Washington to release (or trade?) Landon Collins

[Dante84]

Sources: The Washington #Commanders are expected to release star defender Landon Collins after the two sides did not agree on a restructured contract. Collins will now hit free agency to cash in again.

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) March 10, 2022

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by O.city

If "struggles in coverage" is said for a secondary player, I am out as far as you can get on said player.

Spags defense wouldn’t use him as a deep safety covering WRs, though.

His third safety is a box guy doing the things Collins is ELITE at.

[O.city]

How many times did they get Sorenson singled up on a TE or Wr while doing that?

No thanks. Pass.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

How many times did they get Sorenson singled up on a TE or Wr while doing that?

No thanks. Pass.

If he's 2021 Sorensen, sure.

2016 Sorensen was damn effective against TEs 'while doing that'.

And if you let him on the field w/ a 4 wide formation out there, it's your own damn fault as a DC for not paying attention to who's in the huddle.

Yes, you can avoid that sort of thing. You can't have your 3rd safety just another CB. If that's what you're doing, you're just running a Dime. Your 3rd safety has to be a more physical, versatile DB.

And you're only willing to do that if the guy can ALSO hang with WRs if single covered? Then you're just saying we should never send 3 safeties out there and scrap the heavy nickel in favor of a dime.

I mean...okay. That's an option. It's just not one I'd pursue.

And Sorensen was RARELY put in that blender when he was in the heavy nickel role. His embarrassing moments early in the year came exclusively when he was starting over Thornhill and... playing single high for some bizarre damn reason.

I just feel like you're clouding the roles here.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

If he's 2020 Sorensen, sure.

2016 Sorensen was damn effective against TEs 'while doing that'.

And if you let him on the field w/ a 4 wide formation out there, it's your own damn fault as a DC for not paying attention to who's in the huddle.

Yes, you can avoid that sort of thing. You can't have your 3rd safety just another CB. If that's what you're doing, you're just running a Dime. Your 3rd safety has to be a more physical, versatile DB.

And you're only willing to do that if the guy can ALSO hang with WRs if single covered? Then you're just saying we should never send 3 safeties out there and scrap the heavy nickel in favor of a dime.

I mean...okay. That's an option. It's just not one I'd pursue.

I'm just of the opinion that you can't be so subpackage dependent anymore. Teams catch you in it and just kill you.

I dont' know that answer, but I'm weary of safeties that struggle in coverage.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

I'm just of the opinion that you can't be so subpackage dependent anymore. Teams catch you in it and just kill you.

I dont' know that answer, but I'm weary of safeties that struggle in coverage.

What about Linebackers that are awesome at it for the position?

You can't be sub-package dependent if your STARTERS depend on your sub-package bringing better players on the field. That's where we were getting murdered early in the year. We were getting trapped in our base defense and couldn't get a sub out to rescue Sorensen.

But if your starters are credible and you can deploy your sub-packages situationally, that's absolutely a good situation to find yourself in.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

What about Linebackers that are awesome at it for the position?

You can't be sub-package dependent if your STARTERS depend on your sub-package bringing better players on the field. That's where we were getting murdered early in the year. We were getting trapped in our base defense and couldn't get a sub out to rescue Sorensen.

But if your starters are credible and you can deploy your sub-packages situationally, that's absolutely a good situation to find yourself in.

That's my preference. I'd rather have a credible "LB'er" at that spot. Maybe that can be collins.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

That's my preference. I'd rather have a credible "LB'er" at that spot. Maybe that can be collins.

That's your 'subpackage'.

You rotate your 3rd LBer and 3rd safety.

When it's a clear run situation, you bring out a heavy backer to play the Sam, move Bolton to Mike and Gay to Will.

If it's clear pass, you go into a Dime and you have 4 CBs w/ 2 Ss

But when you're in that mushy middle, especially on early downs between the 20s, you put Gay at the Sam, Bolton at the Mike and at your Will you have a guy who is strong in run support, capable of blitzing and viable in coverage (again, for a LBer).

And yeah, I just don't see why Collins can't be exactly that guy.

Don't think of him being utilized as a safety - that's really not how we'd be using him. He'd be effectively a hybrid Will 'backer.

[WarChiefs89]

With guys being released before actual FA starts would you be in favor of the chiefs playing the compensatory pick game and mostly focus on players who have been cut (Trey Flowers, Collins, Bobby Wagner, Jordan Hicks, Tavon Young, maybe a Zadarius Smith or Cole Beasley if released) instead of going after any mid-tier or top-tier unrestricted FA's?

Doing so would probably net us a couple of decent comp picks next year by losing Matthieu and probably Ward. I would guess they would net 4th round comp picks to us next draft.

[Chris Meck]

Collins would be a large, large upgrade over Dirty Dan Sorensen. That's his role. Not Thornhill's, not Honey Badger's.

I'm not convinced this is the way they should go cap-wise, but Collins is real good at that role.

[chiefforlife]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Collins would be a large, large upgrade over Dirty Dan Sorensen. That's his role. Not Thornhill's, not Honey Badger's.

I'm not convinced this is the way they should go cap-wise, but Collins is real good at that role.

Yes he is!

His value is way down too, we might be pleasantly surprised by the offers he gets. Having Spags should give us a slight advanatge.

Covering RBs out of the backfield has burned us for years, TEs too. I like this idea at the right price.

[tyreekthefreak]

Originally Posted by WarChiefs89

With guys being released before actual FA starts would you be in favor of the chiefs playing the compensatory pick game and mostly focus on players who have been cut (Trey Flowers, Collins, Bobby Wagner, Jordan Hicks, Tavon Young, maybe a Zadarius Smith or Cole Beasley if released) instead of going after any mid-tier or top-tier unrestricted FA's?

Doing so would probably net us a couple of decent comp picks next year by losing Matthieu and probably Ward. I would guess they would net 4th round comp picks to us next draft.

They'll keep Ward. They have to because he's too good to let go. No way he leaves.

[Titty Meat]

I think there's several guys on the roster currently who the Chiefs view as the next Sorenson

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by tyreekthefreak

They'll keep Ward. They have to because he's too good to let go. No way he leaves.

San Diego will, at worst, price enforce the shit out of him. They’ll make sure we don’t get him back cheap and they have the cap space to go ahead and sign him if he bites.

REALLY would’ve been nice to get a deal done there a year ago.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

San Diego will, at worst, price enforce the shit out of him. They’ll make sure we don’t get him back cheap and they have the cap space to go ahead and sign him if he bites.

REALLY would’ve been nice to get a deal done there a year ago.

He bet on himself over the quick buck.

And he won because I think he’s going to get a really nice deal. Won’t be surprised if he gets 10-15m per.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by BossChief

He bet on himself over the quick buck.

And he won because I think he’s going to get a really nice deal. Won’t be surprised if he gets 10-15m per.

I’d say more in the $13-$16 million range with the high number being more likely.