Safety... The Defensive Equivalent of the Fading Role of Fullback

Hostile;3300020 said:
That is essentially the whole point of my post. That is why I brought up Ball who is not a typical Safety at all. No way he ways 2 bills. Yet he played the position well.

Again, Safeties have always had a major role in run support and pass coverage, but now it is evolving into a situation where teams pass more than they run so coverage skills are more valuable than run stopping skills. Every Defensive player supports both. I am saying the coverage skills are becoming far more valuable all the time.

Hence the evolution to more CBs moving to Safety.

I think the trend has been clear for some time but your title is a little misleading, in the end it turns out safeties are more important than ever.

You need guys that are more athletic than they have been in the past. If you could find a 6'3 230 lb guy that could cover like a 5'11" 195 lb guy, you'd play him in a heartbeat.

The fact that you didn't notice much difference between Hamlin and Ball is probably more of an indication of Hamlin's level of play than anything else, if you ask me. He didn't have to do much to maintain Hamlin's level of play.
 
TheCount;3300103 said:
I think the trend has been clear for some time but your title is a little misleading, in the end it turns out safeties are more important than ever.

You need guys that are more athletic than they have been in the past. If you could find a 6'3 230 lb guy that could cover like a 5'11" 195 lb guy, you'd play him in a heartbeat.

The fact that you didn't notice much difference between Hamlin and Ball is probably more of an indication of Hamlin's level of play than anything else, if you ask me. He didn't have to do much to maintain Hamlin's level of play.
The title? People don't know the difference between fading and extinct? Not my problem. I didn't say it would go completely away. I said it is evolving.
 
Hostile;3300104 said:
The title? People don't know the difference between fading and extinct? Not my problem. I didn't say it would go completely away. I said it is evolving.

I said it was misleading, not that I didn't understand what you were saying.

I think "Evolving" would have avoided any confusion, but I actually read what you said rather than replying after just reading the title, so it doesn't bother me.
 
Many interesting thoughts on this thread. The liberalization of passing rules has led to a lack of emphasis on the running game in the modern offense. This has resulted in the FB being substituted for a second TE or a third WR as the base offense for many teams around the league. When you combine this with the fact that headhunting is no longer allowed in the secondary against defenseless WRs, you can see why the league has moved away from the large thumpers at safety.

The only issue about safety is it still has to be a very physical position due to the ongoing need for support in the running game. Many CBs are not going to do well having to make a tackle against a chargeing 235 pound RB. Furthermore, the instincts required of safeties who play in space are going to be quite foreign to many CBs so I'm not sure how many are going to make the transition smoothly.

I think this is ultimately an area where college football will start developing players in the mold of a hybrid CB/Safety. These may be slightly large, physical corners who are taught safety skills. Such people will start to climb up draft boards as the need for them increases in the future.

I think if you wait until the pros to make the conversion, you have probably waited too long for most players.
 
TheCount;3300109 said:
I said it was misleading, not that I didn't understand what you were saying.

I think "Evolving" would have avoided any confusion, but I actually read what you said rather than replying after just reading the title, so it doesn't bother me.
Evolving instead of fading? I'll change it because I don't care about the title. The post I do.
 
masomenos85;3300080 said:
I thought that went without saying, but you said it. Besides, wouldn't that make your previous statement pointless? You said the safety position was becoming about coverage and speed, so WRs had to do the same to combat it. So, you were wrong too or...?

And so did your comments. You named a few rare players with speed and size...yea they have the ability to beat any coverage, obviously. I don’t agree you beat speed with ONLY size, but then again there are a few players that can do that to some degree given their talent. I think to say a safety has to be this or that is putting them in a box. They have to have speed, have to be a sure tackler, read formations, communicate, catch the ball, ect.

Hostile;3300092 said:
So did I.

Ok, i am confused. You said to combat speed with size...they why the original post that the position is evolving. Just have a core of big slow WRs and fullbacks? I think your best bet would be to match speed with speed and size is a bonus.
 
Hostile;3300104 said:
The title? People don't know the difference between fading and extinct? Not my problem. I didn't say it would go completely away. I said it is evolving.
when I 1st read the title I thought it was gonna be about the old school Roy Williams type strong safety position.
 
Rampage;3300175 said:
when I 1st read the title I thought it was gonna be about the old school Roy Williams type strong safety position.
It partially is. It is the evolution of the position from enforcer/run stuffer to coverage.
 
Hostile;3300177 said:
It partially is. It is the evolution of the position from enforcer/run stuffer to coverage.

Related to this discussion should be the evolution of LB play. What we're seeing more and more now is teams trying ot use their TEs over the middle as receivers.

As S are evolving towards better coverage-ability, this is making it harder for WRs to beat the secondary, so teams are opting to use their TE's more and more now to beat the LBs underneath, while WRs occupy the faster S in the deep midle.

That's why I like having Bobby Carpenter on this team - because he gives Dallas somewhat of an edge in this area because he can surely cover as a LB.
 
Does anybody here (Adam???) have the ability to dig up the total number of tackles, INT's, passes breakups, and sacks for the safety position going back over the last 20 years? Might be interesting to see what trends those numbers show.
 
proline;3300223 said:
Does anybody here (Adam???) have the ability to dig up the total number of tackles, INT's, passes breakups, and sacks for the safety position going back over the last 20 years? Might be interesting to see what trends those numbers show.

Those stats are readily available, you just don't want to do the work. :laugh2:
 
AMERICAS_FAN;3300197 said:
Related to this discussion should be the evolution of LB play. What we're seeing more and more now is teams trying ot use their TEs over the middle as receivers.

As S are evolving towards better coverage-ability, this is making it harder for WRs to beat the secondary, so teams are opting to use their TE's more and more now to beat the LBs underneath, while WRs occupy the faster S in the deep midle.

That's why I like having Bobby Carpenter on this team - because he gives Dallas somewhat of an edge in this area because he can surely cover as a LB.

Exactly.

There's nothing a great receiving TE like #82 wants to see more then a "little" safety like Newman trying to make the tackle after he beats the LB for the catch.


I get the point of the OP and there is a lot of truth to it BUT it's a fine line to be walked.
 
Its not going to be long where there will be starting secondaries with 3 CBs and 1 Safety. That safety will be critical because he will have to both support the run and be able to cover. WHich are real hard to find.
 
[youtube]HcOZ6xFxJqg[/youtube]

Sorry...had to be done.
 
I agree with this post. Still a little uneasy about scandrick but he could have just had a bad year.
 
Hostile;3299475 said:
The NFL evolves all the time. Occasionally it will run in cycles where something from the past comes back, and then it goes away again gradually. Like the 46 Defense. It was huge, then defunct, now it is returning in bits and pieces and will likely fade away again. We'll see the same with the Wildcat Offenses.

We've all noted that Fullback is a position in the NFL just isn't the same as it used to be. There are very few Moose Johnston's anymore. Lorenzo Neal had as much to do with LaDanian Tomlinson's success as Moose did for Emmitt, but FBs like that are not high on priority lists much any more.

Safeties are the Defensive equivalent. They are going to gradually fade from importance. Mainly because very few of them can cover like a CB and many of them are going to follow the path of Rod Woodson from CB to Safety.

That is why I really wasn't upset when Antrel Rolle signed in New York with the Giants. Like Woodson, he is a CB who has moved to Safety. The money he commanded is the number one reason why I am not upset we missed out on him. I feel like we could move Terence Newman to Safety just like we have Alan Ball and be fine. Scandrick is more than capable of being a starting LCB.

That is also why I am not all that high on Bethea, or Atogwe, or any other option where we have to pay a team. The Cardinals got a great deal on Kerry Rhodes. I doubt you will see a huge drop off in production from Rolle to Rhodes for them. So they ended up with a bargain. Yet I still wouldn't want to pay the prices they did.

It is also why I don't want to pay the price of a Safety with our 1st or 2nd round pick. Not even for Earl Thomas if he is there. I just see it as an unnecessary luxury anymore. It is rare to find an Ed Reed or a Troy Palumalu and Earl Thomas may be that rare breed, but relying on them to stay healthy because the drop off if they don't is so severe that it just doesn't make it seem worthwhile.

Pass Offenses have become so sophisticated that coverage skills outweigh tackling skills at Safety. That is why a phenomenal athlete like Taylor Mays is being looked at more as a LB. That is why a Roy Williams could go from difference maker to liability in such a shirt time. The position is evolving and teams have to evolve with it.

I think you will see a time coming where teams play with only one Safety, who acts like a Center Fielder looking to cover to either side and the middle. You hardly even see Safety blitzes any more, but Corner blitzes still get called.

Dallas wanted to be ahead of this curve when they talked about using Scandrick in the "Star" position. In reality this was merely a recycling of the way Tom Landry used to use Cornell Green. Cornell remains one of the more under appreciated unsung heroes in the History of our team. He was a tremendous difference maker for a long time. I believe Newman, Ball or Scandrick could handle that role just fine if need be.

When Ball got drafted he weighed 172 pounds. I doubt he is 6 feet tall. I remember joking that he needed to step away from the salad bar. I doubt that today he is pushing 200. Yet he played Safety for us in 2009 and did a fairly good job of it. Why? Because his coverage skills as a CB benefited the way the NFL is evolving.

For this reason, I put more importance on CB in the 2010 Draft than I would Safety. Yeah, I'd take Earl Thomas if he falls to us. You don't pass on rare ability. But I don't think Safety is as big a need as people assume. Coverage ability is, which is why I think we will keep Sensabaugh ultimately but might let Ken Hamlin go.

If we want more INTs, and I think we all do, there are two ways that will happen. More pressure, and I think that arrives with a healthy Ware and a ready Spencer, and better coverage.
Basically, we need coverage guys at safety.

That's been my thinking for some time now - safeties with an emphasis on coverage and less on run support, and it really doesn't matter to me if they're safeties first or converted corners, but guys who play in the box more than not are indeed going the way of the fullback. I couldn't agree more with that statement.

Of course, I'd want my safeties to be able to tackle too, which is why, as I've said before, finding the right safety is almost as hard as finding the right QB...well, almost. Ideally, you want guys who are fast, are comfortable in space, have good recovery speed, can make plays on the ball, and are sure tacklers. I couldn't care less if they can deliver a good hit, but can they tackle?

Asking one player to be all that is asking for quite a bit, in my opinion, but that's exactly what teams need in today's NFL. Safeties the quality of Earl Thomas are rare and in demand, and converting corners has it's own built in difficulties. Will the player want to play safety? Can he play in space? Can he tackle? I ask because a lot of corners, generally, just aren't that physical.

Finding such players won't be easy, and to make things even more difficult, what a team really needs is two of these guys. Imagine two Ed Reed types in the secondary. Wow.
 
Joe Rod;3300374 said:
Best part of this thread hands down! :bow:

If we somehow wind up getting E.Thomas...I might do a safety dance myself.:D
 
TheCount;3300266 said:
Those stats are readily available, you just don't want to do the work. :laugh2:

Readily available to whom??? I don't know of any way to get them that doesn't require finding every safety who has played in the league for the last 20 years and looking up the individual stats (since that's over 1200 man-seasons!), but I assume (maybe wrongly) that somebody has the ability to look at the data by position and get totals without having to find each individual. You're right, I'm NOT going to do that amount of work, but if there's an easier way to get it and you'd like to teach me I'm all ears .....
 
proline;3300386 said:
Readily available to whom??? I don't know of any way to get them that doesn't require finding every safety who has played in the league for the last 20 years and looking up the individual stats (since that's over 1200 man-seasons!), but I assume (maybe wrongly) that somebody has the ability to look at the data by position and get totals without having to find each individual. You're right, I'm NOT going to do that amount of work, but if there's an easier way to get it and you'd like to teach me I'm all ears .....

So what you're saying is that the numbers ARE readily available, but you just don't want to do the work?

I'm just joking man, relax!
 

Forum statistics

Threads
465,971
Messages
13,907,949
Members
23,793
Latest member
Roger33
Back
Top