2008 Denver Broncos -- Breaking Down the Roster #8 - Safety


Is Hamza the top Safety in Denver?
[Editor's Note: John Lynch has left the Broncos to weigh his options. While that changes the fact the Lynch should be listed here, I will leave him for now since Styg's breakdown fit Lynch's proposed role perfectly.]
If you are a fan of defense, particularly if you are into the nuances of the safety position, it is probably safe to say that Denver has been disappointing for years. Its not completely the talent, of course, since no one would argue that Lynch was less than a future Hall of Famer. And it isn't the selection or marketplace, since great safeties have been cropping up fairly regularly around the league, and Denver has had plenty of fair opportunities to go after them.
The thing is, they just haven't.
While not completely ignoring the position, the Broncos have certainly not placed any kind of tremendous priority on it, with the most notable moves in recent history being the signing of Lynch and the recent pickup of Josh Barrett in the draft. And while Lynch was a good pickup, I'm sure that there is no lesson in "NFL GMing 101" that says how wise it is to sign a player recovering from a serious neck injury and going into the second decade of his career. The Broncos put their money on Lynch the person, not Lynch the player, and the bet turned out to be a good one. But guys like Lynch are few and far between. Similarly, Barrett may be one of the best pure talents out of the draft to don Broncos' blue and orange in years, but he slipped to the seventh round for a reason, and the jury is still out.
2008 looks to be the year of the NOW for the safety position. Whether any of the players on the roster will have impacts that resonate deeply for the Broncos for years to come will be an intriguing, and LONG struggle to witness, promising to be one of the final positions to get straightened out in the offseason, and continuing on throughout the regular season as well. Each player brings unique assets and questions to the struggle, and they each bring a dynamic that could make 2008 the beginning of the road, or the end of the road for any of them. Lets take a look at who they are, and what they bring.
JOHN LYNCH (6-2, 220 / 16th Year)
2007 was a year that Lynch would probably like to forget on so many levels. The safety position saw him paired with different players three times, his team was utterly uncompetitive more than once, and on top of it all, his body betrayed him, as he missed time in over four games due to injuries. For a competitor of Lynch's degree, such things must have given him nightmares. Follow all this up with a paycut and the consistent mantra coming from the coaches that, regarding playing time, "there are no guarantees," and you have a player who appears on the cusp of radical change.
But will there really be that big of a change? After spending this offseason representing the 1% of Broncos who did NOT participate in the offseason conditioning program, Lynch is in stellar shape regardless, having returned to his traditional conditioning workouts with an ex-navy seal. Long one of the smartest players to ever suit up, there can be no doubt that he will not have lost any of his instinct or intensity on the field. You hear a lot about how he has lost speed, and while he was never one of the fastest safeties in the league, he lost most of his speed between years 5 and 15. From this year to last there won't be a noticeable difference.
But one area that I think is declining for Lynch, that has been his bread and butter for years, is his aggressive hitting in run support. I watched every snap played from the safety position for the Broncos in preparation for an article last January, and in watching Lynch I noticed that he was much more of a force pursuing a play from the backside in run support, and closing from a mid-depth FS zone. When playing from the 4th LB spot, or blitzing on a SS "monster" play he would be swallowed up by the garbage around the line, and as a result his ferocious hitting was neutralized.
Going into 2008 Lynch isn't fighting for a roster spot, he's fighting for a ProBowler's pride. And when the dust settles, he will be expected to play about 50% of snaps from the FS position, both as a primary run support player, but also with the skills needed to play a solid SS zone. He played very well at FS, with heavy coverage responsibilities, through the first part of 2007, and only after getting injured did the position begin to see the flux and indeterminacy that would plague the defensive unit as a whole.
If reports are correct at this point, Lynch will be released from the Broncos to better pursue his goals, whether those are on field or off. When Lynch initially took the paycut, he mentioned at the time that he felt there were some in the organization who did not want him back, and he singled out Bowlen and Shanahan as two guys who absolutely DID want him back. I thought then, and I think now that he was talking about Slowik. Whether he was or not, one can certainly sympathize with a defensive coordinator who would face a PR nightmare for benching one of the most popular players to wear a Broncos' uniform in recent years, and yet probably felt like said player was a major tell for his defensive tendencies. Slowik was in a tough position with Lynch in the mix, and if all parties have resolved to move on, then there is certainly a silver lining to this outcome. I just hope that anything to come is carried out with the class and integrity that both Lynch and the Broncos have come to stand for.
UPDATE -- Lynch has decided to leave the Broncos, ending a wonderful tenure after 4 years. Personally, I wish Lynch the best and feel thankful for what he did for the Broncos on and off the field.
2007 Season Notes:Lynch played 13 games (12 starts) for Denver, ranking fifth on the team with 62 tackles (48 solo) while adding one sack (11 yds.) and three pass breakups. Selected to play in the Pro Bowl as an alternate after an injury to the Colts’ Bob Sanders, increasing his career Pro Bowl total to nine to mark the second-most selections at the safety position in NFL history (Pro Football Hall of Famer Ken Houston has 10). Also went to the Pro Bowl for the fourth year in a row (all with Denver) to move into third in Pro Bowl selections (4) by a Broncos safety. Contributed three tackles and one sack (11 yds.) in the opener at Buf. (9/9). Posted a pair of solo tackles before leaving with a groin injury in the second quarter vs. Jac. (9/23), which was his 50th game as a Bronco. Declared inactive at Ind. (9/30) with the groin injury. Returned to the lineup and contributed six tackles (5 solo) vs. S.D. (10/7). Added a pair of solo tackles before leaving in the first quarter vs. G.B. (10/29) with a neck injury that forced him to be declared inactive at Det. (11/4) and at K.C. (11/11). Led the secondary with six tackles (5 solo) at Oak. (12/2). Added six stops (4 solo) and one pass defensed at Hou. (12/13), entering the game as a reserve for the first time in his Denver career. Led the club with nine tackles (6 solo) vs. Min. (12/30).
HAMZA ABDULLAH (6-2, 216 / 4th Year)
Hamza came on strong last year, battling back from early season injuries to take Ferguson's SS spot on the roster, but closed out the season looking worn down and struggling to execute fundamental technique. The result was poor tackling and missed assignments. An incomplete finish to an incomplete season.
Going into his fourth year in the league, Hamza is facing a make or break season in my eyes. He has the starting experience, he is having a healthy camp, and he has the opportunity, so he needs to put it together in his fourth year, just as he did at Washington State, where he was a late bloomer derailed early by injuries. The reports out of camp have him running as a full time first team coverage safety. He may or may not be termed a SS, as in Denver's, and many team's, schemes the FS is the "free-er" safety, the one with the most options, and the position tends to be reserved for the more experienced, and thus knowledgable player. Either position may have responsibilities for deep "safety" coverage.
He is not a terribly fast player, lacks acceleration if he gets caught peeking into the backfield for too long, and isn't terribly strong, though he is a hard hitter. Signs from last year indicate that he is learning to read plays as they develop, arguably a safeties most important job, and the fact that he is getting so many reps in camp speak to the coaches confidence in him, but like Lynch, Hamza is a player best suited to playing up in the box.
Regardless of his shortcomings, Hamza is a dependable player, both on the field and off who has shown in the past an ability to raise his level of play with experience. He is a solid all around safety who should be serviceable in coverage, and an above average run support guy for years to come, and he should lend a lot of stability to the safety position as this defense re-establishes itself.
2007 Season Notes:Abdullah played 11 games (8 starts) for Denver, assuming the starting strong safety position for the last half of the season, and finished with a career-high 48 tackles (40 solo), one forced fumble, one fumble recovery and seven passes defensed. Also assisted on one special-teams tackle. Did not record any stats vs. Oak. (9/16) before leaving with a hip injury that forced him to be inactive for the next five weeks. Returned to action and played extensively at Det. (11/4), leading the secondary with seven tackles (5 solo). Made nine solo tackles and broke up two passes, including one intercepted by Karl Paymah, in his first career start at K.C. (11/11). Led the secondary with eight tackles (6 solo) on Monday Night Football vs. Ten. (11/19). Led the secondary with seven solo tackles and had one forced fumble, one fumble recovery and one pass breakup at Chi. (11/25).
MARLON MCCREE (5-11, 204 / 8th Year)
McCree looks like a short term solution for the Broncos in an effort to add more range to their defensive backfield, especially in nickle situations. He has spent the first days of camp relieving Lynch in passing situations, which projects to about 55% of snaps from the FS position.
McCree has above average hands for a safety, with explosiveness and average speed, but the experience to translate that speed into good range. In San Diego he benefited from a stellar defensive line stocked with probowlers, and was able to play a high energy aggressive ball hawking style. Lacking the athleticism to stay on the SD roster in the offseason, he chose Denver as a team desperate for versatile coverage safeties.
For Denver the attraction had to be the added range, for sure, but also the chance to gain some insight into the Chargers, and to add a player to the roster who has seen some recent playoff experience. For the fans, the attraction might not be there at all. McCree has bounced around the league some, being waived by the Jaguars and Texans, and being signed away from Carolina by the Charger's to be part of their already stellar defense.
He has come out in camp as a steady contributor, reliable when called upon. If Lynch moves on, the next test for McCree will be to show his versatility and durability, both areas of his game that really came into their own when he played for San Diego. Let's hope he can keep the momentum going.
And while most fans will be disheartened to remember that it was McCree who didn't protect the interception in last year's playoff loss to NE, having it stripped away giving the Patriots a chance to win the game, they should be somewhat enamored of the fact that some of McCree's best efforts have come at the expense of the Colts, in particular Marvin Harrison. Every little bit helps.
2007 Season Notes:McCree started all 16 games for the second time in his career for San Diego and totaled 75 tackles (51 solo), three interceptions (20 yds.), six passes defensed, one forced fumble and one fumble recovery. Helped the Chargers lead the NFL in opponent passer rating (70.0). Finished with two special-teams tackles. Added nine tackles (7 solo), one pass defensed and one fumble recovery in three playoff games (3 starts). Recovered a fumble to set up the game-tying score in an AFC Divisional Playoff Game at Ind. (1/22). Added two solo tackles in the AFC Championship Game at N.E. (1/20). Intercepted a pass in the season opener vs. Chi. (9/9). Posted 10 stops (6 solo) on Sunday Night Football at N.E. (9/16). Accounted for two turnovers at Den. (10/7) with one interception and one forced fumble.
MARQUAND MANUEL (6-0, 213 / 7th Year)
Manuel is a player expected to provide veteran backup experience, having compiled 41 starts in a 6 year career. Denver will be his fifth team in that time span, and what they desperately are looking for in him is a solid guy who can bring it on special teams, where he was active in 16 games for Carolina last year.
With average strength and speed, he will need to overachieve in a big way if he wants to force the Broncos to keep six safeties, or to beat out either Barrett or Rogers below.
2007 Season Notes:Manuel played 16 games (2 starts) for Carolina, totaling 14 tackles (9 solo), one interception (4 yds.), one sack (11 yds.), one pass breakup and five special-teams tackles. Added one forced fumble on special teams. Joined the Panthers on Sept. 3 after competing in training camp with Green Bay. Started at free safety and produced one tackle on both defense and special teams at Atl. (9/23). Forced a fumble on punt coverage (recovered by Carolina) and had one special-teams tackle at Ten. (11/4). Posted one sack and one interception vs. S.F. (12/2), marking the first such outing of his career. Sack also was his first as a pro. Started in place of an injured Chris Harris at strong safety and collected a season-high six tackles at T.B. (12/30).
RODERICK ROGERS (6-2, 187 / 2nd Year)
I have to admit to all of you that I am pulling for Rogers not because I see any kind of sleeper talent here, but just because I would like to see his speed equate to some elite range in our backfield. And I have to admit to myself that speed is not the only component of range, which is as much about technique and a good first step as anything.
The latter two points are the make or break issues for Rogers, though it is debatable whether or not that is an issue for this year or next, as he is still eligible for the practice squad. He was a very raw player coming out of Wisconsin, and ever so slightly underweight, in my opinion, but that can easily be overlooked. What he did have was very good instincts for attacking the ball in coverage, something he was able to prove while ranking fourth in the Big10 for passes defensed. Going forward he continues to be an interesting prospect who needs to show tremendous strides in game study and fundamental technique in order to keep a possible roster spot in his sights. Unless injuries plague the safeties this year, it is unlikely that 2008 will be the year of the Badger.
2007 Season Notes:Rogers, who entered the NFL as a college free agent with Denver on May 2, played in the final two games of the season with the Broncos. Spent the first 15 weeks of the season on the Broncos’ practice squad before he was signed to their active roster on Dec. 18. Made his pro debut on Monday Night Football at S.D. (12/24) and saw time vs. Min. (12/30) in the season finale.
JOSH BARRETT (6-2, 225 / Rookie)
Save the best for last right? One of the best safeties to ever suit up for the Arizona State Sun Devils, Barrett brings an infusion of much needed pure athletic skill to the Broncos. He has speed, exceptional range, and the kind of size and build that looks like the mold for a "standard issue elite safety" action figure. So why did he fall to the seventh round? Injuries his senior year, including a knee injury are part of it, but the big issue was the question of why his awesome workout measurements didn't translate consistently to his onfield performance. "Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane." This is the exact opposite phenomenon of a player who may not measure well, but is considered "a football player." You can see why I wasn't 100% behind the pick.
But the good news is that he is having an awesome camp. This is the best thing we can hear coming from his corner. It doesn't matter if we hear that he is a playmaker, or that he is one of the most explosive defensive players, or that he takes perfect angles and hits like a truck. I like hearing that he gets in a receiver's hip pocket and can't be shaken out, or that he is absorbing the playbook and looking instinctual on the field. But none of that matters, because for Barrett those are the things that are in the bank. Lock it up, the kid is an athlete, and a good one. What matters the most with Barrett is that he keep up the intensity, the drive to keep getting better, to keep pushing for success. What matters is that he is still looking good when camp is thirty days old, not three. That when the dog days have started to take their toll, he is still there and still impressive. He has what it takes to separate himself from the rest of his peers. The question has always been, will he do it?
2007 College Notes:Barrett played 11 games (8 starts) as a senior at Arizona State, finishing the year with 38 tackles (25 solo), one sack (9 yds.), one interception, a career-high seven pass breakups and one fumble recovery. Missed three games early in the year due to injuries. Received ASU’s Cecil Abono Team Captain Award. Posted seven tackles vs. California (10/27) and intercepted a pass at UCLA (11/10).
1 recs |
12 comments
Comments
Safety differences
It seems rare to find safeties who are great at both coverage and run support. I personally think Dawkins in Philly and Reed in Baltimore are two of the best.
But for most teams, a good defense usually means one safety that is good at coverage, and one who is a better run stuffer. The Broncos have always struggled finding a great coverage safety. I think that is why the Broncos have tried Foxworth at safety.
Even Atwater, back in the day, was not a great coverage safety (Braxton kind of filled that role). In fact a lot of the all time great safeties were not necessarily the fastest and greatest coverage safeties (Harrison, Lott, Tatum, Atwater), but they were smart and consistent, which seems to be the most important skills for a safety.
Thus, I think Mcree will help the Broncos a lot. He has experience and savy. And hopefully Abdullah does become more consistent. If so they could be a good tandem.
Barrett could be a future star, but there is so much to learn, as far as coverages and assignments, that I can’t see him playing a lot this year. However, he might be successful, if he is fast enough to go sideline to sideline, and they are willing to simplify their safety coverage to the point of predictability, where they just tell him to play deep help coverage and to simply fly to the ball. The thing is he can’t bite on fakes, he can’t be slow to read to deep ball, and he has to know how to handle multiple deep routes. It still is not all that easy of an assignment. And the mental part of the game was one of Barrett’s weaknesses in college.
Now with Lynch leaving, they are a little short on one of the most important skills for a safety – experience. So, I wonder who they will try to acquire?
by The Gun Young on Jul 30, 2008 8:38 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Not sure if this is official
but coming from nfl.com, I find it to be a reliable and honest source.
so here is the latest of your safety, Mr. Lynch
by metal_militia on Jul 30, 2008 8:39 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Very good writeup . . .
Two safeties deeply regretting the departure of Lynch are McCree and Abdullah. No question, Lynch’s leadership will be missed. The guy is pure, 24 carat class.
Regarding Hamza, are you sure you aren’t mistaken about his speed, Styg. It seems all I have read about him is his speed and his range. I was quite suprised to see you say that he wasn’t necessarily fast after all that.
Nonetheless, I am excited about the personnel back there. But, as you implied, we have a lot of preseason yet to go.
Never pass up the opportunity to keep your mouth shut. - my daddy
by AZDynamics on Jul 30, 2008 10:56 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Just my opinion....
but there seems to be game speed and straight-line speed. Hamza is the latter. A bigger concern to me about Hamza is the angle he takes to the ball, whether in the air or when he is chasing a ball carrier. Hopefully that improves with time, but I am going to be looking for it the next couple of days…
-TSG
www.milehighreport.com
by John Bena on Jul 30, 2008 11:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes but . . .
When the coaches were gushing over Hamza’s range, they were talking about what they saw on the football field from him, not on the track.
I dunno . . . keep an eye on that, will you Guru? :)
Never pass up the opportunity to keep your mouth shut. - my daddy
by AZDynamics on Jul 31, 2008 12:04 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Guru's gonna need
about eight sets of eyes!
What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us. - Emerson
by firstfan on Jul 31, 2008 12:52 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outstanding work Styg!
It’s nice to know that MHR has depth at the writing position for one of the best series we have!
Safety is my favorite position, and one (like you point out) that Denver hasn’t been big on. Also, like you, I am enamored by speed, even though there is so much more to the position (“football smarts” is the biggest). Unlike Gun Young (who’s points are all valid), I’m of the opinion that two coverage safeties are ideal if a team can field seven credible players up front. In short, this is the write-up I’ve been waiting for.
I found out about the departure of Lynch when I got up this morning. I saw it coming last year when I predicted his retirement, and I guess I get half credit a few months late on the prediction. He can be a starter elsewhere, but in Denver he wasn’t going to be an every down starter, and that’s a hard pill to swallow for an elite talent. I wish him the best.
The good news for Denver is that we get a year to develop another player in his place. I still think that we are young and gelling together this year for a run at greatness next year. This means that I would like to see young players like Rogers and Barrett honing their skills.
I’m not big on Manuel at all. But McCree could go either way. I’m hoping he can do well on our team. A few SD fans seem to have disowned him after he left, but my understanding was that SD considered themselves deep at the SAF position with a lot of up and coming talent, and letting McCree go made just made sense. That’s no knock on McCree at all.
Hamza is also a question mark. I saw a lot that I really liked last year out of him. He has the potential to be one of those DBs who can cover, but also does terrific in run support. But the errors he made late in the season concerned me too. My theory, right or wrong, is that a player who has played well at least has the ability and the potential to play well, and can be coached or taught to play well consistently. Inconsistency can be corrected, but a lot of the problem is up to the individual’s desire to correct the problem.
My guess is that Hamza and McCree are starters, Manuel makes the roster because of experience and STs ability, and Rogers or Barrett might fight for the chance to be a future starter for the team. The loss of Lynch gives each player a better chance.
On the other hand, if Denver keeps Jack Williams at CB (as well as Pay and Fox), they may justify five CBs by using one at SAF depth, thus knocking out a SAF player.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jul 31, 2008 4:18 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
What you get is what you got
I agree two coverage safeties is ideal, but my point earlier is that most teams have to settle for one safety who is more the coverage safety and one who is more the run support safety.
The reason most teams have to settle for that is because, as I stated earlier, finding safeties who are really good at both is very hard to find. Like I said just look at a lot of the all time greats. Many of them were not great at both. And when the rare draftee, like Sean Taylor, comes along who has the great speed and coverage ability, and great tackling ability, then they get drafted real high.
Furthermore, many of the great coverage safeties are not great tacklers, so that is why a team will make the other saftey a good run support person. Even though having two safeties who can do both well is ideal, it is not necessary for a successful defense. Just look at the Patriots – Harrison has never been a great coverage safety. He is purely run support. Of course their defense has been pretty good over the years.
McCree and Abdullah are both better at coverage than Lynch was at this point, but if they miss John on the field, it will be his tackling and his run play diagnosis ability (or smarts or experience). I know the foxy experiment at safety did not work out, partially because he was undersized, and thus not a great at run support. But I am surprised the Broncos never tried to move Paymah to safety, cause he has a lot more size than Foxy, and he is very good in man coverage, and they now seem very deep at CB.
by The Gun Young on Jul 31, 2008 10:25 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
As I wrote,
...your points are all valid. It’s more a matter of taste than an absolute. There are different schools of thought on the matter, and people will differ. That’s why I chose to use the terms “valid” refering to your comment, and “opinion” relating to mine.
My approach in thinking is that if you really want a fourth LB, or really have to stop the run, then just run a 46 defense like the Eagles do or run a true 4-4 defense. But the 4-4 defense is rare (unheard of at the pro-level), and the 46 is down to one team. The reason the 46 still survives is because it is not a true 4-4, and the SS doesn’t play like a true LB (even though he is still lined up as an OLB).
Also, I still hold that two coverage guys are the ideal. We only moved Lynch to run support when our front seven were failing. Two SAFs in coverage is the ideal, which was another word I was careful to use. Bear in mind that there are typically seven players devoted to the run. On most plays that are pass (with two WRs), there are at least 3 players going for a reception (typicaly the WRs and a TE), and sometimes a fourth (RB). Locking up the CBs one on one with a WR and you are left with a major risk. The SAFs’ purpose then is to minimize that risk. As we saw last year, a SAF in an isolated deep zone can not cover both sides of the field.
But 2 SAFs can cover the deep zone sideline to sideline. In fact, many of our notorious blown plays by Bly and Bailey were the result of the SAF being out of position.
The issue that Styg brought up was the matter of Denver not choosing to go for better SAFs in many drafts, and he is correct. You brough up the matter of true coverage safeties being a rare thing, and this may be true. But when they are available, we pass on them. Much of the reloading season at MHR was devoted to members guessing at which direction we would go in. Most members seemed to indicate a desire for DT and SAF (and this was even before Lynch left us). Denver passed on any of the early DTs we expected, but entirely skipped the coveted safety we wanted for a choice in the seventh round. This isn’t to be critical of Denver’s selections, but just to point out that Denver doesn’t place a high emphasis in drafts, trades, or FA on terrific safeties. Lynch may be the exception, but even he was taken past his best years.
The only issue I disagree with is the stereotype that speed equals a declined ability to tackle. The generalization comes about for two sound reasons. One, defenders that rely on speed are more likely to be in a position on a play where there is more space and less room for error (such as safeties and cornerbacks). A MLB in the middle of a jumble of players gets more second chances, and a missed tackle is less noticable and easier to adjust for. Second, speed converts into momentum, which can carry a defender (most likely a DB) out of his tackle. A defender who can not tackle has not met the minimum standard to play pro football.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jul 31, 2008 11:56 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Size with speed
I did not specifically state that “speed equals a declined ability to tackle.” But if you are referring to my point that many good coverage safeties are not great tacklers, than my implication has as much to do with size as it does speed. Many great coverage safeties are not as big, they are much like corners, and when you have to bring the wood in the open field against a running back with straight ahead momentum, then size does matter. That is why safeties who have ideal size and speed, like the late Sean Taylor, or our own Barrett, are harder to find. But of course being a good coverage safety involves a lot more than speed, it involves smarts, and specific ball skills. To find a safety who not only has the physical tools, like Barrett, but who also can put it all together mentally, is the rare find, and the reason so many teams settle on a couple of safeties with complimentary skills. I agree it is ideal to have two coverage safeties, but only that it is the exception, to find two safeties who do both run support and coverage very well. Also when, I talk about a good coverage safety, I am talking about a safety that can not be exploited in man coverage, and one who can also cover deep zones very well. The run support safety still has to play the short zone, which is not as demanding. But it can be handled well by a slower safety if they are in zone, and if they have smarts and experience like Rodney Harrison.
Either way, I think we agree more than disagree on this. We are getting down to specific nitty gritty, which is fun. Thats all.
by The Gun Young on Jul 31, 2008 12:45 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
One minor point (for fun).
We might be defining terms a little differently too.
You are looking at a SAF in terms of being able to stop the pass and the run (I think), while I define a SAF solely in terms of the pass. When you write that it is a rare thing to find someone who can do both, we are writing past each other. It IS a rare thing. But I don’t look for a safety who can stop the run. If he has the speed to prevent the deep (blown) coverages, and the ability to tackle (which is a minimum), then I am satisified that the player is solid. Whether stopping a running back or a receiver, the tackling should be sound either way. I place a higher emphasis on technique than build for the ability to tackle. If the SAF has good enough hands to get an INT here and there, that’s just icing on the cake. Going for the INT is risky business, and I’d really rather that the SAF go for the sure tackle unless the INT is clear and free.
Since I’m holding tackling as a minimum standard for every defensive player, my two qualities for the ideal safety are speed and intelligence. If a SAF is being placed in the box, it is an indication that a team can’t do the minimum job a defense has, which is stopping the run.
Here’s a small snippet from Mdierk’s Horse Tracks (courtesy of Rocky Mountain News) on teams and the movement of defenses towards coverage. The concept here is that so many defenses are emphasizing coverage (and more players in coverage), that receivers are having to be more physical than fast (ala Marshall):
“In our division, we’re going to have to be physical,” receiver Darrell Jackson said of the AFC West. “And the way we run the ball here, you have to block everybody. You can’t be shy or you won’t play.”The Broncos also are adjusting to a league that increasingly is emphasizing the catch-and-run as defenses drop more and more players into coverage.
It has put a premium on receivers who can break tackles and tack on yards, the ones most likely to turn small plays into big ones.
Quarterback Jay Cutler already has talked about the importance of getting the ball away quickly and letting the receivers run.
Also, end-zone battles between receiver and defender often are won by those who can snatch the ball and keep it. And the Broncos, who were fourth in the league in plays of 10 yards or more last season, finished the season 21st in points scored per game.
break
“I believe, more and more, that the game has gotten to the point where wide receivers are big, strong, physical players, and I want to make sure we take that approach,” Fisch said. “That we buy into it, that we believe it. Whenever you see the plus-20-yard gain, it’s because they’ve caught the ball and gone vertical.”
I don’t see SAFs in terms of “coverage” or “run support” safeties. There are safeties who can do the primary job of deep zone and man coverage, and those who aren’t as good. The ones who aren’t the top SAF are typically placed at SS, and if the opposing team runs heavily (and the front seven can’t handle it) the SS gets stuck in the run support role, while the superior SAF keeps the coverage role. In my view, the reason that teams have one guy that plays run support is less because that is how the team designs it, and more because the lesser SAF gets plugged in that role if the run can’t be stopped.
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe
by Steve Nichols on Jul 31, 2008 8:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its all about relative weaknesses and exploitation
I think we both understand the same things, but we have been using different terminology. Nonetheless, football specifics like these are interesting to talk about. So thanks for the continued dialogue, and sorry to others for hogging the blog.
And so, where were we . . . .oh yeah,
When you say as a minimum standard every safety must be able to tackle, I would agree with you. You cant’ be bad at tackling or bad in coverage or else you will not be on the field anymore (Like Lynch being a liability in coverage). I was pointing out the differences between being a great coverage safety versus a great run safety. The relative weaknesses of a player eventually gets exploited by the good teams.
Atwater was a perfect example. He was not bad at coverage, but he was not great. He got exploited in pass coverage by good teams, like San Fran. However he was great at run support (Nightmares for the Nigerian). So usually a safety like Rodney Harrison is placed in the short zone, and not asked to play deep zone or man coverage. Rodney is not bad at coverage, but he is not great. A good coverage safety would have been able to deflect that desperation pass from Eli that the giants player caught on his helmet.
Considering you put more emphasis on pass coverage skills for the SAF, then would Rodney Harrison be a SAF in your terminology? Or do you call guys like that just a SS? I personally have gotten away from the traditional use of Strong Safety (SS) or Free Safety (FS) cause quite frankly so many teams use them for different and sometimes opposite roles, and thus there is no consistent differences in responsibilities. So I just call em all Safetys now. But most Safetys have a relative weakness and strength in either pass coverage versus run support, and you can see that by how their teams use them, and how other teams try to exploit them.
I do agree that pass coverage is at more of a premium now, and that is why most teams would not keep a Rodney Harrison, or pick up a John Lynch. But it does kind of depend on your defensive scheme. A pure zone team, which uses a lot of deception, rolling or rotating zones, mixed zones like the Pats can afford to play a player like Harrison, cause he will never be put in man or deep coverage. Teams like the Broncos who mix in a lot of man, cant’ afford the chance of getting exploited by a relatively weak coverage safety.
Most teams try to change things as much as possible to be as unpredictable as possible, because the offenses and QBs are too good if they know what to expect. Thats why intelligence or smarts or experience is so important for a safety, and why I think the Broncos favor veteran FAs to fill that void instead of through the draft.
For the Broncos, their saftey coverage will definitely be improved this year, I just hope they can consistently make the tough tackles that make a difference between short runs and long gains. We will see. And hopefully they don’t have a injuries at that position, cause I am not sure about the quality of their depth now.
by The Gun Young on Aug 1, 2008 10:53 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs

by 




























