Would you sign Lions safety Louis Delmas, and let Chung walk?

[supafly]

Louis Delmas has the potential to be a very good safety in this league. His problem is that he has had an injury bug and has not been dependable yet, so that is the biggest concern and the biggest gamble.

He reportedly brings a ton of energy, hard-hitting value, and leadership to his practices every single day, and when he's been lucky enough to see the field on Sundays.

If Belichick deems him as worthy enough value to take a look at, I would trust him and be more than happy. It would almost definitely pay off as long as he sees the field...of course that's a big 'if.'

 

[DarrylS]

Chung is gone.. he needs to go back and take a course on geometry.

 

[Triumph]

People seem to forget that at the by the en of the 2011 season, Chung was probably our best DB.

Thats the problem.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

So you want to replace our injury-prone, inconsistent safety with another injury-prone, inconsistent safety?

 

[Ring 6]

His price just doubled, and he's a cover safety. Would be kind of duplicitous with McCourty at FS.

We need 2 cover safeties. Run stopping safeties who can't cover are dinosaurs now.

 

[furley]

Not sure why you say he won't come here?

Personally I think we should be more worried about CB and pass rush than safety. At this point my preference is to leave McCourty at safety and he can pair with Gregory, Wilson, or a rookie and we will be good if the corners are set and possiblely great if the corners are set and we improve the pass rush.

It's still unclear why New England didn't offer him a contract two years ago. Whatever hangups that New England had about him to have pause, I doubt that feeling has changed any.

Another safety I would've an interest in is Jairus Byrd, but he's an even more unlikely option.

The Bills put the franchise tag on Jairus Byrd Friday, but the nature of the tag was the question.

The club confirmed this afternoon that the franchise tag used was non-exclusive. That means that other NFL clubs can try and sign Byrd to an offer sheet. Buffalo has the right to match any offer, but if they choose not the Bills would be awarded a pair of first round picks by the club that signed Byrd away.

Inside The Bills | Tag of Byrd was non-exclusive

 

[Sciz]

It's still unclear why New England didn't offer him a contract two years ago. Whatever hangups that New England had about him to have pause, I doubt that feeling has changed any.

They did make him an offer. He went to SF anyway.

 

[supafly]

This has been a popular question lately due to the emergence of Goldson as a more dominant player, but you'd need to remember that at the time he was not anything at all special.

We actually reportedly offered him a little more than SF's ridiculously low (but appropriate at the time) offer, he just didn't see much of a difference between the two offers and chose to stay where he was instead, hoping that he could transform staying there into a nice long-term deal with them, which he has set himself up to do with his much better play.

It certainly wasn't like we offered him some ridiculous deal for the kind of player he was at the time. His own team actually offered less. Both offers were very low but were on par with his value at the time.

I just explained this to furley. Maybe he didn't see it, or he simply doesn't believe me? Either way, this is what happened with the Dashon Goldson situation.

 

[supafly]

Another safety I would've an interest in is Jairus Byrd, but he's an even more unlikely option.





Inside The Bills | Tag of Byrd was non-exclusive

You can cross Byrd off the list. Belichick isn't going to give up 2 first rounders to get him, along with paying him a highly paid contract to boot.

Those are the kinds of guys who do not offer the value that he looks for, rightfully so. I'm not sure how many NFL players Belichick would currently give up 2 first rounders for, but my guess is that you could count them on one or two fingers...if that.

We'll have to look for other avenues instead.

 

[wpgjets>nyjets]

At this point the make-up of the secondary is completely unknown

we do not know who the "#1" corner will be and the #2 corner could be Dennard (but jail? suspension? year 2 regression?)

Safety could be McCourty but he could potentially be #1, #2 cb depending on what happens in the offseason.

Personally I think next year with a full training camp McCourtey could be> Goldson at safety, as I have never been a huge fan of his and don't think he's worth the 6 or 7 mil he's asking for. I think I'm the only one in that boat.

Would rather spend the 6/7 mil on someone like Chris Gamble and also sign Q.Jammer as a #2/#3 CB/S veteran and do the overpay thing for Ed Reed (5 mil+ is crazy!)

That way, whatever happens with Dennard or McCourtey's training camp, the team could adapt.

secondary of Dennard, Gamble, McCourtey, Jammer, Reed, Dowling, T Wilson could be one of the better ones we've had and it would give Bill the ability to move players around as he pleases. Although I am not sure if this would be feasible $$ wise...

Thoughts?

 

[DocHoliday]

We need 2 cover safeties. Run stopping safeties who can't cover are dinosaurs now.

Funny, I seem to recall both defenses in the Superbowl featuring one.

Even Chung in the 2011 Superbowl did us a huge favor in laying out a big hit on Hakeem Nicks. The guy came back but didn't catch another pass the rest of the game.

I know how you feel about big hits, so I'll put out another reason - having a big run stopping safety is really no more archaic than having three big hulking run stopping linebackers (and depending on two cover safeties to make up for the weakened pass defense).

Ideally, of course, you don't have a roster built to an extreme and all your players are flexible. I think one of Hightower and Spikes sitting out with Fletcher or his equivalent inserted with Tavon Wilson, a strong safety who can somewhat cover is the ideal defense. I can't recall how Wilson is in run support however.

 

[Triumph]

The 2009 draft was chock full of busts - Chung, Brace, Bustler. Value picks my axx.

Vollmer and Edelman are all thats left.

 

[supafly]

The 2009 draft was chock full of busts - Chung, Brace, Bustler. Value picks my axx.

Vollmer and Edelman are all thats left.

2006--2009 = the lean yrs drafting wise

I think the past few have been much, much better. Hopefully that continues.

 

[supafly]

Funny, I seem to recall both defenses in the Superbowl featuring one.

I think Andy's strong wording may have thrown you off, but I also think he has a good point. It may not be "archiac," but it can certainly limit you. While both defenses had some form of this, there were also many, many big plays of 20+ yards in that game.

Even Chung in the 2011 Superbowl did us a huge favor in laying out a big hit on Hakeem Nicks. The guy came back but didn't catch another pass the rest of the game.

We also paid for that terribly later in the game when the poor coverage allowed them to march down the field for the winning score and SB victory. Some of the blame would certainly fall on Chung's inability to properly cover my grandmother (who is sadly no longer with us).

I know how you feel about big hits, so I'll put out another reason - having a big run stopping safety is really no more archaic than having three big hulking run stopping linebackers (and depending on two cover safeties to make up for the weakened pass defense).

Again, I think that you'd be right that other teams obviously follow these patterns still, but you'd also have to take into account how those "3 hulking LB's" limit us in pass coverage. What we're currently lacking is a pass covering LB, so at least one of those hulkers is really only a 2 down player in theory.

I think the hope is that Wilson can transform into a better safety, though moreso in coverage. He should be able to hit and tackle with at least average efficiency, so the thinking is that we could use an improvement in the pass coverage aspect more than the more typical SS of the olden days, mostly due to the changing pass happy league.

It is just a theory, but it may make more sense than initially thought.

 

[furley]

I just explained this to furley. Maybe he didn't see it, or he simply doesn't believe me? Either way, this is what happened with the Dashon Goldson situation.

Reportedly, Goldson's seeking $8M a year which is likely too high of a price tag for San Francisco. Ditto for New England.

 

[bagwell368]

Delmas: No. Too many injuries, will cost too much

Chung: Maybe. If he signs for the minimum and is asked to play short yardage, he'll be OK. What speed he had is all but gone, his health blows. 15-20 snaps is all he is good for. Very good chance he's out of the league inside of 4 years.

 

[supafly]

Reportedly, Goldson's seeking $8M a year which is likely too high of a price tag for San Francisco. Ditto for New England.

I would imagine that you're right, but one thing to keep in mind is that while we probably won't sign Goldson, any of those top tier safeties are going to warrant something in the 5/35 range.

I like Goldson, but I'd be leery about giving him that kind of money at the same time. There seems to be some inconsistency there.

 

[supafly]

Delmas: No. Too many injuries, will cost too much

Chung: Maybe. If he signs for the minimum and is asked to play short yardage, he'll be OK. What speed he had is all but gone, his health blows. 15-20 snaps is all he is good for. Very good chance he's out of the league inside of 4 years.

I think it would depend on the asking price of Delmas. It may not be as high as you'd first think. His potential ceiling is obviously way above someone like Chung's. I just couldn't see Chung coming back here in a reserve role. I thought it could have been a possibility about 1/2 way through the season, but I don't think that's the case anymore.

 

[furley]

Also, it's being reported that San Fransisco and Atlanta want to trade for Revis. Another sign that San Fransisco could move on from Goldson.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I prefer Delmas to Chung, but I don't really like either of them.