Stupid Question of the day

[Frosty]

What is it, that a Safety can do.. but a CB cannot do... in the backfield?

I'm not the coach, or football wizard but with all the trouble the Cowboys have finding Safeties why dont they just use CB's instead. The NFL is a pass happy league, and from my novice perspective, it seems having 4 Mike Jenkins in the back field, could better defend the pass than Ken Hamilin can on good day.

So what is the deference and why not use CB's instead of Safeties.

 

[Illini88228]

What is it, that a Safety can do.. but a CB cannot do... in the backfield?

I'm not the coach, or football wizard but with all the trouble the Cowboys have finding Safeties why dont they just use CB's instead. The NFL is a pass happy league, and from my novice perspective, it seems having 4 Mike Jenkins in the back field, could better defend the pass than Ken Hamilin can on good day.

So what is the deference and why not use CB's instead of Safeties.

Essentially you need someone more physical than the typical corner, so that he can be the last line of defense against the run. It also helps to have some one who can make wide receivers pay a little for running over the middle.

And, you need someone bigger who can wrestle with TEs and RBs who are a lot bigger than the typical WR in coverage.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

What is it, that a Safety can do.. but a CB cannot do... in the backfield?

I'm not the coach, or football wizard but with all the trouble the Cowboys have finding Safeties why dont they just use CB's instead. The NFL is a pass happy league, and from my novice perspective, it seems having 4 Mike Jenkins in the back field, could better defend the pass than Ken Hamilin can on good day.

So what is the deference and why not use CB's instead of Safeties.

CBs are supposed to be speedier and more agile but cannot freelance like safeties can. Safeties are like a hybrid lb but fleeter of foot and can take on the run.

Glad i could hep, bud.

And let me add that there are no dumb questions. only dumb posters.

 

[masomenos]

What is it, that a Safety can do.. but a CB cannot do... in the backfield?

I'm not the coach, or football wizard but with all the trouble the Cowboys have finding Safeties why dont they just use CB's instead. The NFL is a pass happy league, and from my novice perspective, it seems having 4 Mike Jenkins in the back field, could better defend the pass than Ken Hamilin can on good day.

So what is the deference and why not use CB's instead of Safeties.

You're not him?

 

[Future]

Next to nothing other than stopping the run...physically.

But they must have a different set of instincts, or something of that nature, in order to be able to judge who to cover and who to pass off to someone else. And the timing is way different.

 

[MapleLeaf]

...them. This doesn't mean that the Cowboys have the individual assignments down the same way.

CB. Think pass first, watch for run.

Zone coverage. Get to your zone first, keep body angle as such to view both WR and the QB. Know your depth and drop.

Man to man, get your bump if defence calls for it. Play your man with inside leverage at corner, outside leverage in slot.

Play the tackle first go for the ball if you have a chance second.

If run get outside leverage keep outside arm free, drive to make the tackle outside in or force runner back inside to pursuing LBs.

Safeties.

Depends on the defensive coordinator, but you may be required to call the defence along with the MLB. At the very least you set the safeties and call the coverage. Most coordinators pick either the FS or SS based on ability and experience. I can be either.

Think pass first. Run second. Unless its zone defence or called blitz and you are switching roles with a LB dropping in coverage.

On sweeps you fill in the gap inside out behind the pursuing LBs. On dives you fill outside in or head on.

On pass you read the QB or the WRs, but don't let any man get past you.

You coordinate with the LBs to make sure your depth is set right in zone coverage. You also communicate the coverage to the CBs so they know when to drop off in zone or pass off a WR to you.

When pass is in the air if you are the lone man in coverage you play the tackle first, ball second.

If you are the second man in coverage you play the ball first if you can track it. If you have lost the ball then play the tackle along with the CB.

As a general rule you like Safeties who can track a ball in the air fairly quickly. A big hitter is nice, but a ball hawk is way more effective with the scoreboard.

Rarely do big hits win games, but interceptions have been shown to greatly affect the outcome of games.

 

[MapleLeaf]

...one other thing.

You want your corners quick and your safeties fast. Your corners break on a dime and recover quickly they are faster backpedaling than most of the team going forwards.

Your safeties are fast. They are long striders and cover huge territory in very few steps. They track the ball well and know positioning of the defensive backfield and can keep a good sense of this as they are moving in space.

They intuitively know pursuit angles. They have long arms and great hands.

 

[Hostile]

What is it, that a Safety can do.. but a CB cannot do... in the backfield?

I'm not the coach, or football wizard but with all the trouble the Cowboys have finding Safeties why dont they just use CB's instead. The NFL is a pass happy league, and from my novice perspective, it seems having 4 Mike Jenkins in the back field, could better defend the pass than Ken Hamilin can on good day.

So what is the deference and why not use CB's instead of Safeties.

Teams will use converted CBs more and more as teams continue to pass more than run. I don't really play Madden, so I will probably screw this explanation up.

CBs typically would rate an 8 in coverage but a 7 in run support.

Safeties would be the opposite. 8 in run support, and 7 in coverage.

As coverage becomes more and more important, teams will sacrifice a little in run support to have better coverage. So you very well may see more Antrel Rolle's moving from CB to Safety.

Personally, I am in favor of better coverage because I believe our front 7 are good enough against the run that a true run support Safety is not as needed.

 

[Doomsday101]

Teams will use converted CBs more and more as teams continue to pass more than run. I don't really play Madden, so I will probably screw this explanation up.

CBs typically would rate an 8 in coverage but a 7 in run support.

Safeties would be the opposite. 8 in run support, and 7 in coverage.

As coverage becomes more and more important, teams will sacrifice a little in run support to have better coverage. So you very well may see more Antrel Rolle's moving from CB to Safety.

Personally, I am in favor of better coverage because I believe our front 7 are good enough against the run that a true run support Safety is not as needed.

I played safety in high school and college. I always consider our group as the LB of the secondary. Our job was to make the calls in the secondary, to provide support on running plays to provide coverage and to be that 5th or 6th pass rusher on the safety blitz.

When the QB gets to the line of scrimmage he is looking to see where the safeties are, are we sitting back 2 deep or offset with one moving up while the other slides to the middle and where the safeties are lining up gives the QB somewhat of a clue as to what the defensive coverage may be.

 

[DCBoysfan]

A safety is usually bigger to defend against the run and matchup with TE's better, and have the ability to read angles from a distance, a corner usually plays on the edge and have better change of direction than a safety. A safety also has the responsibility to change coverage based on formations, I wasn't a pro or anything like that, but played corner and I always though safety was harder, its not easy being back and having a play happen in front of you very fast and the safety coming up to make a play to prevent a TD.

 

[DCBoysfan]

I played safety in high school and college. I always consider our group as the LB of the secondary. Our job was to make the calls in the secondary, to provide support on running plays to provide coverage and to be that 5th or 6th pass rusher on the safety blitz.

When the QB gets to the line of scrimmage he is looking to see where the safeties are, are we sitting back 2 deep or offset with one moving up while the other slides to the middle and where the safeties are lining up gives the QB somewhat of a clue as to what the defensive coverage may be.

These are good points, our safeties would try to stand together based on coverage and move just before the ball was snap to try to hide what defense we was in.

 

[Doomsday101]

These are good points, our safeties would try to stand together based on coverage and move just before the ball was snap to try to hide what defense we was in.

I think the fun part I had playing safety was the role of enforcer. any WR coming over the middle had to pay the price and when you get that clean shot as the WR is looking in the ball and has no clue what is about to happen you can't help but grin as you prepare to to lower the boom. Of course you let him know you will be there all day long as your standing over the WR, they tend to get upset when you do that. :laugh2:

 

[DFWJC]

What is it, that a Safety can do.. but a CB cannot do... in the backfield?

I'm not the coach, or football wizard but with all the trouble the Cowboys have finding Safeties why dont they just use CB's instead. The NFL is a pass happy league, and from my novice perspective, it seems having 4 Mike Jenkins in the back field, could better defend the pass than Ken Hamilin can on good day.

So what is the deference and why not use CB's instead of Safeties.

I do think the league is heading more and more towards CBs over safeties, but not yet.
Unless there are rule changes, don't be surprised if the norm soon is 3 starting CBs and one safety.

Safeties should be able to defend the run better and get up in the box if needed to sometimes cover a TE (where some CBs may be physically overmatched). They also tend to be taller (not always) and should be instinctive--able to react to cover the backsides of the CBs and also underneath coverage.
CBs should be faster and more fluid--able to cover man-to-man better vs especially (but not only) the WRs.

 

[THUMPER]

The other posters have given good responses on this but I'll add some stats to consider:

Our 4 CBs from last year were all under 6'0 (except for Ball who is 6'1") and under 200 LBs.

Newman - 5'11" 191
Jenkins - 5'10" 198
Scandrick - 5'10" 193
Ball - 6'1" 188

Our 4 Safeties were all 6'0" or taller and the lightest was 209 lbs.

Ken Hamlin - 6'2" 209
Sensabaugh - 6'0" 210
Watkins - 6'5" 218
Mike Hamlin - 6'2" 213

Now look at our TEs & RBs:

Witten - 6'5" 263
Bennett - 6'6" 266
Phillips - 6'5" 255

Barber - 6'0" 222
Jones - 6'0" 218
Choice - 5'10" 212

Our CBs are not small compared with other teams' CBs but they would have a tough time covering TEs & RBs, that's why you need bigger guys at the Safety spots or they will simply get out-muscled by the TEs and RBs.

Not that you have to be big in order to play Safety but it helps. Ed Reed, for instance, is only 5'11" 200 LBs and is acknowledged as one of the best Safeties in the game today, but most are bigger than that.

 

[Doomsday101]

I do think the league is heading more and more towards CBs over safties, but not yet.
Safeties should be able to defend the run better and get up in the box if needed to sometimes cover a TE (where some CBs may be physically overmatched). They also tend to be taller (not always) and should be instinctive--able to react to cover the backsides of the CBs and also underneath coverage.
CBs should be faster and more fluid--able to cover man-to-man better vs especially (but not only) the WRs.

As soon as they do I think you will see offenses going back more to the run. Things in the NFL run in cycles

 

[DFWJC]

As soon as they do I think you will see offenses going back more to the run. Things in the NFL run in cycles

The rules favor the WRs so much right now, that it has forced teams to change on both sides of the ball.

 

[Doomsday101]

The rules favor the WRs so much right now, that it has forced teams to change on both sides of the ball.

I don't disagree with that however if defenses to combat the passing attack went to smaller CB through out their secondary offense then could counter by attacking the smaller DB with a running game. Safeties tend to be a bit bigger than most CB and more physical. Offense and defense coaches have always looked to counter what each side does.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Personally, I am in favor of better coverage because I believe our front 7 are good enough against the run that a true run support Safety is not as needed.

Hence the cutting of Roy31.