Freeney, Taylor vs Seymour.

[jimleehunt]

Welker-you have proven you know NOTHING about seymour or the 3-4 2gap. you stated that seymour would be a de in the 4-3-WRONG!! seymour would be the best dt in the nfl in a 4-3. he would be so good that even on ateam that played 100% 4-3-he would be paid MORE $ as a DT-than Dl in the nfl-that includes all des. if saban had seymour-he would gladly pay him more than taylor. why? because seymour is an unusual player. he is not just the best dl in the nfl-all positions included-most nfl gms, coaches and scouts rank as either the best or 2nd best defensive player in the nfl-at any position. you have NO CLUE what he does for a defense. nobody,repeat nobody in the laegue gets doubleteamed as much as seymour. that fact alone makes him incredibly valueable. seymour is not just arunstopper-he is very often the CAUSE of many sacks by other patriots(often the olbs). to be fair, he should probably get a1/2 sack every time another patriot sacks a qb, because often, w/o seymour,those sacks wouldnt happen. there is not ONE other player in the nfl who can do what seymour does. not one. and seymour is NOT a de-he is a dt. a 3-4 de IS a dt. i dont know of any 4-3 des in the nfl who could play 3-4de. and i cant name any 3-4 des, except seymour, who could play 4-3 de. but ina 4-3 sey is WAY more valuable as a dt than a de. taylor would have to be an olb in a 3-4--and NO 3-4 olb will ever be as valuable to the Pats as seymour is. you gave away your lack of REAL football knowledge when you mentioned the "fantasy" players like des. In REALITY football, not FANTASY football -seymour is BY FAR the most valuable dl in the nfl -regardless of position,regardless of system. if the pats played only a 4-3-sey would be afulltime dt-and would be allowed to collapse the pocket and go after qbs much more-he could well lead the league in sacks-while playing at dt-think about that.

 

[Alk]

Is it possible to carry on a discussion without attacking someone's football "knowledge". Christ, this whole thing was going surprisingly smooth.

 

[maverick4]

You just opened up a whole new argument. Your description of Sanders is way off IMHO. If he was like you described, he wouldn't be anywhere near number 3 on the all time rushing list. Not to mention the fact if he hadn't retired so early he would be the one sitting at number one.

How am I way off? Sanders danced on almost every play, and many times ended up not advancing the ball at all. However, he was so good that when he did find an opening, he was gone for 80 yards.

Thus, Sanders could generate tons of yards, but the way he did it was not beneficial to his team in the way that an Emmitt Smith did it.

 

[jimleehunt]

huskeralk-i only attack someones football "knowledge"-when they try to pose as someone who is knwowledgeable-but in fact has no clue what theyre talking about. if welker had prefaced his remarks with something like" okay,im a dolphin fan and i dont know much about your 3-4 2gap, or exactly what seymour does every game..". that would have been fine. i dont mind someone making an intelligent argument against a pats player or the pats-but i have problems when someone takes swipes spouting misinformation and being clueless. and the original topic was absurd(not the poster-but pfw)-since seymour is NOT a de.its ludicrous to compare him to taylor and freeney.

 

[Welker83]

huskeralk-i only attack someones football "knowledge"-when they try to pose as someone who is knwowledgeable-but in fact has no clue what theyre talking about. if welker had prefaced his remarks with something like" okay,im a dolphin fan and i dont know much about your 3-4 2gap, or exactly what seymour does every game..". that would have been fine. i dont mind someone making an intelligent argument against a pats player or the pats-but i have problems when someone takes swipes spouting misinformation and being clueless. and the original topic was absurd(not the poster-but pfw)-since seymour is NOT a de.its ludicrous to compare him to taylor and freeney.

Nope...just versatile in different ways.

Seymour..in a 4-3 would be a DT and in a 3-4 a DE so those are his 2 positions...

Where as players like taylor or freeney would become a LB in the 3-4 (Mcginest, Bruschi..sound familiar to players that made the transition)

You are trying to compare players with completely different skill sets and body types ALL of them ...Taylor is tall and lean, Freeney is short and Fast, Seymour is big and athletic...

It's like trying to compare a drag racer to an F1 car...each will dominate in their own categories but will ultimately fail when asked to do things they are not capable of.

In a 4-3 the defensive ends job is to rush the passer...Everything else is secondary. So since both freeney and taylor can rush the passer, and do it better than most in the league they are both top DE's.

in a 3-4 Seymour main job is to tie up blockers for LB's to blitz and stop the run...everything after that is secondaty (like sacking the QB)... Now he does his main job better than most in the league and because of that he's a top DE.

now as to the versatility claim your are wrong. All these players are versatile but in different ways. Taylor can play DE or LB. Thats versatility. He can play a short zone, and he's also been used as a TE.

Seymour is versatile. He can play any position on the line. He has been played as a FB.

All of these guys are effective. All of these guys are versatile. I want ALL of them on my team. BUT!!!!!!! They are all versatile in different ways and they all have different jobs that they all do well.

but the fact is a DE in a 4-3 is not a DE in a 3-4 where they need to do all the same things.

Seymour is not a speed rusher and taylor is not a o-line Blackhole...


So let me ask you this if you had all three of these players on your team where would you lin ethem up in a 3-4 and a 4-3 system?

4-3: DE: Taylor DT: Seymour, DE: freeney
3-4: DE seymour OLB: Taylor OLB: Freeney

wow look at what i posted on page 3!!!!!!!

Now who looks like they dont read the whole thread before claiming some one is an idiot.

And i do not consider myself a biased troll and neither do most here. Don't group me with those people. If you read the whole thread you will realize i never, NEVER said taylor was better or seymour was worse..What i did say is that this is an apples to oranges discussion therefore they should not be compared.

Now who looks stupid?

 

[jimleehunt]

welker- your last post makes sense. they all play different positions. i couldve sworn you had another post in there that contradicted that one -where you said seymour would play de in a 4-3-but im not gonna hunt for it. if its not there-then i apologize-that last post,as i said, makes sense. except for one thing. theres not a gm or coach in the nfl who would pick either taylor or freeney ahead of seymour. and while both taylor and freeney are 2 of the best 4-3 des(tho i think freeney is overrated-peppers is better), neither one of them has as much impact on the course of a game, or carries a defense as much as seymour.

 

[feelthepain]

JT should be 1 or 2 in the league, his total numbers are far better then either Seymour or Freeney.

 

[spacecrime]

Now who looks stupid?

Mirror, mirror, on the wall. Who's the stupidest doofin of all?

(Don't look, Ethyl.)

 

[Digger44]

The problem with this comparison is that Seymour is a 3-4 DE. If I were building a 3-4 defense with current players, I would have Seymour as my #1 DE and Freeney as my #1 OLB. As for Taylor, he dosen't belong in this conversation.




I doubt that very much. Look, I hate Indy too, but against Freeney, the Pats will have a TE helping out Light most of the time, if not always.

I may be wrong on this, but I was confident that in our win run on Indy, Light drew Freeney 2-3 games and Freeny did not present any problems. Matt really stepped up and played.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

bingo bingo bingo. Guys get rated so high simply based upon their limelight as a sackmaster. There is more to being an effective, balanced DE than a sackmaster. There is no doubt that Freeney does an incredible job as a pass rusher, but he can be shut down 1on1. In fact i believe a healthy Matt Light can shut down Freeney by himself. Who is going to win a Seymour 1on1? What RB is running at Seymour? They must either run wide or go to the "weak" side with Warren, and that isnt all that weak. Seymour causes nightmares because he must have two bodies on him. If he draws two bodies, then Vince in the middle gives big problems as well.

Just to pile on, the question with Seymour is "is a double team going to get it done?" And you see him across the line from his gaps by the end of the play, making the play.

Come on. Freeney is a guy who can spin and still know which direction to go when the spin is over. He is very good at spinning. Period. As it happens, he's so good at spinning, he can rush the passer. He excels at nothing else.

I don't know what Seymour's stats would be like if the Pats said "aw F it, Richard, just get us a sack" every play. I would wager much more impressive than now.

One of those situations where stats are way off from reality -- ask any lineman or coach in the NFL, they'll tell you who rules the position.

PFnV

 

[Keegs]

Ok...just go with it for a second...

1)First and Ten. The QB hands the ball off toa RB and he's stuffed at the line of Scrimmage for no gain By DE Richard Seymour... so now it's second and Ten.

2) First and Ten QB takes the snap goes back to pass and is sacked by Jason Taylor for a 5 yard loss...now it's 2nd and 15...

So tell me...which one was a bigger play? which one had the most impact?

Now i am not by any means ragging on Seymour. Honestly he will always be underapreciated for what he does...and that is redirect the play and free up the LB's to make the tackle. But in our Fantasy driven big play NFL world a Sack is much more important than a run stuff...Especially cause you can always just run to the other side... So thats why they ranked freeney and taylor above seymour...

you are assuming that Jason Taylor has multiple sacks a game , every game, every year.

You say it like He sacks the QB every play, that is a horrible example.
2 years ago Freeney had 16 sacks, one a game on average.....
So is the play you are referring to in your example is that one single play every game?
are you assuming that Seymour only stops the run once a game??
I really don't get what your saying

???????????????????????????

 

[dhamz]

I'd take Seymour.

Then I'd go with Taylor because I think he is much better down to down than Freeney.

Freeney is the best pass rusher but that defense has gotten run over so often in the playoffs you'd think people would notice how he is a zero factor in the running game.

 

[Welker83]

you are assuming that Jason Taylor has multiple sacks a game , every game, every year.

You say it like He sacks the QB every play, that is a horrible example.
2 years ago Freeney had 16 sacks, one a game on average.....
So is the play you are referring to in your example is that one single play every game?
are you assuming that Seymour only stops the run once a game??
I really don't get what your saying

???????????????????????????

The problem you are having is all you see is names...you see #$%^#^#^Taylor&^#^@$^@$^ Seymour4#$^#^#^ ... I was trying to illustrate a point of situations...not which player is better. SO.... loom at the situation without the names in it and tell me which one is a bigger impact play.... And then before you go on a seymor this and seymour that tirade realize that the only point i'm making is that Freeney and Taylor are listed because we see sacks as big impact plays.. Thus i have now answered the original question of why Taylor and Freeney are listed without bashing an excellent Football player like Seymour.

But you wont read this..you will only see my avatar and some how twist my words in your mind that i'm attacking a player that if he was traded tommorrow you would say "He's over rated" or something to that effect....

 

[Welker83]

welker- your last post makes sense. they all play different positions. i couldve sworn you had another post in there that contradicted that one -where you said seymour would play de in a 4-3-but im not gonna hunt for it. if its not there-then i apologize-that last post,as i said, makes sense. except for one thing. theres not a gm or coach in the nfl who would pick either taylor or freeney ahead of seymour. and while both taylor and freeney are 2 of the best 4-3 des(tho i think freeney is overrated-peppers is better), neither one of them has as much impact on the course of a game, or carries a defense as much as seymour.

In an earlier post i said that seymour COULD play DE in a 4-3...we were discussing his versatility. Apology accepted. I'm sorry i flew off the handle.


I will disagree with you on which player a GM would take above the others...if your playing a 3-4 scheme definatly take Seymour..but in a 4-3 a dominant DE is the key and you HAVE to take a Speed rusher like taylor or freeney... Thats the key to the whole scheme...your DL has to provide constant pressure, while the LB's are not as involved in the blitzing.

 

[desi-patsfan]

I'd take Seymour.

Then I'd go with Taylor because I think he is much better down to down than Freeney.

Freeney is the best pass rusher but that defense has gotten run over so often in the playoffs you'd think people would notice how he is a zero factor in the running game.

Agreed, Seymour followed very closely by taylor.

 

[Welker83]

I'd take Seymour.

Then I'd go with Taylor because I think he is much better down to down than Freeney.

Freeney is the best pass rusher but that defense has gotten run over so often in the playoffs you'd think people would notice how he is a zero factor in the running game.

I wouldn't say JT is a dominant run stuffer, but you cannot run at him constantly as he will shut some of the plays down. Just check out the man's tackles. Freeney you can run at, but thats mainly becaue his spin moves is like a coin flip. either your in the play or your not... I think freeney will improve as time goes on ...JT has had steady imrovement in a similiar fashion.

 

[Keegs]

The problem you are having is all you see is names...you see #$%^#^#^Taylor&^#^@$^@$^ Seymour4#$^#^#^ ... I was trying to illustrate a point of situations...not which player is better. SO.... loom at the situation without the names in it and tell me which one is a bigger impact play.... And then before you go on a seymor this and seymour that tirade realize that the only point i'm making is that Freeney and Taylor are listed because we see sacks as big impact plays.. Thus i have now answered the original question of why Taylor and Freeney are listed without bashing an excellent Football player like Seymour.

But you wont read this..you will only see my avatar and some how twist my words in your mind that i'm attacking a player that if he was traded tommorrow you would say "He's over rated" or something to that effect....

I never said anyone was overrated in this thread.
I rank them
Seymour, Taylor, Freeney. You are saying comments like that because you said something stupid and i called you out on it.

In your original post that i responded to, you compared a play where seymour stopped the run, and where taylor (or freeney) sacked the Qb for a 5 yard loss. By comparing the 2 you implied that Taylor will do this more than a few times a game because Seymour stops the run multipe times a game.

It was a bad comparison and a stupid comment. You asked which i would rather have and which is a bigger impact play..... well id rather have seymour any day but I guess the sack is the bigger play (probably his one sack of that particular game). Not sure what your point was though.

I can make my own example where Taylor sacks a qb for a loss of 5. And Seymour stops a run, forces the fumble, and it is recovered by the Pats.......
He HAS done that before..
which is the bigger impact?????!!!!!!!???????!!!!!!!!

I can do it too see, sounds a little ridiculous doesn't it?

 

[desi-patsfan]

training camp....we need training camp.....badly.

 

[Welker83]

I never said anyone was overrated in this thread.
I rank them
Seymour, Taylor, Freeney. You are saying comments like that because you said something stupid and i called you out on it.

In your original post that i responded to, you compared a play where seymour stopped the run, and where taylor (or freeney) sacked the Qb for a 5 yard loss. By comparing the 2 you implied that Taylor will do this more than a few times a game because Seymour stops the run multipe times a game.

It was a bad comparison and a stupid comment. You asked which i would rather have and which is a bigger impact play..... well id rather have seymour any day but I guess the sack is the bigger play (probably his one sack of that particular game). Not sure what your point was though.

I can make my own example where Taylor sacks a qb for a loss of 5. And Seymour stops a run, forces the fumble, and it is recovered by the Pats.......
He HAS done that before..
which is the bigger impact?????!!!!!!!???????!!!!!!!!

I can do it too see, sounds a little ridiculous doesn't it?

And a player like JT has never sacked a QB stripped him off the ball and ran it back 80 yards for a TD?

This is getting juvenile..me included. Apples to Oranges...

 

[Alk]

I may be wrong on this, but I was confident that in our win run on Indy, Light drew Freeney 2-3 games and Freeny did not present any problems. Matt really stepped up and played.

Pretty sure Graham had something to do with that.