Random Commanders Thoughts

[McD5]

I wonder if reading something like that pisses Amerson off.

 

[Burgundy Burner]

He's kinda small.

He's kinda better than Biggers.

 

[JohnssBass]

Flowers 5'9"/187 - He may be better but still kinda small @ 5' 9". And he was whinny last year at playing in the slot.

 

[MikeSr619]

Dead?

Shit..you know me. I'm sparing you guys, honestly. I could continue this until the season but I'm not trying to scare people off

Moss in '14

 

[Fear The Spear]

He's kinda better than Biggers.

but not bigger than Biggers

 

[McD5]

Flowers update:

1. He has no agent. He represents himself.

2. Multiple sources, including ESPN, reporting that he wants to come to Washington.

Further thoughts.....it's nice to have players like Garçon that actively recruit others to DC. We could easily afford him, by restructuring contracts or cutting Chris Chester. Flowers was pissed last year at KC because he didn't like to play the slot. We already have D Hall and Amerson as starters......so.......his signing might not be a huge vote of confidence for Amerson.

 

[Fear The Spear]

I wonder if reading something like that pisses Amerson off.

Maybe that's the intention and plan

 

[DieselPwr44]

Amerson started coming on down the stretch last season so I look forward to seeing his progression this year.

 

[MikeSr619]

I'd like to see that and can believe it.

But Rambo is another case. He might be too far gone mentally

 

[JohnssBass]

Vikes called about Flowers pretty much immediately after he got cut; he's got a good relationship with Crennel in Houston. I think the Falcons are pretty much on the fringe and will back out unless everyone else passes. Skins have plenty of options to dump salary to sign him (ie Bowen $4.5M - more of a matter of when vs if). Can't hurt to test the waters though.

Houston link: NFL | Chiefs cut longtime corner Brandon Flowers - Rotoworld.com
Vikes link: NFL Rumors: Vikings Inquire About Brandon Flowers - The Viking Age - A Minnesota Vikings Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and more.

 

[JohnssBass]

Maybe move Hall to safety and start Flowers and Amerson?

D Hall is pretty old. Still effective, but old...tick...tick...tick.

Our secondary sucked last year, so new faces don't scare me. Even small guys.

I was wondering if they might have Hall at least split some time between SS and CB. Coaching staff did say they were looking at some CBs playing @ Safety; didn't define the parameters after that.

 

[Boone]

Our sucky secondary is going to look amazingly better when we have folks other than Kerrigan and Orakpo as pash rush threats. And now, we do

 

[McD5]

Amerson started coming on down the stretch last season so I look forward to seeing his progression this year.

It's a tough one for sure. Both sides have advantages and disadvantages.

On one hand, Flowers is an incredible tackler. He's one tough SOB, who ranked third in tackles on a very tough KC defense last season. We could certainly use a great tackler back there. We had way too many opposing players just shred our secondary for big plays. Adding Flowers would be like adding another SS on the field. He's that physical.

On the other hand, if your CB is making a lot of tackles, you probably have bigger problems.

 

[JohnssBass]

...CBs making a lot of tackles and if your Safeties are making a lot of tackles you have even bigger problems - 2013; Reed Doughty #4 & Brandon Meriweather #6 in tackles. (Kerrigan & Rak - #7 & 8 respectively). #1 &#2 in tackles were LBs. 3 through 6 were all secondary players.

 

[Shi no Tenshi]

...CBs making a lot of tackles and if your Safeties are making a lot of tackles you have even bigger problems - 2013; Reed Doughty #4 & Brandon Meriweather #6 in tackles. (Kerrigan & Rak - #7 & 8 respectively). #1  in tackles were LBs. 3 through 6 were all secondary players.

The thing is, that is pretty common in defenses across the league. #1 Defense in football, that destroyed everyone, would be Seattle. #1 tackler was an LB, but their next several were....safetys and CBs. Nature of the game anymore is that it's a passing league, and therefore your DBs are getting more tackles. Most teams have a LB at the top spot, but a great many DBs are in that 2-7 area.

Basically, I think our CBs getting tackles is the least of our worries.

 

[McD5]

Basically, I think our CBs getting tackles is the least of our worries.

I was more referring to the school of Deion Sanders. "Show me a corner with a lot of tackles, and I'll show you a bad corner."

The great corners don't make a lot of tackles, because no one catches the ball. It's awesome to have a corner that can come up and lay serious wood in run support, but that's secondary to what you really want to see.

If you notice, the truly elite corners, and there aren't many left these days, rarely make tackles.

Out of eleven guys on defense, you'll see the greats like Revis, Sherman and Haden 7th or 8th on their teams. Now, there are additional factors as well, but a corner who is third on their team in tackles is more often than not, a corner you can complete passes on.

 

[Fear The Spear]

Basically, I think our CBs getting tackles is the least of our worries.

Well if the CB making those tackles, is not making it after 3 other defenders missed a tackle attempt, it would be an improvement over the last few years, and thereby the least of our worries, for now.

 

[JohnssBass]

The thing is, that is pretty common in defenses across the league. #1 Defense in football, that destroyed everyone, would be Seattle. #1 tackler was an LB, but their next several were....safetys and CBs. Nature of the game anymore is that it's a passing league, and therefore your DBs are getting more tackles. Most teams have a LB at the top spot, but a great many DBs are in that 2-7 area.

Basically, I think our CBs getting tackles is the least of our worries.

Don't think so. 1 through 7 on Seattle in 2013; LB, S, S, LB, LB, DT, CB. Actually you should have some LBs at least up there putting in some separation before you get to CBs in number of tackles, not the other way around. If not, it means either the secondary is stopping the running game or nobody is breaking up pass plays or possibly a combo of both. May not be the least of your worries but it has to be a concern. Josh Wilson @ #3 in tackles - That was because he was getting torched, it wasn't his run support. If it was really a good idea to have your #2 CB as your #3 tackler why is he gone?

 

[McD5]

^^^ This is what I'm talking about. It's a red flag.

 

[Shi no Tenshi]

and if your Safeties are making a lot of tackles you have even bigger problems

That was what you said. Specifically brought up safeties. I was pointing out that even top defenses have that. There is nothing in what I said that states CBs having tons of tackles is a good thing. Just that it is not what I worry about for them.

I'm worried about our CBs defending passes. Tackles are just a correlation. Correlation =/= causation.