Logan Ryan possibly moving to safety?

[JMC00]

Not really. But he's got a contract so they have to. Sorry bro, but the guy flat out sucks.

Actually he's pretty decent playing inside

 

[Stylez]

Decent = 1st quarter? Cause he sure was given the hook by halftime down the stretch, in multiple games

 

[Ring 6]

That's way too simplistic a distinction.

Not really.

Every team plays a combination of coverage schemes, but ultimately it comes down to whether you play 1 deep safety or 2 deep.

And every team plays schemes with both.

It only makes sense to talk about "left and right safeties" as mirror images of each other if you are playing 2 deep safeties most of the time - Cover 2, Cover 4, and Cover 6.

This is not true. Playing left and right safeties rather than strong and free is based upon having both safeties able to play either role. BB has spoken at length about this in the past. His goal is interchangable safeties, because offenses can force you into their roles being reversed by alignment and motion. In a 2 deep zone, it doesn't matter, so the point is irrelevant. It is exactly the schemes you are dismissing where the concept comes into play.

Those are primarily zone coverage schemes. But the Pats have been moving more and more towards a single high free safety with press-man coverage. They obviously won't play any scheme exclusively, and will have a mixture of coverages, but the acquisition of Browner and Revis suggests that they have gone "all in" on playing press-man coverage with primarily a single high FS. As former NFL DB Matt Bowen recently noted:



Patriots' Secondary Additions Prove Bill Belichick's Ability to Adapt | Bleacher Report

The Pats certainly didn't use Gregory as a mirror image of McCourty last year. There were times he played a deep coverage role opposite McCourty, but he was also used an more of a SS role and as a "robber" or "rat" role (covering the underneath zone).

Sometimes you can dictate them to a role and other times you cannot.

I've assumed that the Pats would be running a fair amount of Cover 3 this season, which allows you to put 8 men in the box, and where the SS is really playing a role opposite the WILL:

Stopping the run with a Cover-3 base defense - Big Cat Country

Now you are basing your conclusion on assumptions that are just guesses.

The Pats' interest in guys like Wes Woodyard in FA and Kevin Pierre-Louis would fit with this kind of a role. Devin McCourty as the SS really doesn't fit this role.

They didn't sign Woodyard, and how do you know where there interest is in the draft?

My best guess is that we will see Ryan play some safety opposite McCourty when the Pats want to play Cover 2/4/6 coverages, which will probably be about 25-33% of the time. Otherwise, I think we'll see McCourty as the single high FS with more of a traditional SS or a LB/S hybrid playing in the box, or with 1 safety and 3-5 CBs.

Well, this report suggests that is not the case.

It will be very interesting to see how the Pats use all their weapons in the secondary, but I don't think they are finished, and I don't think it will be uniform. Like Bowen, I see single high FS (Cover 1 and its variants) being the base, but a lot of traps and "game plan-specific schemes" mixed in. At any rate, I think simply saying that BB plays "left and right safeties" is a gross oversimplification, and not very helpful.

Ignoring the fact and dismisisng what he has done his entire career is even less helpful.

 

[50-yard-line]

Decent = 1st quarter? Cause he sure was given the hook by halftime down the stretch, in multiple games

He was playing on a torn groin. And if he flat-out sucked, I doubt BB, who watches all the game tape and knows what play was on, would have given him the contract. That's just not his way of doing business.

I doubt the Pats make a move at CB or S in the draft or FA. With Revis, Browner, Dennard, Ryan, Arrington, Harmon, Wilson and Wilson, this area is the least of their concerns. They might bring Gregory back at a lower price.

I think we're going to see a lot of different looks from this group, too (and I'll add Jamie Collins into the mix). A Wilson, if he makes the team, may see more than a little time at coverage LB.

 

[Kontradiction]

He was playing on a torn groin. And if he flat-out sucked, I doubt BB, who watches all the game tape and knows what play was on, would have given him the contract. That's just not his way of doing business.

I doubt the Pats make a move at CB or S in the draft or FA. With Revis, Browner, Dennard, Ryan, Arrington, Harmon, Wilson and Wilson, this area is the least of their concerns. They might bring Gregory back at a lower price.

I think we're going to see a lot of different looks from this group, too (and I'll add Jamie Collins into the mix). A Wilson, if he makes the team, may see more than a little time at coverage LB.

Arrington's contract is one of the worst contracts that Belichick has given out in his time here. He's nowhere near worth what he's being paid.

 

[Stylez]

He was playing on a torn groin. And if he flat-out sucked, I doubt BB, who watches all the game tape and knows what play was on, would have given him the contract. That's just not his way of doing business.



I doubt the Pats make a move at CB or S in the draft or FA. With Revis, Browner, Dennard, Ryan, Arrington, Harmon, Wilson and Wilson, this area is the least of their concerns. They might bring Gregory back at a lower price.



I think we're going to see a lot of different looks from this group, too (and I'll add Jamie Collins into the mix). A Wilson, if he makes the team, may see more than a little time at coverage LB.

He gave him the contract before the season...this makes little sense.

So, to sum up a "decent" slot cover guy playing on a torn groin is what we have so far? Who barely got out of the 1st quarter. Awesome sauce.

Honestly I think they move Logan Ryan to the nickel. I know I cap on Arrington and all but I think Ryan becomes the nickel.

 

[Kontradiction]

He gave him the contract before the season...this makes little sense.

So, to sum up a "decent" slot cover guy playing on a torn groin is what we have so far? Who barely got out of the 1st quarter. Awesome sauce.

Honestly I think they move Logan Ryan to the nickel. I know I cap on Arrington and all but I think Ryan becomes the nickel.

Dennard will probably be the nickel on the majority of passing downs. Arrington and Ryan will fight it out as dime backs.

 

[Stylez]

I think it'd be interesting to see dennard moved to safety with Ryan as the nickel. Not saying I want it, but I'd love to see how it looks.

 

[Kontradiction]

I think it'd be interesting to see dennard moved to safety with Ryan as the nickel. Not saying I want it, but I'd love to see how it looks.

If the Patriots are playing Cover-1, it wouldn't look very good. Dennard doesn't have the sideline to sideline range and speed that McCourty has.

 

[Stylez]

If the Patriots are playing Cover-1, it wouldn't look very good. Dennard doesn't have the sideline to sideline range and speed that McCourty has.

Good point.

 

[Brady6]

I think it'd be interesting to see dennard moved to safety with Ryan as the nickel. Not saying I want it, but I'd love to see how it looks.

Dennard excels in man coverage where he can be physical off the line. I do not think he would be very good at safety. Ryan actually makes sense because as we saw last season he has very good ball skills and a knack for forcing turnovers.

I personally believe Belichick intends to use Browner primarily in 1on1 coverage with the other teams tight end. The evolvement of that position over the last five years justifies it.

 

[BobDigital]

The general rule is scheme and situation withstanding; get your 11 best players on the field as much as possible.

To me in the DB core this means Revis, McCourty Browner Ryan Dennard. Harmon & Arrington can be good in certain situations but they are scheme/matchup specific at this point.

Also lets not forget you have Collins who showed an interesting combination of size/skill in coverage able to deal with players from Welker to big TEs in certain spots.

I don't think the SS position is vital for a defense to win. The key is being able to get physicality from your DB group in some way and the more the better.

 

[Fencer]

On a passing play, you typically have 3-5 guys running routes immediately, with 0-2 staying in to block and perhaps running delayed routes later.

It looks like the Pats plan to man up on every one of the immediate receivers, I presume with a deep safety when possible. The possible-delay receivers would generally be covered by LBs (Collins, Mayo) and maybe a remaining underneath safety. So far we're not describing anything that's a problem with current personnel.

If it turns into a running play, however, than the guy manning up on the TE is in danger of being blown up, even if it's Browner -- at least if the TE is a Gronk-class dual threat, which thankfully very few are. The DBs lining up on ordinary receivers are in some cases above-average in run support, but of course sometimes the WR will nail his block anyway. So (in the 3 ostensible receiver case, one of whom may be a receiving TE) we have a deep safety, three other DBs who are in various states of yes or no participating in the run defense, and 7 other guys. If those 7 guys are all DL and LBs, this discussion sees a bit moot anyway, except to the extent we think a man-covering DB will be able to get off any blocks from his coverage assignment and tackle the running back.

I'm actually more concerned about the sub run defense than about run defense in the base package. That's also when the DTs -- or slid-over DEs -- are more likely to be of dubious interior rush defense virtue.

 

[Nunchucks]

Concerned that one the the Patriots more promising young CBs will have his development stifled by playing safety. However, if it is in an attempt to have better coverage units on the field in passing situations, I am all for it.

 

[dex13]

I could see this but I think we need to remove the whole SS/FS and go back to when BB had only safeties (no designation). This would be an excellent move in obvious passing plays especially with 3rd and longs.

edit: actually, forget the designation of CB and safeties...BB is just going to run with a bunch of DBs. It still seems like a potent defense against teams that run with no backs or backs that split out.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Against Denver, also known as the road to the superbowl, is it possible our main defense would feature 4 CBs and just 1 S?

CB1: Revis (D. Thomas)
CB2: Dennard (Sanders)
CB3: Ryan/Arrington (Welker)
CB4/TE Destroyer: Browner (J. Thomas)
S1: McCourty

 

[patfanken]

Some comments on the comments:

1. Kudos to the Herald for inciting a great thread. I love it when we get into this kind of football discussion. Thus far the back and forth has been eminently both entertaining and informative.

2. Jeers to the Herald for once again attempting to imply that they have some inside source that's feeding them info. BS. SacPete was the first to question it, and he's right. In what world would the organization that is the most closed-mouthed in the league, suddenly tell a reporter how they are going to use their personnel?

3. Its just another example of the Herald making it up as they go along. At least this time they chose an interesting topic.

4. Forget about thinking about Browner as a SS. The simple fact is that he's not any good in space. And while he'd be a better physical presence than Gregory at the spot, he'd be a major downgrade in coverage.

That's not to say that he'd never line up in the middle on occasion. But Browner is here to play press physical man or zone coverage with help over the top.....period. What makes him so potentially valuable, is WHO he plays press man week to week will depend on who we play.

5. Contrary to the article, I don't see Browner as taking Dennard's role as the outside CB. Dennard was progressing very nicely last season, getting better with every game. Its actually surprising how much bigger and physical he plays than his actual size.

No I see Browner as the "wildcard" BB will pick Browner's best matchup each week depending on who they play, and when they need to play press/man or match up zones, that's where he'll play. One week it might be a big outside WR. Another week it might be the TE, etc

6. In this day and age you can't have too many DB who can play against the pass. With every year position designations like SS and FS become less and less meaningful. In today's NFL the team that can put out the best DB's regardless of "position" is the team that will be most effective against the pass.

7. One of the best ways to defend against the pass these days is to disguise secondary coverage. That's the reason BB has been loathe to flop safeties with formation, simply because that's the easiest way for the QB to determine coverage. Being able to flood the secondary with good coverage people regardless of what their positions are stated on the program will be a huge advantage.

Being able to successfully disguise their coverages is the key reason why the Pats have been consistently at the top of the league in picks, even though they have had sub par personnel back there for the most part.

8. I doubt very much that McCourty will be anything but our "FS". Because of his range and rare skill set, he is the guy who allows all the aggressiveness in front of him to happen. You need an "eraser". A guy with the range to help out on those times when DB's get beat. The guy to turns long TD's into 20 yd gains.

Remember BB is at heart, the ultimate bend but don't break coach. "Big plays" are his biggest fear. So why would he take the guy with the most range in the league and put him "inside the box" to put a guy without nearly the same range in his place. It makes no sense at all. Typical Herald logic.

9. I am very excited about this year. For the first time in the new era of the NFL passing game (post Polian rules), the Pats have the size and numbers to really compete against the best passing attacks in the league.

Think about this. Looking at this skill sets and depth of this secondary, how many of the 2011 secondary who made it to the superbowl and played well, would even make this team, let alone start.

24 Kyle Arrington CB
31 Sergio Brown FS
25 Patrick Chung FS/SS
44 James Ihedigbo SS
23 Nate Jones CB/FS
32 Devin McCourty CB/FS
27 Antwaun Molden CB
29 Sterling Moore CB/FS
41 Malcolm Williams CB

Only McCourty and Arrington are still on the team, and only Ihedigbo has had even moderate success after he left, and it wasn't enough for his team to want to keep him. Remember this was the year where Julian Edelman played a significant amount of time on defense

10. I think it would behoove us all if we started to forget about the old position designations like FS, and SS, as well as looking for players who can be the next Ty Law and Rodney Harrison in our minds. Those are players who played in a literally a different league, which required different skill sets to succeed.

DB's in this era face a myriad of differing issues that Rodney and Ty only rarely had to face. Today EVERY team will have a couple 4.4 and 4.5 guys who are 6'3 and above. Law and Harrison rarely had to play against a "move TE" In retrospect Dallas Clark was really the first of his kind. Now the league is rife with them. Back in the day, for the most part TE's were just adjuncts to the passing game, not the focus.

No this is a new age, and the Pats, for the first time, in that age have the size quickness and depth to compete with the best pass offenses in the league, and if that doesn't get your juices flowing then.....

 

[50-yard-line]

He gave him the contract before the season...this makes little sense.

It was in response to "he barely got out of the first quarter."

 

[Big-T]

Against Denver, also known as the road to the superbowl, is it possible our main defense would feature 4 CBs and just 1 S?

Personally, I'd only use 1 Safety in the base defense.

Either 3 CB or a 5 man DL instead. Get the best 11 players on the field at one time. Look at Seattle they do some crazy things like a 6 man DL with 1 LB and 4 DBs (Thomas, Chancellor, Sherman, Maxwell).

 

[Stylez]

It was in response to "he barely got out of the first quarter."

I'm still lost but I've been that way for a while