Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

teeray

Charles Johnson, Jon Beason, and Chris Gamble...

74 posts in this topic

I believe we should target 4 new starters on the defensive side:

  1. CB #2
  2. FS
  3. OLB
  4. DT (Nose)

Up to 3 of those may be on the roster already (Hogan, Edwards, Davis) but I don't see any of those as a sure thing, so it would be wise to add through the draft/FA.

You can't totally overhaul the defensive roster in one year. We are going to have to plan on guys like Anderson and Godfrey performing better as the cast around them improves. The same is probably true with Hardy/Keiser/Applewhite.

Fix the 4 holes listed above, and this D will look much, much different next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand saying that there should be competition for the starting roles next year across the board. But to suggest that these are the only three guys who should be assured a roster spot on the defense is ridiculous. The reality is that contracts, cap hits and other issues have to be considered as primary concerns. Plus just because they played great in 2011 doesn't guarantee they will be great in 2012.

But to my earlier point, we have a number of guys who are going to be on the roster for a number of reasons.

For example, Hardy isn't going anywhere just like a number of guys who are on their rookie contracts. They are cheap and productive. Most teams need a number of guys who are role players and cheap. You can't have a total team of stars and high paid guys. Players like Fua and McClain will be here as well. Will they start? That remains to be seen but they will surely be on the roster no matter what.

We also have guys who just received a long-term contract who would cost too much to let go at this point. Anderson and Edwards comes to mind. Obviously Davis is a different entity.

But any discussion about who should or should not be here has to take into account contracts, financial realities, value versus cost and other factors like that. Otherwise this discussion is not much different than a Madden game discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big picture IMO is that is these guys are so good how come we are terrible on defense?? Great you have 145 tackles. Yet every team runs the ball effectively to your side because the DT can't get penetration and the DE is a non-factor in the run game and you also miss a ton of tackles and your safety help is a worse tackler than Deion Sanders.

It isn't surprising that he has 145 tackles.

NO LB IN THE LEAGUE CAN PLAY WELL IF THE PEOPLE UP FRONT SUCK. Everyone is acting like Jon Beason made every play. I remember plenty of times last year when Beason was healthy he was getting torched and missed some tackles also. Go back and look at the games and box scores.

Hardy is a valid point. However as someone said statistically his development is close to CJ so I would play it out a year. Competition isn't a bad thing.

Sherrod Martin consistently takes bad angles. Consistently misses asssignments, Consistently mistimes passes.

Charles Godfrey keeps getting poo. I really don't understand it anymore. It's like he can make 15 good plays in a row and 1 bad play he is the worst safety in the league. I'm tired of defending him tbh so I'll just disagree.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand saying that there should be competition for the starting roles next year across the board. But to suggest that these are the only three guys who should be assured a roster spot on the defense is ridiculous. The reality is that contracts, cap hits and other issues have to be considered as primary concerns. Plus just because they played great in 2011 doesn't guarantee they will be great in 2012.

But to my earlier point, we have a number of guys who are going to be on the roster for a number of reasons.

For example, Hardy isn't going anywhere just like a number of guys who are on their rookie contracts. They are cheap and productive. Most teams need a number of guys who are role players and cheap. You can have a total team of stars and high paid guys. Players like Fua and McClain will be here as well. Will they start? That remains to be seen but they will surely be on the roster no matter what.

We also have guys who just received a long-term contract who would cost too much to let go at this point. Anderson and Edwards comes to mind. Obviously Davis is a different entity.

But any discussion about who should or should not be here has to take into account contracts, financial realities, value versus cost and other factors like that. Otherwise this discussion is not much different than a Madden game discussion.

Maybe I wasn't as clear as I wanted to be in the original post. I wasn't suggesting that they are the only ones who should be guaranteed a roster spot, I meant their starting jobs should be the only ones that are safe and that the rest need to be challenged and possibly replaced for their starting jobs.

I didn't make that as clear as I wanted in the original post. By "job" I meant starting job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I wasn't as clear as I wanted to be in the original post. I wasn't suggesting that they are the only ones who should be guaranteed a roster spot, I meant their starting jobs should be the only ones that are safe and that the rest need to be challenged and possibly replaced for their starting jobs.

I didn't make that as clear as I wanted in the original post. By "job" I meant starting job.

Why would they be safe either from a starting point of view. Who knows how they will play in 2012. Seems to me that every starting job should be up for grabs. if they are hands down the best player at that position, then they will rise to the top and win the position. The way to ensure everyone plays at a high level is to make it clear that the guys who play best in training camp and the preseason start and there are no guarantees. This league is about what have you done yesterday, not what you did last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the numbers - Greg Hardy vs Charles Johnson through two season:

Charles Johnsons first two years as a contributor ( did very little as a rookie ):

50 tackles

37 solo tackles

10 sacks

3 FF

1 recovery

10 passes defensed

0 points scored

Hardy in two years as a fifth round pick:

80 tackles

62 solo

7 sacks

3 forced fumbles

0 recoveries

12 passes defensed ( 11 his second year )

1 kick blocked

1 Safety

2 points scored.

So why does Johnson get a pass where Hardy doesn't despite Hardy coming off looking much more versatile.

Thing is, I don't see a viable option in free agency or the draft that can come in right away and be more productive than Hardy in this defense. So let the kid play and continue to develop. If Hardy, who all around through two years is ahead of the curve that Johnson was, continues his trend, he will be looking real good next season.

New England and Philly were the only teams in the NFL last season who had two players with over 10 sacks each. Along with the Giants ( who have the best pass rushing line in all of football ) they were the only three teams who had over 9 on two players that were DEs in the entire NFL. Pitt had 3 linebackers go over 9 and Denver had 2 linebackers. The next best for a pair of DEs were the Colts, who have what is considered two elite DE rushers, and both were around 8. I think you guys might have your expectations set too highly for how much production a team should get out of their ends.

Hardy and Johnson are awesome pieces as a whole, it is the interior that needs improving. Get one above average rusher on the interior and you will see Hardy sit around 7-8 sacks and Johnson go back over 10.

Those numbers aren't fair because Hardy has started most of his career while Johnson came off the bench. However Hardy is fine. They both look beastly to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think Anderson is playing out of position and would be better suited at WLB. what this defense really needs is a push from the inside from a penetrating DT which i dont think is on this roster. did not see that from McClain but plenty of time left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would they be safe either from a starting point of view. Who knows how they will play in 2012. Seems to me that every starting job should be up for grabs. if they are hands down the best player at that position, then they will rise to the top and win the position. The way to ensure everyone plays at a high level is to make it clear that the guys who play best in training camp and the preseason start and there are no guarantees. This league is about what have you done yesterday, not what you did last year.

Because unlike every other starter on the defensive side of the ball those are the only 3 that have proven that they are actually legitimate starters in the NFL.

Maybe they massively regress next season but I don't really see any reason to believe that will be the case. But every other position needs legitimate NFL starters. Anderson and Hardy don't quite cut it in my opinion.

Although I admit a good argument can be made for Anderson I just don't think he has played as well as his numbers suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. James Anderson is safe bro. Wtf. He broke the record for tackles didnt he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. James Anderson is safe bro. Wtf. He broke the record for tackles didnt he?

We all know that tackles is the only measuring stick for linebackers :rolleyes:

Check out his coverage and how many of those tackles were late or 8 yards past the line of scrimmage. Also check out how many big runs came through his gaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because unlike every other starter on the defensive side of the ball those are the only 3 that have proven that they are actually legitimate starters in the NFL.

Maybe they massively regress next season but I don't really see any reason to believe that will be the case. But every other position needs legitimate NFL starters. Anderson and Hardy don't quite cut it in my opinion.

Although I admit a good argument can be made for Anderson I just don't think he has played as well as his numbers suggest.

Bill Parcells would disagree vehemently with you. The way he would come in and instantly improve the player's production, essentially using the same personnel, would be to threateneveryone's job and indicate that no one is safe. In fact he would often make the example using one of the best players to show players that no one is safe. When he went to Dallas he jumped on Larry Allen's case right away even though he was a perennial probowler.

Rivera would be best served telling everyone and particularly guys like Johnson and Gamble that all the jobs were up for grabs and there were no no guaranteed starters.

So no I think this time you are completely off base. No starting jobs should be guaranteed before the season starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites