Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Secondary considerations
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Baixis


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 1488
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:04 pm    Post subject: Secondary considerations Reply with quote

I hear a lot of people talk about how the DL is far more important than the secondary, and dog on Jerry and Co. for not putting more attention into the DL and dogging on him for paying Carr and moving up for Mo, and screaming that DL HAS TO BE a bigger priority than Safety, etc. Often times, especially after they've won a SB, people point to the Giants and their great DL as proof of why this is or how this is. There's no denying that they HAVE HAD some great DLs and they've come up big in two recent playoff runs. No denying that!

However, it also got me thinking about their secondary. The Giants do not and have not had a scrub secondary by any means! Look at their last SB team. Yes, the DL played a big part. But look who that DL had covering their butts:


20 Prince Amukamara CB (former 1st rd pick!)(I think he was actually out though)
36 Will Blackmon CB
34 Deon Grant FS (NOT a scrub)
22 Derrick Martin SS
21 Kenny Phillips SS (former 1st rd pick!)
26 Antrel Rolle FS (former 1st rd pick!)
31 Aaron Ross CB/PR (former 1st rd pick!)
39 Tyler Sash SS
23 Corey Webster CB (NOT a scrub)

That folks, is a better secondary than we've had in YEARS! Maybe they had something to do with how good that DL looked?! Just maybe.

Another example I thought of was the Eagles from 10 years ago or so. I hate the beagles, but I ALWAYS loved Jim Johnson and that blitzing style defense! I also remember that they had TWO Pro Bowl CBs at the height of their success, and one of the greatest Safeties ever in Brian Dawkins! Look at this 2002 secondary:


24 Blaine Bishop SS (very solid)
39 Sheldon Brown CB R (very solid; turned out to be)
42 Rashard Cook S
29 Darrel Crutchfield CB
20 Brian Dawkins FS (stud!)
41 William Hampton CB
31 Al Harris CB (very solid)
33 Clinton Hart FS
27 Julian Jones FS
32 Michael Lewis SS R (very solid; turned out to be)
26 Lito Sheppard CB R (very solid; turned out to be)
21 Bobby Taylor CB (stud!)
23 Troy Vincent CB (stud!)

That is INCREDIBLE! Samuels came out of Philly too at some point. Johnson and the Eagles were always getting sacks and pressure on the QB, and I believe that that secondaries' ability to lock down people was a huge reason why.

Fast forward to our current team! I think Mo and Carr are going to be quality CBs for quite a few years to come. If we can get one more solid/stud Safety and have Church and/or Johnson really breakout, they could provide a ton of leverage for our DL. With that kind of help, and a solid rotation (remember, Jimmy's teams had like 7-8 DL that rotated all the time, but few came out of college as sure fire studs), our defense has the potential to take a huge leap forward! I don't believe we have to have any early rnd DL this year to accomplish this either. A couple late rdrs this year, and maybe a high rdr next year, and our DL could be set.

What do you think?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 13220
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's the truth... in the NFL it does not matter how good a secondary is if a QB has time to throw the ball. This comes down to the most fundamental advantage the offense has over the defense... the offense knows the play. The QB knows when and where the WR, TE or RB is cutting; the defense does not. It's up to the defensive pass rush to disrupt the timing and angles. A good pass rush is the secondary's best friend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flyingmonkey30


Moderator
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 6466
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
Here's the truth... in the NFL it does not matter how good a secondary is if a QB has time to throw the ball. This comes down to the most fundamental advantage the offense has over the defense... the offense knows the play. The QB knows when and where the WR, TE or RB is cutting; the defense does not. It's up to the defensive pass rush to disrupt the timing and angles. A good pass rush is the secondary's best friend.


Totally agree with this. Forcing the ball out of a QB's hands makes the job of the secondary that much better. You could have the best secondary in the NFL, but it doesn't really mean much if a QB has all day to throw. You can only cover for so long.
_________________


Check out my draft thread!
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=490478t=447580&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Northland


Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 3879
Location: Ajax, Ontario
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The late great Bill Walsh said that the key to winning in the NFL is a strong pass rush in the fourth quarter. I just think that strong line play will overcome a lot of sins.

With respect to this draft I think I would rather spend a first round pick on a DL vs a DB (taking into account that we stay where we are). I think the value of the D Lineman that should be available at 18 will be greater than the value represented by a DB at 18 who in all probability will be a S. I think we can land a S in round 2 or later.
_________________
Northland
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baixis


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 1488
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

flyingmonkey30 wrote:
The_Slamman wrote:
Here's the truth... in the NFL it does not matter how good a secondary is if a QB has time to throw the ball. This comes down to the most fundamental advantage the offense has over the defense... the offense knows the play. The QB knows when and where the WR, TE or RB is cutting; the defense does not. It's up to the defensive pass rush to disrupt the timing and angles. A good pass rush is the secondary's best friend.


Totally agree with this. Forcing the ball out of a QB's hands makes the job of the secondary that much better. You could have the best secondary in the NFL, but it doesn't really mean much if a QB has all day to throw. You can only cover for so long.


I would say you are both correct, to a certain point. Another truth is, is that many of the Top QBs can get the ball out in less than 3 sec. on a regular basis. The greatest pass rush in the league will find it almost impossible to get to the QB in that limited time. Many QBs will NOT throw that ball though if secondary players are in a spot to make a play on the ball. We've had one of the best pass rushers to ever play the game on our defense for years now, and a horrible secondary. How has that affected our defense. I think the DL is a little more important than the secondary, but I'm just not convinced it is to the magnitude that many (Slam, Plan, etc) others think. Unless some very serious evidence otherwise can be given, I think it's much closer to a 60-40 split, if that. Does anyone have any actual countering evidence? Along the lines of, great teams, that had great pass rushes, and well below average secondary?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Northland


Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 3879
Location: Ajax, Ontario
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is a good topic. I think the issue we have with the Cowboys is that by and large both lines have not been a draft priority, Tyron Smith notwithstanding. If some prior research I did some time ago is correct ( and I am pulling this from memory so don't shoot me if i am wrong)since the 2005 draft we have not drafted any lineman, offensive or defensive, higher than the third round until we took Smith. When we hear that this game is won in the trenches, which at the end of the day is something I believe, and you look at our documented struggles on both sides of the ball, it only magnifies the argument for an investment in the lines.

At the end of my little rant I still want a lineman in round one.
_________________
Northland
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dboys88-82


Joined: 12 Jan 2011
Posts: 1761
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baixis wrote:
flyingmonkey30 wrote:
The_Slamman wrote:
Here's the truth... in the NFL it does not matter how good a secondary is if a QB has time to throw the ball. This comes down to the most fundamental advantage the offense has over the defense... the offense knows the play. The QB knows when and where the WR, TE or RB is cutting; the defense does not. It's up to the defensive pass rush to disrupt the timing and angles. A good pass rush is the secondary's best friend.


Totally agree with this. Forcing the ball out of a QB's hands makes the job of the secondary that much better. You could have the best secondary in the NFL, but it doesn't really mean much if a QB has all day to throw. You can only cover for so long.


I would say you are both correct, to a certain point. Another truth is, is that many of the Top QBs can get the ball out in less than 3 sec. on a regular basis. The greatest pass rush in the league will find it almost impossible to get to the QB in that limited time. Many QBs will NOT throw that ball though if secondary players are in a spot to make a play on the ball. We've had one of the best pass rushers to ever play the game on our defense for years now, and a horrible secondary. How has that affected our defense. I think the DL is a little more important than the secondary, but I'm just not convinced it is to the magnitude that many (Slam, Plan, etc) others think. Unless some very serious evidence otherwise can be given, I think it's much closer to a 60-40 split, if that. Does anyone have any actual countering evidence? Along the lines of, great teams, that had great pass rushes, and well below average secondary?


One elite pass rusher doesnt mean your defense is getting consistent pass rush. Thats been our problem. Outside of ware..we havent had anyone get consistent pressure on the quarterback.
_________________

^^Thanks to Kempes for the sig.^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cowboyschill


Joined: 20 Mar 2013
Posts: 12
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's a novel thought: maybe having a good secondary that can completely blanket the downfield options for an extended period gives the pass rushers time to get to the QB. Why does it have to be just the one way, i.e. a strong pass rush helps the secondary? The relationship is symbiotic, no?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23922
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cowboyschill wrote:
Here's a novel thought: maybe having a good secondary that can completely blanket the downfield options for an extended period gives the pass rushers time to get to the QB. Why does it have to be just the one way, i.e. a strong pass rush helps the secondary? The relationship is symbiotic, no?


You're right. It's a two way street. People here like to deal in absolutes which is rarely based on reality. It takes just one play to score. Giving the defense a few extra fraction of a second to get to a QB turns Almost Anthony into a Pro Bowler. As the adage goes, it takes two to tango.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 13220
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cowboyschill wrote:
Here's a novel thought: maybe having a good secondary that can completely blanket the downfield options for an extended period gives the pass rushers time to get to the QB. Why does it have to be just the one way, i.e. a strong pass rush helps the secondary? The relationship is symbiotic, no?


Not so much. In NFL history, there are very few players who were capable of blanket coverage. I honestly can't think of a team that has won the SB where the defense was based on having a great secondary with blanket coverage. I can name dozens of SB winners that featured a great DL.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20399
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
cowboyschill wrote:
Here's a novel thought: maybe having a good secondary that can completely blanket the downfield options for an extended period gives the pass rushers time to get to the QB. Why does it have to be just the one way, i.e. a strong pass rush helps the secondary? The relationship is symbiotic, no?


You're right. It's a two way street. People here like to deal in absolutes which is rarely based on reality. It takes just one play to score. Giving the defense a few extra fraction of a second to get to a QB turns Almost Anthony into a Pro Bowler. As the adage goes, it takes two to tango.


It really isn't a two-way street, T_O7. And it never has been. A great secondary doesn't make a d-line better, where a great d-line makes the secondary better. That's how you know it's a one-way street.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
htfryar


Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 10313
Location: Hot Springs, Arkansas
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
cowboyschill wrote:
Here's a novel thought: maybe having a good secondary that can completely blanket the downfield options for an extended period gives the pass rushers time to get to the QB. Why does it have to be just the one way, i.e. a strong pass rush helps the secondary? The relationship is symbiotic, no?


You're right. It's a two way street. People here like to deal in absolutes which is rarely based on reality. It takes just one play to score. Giving the defense a few extra fraction of a second to get to a QB turns Almost Anthony into a Pro Bowler. As the adage goes, it takes two to tango.


It really isn't a two-way street, T_O7. And it never has been. A great secondary doesn't make a d-line better, where a great d-line makes the secondary better. That's how you know it's a one-way street.


So, you are saying that the improved CB play this past season had nothing to do with Anthony Spencer getting more sacks, instead of almost getting there, as in previous years. You really believe that Spencer magically turned the corner on his own and finally started living up to his potential and it had nothing to do with Carr and Caliborne. Really?
_________________


Homer Simpson wrote:
Beer, the cause of, and solution to all of life’s problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20399
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

htfryar wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
cowboyschill wrote:
Here's a novel thought: maybe having a good secondary that can completely blanket the downfield options for an extended period gives the pass rushers time to get to the QB. Why does it have to be just the one way, i.e. a strong pass rush helps the secondary? The relationship is symbiotic, no?


You're right. It's a two way street. People here like to deal in absolutes which is rarely based on reality. It takes just one play to score. Giving the defense a few extra fraction of a second to get to a QB turns Almost Anthony into a Pro Bowler. As the adage goes, it takes two to tango.


It really isn't a two-way street, T_O7. And it never has been. A great secondary doesn't make a d-line better, where a great d-line makes the secondary better. That's how you know it's a one-way street.


So, you are saying that the improved CB play this past season had nothing to do with Anthony Spencer getting more sacks, instead of almost getting there, as in previous years. You really believe that Spencer magically turned the corner on his own and finally started living up to his potential and it had nothing to do with Carr and Caliborne. Really?


No, I do not believe they were a factor. I believe that money was the factor since he's in a contract year due to being tagged. And if you ask many of the folks around here, Spencer has had 4 consecutive great years, so your point would be moot to them since our secondary stunk for 3 of those 4 seasons. If he's had 4 consecutive great seasons, then the improved secondary had nothing to do with his play on the field. I do not, and will never, believe in "the coverage sack". It's hogwash and complete and utter garbage.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23922
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
cowboyschill wrote:
Here's a novel thought: maybe having a good secondary that can completely blanket the downfield options for an extended period gives the pass rushers time to get to the QB. Why does it have to be just the one way, i.e. a strong pass rush helps the secondary? The relationship is symbiotic, no?


You're right. It's a two way street. People here like to deal in absolutes which is rarely based on reality. It takes just one play to score. Giving the defense a few extra fraction of a second to get to a QB turns Almost Anthony into a Pro Bowler. As the adage goes, it takes two to tango.


It really isn't a two-way street, T_O7. And it never has been. A great secondary doesn't make a d-line better, where a great d-line makes the secondary better. That's how you know it's a one-way street.


Well, we disagree. I put a greater emphasis on the DL sure. But even the vaunted DL of the Giants had sever holes because C.C. Brown could not cover for longer than a fraction of a second. If you don't think Secondary matters, then you are very much like Parcells.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
htfryar


Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 10313
Location: Hot Springs, Arkansas
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spencer was in a contract year the previous season, when we had poor CB play, and he had 6 sacks. Yet, you think that his career high in sacks had more to do with the fact that he was playing under the franchise tag, rather than because of the improved CB play. Why?
_________________


Homer Simpson wrote:
Beer, the cause of, and solution to all of life’s problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group