Re: New Look Defense
 

Front 5: Smith--RickyJ--NT?--McGee--Kerrigan

Backers:.......Foster(Daniels)--Compton

Conrers: Norman, Breeland, Fuller

Safeties: DJ (Free)--S'ua (Strong)

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1167994]Front 5: Smith--RickyJ--NT?--McGee--Kerrigan

Backers:.......Foster(Daniels)--Compton

Conrers: Norman, Breeland, Fuller

Safeties: DJ (Free)--S'ua (Strong)[/quote]

That doesn't scare anybody.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1167996]That doesn't scare anybody.[/quote]It should scare all of the fans tho ;) ....I'm hoping that won't the starting line-up come week 1

Re: New Look Defense
 

It won't be. Galette will be starting.

Championship.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Front 5 ("base"): Smith--RickyJ--NT?--McGee--Kerrigan B

Nickel Front (actual base): Smith--Ricky J--McClain--Kerrigan

^^ I would like to add a true NT for "base" D:

Would also like 3-tech and another edge rusher for nickel

This draft has tons of edge rushers

[B]Backers:[/B] .......Foster(Daniels)--Compton

Would like a dynamic ILB that can cover

[B]Conrers:[/B] Norman, Breeland, Fuller

Would like a corner that can run and has ball skill to pair with Norman, whomever plays opposite Norman needs to know they're gonna get targeted a lot and be ready

[B]Safeties:[/B] DJ (Free)--S'ua (Strong)

Wouldn't necessarily target a S but if one is bpa then

Re: New Look Defense
 

McClain has already been penciled in as NT from what I've seen.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=MTK;1168003]McClain has already been penciled in as NT from what I've seen.[/quote]I'm just going by how the players were used in their previous stops and neither seems like a 34 NT.

What have you seen?

Re: New Look Defense
 

Keim mentioned it here

The Redskins view Terrell McClain as a nose tackle in base and a tackle in nickel. He’s not big -- he's listed at 302 pounds -- but he relies on quickness and footwork to penetrate. He hasn’t been the most consistent player, either, playing only one season of 16 games. But he can make plays, and the Redskins like how he moves sideline to sideline, a key when they’re in nickel vs. spread offenses. But he’s coming off his best year and was active. Is he worth $5 million a year? We’ll find out. He played two years in Houston when the Texans ran a 3-4, and one reason he signed with Dallas was because it played a 4-3. He often lined up over the center in the Cowboys’ front.

[url=http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/30516/as-redskins-re-shuffle-line-interest-remains-in-bennie-logan-others]Washington Redskins re-shuffle line, still interested in Bennie Logan - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url]

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=MTK;1168011]Keim mentioned it here

The Redskins view Terrell McClain as a nose tackle in base and a tackle in nickel. He’s not big -- he's listed at 302 pounds -- but he relies on quickness and footwork to penetrate. He hasn’t been the most consistent player, either, playing only one season of 16 games. But he can make plays, and the Redskins like how he moves sideline to sideline, a key when they’re in nickel vs. spread offenses. But he’s coming off his best year and was active. Is he worth $5 million a year? We’ll find out. He played two years in Houston when the Texans ran a 3-4, and one reason he signed with Dallas was because it played a 4-3. He often lined up over the center in the Cowboys’ front.

[url=http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/30516/as-redskins-re-shuffle-line-interest-remains-in-bennie-logan-others]Washington Redskins re-shuffle line, still interested in Bennie Logan - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url][/quote]

i read they are also looking at Hankins and still are not done with looking at Poe . . . yet

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=MTK;1168011]Keim mentioned it here

The Redskins view Terrell McClain as a nose tackle in base and a tackle in nickel. He’s not big -- he's listed at 302 pounds -- but he relies on quickness and footwork to penetrate. He hasn’t been the most consistent player, either, playing only one season of 16 games. But he can make plays, and the Redskins like how he moves sideline to sideline, a key when they’re in nickel vs. spread offenses. But he’s coming off his best year and was active. Is he worth $5 million a year? We’ll find out. He played two years in Houston when the Texans ran a 3-4, and one reason he signed with Dallas was because it played a 4-3. He often lined up over the center in the Cowboys’ front.

[url=http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/30516/as-redskins-re-shuffle-line-interest-remains-in-bennie-logan-others]Washington Redskins re-shuffle line, still interested in Bennie Logan - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url][/quote]TY.

But even that article suggests to me he's not a fit at NT, says he left Houston for Dallas because they played a 43. The article mentions exactly where I think his true fit is=3-tech/nickel interior pass rusher.

Anyhow...I hope we bring in a true NT via FA or draft 1.
Even though most teams are only in "base" ~40 percent of the time IF we can't stop the run in base teams will keep us in base just to run the ball.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1168118]TY.

But even that article suggests to me he's not a fit at NT, says he left Houston for Dallas because they played a 43. The article mentions exactly where I think his true fit is=3-tech/nickel interior pass rusher.

Anyhow...I hope we bring in a true NT via FA or draft 1.
Even though most teams are only in "base" ~40 percent of the time IF we can't stop the run in base teams will keep us in base just to run the ball.[/quote]

If 40% was the average, then we were below average last year. I remember reading it was 25-30% somewhere.

It is time to go back to a 4-3 for two reasons. First, we have never had a true NT and thus don't have the personnel to run base whatever the percentage of snaps. Second, why waste a roster spot on such a limited position. Use the roster spot instead on a more versatile player who can rotate and make the entire line fresher late in games no matter if we are playing nickle or base.

I'm still shaking my head remembering Pot Roast trying to rush the passer in a nickle front late in games. By the end of 2015 they just stopped trying.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Even though we're in nickel more than the base 3-4, I would agree, they need to just do away with it. It hasn't worked. At this point I don't get why they'd run the 3-4 ever.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1168372]If 40% was the average, then we were below average last year. I remember reading it was 25-30% somewhere.

It is time to go back to a 4-3 for two reasons. First, we have never had a true NT and thus don't have the personnel to run base whatever the percentage of snaps. Second, why waste a roster spot on such a limited position. Use the roster spot instead on a more versatile player who can rotate and make the entire line fresher late in games no matter if we are playing nickle or base.

I'm still shaking my head remembering Pot Roast trying to rush the passer in a nickle front late in games. By the end of 2015 they just stopped trying.[/quote]

Your right. From what I read...and witnessed... our nickle unit and the approach on the dline was a fatal flaw with the defense. All those conversion on 3rd down, couldn't get off the field.

Sure McClain is undersized in our base, but he will play a 1 gap for a down (probably) maybe 2 downs depending down and distance . The nickle, Stacy will kick down with him and give the 4 man front. The nickle killed us the last couple years...teams could run against it and we weren't getting the push up the middle for a pass rush.

But your % are right.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=30gut;1168002]Front 5 ("base"): Smith--RickyJ--NT?--McGee--Kerrigan B

Nickel Front (actual base): Smith--Ricky J--McClain--Kerrigan

^^ I would like to add a true NT for "base" D:

Would also like 3-tech and another edge rusher for nickel

This draft has tons of edge rushers

[B]Backers:[/B] .......Foster(Daniels)--Compton

Would like a dynamic ILB that can cover

[B]Conrers:[/B] Norman, Breeland, Fuller

Would like a corner that can run and has ball skill to pair with Norman, whomever plays opposite Norman needs to know they're gonna get targeted a lot and be ready

[B]Safeties:[/B] DJ (Free)--S'ua (Strong)

Wouldn't necessarily target a S but if one is bpa then[/quote]

Skins had visits with 2 corners at the Senior Bowl, and don't count out the Skins drafting a SS. If the Skins draft most of the players they talked with during the bowl we will do well in the draft and the D will be stacked. I personally don't expect anyone from Scot's last draft to be retained past their rookie contract. If Josh lives up to his pre injury hype he will be the lone exception. I rather have Jabril Peppers be our SS over Cravens any day.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Schneed10;1168000]It won't be. Galette will be starting.

Championship.[/quote]

Junior and Josh can't carry that sorry ass lineup by themselves. Swearinger will start but I think we draft a SS, maybe Peppers, but even if it isn't him we will get a straight up safety. Cravens will be going uphill fighting for a starting job. Our last draft was pathetic and I don't think it is that much of a stretch to say what I did in my last post on this thread.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=MTK;1168011]Keim mentioned it here

The Redskins view Terrell McClain as a nose tackle in base and a tackle in nickel. He’s not big -- he's listed at 302 pounds -- but he relies on quickness and footwork to penetrate. He hasn’t been the most consistent player, either, playing only one season of 16 games. But he can make plays, and the Redskins like how he moves sideline to sideline, a key when they’re in nickel vs. spread offenses. But he’s coming off his best year and was active. Is he worth $5 million a year? We’ll find out. He played two years in Houston when the Texans ran a 3-4, and one reason he signed with Dallas was because it played a 4-3. He often lined up over the center in the Cowboys’ front.

[url=http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/30516/as-redskins-re-shuffle-line-interest-remains-in-bennie-logan-others]Washington Redskins re-shuffle line, still interested in Bennie Logan - Washington Redskins Blog- ESPN[/url][/quote]

[url=http://was.247sports.com/Bolt/Greg-Manusky-says-Redskins-looking-for-nose-tackle-in-NFL-Draft-51823574]Greg Manusky says Redskins looking for nose tackle in NFL Draft[/url]

Re: New Look Defense
 

DE Mcgee NT McClain DE Murphy

OLB Kerrigan ILB M. Foster ILB Cravens OLB Galette

CB Norman FS Swearinger SS Peppers (17th) CB Breeland

Or swap Cravens to SS and draft Reuben Foster or Hasson Reddick

Re: New Look Defense
 

My biggest draft hope is a 2nd round dream...Jarrad Davis to fall to us. I was originally against Peppers at 17 because he's similar to Cravens. But I love Cravens. And Peppers is a good football player. He made it to the finals for the Heisman on defense! He's a hell of a football player. I like guys that are good football players. That's why I'm happy with Scherff. I don't care if he's "just a guard".

Dream scenario would be Solomon Thomas in the 1st and Davis or the safety from UCONN in the 2nd.

If no Thomas, I'd gladly take Peppers.

Re: New Look Defense
 

If the season started today.

[url=http://was.247sports.com/Gallery/Washington-Redskins-updated-defensive-starting-lineup-after-NFL--52139847]Washington Redskins updated defensive starting lineup after NFL free agency[/url]

Re: New Look Defense
 

According to CSN's mock draft, this would be our new NT.

[url=http://was.247sports.com/Bolt/CSN-Mock-has-Redskins-going-all-defense-in-first-two-rounds-52152782]CSN Mock has Redskins going all-defense in first two rounds[/url]

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=53Fan;1169044]According to CSN's mock draft, this would be our new NT.

[url=http://was.247sports.com/Bolt/CSN-Mock-has-Redskins-going-all-defense-in-first-two-rounds-52152782]CSN Mock has Redskins going all-defense in first two rounds[/url][/quote]

Two good picks...both look like they can help & get a lot of playing time this year.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Bangee7;1169046]Two good picks...both look like they can help & get a lot of playing time this year.[/quote]

I agree. Definite upgrades that would noticeably improve our defense.

Re: New Look Defense
 

CB.
DL. (NT especially)
Edge rusher.

Re: New Look Defense
 

I gotta believe this ads some chutzpa to using picking a D linesman in the first round.

[url=http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/62904/Redskins--Trent-Murphy-banned-four-games-for-PEDs/Default.aspx]Redskins' Trent Murphy banned four games for PEDs[/url]

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1169304]I gotta believe this ads some chutzpa to using picking a D linesman in the first round.

[url=http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/62904/Redskins--Trent-Murphy-banned-four-games-for-PEDs/Default.aspx]Redskins' Trent Murphy banned four games for PEDs[/url][/quote]

Yeah, sort of figured he'd get a few weeks for the PED's. If there is any good news in this, he can still practice and play in pre season games, so maybe he doesn't fall too far behind.

We seem to have quite a few question marks at that position now...Murphy & Gallete. Plus, Preston Smith & Houston Bates didn't exactly flash last year either.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Bangee7;1169312]Yeah, sort of figured he'd get a few weeks for the PED's. If there is any good news in this, he can still practice and play in pre season games, so maybe he doesn't fall too far behind.

We seem to have quite a few question marks at that position now...Murphy & Gallete. Plus, Preston Smith & Houston Bates didn't exactly flash last year either.[/quote]

Way off topic, but I really liked Bates at FB in short yardage. He reminded me of the big full back Seattle used during their SB runs.

Re: New Look Defense
 

I'm interested to see who becomes the starting NT.

Tandler says that Ziggy (6'3, 305) & Ioannidis (6' 3, 308) weren't effective at NT last year because they weren't big enough.

But, Joey Mbu (6' 3, 310) is only talked about as NT (not DE). Stacy McGee (6' 3, 310) has also played NT. Both are listed heavily right now in the NT discussion.

Seems a little weird to me that 2-5 pounds can really swing the balance in being "big enough" to play the position.

I read that Tomsula preferred big NT's, not the Jay Ratliff type that shoots the gaps???
If that's the case, then we're probably down to
Phil Taylor (335 lbs)
AJ Francis (325 lbs)
Ondre Pipkins (330 lbs)

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Bangee7;1170692]I'm interested to see who becomes the starting NT.

Tandler says that Ziggy (6'3, 305) & Ioannidis (6' 3, 308) weren't effective at NT last year because they weren't big enough.

But, Joey Mbu (6' 3, 310) is only talked about as NT (not DE). Stacy McGee (6' 3, 310) has also played NT. Both are listed heavily right now in the NT discussion.

Seems a little weird to me that 2-5 pounds can really swing the balance in being "big enough" to play the position.

I read that Tomsula preferred big NT's, not the Jay Ratliff type that shoots the gaps???
If that's the case, then we're probably down to
Phil Taylor (335 lbs)
AJ Francis (325 lbs)
Ondre Pipkins (330 lbs)

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.[/quote]

If Tandler and Tomsula are right, then I'd say we still don't have a serviceable NT. Phil Taylor having a comeback season is probably our best bet but I don't recall hearing any encouraging comments about Phil from Redskins coaches.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Not sure I get the NT concern, seems like a lot of fretting over a guy who's probably going to play 15-20 snaps at best.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=MTK;1170697]Not sure I get the NT concern, seems like a lot of fretting over a guy who's probably going to play 15-20 snaps at best.[/quote]

I respectfully disagree. I think there is a huge NT concern if the defense stays at 3-4.

The narrative goes that the defense is only in base 3-4 fifteen to twenty snaps a game, or 15 to 20 percent of snaps; I have seen the amount referenced both ways in print and heard it both ways on espn980.

Without a true NT, we have sub standard personnel on the field for that percentage of snaps.

What other position could we use sub-standard personnel as a band aid for 15-2- snaps a game? What if we used a really fast safety or LB for 15-20 snaps a game as a nickle corner?

The argument wouldn't be that we are using him for a limited number of snaps so we should not fret about it. The safety or LB would be exploited.

The two scenarios aren't analogous but similar. The main difference would be the ability of the couch potato to see the personnel weakness. With the safety or LB in coverage, we would all see the glaring weakness. With an end trying to play nose, it would take a knowledgeable fan to see the guard, who should be tied up with a mountain of a NT, killing the ILB on a run.

The point is, why play a scheme we don't have the personnel for, for any number of snaps?

Would it be good coaching to go heavy personnel last season with DJax and Crowder playing two of the TE positions as long as it was just for a few snaps?

How many snaps per game is it ok to have sub-standard personnel on the field?

Re: New Look Defense
 

Yeah, I'd personally prefer better talent at the nose...certainly wouldn't hurt. But I have a lot of faith in tomsula to find and build a guy who can help us right now.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1170699]I respectfully disagree. I think there is a huge NT concern if the defense stays at 3-4.

The narrative goes that the defense is only in base 3-4 fifteen to twenty snaps a game, or 15 to 20 percent of snaps; I have seen the amount referenced both ways in print and heard it both ways on espn980.

Without a true NT, we have sub standard personnel on the field for that percentage of snaps.

What other position could we use sub-standard personnel as a band aid for 15-2- snaps a game? What if we used a really fast safety or LB for 15-20 snaps a game as a nickle corner?

The argument wouldn't be that we are using him for a limited number of snaps so we should not fret about it. The safety or LB would be exploited.

The two scenarios aren't analogous but similar. The main difference would be the ability of the couch potato to see the personnel weakness. With the safety or LB in coverage, we would all see the glaring weakness. With an end trying to play nose, it would take a knowledgeable fan to see the guard, who should be tied up with a mountain of a NT, killing the ILB on a run.

The point is, why play a scheme we don't have the personnel for, for any number of snaps?

Would it be good coaching to go heavy personnel last season with DJax and Crowder playing two of the TE positions as long as it was just for a few snaps?

How many snaps per game is it ok to have sub-standard personnel on the field?[/quote]

I Respectfully AGREE with your thoughts. Well said. The inside of our D was porous, at best last year and some of the reasons given were our guys manning that position were too "small". We didn't do much to improve the size issue during the off season.

But, for the record, I'm not "fretting", that's stuff that wussies do & I'm no wuss.

But I am interested in what will transpire.

What I find really interesting is Tomsula will either coach up a big body to play NT that nobody really expects or Tomsula will coach up a gap splitter, which hasn't been his forte.

So, I am interested in seeing how this will play out.


HTTR.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Terrance Knighton was very good at commanding double teams and clogging the middle in his one season here. Yet our defense still blew chunks and he never played in the NFL again after that. So tell me again how a traditional NT is so important in a 3-4 when nobody else in the NFL thought he was worth it?

The Cardinals and Texans are the two teams with the most successful 3-4 defenses over the last few years, I think we would all agree with that. The Texans have Vince Wilfork playing the NT role, a good traditional NT type, but aging. The Cardinals have Corey Peters in that role, a 6-3 305 pounder drafted in the third round by the Falcons.

Notice those defenses have something else in common, strong pass rushers from the end and OLB spots. JJ Watt, Clowney, the since departed Calais Campbell, and Chandler Jones. To say nothing of the secondary play.

I am with Matty, NT is overrated.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Schneed10;1170723]Terrance Knighton was very good at commanding double teams and clogging the middle in his one season here. Yet our defense still blew chunks and he never played in the NFL again after that. So tell me again how a traditional NT is so important in a 3-4 when nobody else in the NFL thought he was worth it?

The Cardinals and Texans are the two teams with the most successful 3-4 defenses over the last few years, I think we would all agree with that. The Texans have Vince Wilfork playing the NT role, a good traditional NT type, but aging. The Cardinals have Corey Peters in that role, a 6-3 305 pounder drafted in the third round by the Falcons.

Notice those defenses have something else in common, strong pass rushers from the end and OLB spots. JJ Watt, Clowney, the since departed Calais Campbell, and Chandler Jones. To say nothing of the secondary play.

I am with Matty, NT is overrated.[/quote]

Good points, but nobody will convince me that any position on Defense is not important.

No doubt Knighton was Huge, but as we all saw, he was also over weight & out of shape. When he was on the field, he took too many plays off.

Corey Peters is the interesting outlier in this discussion.
He played 497 of 1,019 (48%) defensive snaps last year for the Cardinals.
So you've proven that the argument that Hood & Ioannidis were too small is not valid. (Rich Tandler should be ashamed!)

So, it sounds like it's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.

McGee missed 7 games last year & only played 220 of 987 snaps (22%).

Our Defense was pathetic last year (against the run, against the pass) - just pathetic.

It will be interesting to see if the same basic players line up at the same spots & play better.

Maybe scheme & coaching can make that happen...it's something I'll be watching.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Schneed10;1170723]Terrance Knighton was very good at commanding double teams and clogging the middle in his one season here. Yet our defense still blew chunks and he never played in the NFL again after that. So tell me again how a traditional NT is so important in a 3-4 when nobody else in the NFL thought he was worth it?

The Cardinals and Texans are the two teams with the most successful 3-4 defenses over the last few years, I think we would all agree with that. The Texans have Vince Wilfork playing the NT role, a good traditional NT type, but aging. The Cardinals have Corey Peters in that role, a 6-3 305 pounder drafted in the third round by the Falcons.

Notice those defenses have something else in common, strong pass rushers from the end and OLB spots. JJ Watt, Clowney, the since departed Calais Campbell, and Chandler Jones. To say nothing of the secondary play.

I am with Matty, NT is overrated.[/quote]

No he wasn't. Terrence knighton was not good at commanding double teams per every Cooley Film breakdown. Try to watch the 2nd philly game of 2015. He was barely doubled at all. He was so bad, he was out of the league the very next year and despite being 30 years old is still unemployed.

Whenever he was legitimately doubled (again philly game) he was washed out of the play so far it affected others around him. He was lazy and could not hold his ground which is exactly the opposite of his assignment.

The only reason I remember that game is I went back with pen and paper and posted about it on here.

Do you have a specific game you are thinking of where he played well or just commenting in general?

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1170734]No he wasn't. Terrence knighton was not good at commanding double teams per every Cooley Film breakdown. Try to watch the 2nd philly game of 2015. He was barely doubled at all. He was so bad, he was out of the league the very next year and despite being 30 years old is still unemployed.

Whenever he was legitimately doubled (again philly game) he was washed out of the play so far it affected others around him. He was lazy and could not hold his ground which is exactly the opposite of his assignment.

The only reason I remember that game is I went back with pen and paper and posted about it on here.

Do you have a specific game you are thinking of where he played well or just commenting in general?[/quote]

One dimensional? Yes. Ineffective run stopper? Not even close. Congrats on wasting your time there, arm chair scout.

Pro Football Focus in March 2016:

[quote]
While Knighton failed to standout as Washington’s nose tackle in 2015, he made a solid contribution. As a two-down run defender, he finished with a respectable 76.9 overall grade, recording 18 defensive stops. Considering Knighton played only 38 percent of snaps, his production was respectable. With the depth they now have at five-technique in Chris Baker, Jason Hatcher, Ricky Jean-Francois, and Stephen Paea, Washington can afford to limit Knighton to early downs. Although far from an exciting move, keeping Knighton on a short-term deal makes sense.[/quote]

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=Schneed10;1170735]One dimensional? Yes. Ineffective run stopper? Not even close. Congrats on wasting your time there, arm chair scout.

Pro Football Focus in March 2016:[/quote]

Who wrote that?

Link or it didn't happen.

I am betting the grades that went into the average were compile by a bunch of Englishmen who churn out grades on every NFL player by Monday morning. They truly take the time to break it down!

Link or it didn't happen.

He was garbage and 32 teams in the NFL ignored PFF. His respectable grade from PFF, and their determination of a "solid contribution" earned him not even a vet minimum contract.

Arm chair scout? He is out of the league at 30 and uninjured. Did you read your post before you copy and pasted? He should have been signed if PFF was remotely accurate.

I am not an arm chair scout, I do faithfully listen to Cooley's break downs and more times than not go back and watch the game again if I am interested in something.

It isn't a waste of time if you enjoy it.

Also, it isn't nice to call people sarcastic names.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1170742]Who wrote that?

Link or it didn't happen.

I am betting the grades that went into the average were compile by a bunch of Englishmen who churn out grades on every NFL player by Monday morning. They truly take the time to break it down!

Link or it didn't happen.

He was garbage and 32 teams in the NFL ignored PFF. His respectable grade from PFF, and their determination of a "solid contribution" earned him not even a vet minimum contract.

Arm chair scout? He is out of the league at 30 and uninjured. Did you read your post before you copy and pasted? He should have been signed if PFF was remotely accurate.

I am not an arm chair scout, I do faithfully listen to Cooley's break downs and more times than not go back and watch the game again if I am interested in something.

It isn't a waste of time if you enjoy it.

Also, it isn't nice to call people sarcastic names.[/quote]

[url]https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-kirk-cousins-tops-redskins-list-of-free-agent-priorities/[/url]

For fuck's sake. Could it possibly be that he was indeed good against the run, yet teams decided that skill wasn't worth much given how little he's on the field?

The simpler explanation is often the correct one. Stop overthinking, putz.

Re: New Look Defense
 

Disagreeing with you and a dude with a degree from the University of Bristol from the UK with a degree in philosophy and psychology on how bad Knighton was does not a putz make.

[url]https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-breitenbach-975755113[/url]

Other teams pit, bal, houston, have dedicated NT that play limited snaps and they make rosters. Knighton was just bad according to (literally) every Cooley Film breakdown from 2015.

Using Knighton, a bust who can't make a roster in his prime years, is not a strong argument either way on the importance of the NT position.

Re: New Look Defense
 

[quote=DYoungJelly;1170744]Disagreeing with you and a dude with a degree from the University of Bristol from the UK with a degree in philosophy and psychology on how bad Knighton was does not a putz make.

[url]https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-breitenbach-975755113[/url]

Other teams pit, bal, houston, have dedicated NT that play limited snaps and they make rosters. Knighton was just bad according to (literally) every Cooley Film breakdown from 2015.

Using Knighton, a bust who can't make a roster in his prime years, is not a strong argument either way on the importance of the NT position.[/quote]

Then what of Corey Peters.