Fencer
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2006
- Messages
- 14,293
- Reaction score
- 3,986
A lot of scheme discussions boil down to the question: 2 free safeties or 1?
Arguments for 2 start:
Of course, as in many things, what happens in sub packages may be more important than what happens in base. A dime package could easily be:
Or lose one of the DTs for an LB (Hightower, pure coverage, rush-oriented, whatever).
It's a little more awkward to construct a true nickel package, but BB doesn't always believe in those anyway.
I think BB would like to have at least 4 speedy DBs out there at all times. That doesn't mean, however, he winds up thinking that's the best choice ...
Arguments for 2 start:
- BB in the past has always favored allegedly interchangeable safeties, and being able to cover is a requirement.
- It would be nice to say that our slowish LBs can be offset by fast DBs.
- Especially if we assume McCourty stays at S, CB talent may be questionable.
- What BB says hasn't usually been matched in practice; most of the time he's had Milloy, Harrison, or Chung.
- Who exactly is going to cover TEs?
Of course, as in many things, what happens in sub packages may be more important than what happens in base. A dime package could easily be:
- 2 starting CBs
- 2 free safeties
- 1 slot CB (Arrington)
- 1 SS/LB hybrid
- Mayo
- 2 rushing DEs
- 2 DTs
Or lose one of the DTs for an LB (Hightower, pure coverage, rush-oriented, whatever).
It's a little more awkward to construct a true nickel package, but BB doesn't always believe in those anyway.
I think BB would like to have at least 4 speedy DBs out there at all times. That doesn't mean, however, he winds up thinking that's the best choice ...