Welcome to PatsFans.com

Return of the Big Nickel?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Fencer, Apr 27, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Fencer

    Fencer Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,738
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +73 / 0 / -13

    #12 Jersey

    Reasons to think the Big Nickel might return:


    • The Pats now have multi-year investments in three safeties.
    • The Pats didn't do much to beef up depth among LBs who are good at covering passes.
    • To put it another way, The Pats only have 3 LBs who would be generally characterized as both playable and fast (Thomas, Mayo, Guyton). If they want speed at all positions behind a 3-man DL, some kind of nickel is needed.
    • Tank Williams' role is essentially to play in a big nickel, unless it's for 8-in-the-box situations, and it doesn't seem like the latter will arise that much in today's NFL (short-yardage/red zone sub packages perhaps excepted).
    • BB has always liked playing a lot of DBs.
  2. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,669
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +287 / 19 / -2

    1) In the regular nickel, we have three corners on the field.
    2) When we played the big nickel before we subsituted one of the safeties for a corner.
    3) If one of the safeties is subsitituted for a linebacker, I would call that a dime formation.

    I would NOT have less than 3 corners on the field in a passing situation, unless you are suggesting that we don't hae third CB capabale of playing the nickel.
  3. PushnPencils

    PushnPencils Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +8 / 9 / -4

    Ahhh ...the big nickel.

    Visions of Ray Mickens getting burnt to a crisp in 2002.:eek:
  4. Fencer

    Fencer Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,738
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +73 / 0 / -13

    #12 Jersey

    Are you suggesting we only played the big nickel before when the oppenent showed 3 WRs?
  5. cstjohn17

    cstjohn17 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Messages:
    5,035
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ratings:
    +39 / 11 / -4

    #54 Jersey

    We may see it in some cases against a pass happy team like Indy, but the reality is that all the teams in the division are run first teams. The front seven fundamentals are going to be critical.
  6. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,669
    Likes Received:
    111
    Ratings:
    +287 / 19 / -2

    I think that we are using Big Nickel to mean anytime a 3rd safety is on the field.

    If we mean should we occasionally play a 3rd safety near the line instead of having three ILB's to help against the run, then I would think that I would rather have a LB.

    I guess my question is the problem that we are trying to solve.

    OPTION ONE
    Our corners aren't good enough for nickel coverages. For me, our corners are good enough to be the nickel and the dime back.

    OPTION TWO
    Our LB's are so poor in courage that we'd rather have a 3rd safety playing near the line instead of one of the linebackers.
    =========
    Aren't our base defenses the 3-4-4 (rushing situations) and 4-2-5 or 3-3-5 (pass situations)?

    QUESTION ONE
    Is the safety the sixth defensive back (otherwise I'd rather have three corners)?

    QUESTION TWO
    Who else in on the field in addition to the 3 corners and 3 safeties?

    QUESTION THREE
    Who are we kidding? A couple of months ago (and even a week ago for some), our secondary was our weakness. Now we think we should have six defensive backs on the field.




Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>