as inside nickel pass rusher.

 

[TheSport78]

Give me Seymour everyday, twice on Sundays...

 

[Woods]

I think Seymour could get franchised as well by the Raiders (unless they reach a deal first).

Personally, all things equal (i.e., we give up no draft picks), my guess is that Spears will be quite a bit cheaper.

I would prefer to spend that "extra" money on better depth at NT - meaning getting a younger player with more upside, or at least a veteran NT who offers more.

 

[Don Corleone]

Youth, youth, youth...

 

[Galian Beast]

brooking brooking brooking

 

[TheSport78]

Look how Spears played in a CONTRACT year. In Wade's defense, the DE's have a great opportunity to rush the passer, and Spears didn't do a great job of that this season or anytime before that. The guy has 8 sacks for his ENTIRE CAREER. Seymour would thrive in Wade's scheme. Olshansky is solid but he's just like Spears, solid against the run but almost non-existent in pass rushing situations. We need an upgrade at DE.

 

[Arch Stanton]

I'll take Spears. He's worth an Olshansky type contract.

 

[Galian Beast]

Problem is our defense still lacks two to three catalytic players.

We don't create turn overs either because of our scheme not being aggressive enough, or our players just aren't good enough.

 

[burmafrd]

Seymour wants BIG money so nada

 

[The Realist]

Problem is our defense still lacks two to three catalytic players.

We don't create turn overs either because of our scheme not being aggressive enough, or our players just aren't good enough.

Interesting............

At what positions?

 

[TheSport78]

Interesting............

At what positions?

DE, S and ILB

 

[The Realist]

DE, S and ILB

I agree but those aren't attainable in this draft w/o moving up.

Unless you think Nate Allen, Jared Odrick and Brandon Spikes are catalytic players.

 

[TheSport78]

I agree but those aren't attainable in this draft w/o moving up.

Unless you think Nate Allen, Jared Odrick and Brandon Spikes are catalytic players.

You're probably right, but I think Earl Thomas is going to have a great career in the NFL and he'll most likely be available at #27. DE's are such a crapshoot in the draft anyway, it's impossible to tell who's going to pan out. Look at Aaron Maybin from the Bills, the guy was drafted #11 I believe, had trouble seeing the field and didn't record a single sack. The only player I would consider trading up out of the three positions is Rolando McClain, but he'll probably be a top ten pick.

 

[The Realist]

I've always thought Earl Thomas would be a perfect fit for this team.

I don't think there is any chance he slides to 27.

Zero...............

He can play FS and CB and he is a ballhawk.

 

[jobberone]

I think Spears is better against the run and with our OLBs and Ratliff being the primary pass rusher threats I prefer the DEs be run stuffers. Familair, good character, and cheaper.

I'll take Spears if his price is reasonable.

This. I don't think our scheme would allow Seymour to use all his talent. The DEs in our scheme have to cover the OTs and hold their ground. Seymour would be a better bull rusher and probably wouldn't have to come out on passing downs. So we might be able to carry one less DE. But I don't think he's worth the increase in money nor keeping Bowen or Hatcher off the field. Hatcher was injured almost the entire year. He's a rival to Bowen when healthy.

Leave the DL alone IMO. Turn your attention to more worthy projects.

 

[jobberone]

Look how Spears played in a CONTRACT year. In Wade's defense, the DE's have a great opportunity to rush the passer, and Spears didn't do a great job of that this season or anytime before that. The guy has 8 sacks for his ENTIRE CAREER. Seymour would thrive in Wade's scheme. Olshansky is solid but he's just like Spears, solid against the run but almost non-existent in pass rushing situations. We need an upgrade at DE.

In our base defense the DEs cover the OTs and stuff the run. They don't get out of position. Seymour would be better than Spears in passing situations but he's not that much better than Bowen to justify the money.

We can't really use Seymour unless the money is right.

 

[TheSport78]

In our base defense the DEs cover the OTs and stuff the run. They don't get out of position. Seymour would be better than Spears in passing situations but he's not that much better than Bowen to justify the money.

We can't really use Seymour unless the money is right.

I forget who and where the stat was posted, but someone had a history of the DE's in Wade's scheme with sacks in a season. All of those DE's had great sack totals, where Spears only has 5.5 sacks since Wade came to Dallas in 07'. But basically Spears is a perfect fit for Parcells' 3-4 scheme, where you were only responsible for one gap and allowing linebackers to make the plays. In Wade's scheme it's a multiple gap scheme with a lot more stunting and blitzing, allowing the defensive line to make more plays. Spears hasn't really adjusted to Wade's scheme, and may be better suited as a DT in a 4-3 scheme or a DE in a one gap 3-4 scheme.

 

[sonnyboy]

Problem is our defense still lacks two to three catalytic players.

We don't create turn overs either because of our scheme not being aggressive enough, or our players just aren't good enough.

What defense were you watching this year?

I assume you mean we need 2-3 more difference makers. Well if you want to surpass the 2000 Ravens or 1985 Bears, than ya sure that would be neccessary.

But I don't see the "need" for 2-3 more star type performers. Our defensive roster is loaded. How many teams do you really think wouldn't trade thier defensive roster for ours in a heartbeat?

I think one star player at FS is all we need to field the league's best defense in 2010. And I'm not sure we can't or wont have the best defense without that player.