Quote:
Originally Posted by MTK
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.
|
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?