Seattle D-line

[Fritsch_the_cat]

So did I. I think we'll try to replicate it somewhat here in Dallas. .

Oh god, I hope so. That really seems to be what is missing. The offense is good enough, time to sell out on defense.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

I'm not saying their secondary isn't good, but their effectiveness drops tremendously when you have no rush. You can't cover receivers

True, but it is a fast paced bam-bam game, you only have to cover for a few seconds really. If a QB can't get the hot receiver, and doesn't have time to check down, you have him, for the most part. Seattle has a lethal combination there.

 

[cowboysooner]

Yeah Risen I'm totally on board now, I would draft a pass rushing dlineman or high ranked olineman every year with one of my top 3 picks. Look at Seattle's wr corp, a good bunch but no stud #1 guy, look at Pittsburghs defense (when they last won the sb) their corners and safeties (except Troy P) were virtual unknowns to the common fan. Invest in the oline and dline and after that invest some more.

Just because the public did not know Keenan Lewis and Ike Taylor did not mean they aren't exceptional corners. Pittsburgh had the title belt for best safeties back in 2008 now that is gonna be in Seattle a while.

 

[wileedog]

In my opinion, the Cowboys organization has convinced itself it can win by only being great at a few position and just getting by everywhere else. That's not true.

And Safety is a position we have been trying to 'get by' on for years. I still don't think there is a quality one on this roster. Church is a decent tackler but I think he lacks badly in coverage. At FS we have Jeff friggin Heath and a guy who couldn't beat out Jeff friggin Heath. None of these guys would have lasted on the roster to the 2nd preseason game in Seattle.

So yes, the front 7 was a disaster and put added pressure on the secondary, but there are still plenty of problems back there too.

 

[xwalker]

To me, it's a simple and brilliant personnel philosophy. Go big and physical with the DB's. Go smaller and faster with the front seven. This makes for a fast and physical defense. Even slower DB's are still pretty fast. And even smaller front 7 personnel are still pretty big. So by having speed in the front 7, now you have a defense that is *collectively* very fast. And by going big and physical with the DB's, now the defense is collectively very physical.

Dallas does the opposite. You're only as physical as your softest player. And you're only as fast as your slowest player. So having soft DB's makes your defense soft. And going after big, plodding front 7 players only makes your defense slow.

The only upside to this is that Marinelli/Kiffin have similar personnel philosophy because of the defensive scheme. The issue is getting Jerrah to buy into it and get them the right personnel instead of thinking it's 1995 and you can just have 'cover corners' who can't tackle.

YR

I'm not sure how Dallas does the opposite.

Both the intended starting DLine and players that ended up playing were all the smaller/quicker types. Hatcher had decent size as a 3-tech, but they intended to play him at 1-tech if Ratliff had played.

The Cowboys could use more size in the secondary, but Carr and Church are probably bigger than average at their positions. The young Safeties Wilcox and Heath both have good size. Claiborne could stand to get stronger, but he has very good length with very long arms. Scandrick's size is just right for his intended position of slot CB.

Where they really need to get bigger is at backup CB. The #4 and #5 positions were 5-10, 184 Webb and 5-9 Moore.

At LB, Lee and Carter have good size and speed.

 

[birdwells1]

Just because the public did not know Keenan Lewis and Ike Taylor did not mean they aren't exceptional corners. Pittsburgh had the title belt for best safeties back in 2008 now that is gonna be in Seattle a while.

Yeah but the key to their defense was stopping the run and getting pressure on the qb point blank period.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I'm not sure how Dallas does the opposite.

Both the intended starting DLine and players that ended up playing were all the smaller/quicker types. Hatcher had decent size as a 3-tech, but they intended to play him at 1-tech if Ratliff had played.

The Cowboys could use more size in the secondary, but Carr and Church are probably bigger than average at their positions. The young Safeties Wilcox and Heath both have good size. Claiborne could stand to get stronger, but he has very good length with very long arms. Scandrick's size is just right for his intended position of slot CB.

Where they really need to get bigger is at backup CB. The #4 and #5 positions were 5-10, 184 Webb and 5-9 Moore.

At LB, Lee and Carter have good size and speed.

Before this year the Cowboys were in a 3-4. The DE's were usually terribly slow. We had Brent at NT, not exactly the most explosive NT.

This was the first year we tried to change it up, although I wouldn't consider Spencer to have great speed. The same at the SAM backer position. Lee has decent speed, but nowhere near as fast as Wagner.

Scandrick is the only good sized, physical corner of the bunch. Carr is average in terms of size, physicality and tackling. Claiborne is a joke in terms physicality and tackling.

Church is physical and can tackle. But is so incompetent in coverage that it negates all of that. I honestly wish they would consider him at the WILL. It would add speed to the LB spot (could move Carter to the SAM) and he wouldn't be a liability as the last line of defense.

Wilcox isn't very big as a safety. Heath is tiny. And Heath tackled horrendously last year (to his credit, he should not have been starting anyway).

Compare that to the Seahawks. Earl Thomas can lay the wood, but he is by far and away a sure tacklers first and foremost. He's also superb in coverage. Chancellor towers over Church, hits harder and covers much better. Sherman isn't a great tackler, but a pretty good tackler and great at playing physical press coverage.

When we had the chance to find some big, physical corners and place more emphasis on finding quality safeties....we instead spent $50 million and then moved up in the first round of the draft and nabbed 2 'cover corners' and left ourselves with a cast of safeties that have included:

Barry Church
JJ Wilcox
Jeff Heath
Will Allen
Mana Silva
Gerald Sensabaugh
Danny McCray
Charlie Peprah
Eric Frampton

Pee-you.




YR

 

[xwalker]

Before this year the Cowboys were in a 3-4. The DE's were usually terribly slow. We had Brent at NT, not exactly the most explosive NT.

This was the first year we tried to change it up, although I wouldn't consider Spencer to have great speed. The same at the SAM backer position. Lee has decent speed, but nowhere near as fast as Wagner.

Scandrick is the only good sized, physical corner of the bunch. Carr is average in terms of size, physicality and tackling. Claiborne is a joke in terms physicality and tackling.

Church is physical and can tackle. But is so incompetent in coverage that it negates all of that. I honestly wish they would consider him at the WILL. It would add speed to the LB spot (could move Carter to the SAM) and he wouldn't be a liability as the last line of defense.

Wilcox isn't very big as a safety. Heath is tiny. And Heath tackled horrendously last year (to his credit, he should not have been starting anyway).

Compare that to the Seahawks. Earl Thomas can lay the wood, but he is by far and away a sure tacklers first and foremost. He's also superb in coverage. Chancellor towers over Church, hits harder and covers much better. Sherman isn't a great tackler, but a pretty good tackler and great at playing physical press coverage.

When we had the chance to find some big, physical corners and place more emphasis on finding quality safeties....we instead spent $50 million and then moved up in the first round of the draft and nabbed 2 'cover corners' and left ourselves with a cast of safeties that have included:

Barry Church
JJ Wilcox
Jeff Heath
Will Allen
Mana Silva
Gerald Sensabaugh
Danny McCray
Charlie Peprah
Eric Frampton

Pee-you.

YR

Your post was a general statement about size and speed relative to specific positions. Now you're changing the topic to talent.
Wilcox (6-0, 217) is not small and Heath (6-1, 209) is not tiny.

WLB: Carter 4.4 forty, Church 4.64 forty
Church might be an option in situational packages, but they are not going to have a full time LB at 218 lbs, IMO.

 

[StevenOtero]

No, it does not prove that.

There is no proof that they would have won with their DL and the Cowboys back 7.

On offense, neither team's OLine proved to be significantly if at all better than the Cowboys OLine.

With that kind of logic Seattle should have just let the D-Line stay in their stances/not rush and give Peyton all day to throw. ...because you know Seattle's secondary is so good that they can cover for an eternity and just by their mere presence on the field force turnovers/bad throws/etc

You do not build a football team from the outside in, you build it from the inside out. A defensive backfield is only as good as its defensive front.

Don't even try to misdirect by bringing up the talent level of their O-Line. Denver's O-Line was dominated by the front 7 of Seattle. Period.

 

[casmith07]

I'm not saying their secondary isn't good, but their effectiveness drops tremendously when you have no rush. You can't cover receivers

I like the look of the single high safety. We would need more experience from the FS position to implement it though. I have high hopes that Wilcox can do that for us in the future as he continues to progress. Let Church wreak havoc near the LOS like Chancellor does for Seattle.

Wilcox certainly has the speed and range to play single high in a Cover 3. But the front 7 has to do their job to play that style. Church is an excellent in the box safety.

 

[Clove]

They should reset your likes total to zero.

That made me laugh. Well played.

 

[cowboy_ron]

An aggressive DL that constantly pressures the QB makes your secondary better....we do it the opposite and it makes every area weak

 

[xwalker]

With that kind of logic Seattle should have just let the D-Line stay in their stances/not rush and give Peyton all day to throw. ...because you know Seattle's secondary is so good that they can cover for an eternity and just by their mere presence on the field force turnovers/bad throws/etc

You do not build a football team from the outside in, you build it from the inside out. A defensive backfield is only as good as its defensive front.

Don't even try to misdirect by bringing up the talent level of their O-Line. Denver's O-Line was dominated by the front 7 of Seattle. Period.

I don't think you understand the concept of logic or the concept of proof.

Even if something is true, that does not guarantee that you can prove it.

Just because you have a "feeling" that something is true does not prove that it it true.

Obviously, Seattle has a good DLine; however, you can't prove that their DLine was a bigger factor in them winning than their secondary.

 

[casmith07]

I don't think you understand the concept of logic or the concept of proof.

Even if something is true, that does not guarantee that you can prove it.

Just because you have a "feeling" that something is true does not prove that it it true.

Obviously, Seattle has a good DLine; however, you can't prove that their DLine was a bigger factor in them winning than their secondary.

lol wut

 

[Boys122]

Yes. It's the cornerbacks that make it all go.

Get them up in their face so Tyrone Crawford and Ben Bass can ball.

lmao