Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 4  Next >

Attacking D = Reboot

Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 10:05 AM

Attacking D = Reboot 


I was thinking...

If we're going back to an Oedaphat Rex style "Hopey-change- attacky" D we're in a rebuild process.

It's one thing to take the DL depth Heckert spent 3 years drafting & signing & project it to a 3-4. That's fine. Butt it ain't what feeds that. What makes an attacking D go is the back 7 you simpletons. You need DBs that can hold in press man on islands. We got 1. You need LBers that can get up field & up against traffic & make plays. We got none. We have a solid stay at home Mike & a bunch of kids who are smallish or not all that fast.

You'd have to draft a Jone or Kivi Mingo number 1 to get a playmaker & that means waiting on DBs. Or go CB & you got JAGs out of place. There can be no worse KoolAId to stir in the off season than projecting Sheard as an elephant and expecting transformation via projection. Or one of the kids bulking up at WS OLB & expecting quality.

Bad moon rising. Attacking & failing = blowouts.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 11:55 AM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


Regardless of what we want our D to do there are two things ALL defenses need to be successful, a pass rush(er) and legit DBs.  Each of those can thrive in any 4-3, 3-4, OU812 configuration.

So IMO that changes nothing regarding our first pick if we go defense, get a corner or a pass rushing DL/LB.

But honestly, why we even talking defense, this is the NFL, there is no defense anymore.

It's time to place 75% of our efforts and resources on the offense, including eyeing up the next best QB prospect.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 12:37 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


Sheard stands up a bunch right now. I was looking for that in the last game and he did it plenty.  Can't wait for MK's analysis.

In this newest transition it looks like we will have a bunch of staff from a team that will probably be rebooted. There will be lots of players from the Chargers available. Even if there was no change of offensive and defensive styles we'd see a big transfusion.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 1:24 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


People might be missing the point on Sheard making the transition. Yeah, he stands up a lot and can rush the passer, not a big problem. But OLB's in the 3-4 don't rush on every down. Sometimes they have to cover a TE or RB on short routes, they have to make quick decisions about where the play is going and what area they need to protect. 4-3 DE's rush the passer, set the outside edge, and play the run. Unless you're Zone blitzing (and Jauron did not), these guys have no experience in pass coverage.

Maybe Sheard can do it. But it's as much mental as physical.

To Nas: Totally agree Mitigating factor: 49 large in cap space. There's no physical type pre-requisite for a good cover corner or free saftey. If (IF) the pro player personnel guys are sharp, we should be able to get those guys outside the draft, and maybe the LBer's we would need as well. At least a combination of draft and FA might speed the process and also help add  some veteran presence that could cut the schedule too.

We should be able to buy some talent, the rest is teaching/gelling/team kumbaya.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 2:14 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 



Nasdaq wrote: I was thinking...

If we're going back to an Oedaphat Rex style "Hopey-change- attacky" D we're in a rebuild process.

It's one thing to take the DL depth Heckert spent 3 years drafting & signing & project it to a 3-4. That's fine. Butt it ain't what feeds that. What makes an attacking D go is the back 7 you simpletons. You need DBs that can hold in press man on islands. We got 1. You need LBers that can get up field & up against traffic & make plays. We got none. We have a solid stay at home Mike & a bunch of kids who are smallish or not all that fast.

You'd have to draft a Jone or Kivi Mingo number 1 to get a playmaker & that means waiting on DBs. Or go CB & you got JAGs out of place. There can be no worse KoolAId to stir in the off season than projecting Sheard as an elephant and expecting transformation via projection. Or one of the kids bulking up at WS OLB & expecting quality.

Bad moon rising. Attacking & failing = blowouts.
I don't know that's all true. I'll tell you the same thing I told the poster who thought it was just no problem to switch, it all depends on how the coaching staff sees it.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the first three picks go D, though.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 4:30 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 



Nasdaq wrote: I was thinking...

If we're going back to an Oedaphat Rex style "Hopey-change- attacky" D we're in a rebuild process.

It's one thing to take the DL depth Heckert spent 3 years drafting & signing & project it to a 3-4. That's fine. Butt it ain't what feeds that. What makes an attacking D go is the back 7 you simpletons. You need DBs that can hold in press man on islands. We got 1. You need LBers that can get up field & up against traffic & make plays. We got none. We have a solid stay at home Mike & a bunch of kids who are smallish or not all that fast.

You'd have to draft a Jone or Kivi Mingo number 1 to get a playmaker & that means waiting on DBs. Or go CB & you got JAGs out of place. There can be no worse KoolAId to stir in the off season than projecting Sheard as an elephant and expecting transformation via projection. Or one of the kids bulking up at WS OLB & expecting quality.

Bad moon rising. Attacking & failing = blowouts.
SD:

Love that your pessimistic , if you were enthused , I'd be really worried.

The draft is chock full of 34 talent , plus there are corners and safety help which can be found as deep as the third round .

By bringing in Chud we can use the QB's we have and expend the top pick on the defensive side of the ball possibly trade down and add a second and use that on the same .

On linebackers take your pick from Bama and Georgia with the 6th and get the Elephant , Sheard is not Wimbley  I disagree vehemently with your  cough cough ,assessment of his capabilities, if anything he's more Jamirr Miller and will have fine range on two feet .

Stand him up like the inbred used Kevin Greene and Greg Lloyd who are of similar size and builds , and along the lines of how the Cowboys use Ware , none were over burdened with pass coverage responsibilities and they all did just fine.

We needed to upgrade the linebackers and safety play regardless if we stayed 43 or 34 , as long as we're aggressive and use the San Diego scheme  or inbred hybrid , and stay away from the more veteran specific  cerebral junk Mangy RAC and even Ryan to some extent run , these pups will be able to have success playing down hill .

Hell Shawn Merriweather had one of the greatest rookie years ever with Ware not to far behind in a system which limited their responsibilities and augmented their athleticism , and nether one of them will ever be mistaken for brain surgeons .

and just so we're clear .

I prefer we stayed 43 just because of the two years of time invested in the switch , but if we were ever to make that move with the least collateral waste that time is now.

Now find me a way to get that Bama  or Fla State safety with no second round pick  and make yourself usefull  :)


SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 4:42 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


SD,

Don't blend Nas's take with mine.

That's how bad Sci Fi movies get started. You're gonna end up with some sick mutation that must die or mankind will suffer.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 5:00 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 



Gameface64 wrote: SD,

Don't blend Nas's take with mine.

That's how bad Sci Fi movies get started. You're gonna end up with some sick mutation that must die or mankind will suffer.
SD:

Don't worry we're from Cleveland , nobody will even notice until we've got half  the world swallowed up and engulfed .

The lucky ones will die in their sleep, mankind was never nice to us anyway.





SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 6:45 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


I think Butz makes a great point about Sheard. Dunno it's 100% black & white. Have no problem seeing Sheard as a 5th Beatle rushing the QB from a stand up position. But a 3-4 OLB in base?
Hmmmmmm .... Let's say I have doubts. Didn't he do some a that at Pitt?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 6:47 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 




---------------------------------------------
--- Gameface64 wrote:

SD,

Don't blend Nas's take with mine.

That's how bad Sci Fi movies get started. You're gonna end up with some sick mutation that must die or mankind will suffer.

---------------------------------------------

Megacroc vs Super snake? Tiffany & Debbie Fibson?

Leave Tokyo now.
Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12947 posts this site

Posted: 1/13/2013 8:57 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


Question...who fits?

Don't we need speed or at least more speed than what we have at LB? And Doesn't an attacking D require better play from our DBs?  Only Haden and Ward seem to fit.  Shorty has speed but can't tackle or cover and the rest lack tackling skills. At least, I didn't see a lot of good fundamental tackling by our DBs, excepting Brown and he is likely to move on.

And if we are an attacking D, don't we need more from our DL? even if it is based on a 3 man line, we should have some DL that can rush a passer.  Watt is not available and it looks like Sheard is being placed at LB.

Just have a bunch of questions as what our attacking D will be and how the players we have fit.  Looks as if we will need  a half dozen additions. So who fits?  Where do we get help and who?

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 11:07 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


I think you guys are going nuts over nothing. I really think this will be a gradual transition to a system where we can use both. Chud has stated that he will build a system that takes advantage of the talent that is there now.

Personally i think he stays mostly 4-3 and starts filling in pieces first that gives him the flexibility to switch back and forth. I think the big tell on how close he thinks it is will be in Free agency and where he spends the dough.

There is a LOT of talent in the FA Safety position this off season. D Goldson who would fit perfect in the AFCN would be a huge upgrade. The safety in Buffalo is another option.

I think this will be a lot more gradual then we are talking here. If chud stays true to his word he will build the defense around what is here and add to it.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 7:08 AM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


We can get the 2nd corner and starting FS in FA. The pass rushing OLB with pick 6 in round one.

Bob's your uncle.

Wake me up when we are 10 and 6...

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 8:39 AM

RE: Attacking D = Reboot 


Let's see who the DC is before we say we're going to a straight 34.
I would like to see a hybrid 43-34 combo myself as I prefer the 34 but supported the 43 we went to.
The problem has been the same regardless of the scheme.

We simply don't stock the quality LB's for either scheme.
And we have patchwork DB's and safties.
It is that simple. We now have the downline but thats it.
SD is right about one thing..whoever this quasi GM is ,he better be able to get more picks especially a second.
I'll qualify that by saying it was a valued pick to get Gordon so I'm not angry about using it,we just need another one this year to get a valuable player.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 8:54 AM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 



Nasdaq wrote:


Megacroc vs Super snake? Tiffany & Debbie Fibson?

Leave Tokyo now.
Mansquito.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/14/2013 8:57 AM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


The good news, if you can call it that, is the back 7 has been so devoid of talent that the positions had to be filled anyway, no matter what the scheme.  At least there you avoid the problem of whether a Taylor or Sheard can be reconfigured (hoping Jabal ends up as even a poor man's Willie McGinest).

The cap space will come in awfully handy.  Guard, lbers, free safety, real fb, blocking te.

If the Browns stay at 6, the pass rush olb. 

If gone, the second cb, or trade down to pick up the second rounder.

A year in transition might see more blowouts than this past season, but the defense wasn't as good as many believed anyway.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/14/2013 9:44 AM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


Vark- A year in transition might see more blowouts than this past season, but the defense wasn't as good as many believed anyway.

- It's premature to predict blowouts based on a defensive scheme change. At worst I would expect high scoring loses, not blowouts.

I believe our own ability to score will again increase this coming year under Chud. No more of the ridiculous 1 yard outs to the FB/TE.

The only thing I've heard since Chud was hire that brothers me is the rumor that DA will be coming back with Chudzinski. Although I can see value in it as DA could help BW learn the offense, the part that brothers me is it seems that Anderson believes he could earn a starting role again with the team. I just as soon not go there.

In the end I realize the need for another down field passing QB, I just perfer it be someone else. Either way it pretty much means the end for McCoy. That, I'm ok with.
Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12947 posts this site

Posted: 1/14/2013 10:28 AM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 



Aardvark wrote: The good news, if you can call it that, is the back 7 has been so devoid of talent that the positions had to be filled anyway, no matter what the scheme.  At least there you avoid the problem of whether a Taylor or Sheard can be reconfigured (hoping Jabal ends up as even a poor man's Willie McGinest).

The cap space will come in awfully handy.  Guard, lbers, free safety, real fb, blocking te.

If the Browns stay at 6, the pass rush olb. 

If gone, the second cb, or trade down to pick up the second rounder.

A year in transition might see more blowouts than this past season, but the defense wasn't as good as many believed anyway.
good points

We have been so devoid of high quality talent and production for so long, we have come to accept mediocre as excellence.  Ward is a good in the box run stuffing safety, at least when he maintains scheme integrity and Haden is quality. DQ has been missing so often it is hard to count on him. Indeed we do need an influx of quality and dependable.

Defense wasn't all that good. Suffering close loses by a thousand paper cuts isn't winning. Jauron did well with what he had, but the D couldn't get off the field and rarely delivered a knock-out blow. Hard to think of them as dominating.

Chud will undeservedly suffer slings and arrows.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/15/2013 8:10 AM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


POPPA:

It's premature to predict blowouts based on a defensive scheme change.

AA:

When I wrote "a year in transition," I was talking about change on both sides of the ball.  We "MIGHT see more blowouts" as both the offense and defense take time to readjust given new schemes and, presumably, a fair amount of turnover (likely more on the defensive side).

POPPA:

I believe our own ability to score will again increase this coming year under Chud. No more of the ridiculous 1 yard outs to the FB/TE.

AA:

How quickly they forget Steve Heiden. 

POPPA:

The only thing I've heard since Chud was hire that brothers me is the rumor that DA will be coming back with Chudzinski. Although I can see value in it as DA could help BW learn the offense, the part that brothers me is it seems that Anderson believes he could earn a starting role again with the team. I just as soon not go there.

AA:

No kidding.  And the only thing more ridiculous than the idea of Anderson returning to Cleveland would be the idea that he could help Weeden learn the offense.  Derek would neither be ready, willing nor able.

POPPA:

In the end I realize the need for another down field passing QB, I just perfer it be someone else. Either way it pretty much means the end for McCoy. That, I'm ok with.

AA:

That makes sense on the surface of it, and for more than just that reason, McCoy is likely gone.  But it makes me think that other teams don't necessarily have backups who have the same style as starters.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/15/2013 3:23 PM

Re: Attacking D = Reboot 


New Chargers coach Mike McCoy reportedly wants to keep holdover John Pagano on board as defensive coordinator.

Pagano is under contract for one more year after improving the Bolts' defense from 22nd in 2011 to 16th in 2012. Pagano's unit surrendered fewer big plays, created more turnovers, and rushed the passer more consistently than Greg Manusky's defense the year before


No Pagano means no 3-4?

What defense does Mel Tucker like? He seems to be the next man up.
Would Lovie stoop to being a DC again?

Wake me up when we are 10 and 6...

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 4  Next >