Did you see their run defense this year...at all? I mean, at all?

By your logic, shouldn't our D-Line have been awesome when Sims Freeman Downing and Siavii were here, since we had a #6 overall and two other 2nd rounders (since a ton of 1st rounders is apparently what matters judging from the tone of your post)??

FWIW, Cole 5th Round, Patterson USC guy (I'm sure you're objective), Howard 2nd Rounder and a solid, but not a great player by any means, Bunkley was drafted based on his bench #s, Walker was a third rounder, Ramsey is another USC guy (6th rounder), and McDougle has worse career numbers than Ryan Sims, a tackle per game, and 3 sacks in 4 years.

There is little depth there, and not much talent. All the #1's have either been busts (McDougal), are unproven (Bunkley), or are always hurt and are 1 dimensional (Kearse).

At least the Chiefs have DTs who are decent against the run.

Sorry but you're wrong. The Philly defensive line is VERY talented.

I like it in the redzone. Once you get down there, a zone becomes very effective because that gap between the corner and the deep safety shrinks to zero with the short field. In the middle of the field, I'd prefer a scheme that challenges the offense a little more.

Sadly, frustatingly, I think you're right. :banghead:

Uhh, it's better than GRob's "spinner" d?

Honestly, any defense can look good with talent. It's when you don't have talent that the scheme comes into play big time to try and hide those deficiencies. We didn't really see a pure cover-2 this year because, well, we don't have the personnel to play a solid pure cover-2. So it was a hybrid.

I really don't care about what defense we run as long as it stops opponents and creates turnovers...

I dont mind the scheme because it's a very sound scheme and it increases the defense chances of preventing the BIG play. The only thing I dont like about it, is, it's not an aggresive style of defense.

I just think if you look at our defense as a whole, we build it totally opposite of how a cover 2 is supposed to built. We have 2 good corners, 2 good defensive ends, and a good OLB.

But you really have to have a good line to make a cover 2 bode well, and also a good MLB, and safeties. I think that the biggest problem with our defense. We dont have a strong middle. Thats something REALLY essential if you want to run a cover 2 defense.

If we can build the middle of our defense, you'll see the cover 2 scheme at its best.

Like it now but I'd love it with two REAL DT's...

Actually the cover 2 is a defense thats supposed to hide a lack of talent at certain positions.

It requires a good front 4, at least one hard hitting LB and a ground covering safety. The CBs can be average since they get safety help be design and the MLB has to be fast and able to pass cover. The SOLB only has to funnel the play back inside and keep contain on the edge.

Our problem is that we're built for more of a man to man pressure style of D. We have entirely the wrong people for this style of D.

I'm not a fan of the defense since it can be toasted by a TE or slot WR running a deep post however it's not the worst D scheme in the world.

I wonder if the Buckeye fans like the cover 2 this morning.

Talent doesn't mean shit without the desire to utilize it. Ryan Sims is talented or he wouldn't be in the NFL, and he wouldn't have been playing in division 1. It's the desire to continue to improve that separates great players from fat worthless lazy pieces of shit like Sims

We should give it another year. Get some players more players that can run it and we'll be fine.

It really worked pretty well for a new system in the first year!

I don't think we have entirely the wrong personnel, just inferior personnel in a few spots.

I believe that to run a cover 2 effectively, you MUST have a strong front four. We have 2, at DE, but not a single strong DT. Reed and Edwards are depth guys, not starters, and Sims is a BUST of Trezelle Jenkins' sized proportions.

For the record, you pretty much need a strong front four to run any defense effectively.

You also need fast, agile LB'ers; we have one for sure in DJ, and really probably 2 with Mitchell. Bell is a terrible cover 2 backer and is really suited only as a blitzbacker in a 4-3. That's what Gun wanted him for, and the reason he's here-but that was a system ago. We've changed systems 4 times in 6 years; which leaves you with a hodgpodge of personnel. We're pretty close, though, really, to having the right type of guys to run this one. In my opinion, we should stick with it.

We need two quick, disruptive DT's, and one OLB. We need to start Pollard and Page at S. Reed, Edwards, and Wilkerson need to be rotational players only, and should not all be on the field at the same time.

I disagree that a good QB can just pick apart a cover 2 that is run correctly; the middle of the field is difficult to read and as long as you have a consistent pass rush a QB will make mistakes. Hell, Manning had a rough time of OURS, and it's been well noted that we're lacking in the personnel.

Chris

i think it's curious that we picked the cover 2 defense because the key pieces of that scheme we haven't been able to draft ... the DT.

a powerful defensive line and rangy safeties ... the very things we lack and we pick that scheme to run.

ouch


hopefully Herm will be better at spotting talent along the defensive line.

It's because CP had to hire Herm and Herm is stubborn about running "his defense". He tried to run it in NY when they had 3-4 players.