pakowitz

ESPN - Hashmarks By Matt Mosley


something i thought was an interesting part of the info in the link:


Why the Colts don't spend big on corners

April 1, 2008 10:21 AM


Posted by ESPN.com's Mike Sando

Colts coach Tony Dungy played defensive back in the NFL, but he would put his money on pass-rushers over cornerbacks every time. "Bill [Polian] and I talk about that," Dungy said from the league meetings in West Palm Beach, Fla. "If you had that choice, you've got to go with the front people because they are harder to find and they have more of an impact on the game."

The Colts are not lavish spenders in free agency. When they do spend big on veteran players, cornerbacks aren't a high priority. Their scheme requires the front four to get pressure, while placing fewer demands on corners in coverage. Oakland, Denver, San Francisco and Green Bay are among the teams that have spent heavily on cornerbacks, with mixed results. The Packers have great depth on their defensive line, a key to their success on that side of the ball.

I Live In Beastmode!

Euphoria

OMG thank you so much for posting this... the SECRET why JD got a ring in Indy... have the top guys up front in the trenches. Thats how you win, get to the play offs, win in the playoffs and win a RING.

-been a preaching this for awhile now, and you get to hear it from a SB winning coach now.

I know, I know it doesn't count because Dungy doesn't play man to man he's only a coach.

WVSaint

A lot of people have recognized we need pressure up front first and I certainly agree. That being said I still wouldnt trade up for Dorsey or Ellis. We can not afford to lose picks, even if they are spent on a CB. There is too much age (and players coming off injury) on our D and we need to get younger at DT, LB, and CB.

Euphoria

I wouldn't say a lot there seems to be a mix... its not a decisive group. WE have debated the issue in other threads and now we get a sweet article like this to prove a point its a beautiful thing.

I think it comes down to how much you think Dorsey would be worth to our D. Rivers would fit and be a great talent for us but I don't think he will make an impact like Dorsey. CB is mute because with out pressure who cares we will have a 7-9 season again.

I believe if Dorsey is your guy then go get him. This draft class isn't the best by any means. Later rounds these guys won't make a difference in 3-4 years. Dorsey could make a difference for the next 10-plus years.

E U P H O R I A

wheelman

What the article fails to mention is that the Colts strictly run a Cover 2 defensive scheme. Cornerbacks are not as important as defensive linemen in that scheme because their responsibility is limited to only one quarter of the secondary at most. Therefore they can afford to start average players at the position.

Man-to-man coverage cornerbacks must cover the entire field, however, and the Saints strictly run man coverage. They don't even blitz. No matter how good our d-line is, an NFL quarterback is going to burn our secondary if we continue to put average cornerbacks on the field. What this team needs is a good balance between the talent in the front seven and the secondary. Should we improve our defensive line? Yes. But our need at defensive tackle is far outweighed by our need for a shutdown corner.

And Euph, don't forget one of the biggest downfalls of our 2000 season. We had one of the best pass rushes in NFL history, but the only player in our secondary that was a legitimate NFL starter was Sammy Knight. Do you remember what happened to us when we went against Minnesota in the playoffs? Moss and Culpepper tore that secondary a new one. And also in the second game of the season, Ryan Leaf had the best game of his much-maligned career against that same secondary.

Proponents of higher-order theories of consciousness argue that consciousness is explained by the relation between two levels of mental states in which a higher-order mental state takes another mental state. If you mention this to Chuck Norris, expect an explosive roundhouse kick to the face for spouting too much fancy-talk.

Euphoria

Dude can you send me some of the stuff you are smoking?First of all we didn't have the leagues best pass rush in NFL history that year, you'll need to go back futher like 87ish. We didn't make the playoffs that year either, we were 7-9. Should I stop there???

And do you get the point??? Every team has won the SB in the past few years didn't win it because they were "BALANCED" Thats pure BS. GET TO THE QB and WR can't get open in time nor can the QB throw the ball in time. There is nothing hard about this creating pressure helps the secondaries flaws and creates turn overs... ask the defending Super Bowl Champions the Giants!

Dungy and JD both have rings because they had a PASS RUSH, not by being 'balanced'.

FOOTBALL is a sport that was ment to be played in the trenches people.

-good night.

E U P H O R I A

wheelman

What am I smoking? We didn't make the playoffs that year? The 2000-2001 season was Hazbeen's first year. You know, the year we went 10-6, won our division, and won a playoff game for the first time in franchise history.

And you're right, the Saints didn't have the best pass rush in NFL history that year. I never said that they did. I said they had one of the best pass rushes in the league's history. They had 64 sacks, which would be 11 sacks more than what the Giants had last season.

Another thing, I never said that an improved pass rush would not also improve our secondary. I admitted that the defensive tackle situation should be addressed. What I'm saying is that our secondary is so bad, it wouldn't matter how good our pass rush is. Our best corner may not be ready until the middle of the season and could very easily lose a step because of his age. Jason David and Randall Gay are not #2 corners, and Usama Young is still unproven to say the least.

The Giants on the other hand had a first round pick in Ross, a second round pick in Webster (whose development was hampered by injuries after being considered one of the best man coverage corners in his draft class), and (while he may only have a season or two left in him) Sam Madison. I don't know about you, but I would take this secondary long before ours.

Proponents of higher-order theories of consciousness argue that consciousness is explained by the relation between two levels of mental states in which a higher-order mental state takes another mental state. If you mention this to Chuck Norris, expect an explosive roundhouse kick to the face for spouting too much fancy-talk.

Euphoria

No no... you said 2000 season and if you go over to NFL.com and pull up 2000 stats you'd see what I am talking about, so I am assuming you are correcting yourself then.

I think what you are missing from my posts and the article which both I hope cleary states that: If you have a dominate pass rush and control the line of scrimmage your secondary can be average or less that average and you are still going to be good. Its not true the other way around.

If I hike you the ball and send Dorsey after you, lets say you have 3 seconds to drop back, find your reciever and see if he is open. That isn't a whole lot of time and you are going to not see a LB drop back or S cheating over ect. You are going to make a mistake or get buried into the ground.

Now if I hike you the ball and give you 5-8 secods before I unleash Grants butt on you. You'll have plenty of time to look see where all the defenders are make sure that is the WR you want to throw to in this situation and if MM is cover him close just give your WR another second or 2 to make another break and hit him out of the break. BIG DIFFERENCE and you give your WR a chance... the other way there isn't much time for the WR to get open and your CB doesn't have a lot of time to screw up no matter who the CB is even if its JD or Gay who if you recall have rings from teams who had a rush - a dominate rush. You got to have that to win a SB.

I still don't think that year would put them in as one of the best Pass rushes in NFL history unless you say the top 3000 is one of the leagues best? I think you mean to say one of the best that year only.

E U P H O R I A

wheelman

First of all, saying "2000 season" and "2000-2001 season" means the same thing. So I have no idea what you're trying to get at there. I did make an error in my previous post, however. The Saints had 66 sacks that year, not 64.

NFL Stats: by Team Category

And, yes, that does mean that year's defense was one of the best pass rushing units of all time because they were only seven sacks short of breaking the single-season sack record.

Euphoria

So you are proving my point... get a pass rush and you win the Divison and in the playoffs? I agree with that whole-heartedly.