Rank Our Problems and Discussion

saintswhodi · 02-06-2005, 04:24 PM

Bill Parcells himself says CBs are less important due to the rule changes and I am inclined to agree. It is more important to be able to enforce the play of your D on another team\'s offense to cause mistakes than to count on your CB shutting someone down. That being said, a dominant DT, a serious LT, and a good, solid MLB should be addressed right off. Of secondary concern, S, QB, then CB.

spkb25 · 02-06-2005, 05:00 PM

i think that outside of resigning the guys we need to resign that we need an o tackle and a d tackle. i would also like to see us bring in a qb or draft one to challenge brooks. even if not this year in the years to come

JKool · 02-06-2005, 05:38 PM

spk,

I can get on board with that, but how high a draft pick would you use? Would it depend on what we did in FA?

That is the reason for the ranking; it really makes you stop and think what kind of resources you\'d be willing to devote to such things. When I did mine, it made is slightly clearer to me where QB fell on the list of needs.

Whodi, good point. Rule changes to make CBs value drop a bit. I tend to be in the minority on my view of CBs value (I tend to be higher than most), but I do agree that CBs are decreasing in value these days. Do you have a ranking?

I\'ve recently heard it argued that we don\'t really need a stud DT, we merely need a run-stuffing wide body, what do you think?

spkb25 · 02-06-2005, 06:01 PM

i think the problem with awide body is that you have to worry about the weight all the time. i\'d prefer to just get someone that can get the job done. as far as the o tackle and d tackle i think how high we draft depends in part on what we do in free agency and what talent is available. i dont want to pick up a guy that is really a 2nd or thrid round pick in the first round because we need that position. regardless of need as far as the draft go\'s if someone falls even if it isnt a need i think you have to draft him. just like last year. you can never hgave enough good players. but if there was an o tackle worht our first round pick i would take him. we need a guy like that. im scared to take another d tackle. man i would just hope that sullivan would get it going this year. i doubt it but i guess theres always a chance. im not that concerned anymore with our cb spot. i think we are decent there if we keep mike. i like our lb,s right now especially bockwoldt but i would never mind seeing us bring in a veteran that can really play. as far as qb if we can get a good one in rounds two or three i say go for it. i hope i answered it a little bit better jkool

saintswhodi · 02-06-2005, 06:02 PM

I would be estatic with a run stuffing DT. I don\'t need a Rod Coleman sack making DT. Give me a guy strong against the run, and at least disruptive on enough pass plays to make a difference. He doesn\'t have to have Glover type sack numbers.

What do you mean by a ranking on CBs? Not sure I follow. As presented in this thread or overall value in the NFL? I would be glad to expound on either.

spkb25 · 02-06-2005, 06:12 PM

but also jkool as far as the wide body run stuffer go\'s, i would say that is in part true. but they have to be just that a complete run stuffer. i think that can be huge. i still go back to the fact that if your d line plays really well. your linebackers and cb\'s and safetys will be better. i mean even ray lewis didnt have his normal year this year. from what i have heard thats because the line wasnt as dominant as in the past.

hey i still think that no matter what that two most important parts of any team are your lines

JKool · 02-06-2005, 06:16 PM

Whodi, I meant in the NFL (and by value, I meant importance to having a good defense).

spk, I think we pretty well agree. Thanks for the thoughts.

saintswhodi · 02-06-2005, 06:29 PM

In terms of an NFL defense, I think line is first and foremost the most important on defense. Everything starts up front. I would have had corners before LBs in past years, but not anymore with the rulses changes. I even feel safeties are more important than CBs now cause safeties see the whole field and are now either the ones making the plays, or being that extra run stuffer ala Roy Williams. I watched how the premiere corner in the league Champ Bailey got torched by Chad Johnson on MNF and that dimished my value of CBs some. He also had no safety help, and I realized how bad it would have been had he not been Champ Bailey.

JKool · 02-06-2005, 06:35 PM

Whodi, I\'m starting to agree with you on this.

Before these rule changes here was my ordering of importance per position.

DE
DT
CB
DT
OLB
MLB
DE
CB
SS
FS
OLB

I feel that my first CB would now slip behind the first OLB in terms of importance. Does this seem reasonable?

spkb25 · 02-06-2005, 06:36 PM

saintswqhodi i am 100% with you on the d line. i mean thats where games are won and loss on both sides of the ball. i dont care who your rb is qb is wr\'s are if you cant block you cant win. as far as d line if you cant get push up front everything becomes harder on the rest of the positions.
now dont get me wrong im not saying you dont need talent at all other positions offensive and defensive but it takes a lot of pressure off if you can dominate up front

02-06-2005, 04:24 PM	#21
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Rank Our Problems and Discussion Bill Parcells himself says CBs are less important due to the rule changes and I am inclined to agree. It is more important to be able to enforce the play of your D on another team\'s offense to cause mistakes than to count on your CB shutting someone down. That being said, a dominant DT, a serious LT, and a good, solid MLB should be addressed right off. Of secondary concern, S, QB, then CB.

02-06-2005, 05:00 PM	#22
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,101	Rank Our Problems and Discussion i think that outside of resigning the guys we need to resign that we need an o tackle and a d tackle. i would also like to see us bring in a qb or draft one to challenge brooks. even if not this year in the years to come

02-06-2005, 05:38 PM	#23
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Rank Our Problems and Discussion spk, I can get on board with that, but how high a draft pick would you use? Would it depend on what we did in FA? That is the reason for the ranking; it really makes you stop and think what kind of resources you\'d be willing to devote to such things. When I did mine, it made is slightly clearer to me where QB fell on the list of needs. Whodi, good point. Rule changes to make CBs value drop a bit. I tend to be in the minority on my view of CBs value (I tend to be higher than most), but I do agree that CBs are decreasing in value these days. Do you have a ranking? I\'ve recently heard it argued that we don\'t really need a stud DT, we merely need a run-stuffing wide body, what do you think?
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

02-06-2005, 06:01 PM	#24
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,101	Rank Our Problems and Discussion i think the problem with awide body is that you have to worry about the weight all the time. i\'d prefer to just get someone that can get the job done. as far as the o tackle and d tackle i think how high we draft depends in part on what we do in free agency and what talent is available. i dont want to pick up a guy that is really a 2nd or thrid round pick in the first round because we need that position. regardless of need as far as the draft go\'s if someone falls even if it isnt a need i think you have to draft him. just like last year. you can never hgave enough good players. but if there was an o tackle worht our first round pick i would take him. we need a guy like that. im scared to take another d tackle. man i would just hope that sullivan would get it going this year. i doubt it but i guess theres always a chance. im not that concerned anymore with our cb spot. i think we are decent there if we keep mike. i like our lb,s right now especially bockwoldt but i would never mind seeing us bring in a veteran that can really play. as far as qb if we can get a good one in rounds two or three i say go for it. i hope i answered it a little bit better jkool
	Your team stinks

02-06-2005, 06:02 PM	#25
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Rank Our Problems and Discussion I would be estatic with a run stuffing DT. I don\'t need a Rod Coleman sack making DT. Give me a guy strong against the run, and at least disruptive on enough pass plays to make a difference. He doesn\'t have to have Glover type sack numbers. What do you mean by a ranking on CBs? Not sure I follow. As presented in this thread or overall value in the NFL? I would be glad to expound on either.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

02-06-2005, 06:12 PM	#26
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,101	Rank Our Problems and Discussion but also jkool as far as the wide body run stuffer go\'s, i would say that is in part true. but they have to be just that a complete run stuffer. i think that can be huge. i still go back to the fact that if your d line plays really well. your linebackers and cb\'s and safetys will be better. i mean even ray lewis didnt have his normal year this year. from what i have heard thats because the line wasnt as dominant as in the past. hey i still think that no matter what that two most important parts of any team are your lines
	Your team stinks

02-06-2005, 06:16 PM	#27
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Rank Our Problems and Discussion Whodi, I meant in the NFL (and by value, I meant importance to having a good defense). spk, I think we pretty well agree. Thanks for the thoughts.

02-06-2005, 06:29 PM	#28
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Rank Our Problems and Discussion In terms of an NFL defense, I think line is first and foremost the most important on defense. Everything starts up front. I would have had corners before LBs in past years, but not anymore with the rulses changes. I even feel safeties are more important than CBs now cause safeties see the whole field and are now either the ones making the plays, or being that extra run stuffer ala Roy Williams. I watched how the premiere corner in the league Champ Bailey got torched by Chad Johnson on MNF and that dimished my value of CBs some. He also had no safety help, and I realized how bad it would have been had he not been Champ Bailey.

02-06-2005, 06:35 PM	#29
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Rank Our Problems and Discussion Whodi, I\'m starting to agree with you on this. Before these rule changes here was my ordering of importance per position. DE DT CB DT OLB MLB DE CB SS FS OLB I feel that my first CB would now slip behind the first OLB in terms of importance. Does this seem reasonable?

02-06-2005, 06:36 PM	#30
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,101	Rank Our Problems and Discussion saintswqhodi i am 100% with you on the d line. i mean thats where games are won and loss on both sides of the ball. i dont care who your rb is qb is wr\'s are if you cant block you cant win. as far as d line if you cant get push up front everything becomes harder on the rest of the positions. now dont get me wrong im not saying you dont need talent at all other positions offensive and defensive but it takes a lot of pressure off if you can dominate up front