LaRon Landry

[pepe]

I still want Landry with out 11th pick as much if not more for his attitude as his atheletic ability and football instincts. Last year's Niner defense improved when the organization finally gave Brandon Moore and Keith Lewis an opportunity. The attitude those two brought changed the defense's entire dynamic. I look towards Landry doing the same thing. As everyone must already know, Landry is known for his violent hits.

[pepe]

:falldownlaugh:

You have a terrific way of expressing yourself. The experience is like watching TV with the sound turned off. But I don't even have to press the mute button because you have done it for me.:this:

[DFresh]

Like I have said, if he falls to 11 which I don't think he will I think we will take him at 11. It would be hard to pass up his talent and would be the best player avaliable at that point. I DO NOT think we will trade up for him however...

[SB49er4life]

Oh God, can one of the mods please just take these happy faces off period ? It becomes a problem when people start using them in place of posing an intelligent argument.

Nolan has said repeatedly that the moves they've made in the offseason are going to allow them to go BPA in the 1st round.

I, for one, am not "satisfied" with a starting Safety tandem that includes a GB reject and a has been Pro-Bowler who hasn't done nothing and even got benched last year. Roman isn't anything special, and it's a bad bet to just assume a former good player will just return to form.

Not to say that I don't want Carriker or Okoye if they're available, but Landry by himself will make a much bigger impact on the defense than a solid DE.

Especially when you can find big strong guys who can hold the point of attack and demand a double down in later rounds.

[BladeX]

nothing improves a secondary as much as a pass rush can.

Except a great secondary that allows the pass rush to even happen.

[FantomFortyNiner]

sorry but a pass rush cures all secondary woes and not the other way around. pass rush is by far more important to a defense's success.


This is a dumb argument. You obviously need both and they both help each other equally.

Good db's will allow more time for pressure on the qb.

or

Good pass rush will force qb to throw inaccurate passes.


See this could go on for days.

The solution? Draft the best defensive player available. If Landry is there than i think we should take him. He will probably be the bpa at #11

[49er_fan_22]

nothing improves a secondary as much as a pass rush can.


and nothing improves a pass rush as much as a good seondary can.

[KevinM]

If I'm an OC, I'll prefer to face a team that keeps your receivers covered for 6 seconds but can't penetrate the pocket over a team that puts your QB on his *** in 3 seconds more often than not and can't cover. Every single time.

[mikeyv]

i know a pass rush is cricial in a 3-4 d but isnt the lbs the reason for the pass rush? okoye and carriker are great players but if landry is on the board he is a niner. he would be a full time starter and the des would be part time. if ur gonna draft rotational players why not wait until later? as for pass rush we can get a good lb in the 2nd in woodley, spencer or even francis in the 3rd. i also expect good things from fields at the de position. if landry isnt there dont be suprised if we get willis/okoye/carriker in that order.

[SF1981bornfan]

This is a dumb argument. You obviously need both and they both help each other equally.

Good db's will allow more time for pressure on the qb.

or

Good pass rush will force qb to throw inaccurate passes.


See this could go on for days.

The solution? Draft the best defensive player available. If Landry is there than i think we should take him. He will probably be the bpa at #11

I said this in another thread but its easier quoting someone and saying thank u.

[pepe]

Like I have said, if he falls to 11 which I don't think he will I think we will take him at 11. It would be hard to pass up his talent and would be the best player avaliable at that point. I DO NOT think we will trade up for him however...

I hope you're wrong about the Niner's not being willing to trade up for Landry.

[zappa55]

I doubt the 49ers trade up for Landry but there is a chance he falls. If the Browns do not take Adrian Peterson there is a chance the Falcons will take him. I think the Falcons are the biggest threat to take Landry. Bobby Petrino wants to switch over to a power running game so the could be interested in Peterson.

I agree that a pass rush is very important but a lot of people don't realize that the 49ers had 3-4 DE playing as 4-3 DE. The pass rush will be improved by switching to the 3-4 defense.

[KevinM]

Atlanta also is a dark horse to grab the second WR in the draft. That would make me happy, because then Okoye or Landry should be there for us.

[SBbound49ers]

Atlanta also is a dark horse to grab the second WR in the draft. That would make me happy, because then Okoye or Landry should be there for us.

I think they're done with the WR experiements for now. Jenkins and White are still young and dont forget about Horn. And Crumpler is their #1 target.

[KevinM]

I think they're done with the WR experiements for now. Jenkins and White are still young and dont forget about Horn. And Crumpler is their #1 target.

New coach + new offense makes me wonder if they will decide they need some Meachem/Bowe type WRs isntead of what they've got. I don't know enough about Pterino's offense to really speculate, but it seems a possibility he will want bigger, stronger guys out there.

[KevinM]

I ehat my keyboard. :mad:

[UCBLaxPlayer]

it's more difficult to have a good secondary that complements a mediocre pass rush than vice-versa

[CAG21]

I ehat my keyboard. :mad:

Is the "ehat" a reference to Everybody Loves Raymond? If not, then nevermind, LOL.

[Nevyn]

Wow, this thread devolved into a pretty bad argument pretty quickly.

It is easier to cover for a bad secondary with an excellent pass rush than it is to cover for a bad pass rush with a good secondary. That said, both are important, and if Landry is there AND Nolan thinks he is better than the other options (such as Carriker), he'll take him.

I think the point is moot though, I cannot see a circumstance (except a team paying very heavily to trade up with them) under which Landry gets past Atlanta.

[SB49er4life]

I dont think its a full blown argument, i have nothign against knobs or his opinion. He is right in the sense that a good DLine helps the secondary. But i was just arguing him saying that you do not need both. I believe the secondary can help the DLine just as much as the Dline can help the secondary in terms of pass defense, however, in order to be a great team, you need balance. I have the utmost respect for knobs, and had no intent of making this a shouting match

Fact is that a good secondary that can get a good jam on WR's, cover them tighter and give smaller windows to fit the ball in are gonna give their pass rushers an extra 1-2 seconds to get to the QB, which can be the difference between a clean throw and a hurry, and a hurry and sack/FF. Once again, not an opinion, thats just football.

You guys know what "coverage sack" is, right ?

To say one is more important than another is opinion, but the fact that excellence in one greatly helps the other is not.

D-line play is extremely important, but to say one area of the defense is "more" important than another is to contradict the whole theory behind what a team is. Even excellent D-lines aren't going to get to the QB half the time, so your gonna need your DB's to defend. Oh, and good QB's can still deliver being hurried and under pressure; well, guess who are defense's will go against in the playoffs ?

We'd all get a lot more outta this MB if folks could learn to concede points and realize that them being right about somethings doesn't make everyone else wrong about everything.

[KevinM]

Fact is that a good secondary that can get a good jam on WR's, cover them tighter and give smaller windows to fit the ball in are gonna give their pass rushers an extra 1-2 seconds to get to the QB, which can be the difference between a clean throw and a hurry, and a hurry and sack/FF. Once again, not an opinion, thats just football.

You guys know what "coverage sack" is, right ?

You know what happens when most QBs throw a ball because the pocket is collapsing, right?

[SB49er4life]

You know what happens when most QBs throw a ball because the pocket is collapsing, right?

Yes, I do; it makes them more susceptible to throwing a bad pass or a duck ball that'll hit the ground or get picked off.

And in big games, your gonna go against your Tom Brady's, Peyton Manning's, Donovan McNabb's who can stand tall and deliver in the face of pressure where you can't rely STRICTLY on your pass rush to do all the work for you.

Here we go again with another "my point can beat up your point" deals...

[BigB_85]

I dont think its so much because our pass rush as much as our personnel. Mark Roman and Keith Lewis cant cover. Spencer is a good nickel back, but im not sold that he's a good 2nd corner. Harris was a bright spot last year, he really helped the defense. I dont assume you watched every game of all those teams you mentioned. Also, I know its not sacks, but how come teams like Miami gave up 22 and 26 Passing TDs .... yards may move the ball down the field, but id much rather be last in yardage allowed and first in points given up than vice versa. Sure, we need to adress the pass rush, and we did by signing banta cain. Our DLine doesnt supply sufficient pressure, but thats what the 3-4 Line does. It clogs up holes. Our safeties were part of the problem last year. They couldnt cover. They got beat in zone coverage, and in man. And teams dont build defenses to withstand the Rex Grossman's of the NFL who crack under pressure and throw interceptions when the pocket collapses, but for the guys like Peyton, Brady, and Carson Palmer, who stand in the pocket, step up past the pressure, and deliver the ball over the top of our bad secondary for countless touchdowns. We could get to Peyton all day, hands in his face, he wouldnt get flustered and throw 4 INTs if we didnt have a good enough secondary. He'd probably check down, call a draw, or a screen to slow down and negate the pass rush. A pash rush can be negated, but good coverage is good coverage no matter what the call.

Tell that to the 2005 San Diego Charger squad. Or do you not remember that game?



Overall, both a solid secondary and good D-line are important, but you'd be a fool to believe the secondary is more crucial. Prime examples: San Diego Chargers and New England Patriots. Hands down d-line is more important, and a bigger need to this team. The bottom line is that we produce no pass rush, and without that your defense ain't gonna do too much.

[Denver9erfan]

Fact is that a good secondary that can get a good jam on WR's, cover them tighter and give smaller windows to fit the ball in are gonna give their pass rushers an extra 1-2 seconds to get to the QB, which can be the difference between a clean throw and a hurry, and a hurry and sack/FF. Once again, not an opinion, thats just football.

You guys know what "coverage sack" is, right ?

To say one is more important than another is opinion, but the fact that excellence in one greatly helps the other is not.

D-line play is extremely important, but to say one area of the defense is "more" important than another is to contradict the whole theory behind what a team is. Even excellent D-lines aren't going to get to the QB half the time, so your gonna need your DB's to defend. Oh, and good QB's can still deliver being hurried and under pressure; well, guess who are defense's will go against in the playoffs ?

We'd all get a lot more outta this MB if folks could learn to concede points and realize that them being right about somethings doesn't make everyone else wrong about everything.


It doesn't matter if you have the best secondary in the NFL if you can't get consistent pressure on the QB. NO secondary can consistently cover 3-6 potential targets for 4-5 secs. You absolutely need a secondary to compliment a good pass rush, but all things equal a team with a great pass rush and an average secondary will do better against the pass than a team with a great secondary and average pass rush.

With that being said, it's not like we're going to have a shot at any true pass rushers at #11. Adams will be gone and he'd be the only pass rusher worth considering. So it's not like we're going to get merriman or ware at #11.

[SB49er4life]

Tell that to the 2005 San Diego Charger squad. Or do you not remember that playoff game?


Overall, both a solid secondary and good D-line are important, but you'd be a fool to believe the secondary is more crucial. Prime examples: San Diego Chargers and New England Patriots. Hands down d-line is more important, and a bigger need to this team. The bottom line is that we produce no pass rush, and without that your defense ain't gonna do too much.

You mean the game during the REGULAR SEASON that just ended the Colts perfect season ? 2005 Chargers didn't go to the playoffs, my friend.

Maybe it had something to do with 5th in the league in sacks and 28th in passing yards allowed per game ? You took one particular game in which they stopped a potent passing attack, which the defense coordinator called some very creative and excellently timed blitzes to disrupt their passing attack to make it seem like they were a great pass defending team all season.

New England has always had excellent DB's and LB's that are extremely disciplined and cover like a tight durex. Bill Belichek is a genius at disguising coverages, as well; most of their big plays came from dropping 8 and just the front 3 getting pressure.

To whoever said Rodney Harrison is no good at coverage, tell that to his 2 INT's during SuperBowl XXXIX.

Or how the Colts defense "mysteriously" cranked it up 4 notches with Bob Sanders back in the line-up.

[KevinM]

Larry Brown had 2 picks in the Super Bowl... so did Dexter Jackson. And those guys are badasses!!!!

[SB49er4life]

It doesn't matter if you have the best secondary in the NFL if you can't get consistent pressure on the QB. NO secondary can consistently cover 3-6 potential targets for 4-5 secs. You absolutely need a secondary to compliment a good pass rush, but all things equal a team with a great pass rush and an average secondary will do better against the pass than a team with a great secondary and average pass rush.

With that being said, it's not like we're going to have a shot at any true pass rushers at #11. Adams will be gone and he'd be the only pass rusher worth considering. So it's not like we're going to get merriman or ware at #11.

Look, this is getting absolutely ridiculous on all accounts.

I gladly accept and take in the valid points you are making about NO secondary being able to cover for that long on a consistent basis.

But you guys seem to be transfixed under the idea that a great D-line can get to the QB on over half the passing attempts in a game, and that their aren't going to be MANY crucial situations throughout an entire season where the offense is going to have excellent protection and it's just going to come down great coverage and making a play on the ball.

Have or am I saying in ANY way that I would rather have an "average" pass rush ? Absolutely not. But excellent defenses, ones that you can rely on to take you to the SuperBowl and beyond, have excellence on all levels.

I just think its pure ignorance to think that a good pass rush can mask a bad secondary. On some plays, definitely, but over the course of a season, NO. Good OC's catch on and know when and how to exploit major weaknesses.

What's ours and every teams goal again ? Super Bowl, right ? Let's look some of the teams that joined us the past few SuperBowls...

SB XLI: Chicago Bears - Excellent Secondary (M. Brown, N. Vasher, C. Tillman)
Indianapolis Colts- Good Secondary (B. Sanders, N. Harper, M. Doss)

SB XL: Seattle Seahawks- Excellent Secondary (M. Boulware, K. Hamlin, Kelly Herndon, Marcus Trufant)

Pittsburgh Steelers- Excellent Secondary (T. Polamalu, D. Townshend, I. Taylor, R. Clark)

SB XXXIX: Phi. Eagles- Excellent Secondary (L. Sheppard, B. Dawkins, M. Lewis, S. Brown)

NE Pats- Excellent Secondary (R. Harrison, A. Samuels, E. Wilson, T. Law)

SB XXXVIII: NE Pats- Excellent Secondary (see above)

Carolina Panthers- Excellent Secondary (M. Minter, R. Manning, D. Grant, Reggie Howard)


* Ty Law missed a huge portion of their 3rd SB season and SB, but he was definitely a staple of their D and fully involved in the others that they won.


Is that enough ? Other than the Colts of last year, all the teams participating in the last 4 SuperBowls had EXCELLENT secondaries loaded with playmakers. I'll give a little that Pittsburgh's secondary can possibly be looked as "Very good" rather than excellent. Keep in mind I didn't even get into those Buc's and Raiders teams which featured B. Kelly/R. Barber and R. Woodsen/C. Woodsen.

[SB49er4life]

Larry Brown had 2 picks in the Super Bowl... so did Dexter Jackson. And those guys are badasses!!!!

Your comparing 2 nobodies who got lucky in the SuperBowl to a guy that's been a HOF caliber player his entire career based on a one game stat. Completely fallacious.

Next !

[TerrellOwns]

it kinds seems to me like the secondary is less important. ..and we already signed nate clements and lewis. not sure if we would go secondary but i dont know how good the talent is either

[Denver9erfan]

Have or am I saying in ANY way that I would rather have an "average" pass rush ? Absolutely not. But excellent defenses, ones that you can rely on to take you to the SuperBowl and beyond, have excellence on all levels.



Would it be nice to have both an excellent pass rush and an excellent secondary? Of course. But this is the real world and we're still an up and coming team. The reason this is being mentioned is because we're speculating on what to use our #11 pick on. Our secondary is already as good as most of the superbowl teams you listed - as long as we use M. Lewis correctly - so investing a high draft pick in our secondary is overkill.

This is the real world we're talking about - or at least I am. You have limited resources and it's unwise to put such a huge amount of cap space and your highest draft pick into one area and neglect the rest of your needs. Now, obviously we shouldn't reach for a need, but we're not in the draft room we have no idea how nolan has them ranked.

[KevinM]

Your comparing 2 nobodies who got lucky in the SuperBowl to a guy that's been a HOF caliber player his entire career based on a one game stat. Completely fallacious.

Next !

:potkettle:

Fallacious? How is saying Rodney Harrison is great in coverage because he had two interceptions in one super Bowl any different?

The point<---











Your head<---

[SB49er4life]

:potkettle:

Fallacious? How is saying Rodney Harrison is great in coverage because he had two interceptions in one super Bowl any different?

The point<---











Your head<---

It's fallacious because regardless of how Rodney Harrison fares in man coverage, he has had a great career as a safety, and the debate was having good players/playmakers in the secondary, not great one-on-one cover men across the board.

It is completely different because Rodney Harrison had made those kinda plays for years before doing them in the SuperBowl; he didn't just "happen" to have some great, misleading stats stemming from a complete mental error by the QB like Larry Brown did.

Sorry if I came off a little hot on the post before, but you can't honestly sit here and tell me that Larry Brown and Rodney Harrison are on the same level, and not be able to distinguish the difference.

[SB49er4life]

Would it be nice to have both an excellent pass rush and an excellent secondary? Of course. But this is the real world and we're still an up and coming team. The reason this is being mentioned is because we're speculating on what to use our #11 pick on. Our secondary is already as good as most of the superbowl teams you listed - as long as we use M. Lewis correctly - so investing a high draft pick in our secondary is overkill.

This is the real world we're talking about - or at least I am. You have limited resources and it's unwise to put such a huge amount of cap space and your highest draft pick into one area and neglect the rest of your needs. Now, obviously we shouldn't reach for a need, but we're not in the draft room we have no idea how nolan has them ranked.

You bring up a good point that we're an up and coming team; that means we are not only building for next year, but for years to come. It's naive for anybody to think or expect we're gonna find all the pieces this year.

I'm not saying in anyway that secondary is our primary need, especially with the new signings and Walt Harris' Pro-Bowl play last year.

I am just saying that taking the BPA, which, in my opinion, is Landry would be the smartest choice for us. There are other rounds in the draft, and there is next years draft and FA to help plan for the FUTURE.

If we're able to concentrate and solidify one area of our team at a time, we have one area set and can worry about the others. If we were closer to solidifying the D-line and there were great "can't miss" D-line prospects at #11, I'd see it the other way.

To conclude, your right, we have no idea what Nolan is thinking. It's just speculation on all parties, and I believe there is extremely valid points on both sides.

My take is just to secure and hold down one area of the team before jumping to another, rather than leaving holes here and there and patch things up all over the place. Either way, your making improvements. The only point I was trying to make is that a great pass rush alone does not equal a great defense.

[euronimous]

Oh God, can one of the mods please just take these happy faces off period ? It becomes a problem when people start using them in place of posing an intelligent argument.

Nolan has said repeatedly that the moves they've made in the offseason are going to allow them to go BPA in the 1st round.

I, for one, am not "satisfied" with a starting Safety tandem that includes a GB reject and a has been Pro-Bowler who hasn't done nothing and even got benched last year. Roman isn't anything special, and it's a bad bet to just assume a former good player will just return to form.

Not to say that I don't want Carriker or Okoye if they're available, but Landry by himself will make a much bigger impact on the defense than a solid DE.

Especially when you can find big strong guys who can hold the point of attack and demand a double down in later rounds.



Says who? You? :falldownlaugh: I'll take a veteren DB any day as a safer bet than a rookie as far as being an impact player. Walt Harris is a great example. You probably scoffed at that signing too. Since he was a redskins reject.

[TheWiz]

Says who? You? :falldownlaugh: I'll take a veteren DB any day as a safer bet than a rookie as far as being an impact player. Walt Harris is a great example. You probably scoffed at that signing too. Since he was a redskins reject.

I'd have to disagree with you in thise case. Overall, it's a crap shoot either way. Teams spend lots of picks on first round DL only to see them turn into as big as duds as CBs do. This is a situational call.

- All things considered, even with experience in the system Okoye is still only goinbg to be 20 and could be 4 or 5 years from his top potential. In terms of contracts it would be nice to set up a future at DE but he figures to provide little flash to us up front.

- Carriker will likely have similar problems. He's never played interior DL and moving from 4-3 DE to a 3-4 role is a rude awakening. It's hard to argue that he can be a very impact player in year 1. He's used to know which side the hit comes from and reacting and in the 3-4 he would be at a disadvantage each play.

- Landry has 4 years starting experience at his position. If you've seen film on him you will know he is a deadly force on a S-blitz. He can play both S spots, something Nolan prefers because it allows him to use both safeties in either role on any play. When a player has a fixed role as a SS or FS offenses gain an edge because they know that FS won't blitz or that SS can't cover deep. Since Landry can blitz, cover, or run support and he hits like a bulldozer he is a starting S who can be a FS and a SS.

[SBbound49ers]

- Carriker will likely have similar problems. He's never played interior DL and moving from 4-3 DE to a 3-4 role is a rude awakening. It's hard to argue that he can be a very impact player in year 1. He's used to know which side the hit comes from and reacting and in the 3-4 he would be at a disadvantage each play.

Not sure if you're aware but Nebraska played some 3-4 in which Carriker saw time at 3-4 DE.

[PowerfulDragon]

I'm really hoping Laron lands in houston... goodness knows our secondary can use the help.

[SB49er4life]

Says who? You? :falldownlaugh: I'll take a veteren DB any day as a safer bet than a rookie as far as being an impact player. Walt Harris is a great example. You probably scoffed at that signing too. Since he was a redskins reject.

No, I didn't. I was actually one of very few who called it out to be a brilliant future move, and he even exceeded my expectations. Once again, why it's better to know what your talkin about than to use smiley's to prove a point.

I would rather take a proven veteran at ANY position than an unproven rookie, no matter how good of a prospect he is. But do very good veterans at all the positions you need come in abundance every off-season ? NO.

Honestly, what do you think the point of the draft is ?

[Blong4Ever]

I'd have to disagree with you in thise case. Overall, it's a crap shoot either way. Teams spend lots of picks on first round DL only to see them turn into as big as duds as CBs do. This is a situational call.

Reminds me of the Cleveland's front 4 of a few years ago.

[Jerry's kid]

you guys sure do like to bicker. i thought this thread was about landry. lets argue for three pages on which came first the chicken or the egg

[SB49er4life]

you guys sure do like to bicker. i thought this thread was about landry. lets argue for three pages on which came first the chicken or the egg

It gets stupid. Some people can't handle solid counterpoints that may disprove some claim they made in any way.

[Jerry's kid]

It gets stupid. Some people can't handle solid counterpoints that may disprove some claim they made in any way.

yeah well my dad can beat up your dad:gunshoot:

when i first signed up for this mb i couldnt wait to discuss my beloved 49ers with so many knowledgable fans not listen to ppl hate on each other because they dont share the same view on a peticular player, scheme, or which is better the nooks or the cranies in an english muffin.

[montanamagic]

Laron Landry is going to be a good player but not great imo. you know who has that pro bowl potential who we may have a chance to draft? Okoye and Reggie Nelson FS (Florida). Reggie Nelson has tremendous ball skills much like an Ed Reed type. i think he ran a 4.39 for his pro day. Run support is questioned in some scouting reports but if Okoye and Landry are gone dont be suprised if its Reggie, Reggie!

[SB49er4life]

yeah well my dad can beat up your dad:gunshoot:

when i first signed up for this mb i couldnt wait to discuss my beloved 49ers with so many knowledgable fans not listen to ppl hate on each other because they dont share the same view on a peticular player, scheme, or which is better the nooks or the cranies in an english muffin.

It gets lame. People get caught up in rep, and can't handle the fact that somebody else may have made a point or stated something they themselves, the guru of all that is football, didn't know.

It does get irritating though when folks have no clue what they're talking about and then try to belittle someone else's comments or a simple question that may or may not have been answered in another thread.

[BigB_85]

You mean the game during the REGULAR SEASON that just ended the Colts perfect season ? 2005 Chargers didn't go to the playoffs, my friend.

You're right, it wasn't in the playoffs. My bad. I edited my original post...

Maybe it had something to do with 5th in the league in sacks and 28th in passing yards allowed per game ? You took one particular game in which they stopped a potent passing attack, which the defense coordinator called some very creative and excellently timed blitzes to disrupt their passing attack to make it seem like they were a great pass defending team all season.

Their secondary did experience some difficulty at times in 2005, but that statistic showing where they finished against the pass can be very misleading. You think the fact that they were statistically had something to do with it? There were so dominant against the run that teams used the run a lot less and adverted to the passing game.

New England has always had excellent DB's and LB's that are extremely disciplined and cover like a tight durex. Bill Belichek is a genius at disguising coverages, as well; most of their big plays came from dropping 8 and just the front 3 getting pressure.

Over the past couple seasons they have had paper-thin depth at CB and a pretty injury plagued secondary for the most part...I definitely attribute that defenses success to the defensive linemen.[/QUOTE]

[SB49er4life]

Their secondary did experience some difficulty at times in 2005, but that statistic showing where they finished against the pass can be very misleading. You think the fact that they were statistically had something to do with it? There were so dominant against the run that teams used the run a lot less and adverted to the passing game.


Over the past couple seasons they have had paper-thin depth at CB and a pretty injury plagued secondary for the most part...I definitely attribute that defenses success to the defensive linemen.[/QUOTE]

Maybe if their pass rankings were somewhere middle of the pack, you could have a decent argument, but wouldn't you agree that it's a little far fetched to theorize that "their run D was so good, it made them look like the bottom 5 in pass defense ?" Let's be honest, here.


New England has an excellent D-line, there's no questions about that, but their success, especially with replacing Pro-Bowler CB's with schmucks, was more-so due to

1) Excellent Coaching
a. Coaching up players to be able to step in, ready to perform, regardless
their spot on the depth chart

b. Genius Playcalling/always seemed to make the perfect defense call
i. Well disguised blitze (it was impossible to tell pre-snap what a defenders
zone was gonna be.

2) Their LB's being able to cover sometimes made it seem as if they had 6
DB's on the field while they were still in the 3-4

I say this, because when I remember those games where they would handle the Colts every year, they would always seem to drop 8 and rush 3, and Manning would get picked off with little to no pressure.

This should settle it...

Team Defense
(sorted by points allowed)
|------ PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----|
PT CMP ATT YD YPP TD INT RSH YD YPR TD
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago Bears 202 314 550 2872 5.2 10 24 443 1637 3.7 9
Indianapolis Colts 247 342 509 3151 6.2 17 18 398 1762 4.4 9
Pittsburgh Steelers 258 315 549 3168 5.8 15 15 402 1368 3.4 10
Denver Broncos 258 344 613 3643 5.9 20 20 344 1363 4.0 10
Carolina Panthers 259 306 528 3057 5.8 15 23 408 1465 3.6 9

Jacksonville Jaguars 269 285 482 2946 6.1 22 19 434 1709 3.9 4
Seattle Seahawks 271 331 571 3559 6.2 18 16 420 1510 3.6 5
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 274 275 477 2929 6.1 15 17 438 1515 3.5 10
Washington Redskins 293 291 534 3081 5.8 15 16 411 1686 4.1 15
Baltimore Ravens 299 296 526 2964 5.6 18 12 431 1591 3.7 8
Cleveland Browns 301 278 470 2867 6.1 19 15 527 2202 4.2 11
Dallas Cowboys 308 270 494 3083 6.2 18 15 414 1731 4.2 13
San Diego Chargers 312 338 566 3599 6.4 20 10 386 1349 3.5 14
New York Giants 314 330 581 3584 6.2 20 17 428 1656 3.9 12
Miami Dolphins 317 323 549 3307 6.0 23 14 480 1771 3.7 11
Kansas City Chiefs 325 325 558 3679 6.6 25 16 383 1570 4.1 11
New England Patriots 338 296 526 3703 7.0 25 10 437 1580 3.6 11
Atlanta Falcons 341 320 526 3137 6.0 18 16 438 2063 4.7 18
Minnesota Vikings 344 318 533 3332 6.2 23 24 462 1841 4.0 14
Green Bay Packers 344 253 430 2680 6.2 22 10 504 2010 4.0 10
Detroit Lions 345 294 486 3118 6.4 19 19 488 2040 4.2 15
Cincinnati Bengals 350 325 518 3569 6.9 21 31 429 1850 4.3 16
New York Jets 355 285 462 2755 6.0 17 21 554 2185 3.9 19
Buffalo Bills 367 314 502 3291 6.6 19 17 489 2205 4.5 22
Oakland Raiders 383 296 486 3243 6.7 18 5 507 2049 4.0 18
Arizona Cardinals 387 302 490 3097 6.3 17 15 411 1632 4.0 22
Philadelphia Eagles 388 298 502 3323 6.6 24 17 506 1883 3.7 15
New Orleans Saints 398 242 418 2849 6.8 20 10 503 2145 4.3 16
Tennessee Titans 421 296 470 3216 6.8 33 9 449 1894 4.2 12
San Francisco 49ers 428 374 576 4427 7.7 28 16 486 1832 3.8 19
St. Louis Rams 429 314 507 3424 6.8 26 13 459 2178 4.8 22
Houston Texans 431 304 469 3521 7.5 24 7 506 2303 4.5 21

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/tmstats2005.htm

I'll be fair with you as far as passing YARDS per game, as I know that number can get inflated late in games and what not. But what about what actually matters; the TD's ?

The Steelers, Panthers and Broncos were the only teams that did had a good run defense, a good to excellent pass rush, and also had very good ratios of TD allowed/INT's. All teams with EXCELLENT secondaries ! The Bears, as well, but I lost track of how many of their DB's they sent to the Pro-Bowl that year..

Meanwhile, aside from 2005's scrotum scum of SF, Oak, HOU, TEN and NO, San Diego, despite having the top Rush defense and 5th in sacks, was not only 28th in YARDS allowed, but they had the WORST defensive TD/INT ratio of any team except St. Louis. For lamens--

28th in pass ypg
t- 26th in defensive TD/INT ratio

Meanwhile, the aforementioned teams, *with great secondaries*, managed to not be so terrible against the pass.

Am I saying secondary is more important than pass rush ? Absolutely Not ! I just want this non-sense of "one part of the team is more important than the other" to stop, and recognize all parts are of EQUAL importance.

Great Pass Rush + No Secondary = Defense waiting to be exploited

No Pass Rush + Great Secondary = Defense waiting to be exploited


Great Pass Rush + Great Secondary = SuperBowl/Deep playoff run

[BigB_85]

Yup, you make some very good points and quite frankly I agree with most of this. You are making the the case that a secondary isn't necessarily as good as the pass rush, which you proved by the stats showcased in your post. And it is to no surprise to me that teams with a good pass rush and secondary ranked higher than that of just a solid pass rush. No where did I say you can have one without the other, I just stated my opinion on which one I thought was of more importance. However, I don't see how the statistics oppose my thoughts, that a D-line is more important than a secondary. Because even though the Chargers didn't rank as well compared as the clubs who have good secondaries to go with their d-line, San Diego still had a pretty beastly defense with their mediocre defensive backs. And I don't think you could say the same if it was vica-versa (Mediocre front 7, awesome DBs).

[SB49er4life]

Yup, you make some very good points and quite frankly I agree with most of this. You are making the the case that a secondary isn't necessarily as good as the pass rush, which you proved by the stats showcased in your post. And it is to no surprise to me that teams with a good pass rush and secondary ranked higher than that of just a solid pass rush. No where did I say you can have one without the other, I just stated my opinion on which one I thought was of more importance. However, I don't see how the statistics oppose my thoughts, that a D-line is more important than a secondary. Because even though the Chargers didn't rank as well compared as the clubs who have good secondaries to go with their d-line, San Diego still had a pretty beastly defense with their mediocre defensive backs. And I don't think you could say the same if it was vica-versa (Mediocre front 7, awesome DBs).

I get where your coming from in terms of opinion of importance; there are some that feel a dominant RB who can grind it out and hit the home run on the ground is more important that a gun-slinging QB; it's all to your tasting.

Like I've said before, my take is that it's all equal. If you don't have a good D-line, pass rush, your secondary is gonna suffer, no matter how good they are, and as proven above, vice versa.

In todays NFL, you gotta be able to defend the pass, straight up. With these wild QB contracts and pass happy WCO and vertical offenses, you gotta have something to fall back on for the +50% of the time a QB is going to have time to throw.

If the D-line was so much more important than the secondary, the market value of DB's would decrease greatly, and we'd see more no-name secondaries deep in the playoffs.

**Denvers D got exposed last year b/c of their crappy D-line play. They year before, however, they managed to have an excellent defense due in large part to a star studded secondary.

[KevinM]

Nobody is advocating ignoring any part of the defense; the basis of this argument is simple- if your team lacks playmakers on DL, in the secondary, and at LB, where do you go first? Because you can't fix it all at once right?

In those terms, there is no clear-cut, hands-down answer, but there are compelling arguments to be made for either case, and we are all doing our best to present them here. For me, I'll start with a pass rush and get opportunistic ballhawks in the secondary later.

[Tovey21]

I think we can offically end the Landry talk because there's no way he's gets passed Atlanta at 8.

[Tovey21]

LMAO idk if he means Houston @ 8 or ATL @ 10. But i could very well see him moving past both. Houston could target Levi Brown/ Jamaal Anderson and if Petrino gets his wish, Jimmy Williams is a FS and Landry is not an option for them.

Both just swapped draft positions.

[Jerry's kid]

Nobody is advocating ignoring any part of the defense; the basis of this argument is simple- if your team lacks playmakers on DL, in the secondary, and at LB, where do you go first? Because you can't fix it all at once right?

In those terms, there is no clear-cut, hands-down answer, but there are compelling arguments to be made for either case, and we are all doing our best to present them here. For me, I'll start with a pass rush and get opportunistic ballhawks in the secondary later.

I agree. they say games are won and lost in the trenches so that's where i would prefer to start.

go niners

[SB49er4life]

Agreed ! Rodney harrison is NOT good in coverage, hes just anothe LB out on the field that happens to play Saftey. Do not give him credit for the SB Ints ... Note: they landed in his hands.

Agreed once again ! The Colts create pressure from their D-Line (mainly: Freeney & Mathis) which makes their pathetic corners jobs easy ... Now at Saftey yes Bobby Sanders is the man, but their Secondary as a team is not very good.

A dominating pass rush is more important than any secondary ... Yea good coverage can get you sacks, however a good pass rush can get you a whole lot more.

Once again i hate to say it but I agree with knobs on this one !

It's not about Rodney Harrison's strengths/weaknesses at DB, it's about the fact that any way you cut it, he is great at his position and a HOFer.

You don't need to have 4 guys who can cover like CB's to have a great Secondary.

Once again, if it's MORE important, then how do all the above examples and types of teams/defenses of the last 4-5 SuperBowls hold true ? If it was that much more important, you'd see a lot less teams getting exploited for lack of being able to cover.

[Da Dime]

we can have this argument all day both are important pass rush and good coverage. sometimes your pass rush can cause picks and bad throws and sometimes the coverage can make a sack or a check down for a couple of yards. some teams can disguise their bad corners of secondary with good pass rush but those teams dont win the super bowl you can say what u want about the colts but they had both. the pass rush was good and the scheme they ran helped the coverage. You can have a great secondary and run a bad scheme or coverage and that will get you in trouble. The eagles are an example of this they had a good or decent secondary but the way they blitz can leave the secondary man to man why, because the blitz either didnt get there or it was picked up with blocking. the colts and the bears both ran a cover 2 defense they had decent corners not the best in the league not the worst maybe b level corners. They give them help over top so they dont get beat deep and this allows the corners to jump short routes. The colts and bears pass rush dont get to the qb all the time so they either have to check down (manning) or get sacked or throw a pick(grossman). So this arguement can go both ways depending how u look at it but to be a super bowl team u need both

[SB49er4life]

we can have this argument all day both are important pass rush and good coverage. sometimes your pass rush can cause picks and bad throws and sometimes the coverage can make a sack or a check down for a couple of yards. some teams can disguise their bad corners of secondary with good pass rush but those teams dont win the super bowl you can say what u want about the colts but they had both. the pass rush was good and the scheme they ran helped the coverage. You can have a great secondary and run a bad scheme or coverage and that will get you in trouble. The eagles are an example of this they had a good or decent secondary but the way they blitz can leave the secondary man to man why, because the blitz either didnt get there or it was picked up with blocking. the colts and the bears both ran a cover 2 defense they had decent corners not the best in the league not the worst maybe b level corners. They give them help over top so they dont get beat deep and this allows the corners to jump short routes. The colts and bears pass rush dont get to the qb all the time so they either have to check down (manning) or get sacked or throw a pick(grossman). So this arguement can go both ways depending how u look at it but to be a super bowl team u need both

More or less the only point I've been trying to get across this whole time. Glad to see someone who has a broader perspective on it all than just their own.