Sub is the New Base: An Update

There are so many possibilities but it all begins with the secondary.
With Revis AND Browner, BB is free to be more creative and not worry about getting torched it the stunts or blitzes are picked up. We've seen a return of the delayed blitz up the middle (and its worked well) lately which we wouldn't use before because the secondary couldn't cover long enough for it to matter.

Looking forward with everyone healthy and a nickle base, you have Wilfork, Branch, Easley(as DT in passing situations), Siliga, Chris J and to play inside depending on opponent and situation and then choose any 4 of Chandler, HT, Collins, Ayers, Mayo, Nink, Easley(as DE in more likely run situaitons) and even Casillas as a cover guy on the field with them.
On more passing downs it could be 1 big and 5 of that group.
Last week we saw no bigs, 5 of that group (95,50,55,91,54) and 6 DBs on some passing downs, esp in the second half.

AndyJohnson said:

There are so many possibilities but it all begins with the secondary.
With Revis AND Browner, BB is free to be more creative and not worry about getting torched it the stunts or blitzes are picked up. We've seen a return of the delayed blitz up the middle (and its worked well) lately which we wouldn't use before because the secondary couldn't cover long enough for it to matter.

Looking forward with everyone healthy and a nickle base, you have Wilfork, Branch, Easley(as DT in passing situations), Siliga, Chris J and to play inside depending on opponent and situation and then choose any 4 of Chandler, HT, Collins, Ayers, Mayo, Nink, Easley(as DE in more likely run situaitons) and even Casillas as a cover guy on the field with them.
On more passing downs it could be 1 big and 5 of that group.
Last week we saw no bigs, 5 of that group (95,50,55,91,54) and 6 DBs on some passing downs, esp in the second half.

Click to expand...

Just to compliment your first sentence:

@DougKyedNESN: In the Patriots' first four pass defense plays Sun, they ran Cover 1 man with 1 safety, cover 1 man with 2 safeties, Cover 2 and Cover 3.

Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/dougkyednesn/status/544927228447186944

mayoclinic said:

Jared Stanger of Fieldgulls did a nice defensive tackle breakdown, with some film of Williams:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2014/11/13/7213381/2015-nfl-draft-jareds-gems-defensive-tackle

He notes that Williams played closer to 320# last season, and was noticeably quicker. I haven't looked at 2013 vs. 2014 film in detail. I have little doubt about Williams' ability to take on double teams, but I'm not 100% convinced that a 350# NT is the best fit for a defense that runs 75-80% out of sub. I don't know the answer at this point, and Williams is high on my watch list, but I'm probably leaning more towards a Goldman/Brown kind of DT, if they are available.

Click to expand...

That's why I'm also a fan of Hardison. I like Brown as you know but I haven't seen Goldman yet. The advantage of someone like Hardison is that he can play the 3,5 and even 7 tech at a stretch. Of course the advantage to Goldman and Brown is that they play 0,1,3 and maybe 5 techs.

AndyJohnson said:

There are so many possibilities but it all begins with the secondary.
With Revis AND Browner, BB is free to be more creative and not worry about getting torched it the stunts or blitzes are picked up. We've seen a return of the delayed blitz up the middle (and its worked well) lately which we wouldn't use before because the secondary couldn't cover long enough for it to matter.

Click to expand...

It's worth noting that Seattle's defensive revival has coincided with the emergence of 2nd year CB Harold Simon as a "mini-Sherman". I badly wanted Simon in 2013 (6'3" 204#, went in the 5th round). He spent last year on IR but has emerged big time this year, and allowed Byron Maxwell to move to the slot. With Sherman AND Simon, Pete Caroll is free to be more creative. It makes such a difference having 2 guys with that kind of ability. That's part of the reason (1) that I would not consider cutting Browner, as some have proposed; I'd probably try and extend him a year and lower his cap number; and (2) I'd be looking at developmental CBs who could have an impact 2 years or so down the road. The kid from the CFL (Breaux) comes to mind. So does 6'3" 190# Michigan St. WR Tony Lippett as a conversion project (he's started several games at CB).

manxman2601 said:

That's why I'm also a fan of Hardison. I like Brown as you know but I haven't seen Goldman yet. The advantage of someone like Hardison is that he can play the 3,5 and even 7 tech at a stretch. Of course the advantage to Goldman and Brown is that they play 0,1,3 and maybe 5 techs.

Click to expand...

That's where I see DeForest Buckner being intriguing. I haven't watched enough of Hardison to form a preference yet. But I see those guys as being more valuable in base than in sub.

We gonna see a little old school 3-4 this week? Silega, Wilfork and Branch down, Chandler and Ninko standing up, with Hightower and Collins inside.

Fascinating topic, and one we can get a ton of long term interesting discussion out of.

I think we are just in the infancy of ,understanding these defenses but Belichick is way ahead of the curve in terms of both knowledge and roster for implementing these packages. I also think that this means that the few teams with QB's with superior football IQs are going to have a huge edge when it comes to reading and responding to these packages, and that gives the Patriots v the edge on both sides of the ball, and unless Brady develops a noodle arm as Manning has that he won't bee going anywhere for quite some time.

I also,love the fact that this should provide people here with the opportunity for really interesting football discussions as much of this. will be new ground.

patsfaninpa said:

We gonna see a little old school 3-4 this week? Silega, Wilfork and Branch down, Chandler and Ninko standing up, with Hightower and Collins inside.

Click to expand...

If any matchup favors base over sub, this is it. It will be interesting to see if BB reverts to a high percentage of base. If not, it is very telling about where the future lies.

mayoclinic said:

It's worth noting that Seattle's defensive revival has coincided with the emergence of 2nd year CB Harold Simon as a "mini-Sherman". I badly wanted Simon in 2013 (6'3" 204#, went in the 5th round). He spent last year on IR but has emerged big time this year, and allowed Byron Maxwell to move to the slot. With Sherman AND Simon, Pete Caroll is free to be more creative. It makes such a difference having 2 guys with that kind of ability. That's part of the reason (1) that I would not consider cutting Browner, as some have proposed; I'd probably try and extend him a year and lower his cap number; and (2) I'd be looking at developmental CBs who could have an impact 2 years or so down the road. The kid from the CFL (Breaux) comes to mind. So does 6'3" 190# Michigan St. WR Tony Lippett as a conversion project (he's started several games at CB).

Click to expand...

That and SEA has faced average/below-average QBs.

Last 8 Games:
-Kapernick (2)
-Sanchez
-Stanton
-Alex Smith
-Eli Manning
-Derek Carr
-Cam Newton

manxman2601 said:

That's why I'm also a fan of Hardison. I like Brown as you know but I haven't seen Goldman yet. The advantage of someone like Hardison is that he can play the 3,5 and even 7 tech at a stretch. Of course the advantage to Goldman and Brown is that they play 0,1,3 and maybe 5 techs.

Click to expand...

mayoclinic said:

That's where I see DeForest Buckner being intriguing. I haven't watched enough of Hardison to form a preference yet. But I see those guys as being more valuable in base than in sub.

Click to expand...

To continue this theme, I see several times of potential line players:

1. Guys where are DE/OLBs, with enough strength to play DE in base, but really optimized for a hybrid sub where they are interchangeable swiss army knives. Guys who fit this mold include Bud Dupree, Dante Fowler, Danielle Hunter, Bernardrick McKinney (with more LB capability), maybe Shilique Calhoun, and Noah Spence.

2. Guys who are able to play the 3, 4/5 and 7 tech, and possibly even athletic enough to stand up at times. These guys to me include DeForest Buckner, Shawn Oakman, Marcus Harrison and Aric Amstead. I'm not 100% where Owamagbe Odighizuwa fits in terms of these 2 groups, but I tend more towards this one. Same with Preston Smith. This group seems to me very valuable in the base, but less so in sub.

3. Guys who are able to play the 0, 1, 3 and maybe 5 tech. These include Eddie Goldman and Malcolm Brown. Carl Davis is much less good at this. Jordan Phillips is mainly a 0/1, but he's so athletic that he has some versatility. These guys are valuable in both base and sub, and their ability to stop the run in sub but still get some penetration makes them very, very valuable.

Of less interest to me are:

4. Guys who are really sub rushers and limited to 3-4 OLB. Guys in this list include Shane Ray, Vic Beasley, Eli Harold, Nate Orchard and Lorenzo Mauldin.

5. Guys who are really 0/1 techs only. Guys in this list include Danny Shelton, Ellis McCarthy, and Terry Williams. That is not to say they don't have value. McCarthy seems like a pure space eater to me. Shelton and Williams are interesting if they can do more (though the likely 1st round price for Shelton puts me off).

robertweathers said:

That and SEA has faced average/below-average QBs.

Last 8 Games:
-Kapernick (2)
-Sanchez
-Stanton
-Alex Smith
-Eli Manning
-Derek Carr
-Cam Newton

Click to expand...

I was just going through this myself after hearing a comment along the lines of, "the last 8 teams to play the Seahawks lost the next week." It's certainly an impressive stat, but loses some luster when you actually go through it. Starting from the top....

St Louis
Carolina
Oakland
New York Giants

Ummmmm.... haven't these teams lost the following week after every game?

Kansas City
Arizona

These are the best two examples, since KC lost to Oakland and 'Zona gave Atlanta their only out-of-division win of the season.

At the same time, KC had been treading water for a month at that point and some of us even predicted Oakland would give them a harder time than expected. And all bets are off with Arizona's QB situation.

San Francisco
Philly

San Fran is a mess and any residual shine has come off the Sanchize.

8 games is a lot, but I'm still not sure how Seattle will do when facing a legitimate offense.

patsfaninpa said:

We gonna see a little old school 3-4 this week? Silega, Wilfork and Branch down, Chandler and Ninko standing up, with Hightower and Collins inside.

Click to expand...

Given the Jets offensive limitations we may well see a more straightforward defensive approach to this game. Stopping the run is the absolute key to completely shutting down there Jets as their padding attack is almost non-existent. Revis should completely shut down Harvin and Browner and a safety will take out Decker, after that a bigger front 7 should be able to stifle their run game. I would be interested to see Siliga at NT with Wilfork and Branch at end in a 3-4 set and Nink and Chandler Jones at OLB and Hightower and Collins inside. That would simply be a base but it could really cause the Jets big problems getting their run game going.

I love the versatility this team has, imo,they can adjust to pretty much any kind of offensive attack they will see, and if they can keep the personnel together for the,next few seasions and continue to enhance it they are going to be phenomenal. They really don't need to go into free agency, just keep what they have and draft well.

patsfaninpa said:

We gonna see a little old school 3-4 this week? Silega, Wilfork and Branch down, Chandler and Ninko standing up, with Hightower and Collins inside.

Click to expand...

Yep, I think that could be their base as well.

mayoclinic said:

Of less interest to me are:



5. Guys who are really 0/1 techs only. Guys in this list include Danny Shelton, Ellis McCarthy, and Terry Williams. That is not to say they don't have value. McCarthy seems like a pure space eater to me. Shelton and Williams are interesting if they can do more (though the likely 1st round price for Shelton puts me off).

Click to expand...

This surprises me s little considering that BB emphasises the importance of this role as evidenced by the usage of VW and Siliga.

mayoclinic said:

From Mark Daniels at ProJo:


http://www.providencejournal.com/sp...-return-opens-up-a-world-of-possibilities.ece

Click to expand...

This makes me wonder if their priority in the next draft will be a prospect who can bring the same kind of hybrid abilities Chandler Jones brings, as like Revis he appears to be a critical component for them to be able to run the really complex schemes they want to run. They already have their big bodies but IMO Buchanon and Moore still have much to prove and a top hybrid DL\LB could be brought in to challenge them and provide insurance if Jones leaves when his deal is up.

manxman2601 said:

This surprises me s little considering that BB emphasises the importance of this role as evidenced by the usage of VW and Siliga.

Click to expand...

I think that things are evolving. Wilfork is a freakish player, so he doesn't really fit in any mold. Siliga is more limited, and I see him being valuable in base and as a backup role - rather like Williams. I'm guessing - and this is a purely a projection on my part - that much as Dominique Easley broke the mold, BB would go for a different kind of DT/NT for a sub-based defense.

Ivan said:

This makes me wonder if their priority in the next draft will be a prospect who can bring the same kind of hybrid abilities Chandler Jones brings, as like Revis he appears to be a critical component for them to be able to run the really complex schemes they want to run. They already have their big bodies but IMO Buchanon and Moore still have much to prove and a top hybrid DL\LB could be brought in to challenge them and provide insurance if Jones leaves when his deal is up.

Click to expand...

That's part of why I am so interested in Danielle Hunter, who I see as being the most like Chandler Jones in terms of his versatility and skill set.

mayoclinic said:

I think that things are evolving. Wilfork is a freakish player, so he doesn't really fit in any mold. Siliga is more limited, and I see him being valuable in base and as a backup role - rather like Williams. I'm guessing - and this is a purely a projection on my part - that much as Dominique Easley broke the mold, BB would go for a different kind of DT/NT for a sub-based defense.

Click to expand...

I'm not convinced, after all, he brought in the 330lb Casey Walker to replace Siliga. And Easley wasn't really used as a one-gapping 3-tech either.

Part of his thinking might be that two guys that can take on double teams takes potential blockers off Hightower and Collins.

manxman2601 said:

I'm not convinced, after all, he brought in the 330lb Casey Walker to replace Siliga. And Easley wasn't really used as a one-gapping 3-tech either.

Part of his thinking might be that two guys that can take on double teams takes potential blockers off Hightower and Collins.

Click to expand...

It's possible. But if that's true, then Easley does't really fit. Walker was a stopgap, so I don't put too much stock in that.

I don't know the answer. It's all guesswork. I'm guessing - nothing more - that the "old" approach is as you describe, but that the "goal" is to move towards a sleeker pair of DTs with Easley and a bigger DT who can stop the run more but still push the pocket and with the quickness to penetrate a bit. Keep the investment in big space eaters to a reasonable cost, and invest in guys who can create mismatches. It seems to me that this would fit with the Easley pick, and with a more sub-based defensive scheme. But I'm going out on a limb, and I wouldn't expect anyone to be convinced at this early juncture.

mayoclinic said:

It's possible. But if that's true, then Easley does't really fit. Walker was a stopgap, so I don't put too much stock in that.

I don't know the answer. It's all guesswork. I'm guessing - nothing more - that the "old" approach is as you describe, but that the "goal" is to move towards a sleeker pair of DTs with Easley and a bigger DT who can stop the run more but still push the pocket and with the quickness to penetrate a bit. Keep the investment in big space eaters to a reasonable cost, and invest in guys who can create mismatches. It seems to me that this would fit with the Easley pick, and with a more sub-based defensive scheme. But I'm going out on a limb, and I wouldn't expect anyone to be convinced at this early juncture.

Click to expand...

They never really used Easley to his best this year, maybe because he wasn't physically able (injury). I said sometime ago that the new sub doesn't use Easley optimally so I don't know what the plan is. Currently they have classic 3-tech (Easley), a 1,3,5 tech (Branch) and two 0,1 techs in Wilfork and Siliga. BB has traditionally had a couple of 0, 1 types so a future Wilfork replacement makes sense but then they'll need a Branch replacement if he doesn't re-sign too and Goldman, Brown and maybe Hardison could replace him.