Quote:
Originally Posted by DYoungJelly
There is definitely an argument to going all in on D line investment.
Philly from this year is the case in point.
Their secondary was mediocre at best and Cooley and other analysts named them as a weakness. Their LB corps was injured early on and continued to be banged up throughout their Super Bowl run. These "weaknesses" were covered by the play and depth of their Dline.
Philly strategically invests in the Dline and rotates them throughout the game.
Their strategy is pressure from a fresh talented Dline can and does cover deficiencies in other defensive units. It worked against one of the best QBs and game planning coaches in the league to win a world championship.
I think there is a strong argument that Dline, like a good running game, is greater than the sum of their parts and positively affects other units and game aspects.
It reduces the coverage time, and thus the time for the secondary to F up. It keeps LBs clean and unblocked to tackle a runner. It messes with a QBs timing and can get in his head.
I don't think a team can ever go wrong by drafting or signing a game changing defensive lineman.
|
Dudes on the locked on draft podcast said this. They also said that with the DL depth and diversity of play style in this draft class, it would make a lot of sense for a team to double dip
They were hyping Nathan Shepherd
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk