Printable View
German, who's saying that you can only win w/the current crop of D players, and Marinelli? Who says this group can only win on ST's w/Toub? Isn't that the very definition of short sided? What I'm saying is that if Emery and the new HC believe that the best thing that can be done is bring in all new assistants, I'm going to be okay w/that; same w/if they keep them(I just perfer a clearing of the house).
What I wanted to say:
When our DC is away and the players, I doubt an offense only guy could build a solid D and we'd look like the Saints.
I maybe the in the minority, but I don't consider our defense to be sacrosanct or untouchable...I am not proposing we cut off our nose to spite our face, but we have an abundance of talent of the defensive side of the ball...and some of that talent is on the wrong side of 30...if we have the opportunity to trade some of that aging talent to effectively improve the Offense...I'd be fine with that..."defense first" just doesn't work anymore....
Who on D would you trade?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfman
that is hard to answer until we see what system we runningQuote:
Originally Posted by MPBears68
if we run a 3-4 I can see allot of cutting and trading on the dline from cant you? Other then that secondary can stay intact and singletary wanted Briggs in san fran so I can see him sticking around. Shea would be rush LB. Then it gets tricky with Peppers, Melton, Wooten, Idonije etc. I think Paea is the only for sure bet to stay for a 3-4
that is exactly basically what I said earlier in this thread. Basically Im not against keeping some coordinators if the HC sees that in his vision. But if the new HC wants to go in another direction do it and dont hesitate. Dont castrate the new coach before he enters the door.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riczaj01
Not every team is one or the other. NYG's, SF, Hou all have pretty balanced game plans. GB even purposefully took a step back in O to help their D. I don't believe for one second that if we don't keep the DC that it means that our HC is the polar opposite of Lovie and doesn't care for D. For me it might mean the exact opposite, that he wants a DC that will implement what HE wants, not just assume that the status quo is okay and he doesn't care about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by GermansbombedPH
Any of them...I don't consider anyone to be indispensable(this idea/sentiment that "we need to get" Brian or Peanut or whoever a ring is part of the problem imho)...of course, the devil is in the detail...I don't know what opportunities and trade options are even available...it's probably way too early for any of that anyway...I am just saying that clearly one avenue to improve our offence is though trading off our glut of defensive talent...I think all avenues should be on the table...Quote:
Originally Posted by MPBears68
Sure, 3-4 would require wholesale personnel changes. But Emery seemed to indicate pretty clearly in his press conference that we were staying 4-3. Didn't close the door entirely, but he did set the bar pretty high for hiring a new HC that wanted to switch. I really doubt we are going 3-4 this offseason.Quote:
Originally Posted by motownbear
My question about trading a D player(s) was based on our current system or a reasonably close variant thereof.
I understand the motivation, just picking your brain that's all. Novel ideas are good by me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfman
BU, Roach, & Melton are FAs. Peppers has a huge cap hit that would greatly impact his trade value unless restructured. Briggs is north of 30 and a non-blitzing/cover type LB who's better in our system than he would be in virtually any other. Jennings is probably too small to hold up as a man cover CB and Tillman is over 30 and likewise is ideally suited to his current system. So, unless you're talking about up-and-coming young players like Paea or Wooten, I don't see much trade value there at least compared to what would be lost.