My conversation with Gil Brandt

Start with thanks Zod for the read.

WR Dez Bryant 6'2" 220 lbs. Oklahoma University. Did'nt find a forty time but it is said he could go as fast as the #1 in the 1st. That would take some work for us to pick out. We know how much excitement that could stir up im afraid that might be wishing a bit to much. The front office could have a way tho.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The G Man
Who...Jacoby Ford???

WR Jacoby Ford 5'10" 185 lbs. Clemons Tigers has a forty of 4.126 recorded.

 

I can find several reasons why they were or were not Parcells' guys. That's not the issue. I don't even disagree with your statements. What I'm saying is that posters here and elsewhere claimed that these were Parcells' guys and that he would obviously take one of them early.

As for coverage skills of ILBs, that's really the reason why it's not a core position in the NFL. Every ILB in the league this year has had at least 60% of the passes attempted against him completed (actually this week Chillar improved to 59%, but QBs still have a 108 rating going against him). The vast majority allow over a 70% catch percentage.

So no matter who we get at ILB they will still come out in passing situations and thus won't have much impact in those critical situations.

 

My mistake, I misinterpreted your post.

Good point.

 

Howzabout the coverage skill of the outside LB's?

 

I don't think Bell has a lost a step. In fact, I like him better than Wilson, but I think the age and money mean that they will go with Wilson.

AFAIK you can't renegotiate to a lower salary. The only option is to cut Bell and then re-sign him. That could happen but I think it would be a mistake to go with two SSs again.

As for the quote, I don't see it as any sort of victory for me. I grew up believing "defense wins championships", but after watching Wanny follow that prescription perfectly, I started to re-examine my beliefs. There are so many facts now that point to my original ideas being incorrect. I really think that people are just ignoring the obvious.

 

Well, I disagree that all things being equal, Parcells would take a LB over a WR. And this quote implies that what Parcells is looking for is a WR above all else. I don't think there's much logic to the idea that LB is a greater need and almost no logic that it would have a greater impact. I have a post in the club that outlines my logic on those points.

And I agree that next year should be a good WR year. But I don't think it ever makes sense to pass on a core position for next year. The fact is that almost nobody wins in the NFL without an efficient passing attack. This is not an opinion. People will say the Giants or Steelers, but if you actually look at there stats in the playoffs they were very efficient passing teams. Statistically, if you win the TO battle and the pass efficiency battle you win 95% of the time. There are no other stats that I know of that are more correlated to winning. I don't think it makes sense to throw away a year waiting for the next draft class.

 

They are better than ILBs, but far from good. The fact is that no LB with more than a handful of throws against him is better than 50%. The top half in the league seem to break at about 75%.

The reality is that this is a passing league. Everybody in coverage gets beat at least half of the time and usually considerably more. Even Revis who's having a sick year allowed 58% last year. And looking at other great CBs, the odds are that next year he'll be over 50% again.

 

Since we're talking a bit more about draft philosophy and strategy now, I figured I'd include an exert from something I posted in 2008. Came from a Q&A session with Jeff Ireland that I was fortunate enough to participate in.

Our needs could look much different after free agency. If someone like Andre Johnson, Brandon Marshall or Miles Austin ended up atop the WR corps, naturally the topic is moot.

But as stated above, we aren't a strict BPA team. We have core positions and we take need into consideration. Cornerback was a massive need, especially with the WR's in our division. We spent two Day 1 picks on them.

Was Pat White BPA at 44? I couldn't tell you, but Charlie Casserly said Parcells told him they were going to pick him during the 2008 season.

Parcells has never taken a WR high. Terry Glenn was Robert Kraft and Bobby Grier's pick. Bill wanted Tony Brackens.

I guess, like always, it depends on who's there. We need linebackers inside and out pretty badly. We need a receiver and a tight end.

It's interesting that Brandt mentioned a 'speed' guy. I think that means more than just a fast 40 time. I think that means a guy that can get off press coverage and then have the requisite speed to keep that separation. Bryant isn't a speed guy like Desean Jackson. But he's big and will go up and get the ball. I haven't seen enough of him to know if he can separate from press.

 

Ok, fair enough, but do you really think he would NEVER choose WR if it was BPA and NEED at the same time? Could be perfect storm in 2010 with Dez B.

I am not so sure he would pass.

 

I grew up believing the same. Now, I'm not that sure. Then again, there are no great D's in the current NFL.

Here's a question for you and all. How would the 4-6 D do against today's pass happy teams. How would some of the best D's, in the NFL's history have done?

I do not believe that it is the O, just a lack of the D.

 

50% vs TE's and we probably have two more wins.

 

Thats your #1 error in judgement. Wanny did not follow the Defense wins championships, Perfectly.

In fact, history shows, he offered TABLE DRESSING to it, but didnt understand the CORE of what that means. All things being equal Defenses win Championships.

He failed at the equal part....horrible pass attack and horrible pass blocking scheme. He could run, but didnt even know how to use that properly to manage a game clock.

Sorry, but if you are propping up Wanny as the reason you no longer think Defenses Win Championships, you need a better role model.

I say again, the last two SB champs NYG and PIT show you what the TRUE meaning of Defenses Win Championships equates to. The NFL has changed, but the principle behind a SB champion has been pretty consistent.

 

The 46 was exposed by Marino and went away shortly after for that very reason...and Marino didnt have the luxury of working under modern NFL pass rules.

As far as GREAT D's in the current NFL, they are still alive and well. #1 D's are still #1 D's in the modern/current NFL.

Do O's have a greater advantage to close the gap over great D's sure....but all O's have the advantage to score points, but great D's still produce the SB champions...not great O's.

 

I think it would struggle. I think that QBs would torch it like Marino did the Bears in '85.

Even though the written PI rules haven't changed since that time the enforcement has. Marino threw so quick that the CBs didn't have time to react and were exposed.

Now CBs have to be even more hands off, that's why Marino's records are being challenged more. The rules have basically made the CBs job as difficult as Marino did.

 

NE in 2007 had the most explosive O in NFL history in many ways.....2007 NYG D dominated and won SB.

AZ in 2008 had rediculous scoring ability last year (and perhaps the most dynamic WR combo), PIT D created the difference in SB victory.

Great O's may keep teams in the game and score close (and given sunday), and can keep a SB game tight till the end, but the better D's when compared to opposing D vs. O will continue to be the difference maker.

 

Actually winning the TO battle and the YPA battle wins 95% of the time. There are no stats that are more correlated to winning than those two.

You still need balance. What Wanny proved was that you can't just run the ball great and play great D and win. Which many people here still say. The fact is you need a passing attack. In fact, what you need is to do is pass and stop the pass. (TOs seem to fluctuate from year to year, maybe has to do with luck) Between those two, regression analysis has shown that passing is 23% more correlated to winning than pass defense. That maybe why the article I gave you earlier showed that great offense beats great defense.

And yes Pitt and the Giants had very good defenses. But if you look at their playoffs stats they also had efficient passing games. So what you need is balance. Defense is part of that picture. It's the part that helps helps win championships, but that help is to a lesser extent than passing.

 

I'll post this again. These stats came to the exact opposite conclusion as your anecdotal examples.


http://www.advancednflstats.com/2008...pionships.html

This means that great offenses tend to be "better" than great defenses, and terrible offenses tend to be "worse" than terrible defenses. If my offense is 2 standard deviations (SD) above the mean and your defense is 2 SD above the mean, my offense would tend to prevail because a great offense tends to gain more yards above the NFL average than an equally great defense allows below the NFL average.

So if a great offense usually trumps a great defense, where does the perception that "defense wins championships" come from? Truly dominant defenses such as the 2000 Ravens, 2002 Buccaneers, or 1985 Bears are relatively rare, and are therefore more memorable.

So when looking at the NFL as a whole, offense and defense balances symmetrically. But when focusing on the right tails of performance, where playoff teams come from, we see that great offenses out-pace equally great defenses.

 

But each team has an O and each team has a D. this isnt about 1 side vs only 1 side...its the combo.

NE O was tops, NE D was avg
NYG O was above avg (if inconsistent), NYG D was the tipping point shuting down the top O.

AZ O was above avg, AZ D was less than avg
PIT O was slightly above avg, PIT D was above avg to disrupting at times and the tipping point to hold on enough vs AZ O and points.

its not anecdotal...its REALITY when compared to STATS that are anecdotal to try to tell the true story.

Playoffs and SB more often than not show us that- we DO NOT see GREAT OFFENSES out-pacing equally GREAT DEFENSES! Its the opposite...the BETTER D's vs. each respective O (GREAT or AVG), is the Championship tipping point and has been for decades.

It isnt about only having a GREAT D, or the GREATEST D, its about all things being equal, the BETTER D will win you the GAME!

 

I have read that Bell is due a 14 mil bonus. He is not going to get that money <period> so maybe he gets released and resigned or maybe he just gets released.

 

This mother grabber is on my side!!!

lol

 

I just used promotion in reference to the fact that cutting ties with Bell and moving him into his position, would be a lot of positives for the player, considering i like Y bell.

 

Did you actually read the article? It specifically talks about the synergy between offense and defense. And then it shows that in the playoffs great offense do out pace great defenses. Not anecdotally, but factually.

 

P.S. link didnt work for me

Let me say it this way....a #1 pass attacking WR; and a pass catching seam stretching TE would be value adds and I want them to happen.

However, if we add those and dont change our D OLB's, FS, 1 ILB, and DT we will still lose games and give up points, and it becomes a shoot out.....and with our Running attack, we may eat up more clock that we would want for a MARINO-esque passing attack.

I know the rules have changed since MARINO days, but he killed D's, and we didnt have the proper run or D to compliment to win SB's...not just get into the playoffs. Playoffs smay-offs with 6 teams getting in...lots of weaker O's vs. D's....the analysis that matters is SB Championships. What does that take. The D has proven beyond an anecdotal doubt that it is the difference maker. SB matchups!

I have no desire to repeat the past. I want an above avg D, and above avg O playing together.

If WR gets us to above Avg O.....how many pieces does it take to get our D to above avg (say ranked 5-11)??? The answer is far more pieces on the D side than adding the WR would do to get our O to 5-11 range.

I also appreciate where you say, a WR & TE would improve our D. But I would really like to have our D hold its own, and compliment the O equally. Tied of this 1 side will pick up the pieces for the other - aka Wanny days.

 

I believe that those offensive additions would also improve our D. The hardest thing for a defense to do is play both the run and the pass at the same time. When they know what the other team is going to do it's much easier. That's why I think a team like NO has a fairly highly rated D despite no better (and arguably worse) talent than Miami.

Our D already is a top 10 pressure D (top 5 in sacks; top 10 in hurries). I expect that at least JT will be back and that with Wake, Anderson and Moses we will get similar pressure. I think that pressure coupled with an offense that puts pressure on the opponents to score would result result in much better won/loss record.

IMO if we had a better offense and a ball hawking S, we would would be a top 10 D by almost every measure.

 

It is starting to become a bogus stat if it doesnt equate to yards given up or points given up. Total D in top 5-11 not just a singular category is what I would like to see. Same for O.

I would rather rank dead last in PRESSURE and top 10 in 3rd Down Eff with my D.

Again, if WR gets us to above Avg.....how many pieces does it take to get our D to above avg (say ranked 5-11)???

 

It's not the only measure of a defense. But it is a strength that would be magnified if we put the opponents in more passing situations, for example down by a couple of scores late.

Like I said before, a ball hawking FS would do it.

 

not alone....our D needs more than that one position for upgrade to enter 5-11 Total D rating. We are currently 19th in Yds, and 25th in Points. Do not see FS getting us to top 11 in either while we leave other 10 guys the same (especially LB core).

Now, our offense is 15th in Yds, and 16th in points. Which is why a big part of me sees tremendous value in WR (and then notch down or two a TE). We could climb in Top 11 in both quickly. And I wouldnt argue with doing that so this FO could focus the balance of our efforts on D side. The big question is when can you acquire the WR/TE difference maker, and when and how often can you acquire the D side difference MAKERS.

FA vs. Draft and then what round, etc.

 

Iam not ignoring anything brother..
I know where you see offense going, I just dont wanna go there. Imo,The team need's 1 player at one unit, and 2, 3, for another. and from what I know from Parcells, i think and Hope he feels the same when it comes to shaping how this team is gonna win a championship...

Iam lookin at it like this,

The team needs to build a new linebacking unit, or draft 1 player to complete a wide receiver unit..

If Dez is there then it becomes BPA situation, between him, and the best linebacker on the board, i will not be upset in the least if we take Dez. but iam comin away with 3 linebackers from this draft.

 

it all begins in the trenches

 

Hey Rafael, I have been following your analysis and I think it's pretty interesting, but I think the difference we are looking for at linebacker isn't so much that they will stop the catch much more than they do now, but that they will stop the YAC - our LBs were absolutely miserable at this all year... So while I agree with your stat analysis I don't agree that it's quite that simple, give us some LBs who can at least stop some of the ridiculous YAC we gave up to the TEs and RBs....

 

Doh, and thanks for the info/thread Zod....

 

first thanks for the write up zod, and i agree with your opinion.

457 tackles, 8.5 sacks, 13 ints, and 7 forced fumbles

vs

264 tackles, 7.5 sacks, 3 ints, and 7 forced fumbles.

who is who?

the top one is g. wilson. the bottom is y. bell. the difference is

193 tackles, 1 sack, 10 interceptions, and even in fumbles in g. wilsons favor. and bell is 3 years older than wilson.

80 starts for wilson and 42 for bell.

 

Gibril had 11 missed tackles last season for Oakland
he has 8 missed tackles this season for us

Your Raider fan friends are blind

 

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2008/01/does-defense-win-championships.html

I posted the link again for you and BDH. If it still doesn't work go to advanced stats and on the right they have many links. Click on the one that says does defense win championships.

As for you theory, I believe it's more than that. My short version is that the rules favor the offense. Over time every D is at a disadvantage so if you don't have the ability to put up points your D will eventually fail you.

 

I agree that YAC is a factor. It's actually the area where I believe our CBs can improve too. The thing about thinking that drafting LBs is going to have a big impact which I think is so misplaced is that LBs are only core positions for their pass rushing. In everything else they just don't have that much impact. At least not as much as core positions. If they are not increasing the amount of pressure, which is clearly not a reasonable expectation, then there's no contribution they can make that will have a big impact.

 

The part I believe you're ignoring is the mountain of evidence that drafting LBs will only have a limited impact. It's not about wanting to go there.

 

In two years were likely to have 4 new starting linebackers and some new backups, when do you propose we start going there?

One free agent wide receiver signing that has first round grade.

One free agent linebacker signing thats has first round grade.

1st round draft pick..either Gresham or best linebacker..

2nd round pick, tight end or linebacker depending on who was bpa with the first...

3rd round pick..utility player/returner.

4th round..Linebacker..

5th round..BPA.

6th...BPA..

7th...BPA.

Attack both positions with a double up philosophy for each unit, using the 2 vehilcles with your first 2 choices in free agency and your 1st two choices in the draft.

That way we build the team symetrically with talent, then go heavy in volume later in the draft at linebacker.

If draft time were slotted at 11-15, with Dez likely to be off the board, i think it comes down to whether or not they think Gresham will be worth that high of a pick, if not, linebacker...

I do not want our team to go along with the trend of the modern day passing game, with a defense that gives it up,as quickly as the offense puts it up..

 

I think it's just silly to limit a pick to having to be taken out of 1 or 2 positions. You can't know who will be there. So we should take a 2nd rd LB in the 1st, or a 4th rd TE in the 2nd just because those might be the best available at the times we pick? (obviously that's a hypothetical) I just don't get that reasoning though.