During the Probowl Thomas was playing in the nickle slot during the second hald. He had a pick on the 2nd play of the game. This is what he had to say about it

"Hopefully, coach Carroll saw it and will let me play,” he said through a sly smile that was as good as a wink. “I wanted to put something on film, so coach Carroll can look at it and say, ‘OK, look what we’ve got. He can cover. He can play the slot.’ Maybe I’ll get some action out there.”

I've been preaching this all season! Maybe we can coach up Jeron Johnson to play the deep safety on 3rd downs.

Perfect World - We sign Ed Reed , 1st and second downs Kam will play closer to the LOS with Wright and Wagner as the only LB's on the field. 3rd downs Thomas on slot with Reed patroling the Slot! imagine

Holy crap, I didn't realize he had that much interest in playing slot. That's really interesting from a draft perspective.

His rookie year, in the play in game against the Rams he was all over Amendola in the slot. Too bad LeGree didn't work out. Earl would have been able to shift around a whole lot more.

Come to think of it, he shouldn't have had those interceptions against the deep shot. He almost takes away two deep shots (attempts) a game. No way they are moving him just for that reason.

This is what he had to say after the game on Twitter.

"@Earl_Thomas: Was really happy that I got to play a lil cornerback today....#db.."

I say heck no, ET is the best safety in football right now, If we move him to slot, ok yeah the slot guy wont get open as much but there will be a heck of a lot more deep balls completed. I guess if we brought Ed Reed in it would be okay but I doubt that will happen. just draft or sign a slot corner, problem solved.

I could actually see it working on a situational basis i.e. third downs only. Ideally, however, we'd just find a capable slot corner (you can usually find one deep in the draft or cheaply elsewhere) and let ET do his thing in deep coverage.

Maybe thats part of the reason Schneider liked Mark Barron in the draft last year so much...

Earl played corner at Texas if i remember right, and i have no doubt he'd be great playing the nickel corner. At the same time he's way to valuble and covers too much ground at safety to move him around.

Potential for a nice trick up our sleeve, particularly if our pass rush woes continue and we're looking to get every last bit of effectiveness out of the guys in coverage.

BirdsCommaAngry wrote:Potential for a nice trick up our sleeve, particularly if our pass rush woes continue and we're looking to get every last bit of effectiveness out of the guys in coverage.

I agree. It could definitely work on third down plays!

He has the talent to cover in situational plays, and I hope Carroll at least tries ever so often, to get him playing out of his normal position, just to screw with the opposition.
It wouldn't have to be done too often, but i can see where opposing Quarterbacks would be confused into making a mistake.

I would be okay with him moving to the slot spot on third downs, but I would prefer that the team find someone that can stick there for the long term so that we don't lose the protection that Earl provides for our CBs over the top.

He's too valuable over the top. Some of you are taking what he says 2 reporters too seriously. Maybe if we play a team that doesn't have much of a deep threat we can put him in the slot sometimes.

Think he's too good , out there supporting the CB's .

Makes them even better.


So fast, can cover the ground.

Thought he was a corner tht moved to safety at Texas

Now that I'm reminded...rather surprised he hasn't played in slot. Fast of the blitz as well!

Hmmm, pretty interesting. I'm not sure how I'd feel about a full time move, but (playing devil's advocat here) Earl would be damn good covering the slot, and it would almost certainly add some years to his career (barring injury) as he wouldn't be hitting (or getting hit by) guys as often.

But I don't see it happening, you don't change an all-pro's position... right?

Show safety blitz then fall back into slot coverage. Show slot coverage, then blitz. Show safety blitz, then fall back into deep safety coverage. Just gives the defense more options and the opposing QB more to think about.

Shock2k wrote:Holy crap, I didn't realize he had that much interest in playing slot. That's really interesting from a draft perspective.

Thomas probably didn't have that much interest before the last two years. But two years of seeing our slot DB's get burned like toast will change a man.

Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

Madden and Fantasy Football gives people strange ideas.

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

It is about what is better for the defense. If they move him to cover the slot and the defense is better as a whole, then it is a good decision.

Nickel coverage is becoming more and more prevalent and actually moreso moving to the norm. NFL teams are rolling with 3 WRs are ton nowadays. This isn't just a 3rd and long type personnel anymore.

fridayfrenzy wrote:

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

It is about what is better for the defense. If they move him to cover the slot and the defense is better as a whole, then it is a good decision.

Nickel coverage is becoming more and more prevalent and actually moreso moving to the norm. NFL teams are rolling with 3 WRs are ton nowadays. This isn't just a 3rd and long type personnel anymore.

You just don't get the difference between the ability to find a safety of Thomas' ability and a Nickel of Thomas' ability do you? One is much harder than the other.

Tell you what, if they can get a Safety as good as Thomas, then they can move him to nickel, but in reality, it's going to be MUCH MUCH easier to find a CB who can play Nickel as well as Thomas can while still leaving Thomas at the position he is GREAT at.

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

I said only 3rd down situations . With the D-line pinning the ears back to rush the passer and a Jeron Johnson or Guy filling in the deep safety spot . How would that not help?

Wait .. our defense was amazing on 3rd down , my bad.

fridayfrenzy wrote:
It is about what is better for the defense. If they move him to cover the slot and the defense is better as a whole, then it is a good decision.

Nickel coverage is becoming more and more prevalent and actually moreso moving to the norm. NFL teams are rolling with 3 WRs are ton nowadays. This isn't just a 3rd and long type personnel anymore.

Now you're just talking crazy. You don't move the fastest pro bowl caliber free safety in the NFL from arguably the toughest position to fill on a defense to a part time slot nickel cover CB..............ever.

I'm pretty sure Earl was just talking crap anyway letting everyone know he can cover people outside as well as play safety. Don't think he was serious.

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

I think most people have stated they are intrigued by this in a situational basis only. I, and some others, have already stated our preference for finding a capable slot DB. Seattle was pretty weak defending slot receivers on third down this season. Might be worth a one or two play experiment if that remains an area of weakness.

No need to get all high and mighty.

Sgt. Largent wrote:

fridayfrenzy wrote:
It is about what is better for the defense. If they move him to cover the slot and the defense is better as a whole, then it is a good decision.

Nickel coverage is becoming more and more prevalent and actually moreso moving to the norm. NFL teams are rolling with 3 WRs are ton nowadays. This isn't just a 3rd and long type personnel anymore.

Now you're just talking crazy. You don't move the fastest pro bowl caliber free safety in the NFL from arguably the toughest position to fill on a defense to a part time slot nickel cover CB..............ever.

I'm pretty sure Earl was just talking crap anyway letting everyone know he can cover people outside as well as play safety. Don't think he was serious.

And an all-pro.

If Earl IS serious about this, and you're talking only 3rd downs, you have to consider it. If it's something Earl really wants to do, to the point where it upsets him if he doesn't, then you have to do what it takes to make him happy. Otherwise, he could just walk out once free agency comes around. I don't see this as happening, but stranger things have happened. If you can't find a guy who can cover for nickel downs, then teams are going to continue to burn us (see Trufant). My hope though is that Lane (or if WTIII can stay healthy) will be playing nickel corner next year, or we find another great corner in the later rounds of this draft.

EastCoastHawksFan wrote:

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

I said only 3rd down situations . With the D-line pinning the ears back to rush the passer and a Jeron Johnson or Guy filling in the deep safety spot . How would that not help?

Wait .. our defense was amazing on 3rd down , my bad.

So, your solution for 3rd down is to move a young all-pro FS out of position, and have someone who isn't an all-pro safety play his position on a 3rd down when we already have trouble on 3rd down? I don't see how that helps.

Want to know how you get better at nickel corner? You don't let Trufant play it.

Its not my solution , even though I said it should happen since about week 5 , its Earls solution!

nategreat wrote:(or if WTIII can stay healthy)

This is pretty key. People seem to have written Thurmond off, and I can't really blame them given his inability to stay on the field, but if he can come back completely healthy, we already have our answer on nickel downs. His healthy return would be pretty huge for Seattle.

If we get a healthy WTIII, forget Revis, forget Thomas playing slot. We'd be dead set at CB.

DavidSeven wrote:

nategreat wrote:(or if WTIII can stay healthy)

This is pretty key. People seem to have written Thurmond off, and I can't really blame them given his inability to stay on the field, but if he can come back completely healthy, we already have our answer on nickel downs. His healthy return would be pretty huge for Seattle.

If we get a healthy WTIII, forget Revis, forget Thomas playing slot. We'd be dead set at CB.

I agree. But at this point a healthy WT3 seems as likely as us signing Ed Reed

EastCoastHawksFan wrote:Its not my solution , even though I said it should happen since about week 5 , its Earls solution!

It's not "Earl's solution", it's a guy talking and having fun at the pro bowl. Next thing you know, you guys are going to want to trade for JJ Watt to be our next WR, because he played the position in the Pro Bowl.

kidhawk wrote:

EastCoastHawksFan wrote:Its not my solution , even though I said it should happen since about week 5 , its Earls solution!

It's not "Earl's solution", it's a guy talking and having fun at the pro bowl. Next thing you know, you guys are going to want to trade for JJ Watt to be our next WR, because he played the position in the Pro Bowl.

Maybe they'll trade is JJ Watt straight up for Flynn. Makes sense to me! After that we get RW to switch to Kicker because Haushka can't get it done.

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

Your straw man argument supplemented with sarcasm isn't logic. The implication of what ET was doing is he believes he's more than capable of playing the slot and he wants our coaching staff to look into the possibility of using this versatility to improve our overall defense (IE NOT a full-time move). Looking into this is entirely logical given our less than stellar coverage of slot receivers and the NFL increasingly using slot receivers in their pass game. It's a creative solution to a defensive problem we as fans overlook because it's not as big of a hole in our boat as our problems getting after QBs.

Did you guys scoff and roll your eyes every time Perry, a DT, ran a TD in for the Bears? Vrabel, a LB, coming in & Goal situations for the Pats? How about when teams like DET and ATL put Calvin Johnson and Julio Jones back deep on defense in hail-mary situations? We could very well be better off with ET never covering the slot guy in any situation but to discount the idea solely because it's a change of position is nothing short of foolish.

BirdsCommaAngry wrote:Did you guys scoff and roll your eyes every time Perry, a DT, ran a TD in for the Bears? Vrabel, a LB, coming in & Goal situations for the Pats? How about when teams like DET and ATL put Calvin Johnson and Julio Jones back deep on defense in hail-mary situations? We could very well be better off with ET never covering the slot guy in any situation but to discount the idea solely because it's a change of position is nothing short of foolish.

Sooo.............while Earl is covering someone in the slot in your little "thinking outside the box" scenario, who's playing safety?

I for one cannot think of one scenario where it'd make sense to move Earl from his safety position into the slot. If you're being fair in any of the above examples then you're saying "hey, instead of the Fridge playing nose tackle destroying people, let's move him to running back!" Exactly, doesn't work does it?

BirdsCommaAngry wrote:Did you guys scoff and roll your eyes every time Perry, a DT, ran a TD in for the Bears? Vrabel, a LB, coming in & Goal situations for the Pats? How about when teams like DET and ATL put Calvin Johnson and Julio Jones back deep on defense in hail-mary situations? We could very well be better off with ET never covering the slot guy in any situation but to discount the idea solely because it's a change of position is nothing short of foolish.

1. Every situation you just described is an offensive to defense substitution or vice versa. You know, those times when they're normally off the field and aren't busy being all-pro.

2. Your analogy is no different than ET playing special teams, which he already does.

3. 3rd downs happen a lot more often than any of the situations you described.

4. Some of us prefer that we find a suitable nickel corner not named Marcus Trufant.

5. Some of us prefer our all-pro free roaming safety to be an all-pro free roaming safety.

BirdsCommaAngry wrote:

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

Your straw man argument supplemented with sarcasm isn't logic. The implication of what ET was doing is he believes he's more than capable of playing the slot and he wants our coaching staff to look into the possibility of using this versatility to improve our overall defense (IE NOT a full-time move). Looking into this is entirely logical given our less than stellar coverage of slot receivers and the NFL increasingly using slot receivers in their pass game. It's a creative solution to a defensive problem we as fans overlook because it's not as big of a hole in our boat as our problems getting after QBs.

No, YOU assume that's what Earl was doing, because YOU believe it is a good idea. Neither you nor I have any idea what Earl was trying to say. With the atmosphere of the game, I find it FAR FAR more likely he was having some fun with the situation. It's the pro bowl, not REAL football. There's no way in hell that Earl Thomas believes that the "Film" provided by his play in the pro bowl has any meaning whatsoever.

Now, I can't say that Thomas wouldn't want the change (although I do doubt it), but to assume he does because of what happened in a pro bowl game is really stretching reality.

As I stated in an earlier reply...it's MUCH easier to improve the Nickel position than it will be to improve the safety situation. If we were to get someone who could fill Earl's shoes as well as Thomas does it now, I'd have no problem with the move, be it temporary or permanent, but I'm one who firmly believes that the drop in talent at the Safety position with this move is far greater than the possible improvement we'd see at the Nickel CB position by this move, thus making our defense weaker. So, it makes more sense to find a player to improve the nickel while leaving Earl at his primary position.

Basis4day wrote:
1. Every situation you just described is an offensive to defense substitution or vice versa. You know, those times when they're normally off the field and aren't busy being all-pro.

2. Your analogy is no different than ET playing special teams, which he already does.

3. 3rd downs happen a lot more often than any of the situations you described.

4. Some of us prefer that we find a suitable nickel corner not named Marcus Trufant.

5. Some of us prefer our all-pro free roaming safety to be an all-pro free roaming safety.

How about when we moved Aaron Curry in at DT during 3rd & long? Cory Redding going from 4-3 DT to 4-3 DE to 3-4 DE? Sure, some of these moves were to get more out of a deficient player whether it be Redding not having the speed to play 4-3 DE, Curry being unspectacular at DT but better than our other options at the time. But what about when DEs like Jared Allen switch back and forth from LDE and RDE? LBs like JP and Orakpo moving from WLB to DE on passing downs? DBs like Revis and Carlos Rogers moving in to cover Welker in the slot? Not every player has a skill set limiting them to their natural position and I'm not willing to discount ETs overall coverage ability for the sake of being closed-minded.

If ET were to cover the slot, I'm not saying it would be ideal for him to do it full time. I'm saying we could look into him playing the slot for preparation against teams that feature a match-up more favorable for ET than our usual slot guy. The irony is you say some of us prefer that we find a suitable nickel corner not named Trufant as some sort of logical rhetoric and yet, guess what? ET isn't named Trufant.

BirdsCommaAngry wrote:

Basis4day wrote:
1. Every situation you just described is an offensive to defense substitution or vice versa. You know, those times when they're normally off the field and aren't busy being all-pro.

2. Your analogy is no different than ET playing special teams, which he already does.

3. 3rd downs happen a lot more often than any of the situations you described.

4. Some of us prefer that we find a suitable nickel corner not named Marcus Trufant.

5. Some of us prefer our all-pro free roaming safety to be an all-pro free roaming safety.

How about when we moved Aaron Curry in at DT during 3rd & long? Cory Redding going from 4-3 DT to 4-3 DE to 3-4 DE? Sure, some of these moves were to get more out of a deficient player whether it be Redding not having the speed to play 4-3 DE, Curry being unspectacular at DT but better than our other options at the time. But what about when DEs like Jared Allen switch back and forth from LDE and RDE? LBs like JP and Orakpo moving from WLB to DE on passing downs? DBs like Revis and Carlos Rogers moving in to cover Welker in the slot? Not every player has a skill set limiting them to their natural position and I'm not willing to discount ETs overall coverage ability for the sake of being closed-minded.

If ET were to cover the slot, I'm not saying it would be ideal for him to do it full time. I'm saying we could look into him playing the slot for preparation against teams that feature a match-up more favorable for ET than our usual slot guy. The irony is you say some of us prefer that we find a suitable nickel corner not named Trufant as some sort of logical rhetoric and yet, guess what? ET isn't named Trufant.

You still have yet to even once state who will replace Thomas on these plays, and how our defense will improve with that person at safety instead of Thomas.

kidhawk wrote:No, YOU assume that's what Earl was doing, because YOU believe it is a good idea. Neither you nor I have any idea what Earl was trying to say. With the atmosphere of the game, I find it FAR FAR more likely he was having some fun with the situation. It's the pro bowl, not REAL football. There's no way in hell that Earl Thomas believes that the "Film" provided by his play in the pro bowl has any meaning whatsoever.

I believe it COULD be a good idea and it COULD be something to take a look at in training camp and practice. The pro bowl might not match a typical football game but neither does practice, training camp, and even pre-season games, and that doesn't stop those situations from being useful in attempting to improve and prepare the team. If this move doesn't happen because we get real slot guy, ET just doesn't play it well enough to justify moving him from FS in any situation, or what have us, then fantastic! My problem is not the idea that maybe ET is better off doing what he's be doing, it's that we still have fans discounting the validity of unconventional thinking when that style of thinking is the very thing that allowed our current team to be built so well and so quickly.

BirdsCommaAngry wrote:

kidhawk wrote:No, YOU assume that's what Earl was doing, because YOU believe it is a good idea. Neither you nor I have any idea what Earl was trying to say. With the atmosphere of the game, I find it FAR FAR more likely he was having some fun with the situation. It's the pro bowl, not REAL football. There's no way in hell that Earl Thomas believes that the "Film" provided by his play in the pro bowl has any meaning whatsoever.

I believe it COULD be a good idea and it COULD be something to take a look at in training camp and practice. The pro bowl might not match a typical football game but neither does practice, training camp, and even pre-season games, and that doesn't stop those situations from being useful in attempting to improve and prepare the team. If this move doesn't happen because we get real slot guy, ET just doesn't play it well enough to justify moving him from FS in any situation, or what have us, then fantastic! My problem is not the idea that maybe ET is better off doing what he's be doing, it's that we still have fans discounting the validity of unconventional thinking when that style of thinking is the very thing that allowed our current team to be built so well and so quickly.

It's not us discounting unconventional thinking, it's half thought out unconventional thinking. As I've posted at least twice in this thread, NOBODY has said who will fill Thomas' safety spot to a level where we can make the defense better by moving Thomas to the Nickel spot. Making the Nickel better alone doesn't make it a good idea. You have to make the whole defense better for it to be a good idea.

kidhawk wrote:

fridayfrenzy wrote:

kidhawk wrote:Sometimes I swear I don't understand what passes for logic in this forum.

Let's take one of the best safeties in the game and move him to a nickel coverage guy? yes, this makes perfect sense to me. Great safeties are a dime a dozen, but nickel coverage guys are rare finds.

It is about what is better for the defense. If they move him to cover the slot and the defense is better as a whole, then it is a good decision.

Nickel coverage is becoming more and more prevalent and actually moreso moving to the norm. NFL teams are rolling with 3 WRs are ton nowadays. This isn't just a 3rd and long type personnel anymore.

You just don't get the difference between the ability to find a safety of Thomas' ability and a Nickel of Thomas' ability do you? One is much harder than the other.

Tell you what, if they can get a Safety as good as Thomas, then they can move him to nickel, but in reality, it's going to be MUCH MUCH easier to find a CB who can play Nickel as well as Thomas can while still leaving Thomas at the position he is GREAT at.

We're not talking about moving ET to play the slot for 100% of the game here. It will just be another option that the DC can use to cause confusion to the offense or allow the defense to be more flexible.

I don't get what the issue is...if it makes the defense as a whole better, then how is it bad?

If the defense as a whole is better with ET in the slot and Red Bryant at safety, then what does it matter what position they are the best at?

fridayfrenzy wrote:We're not talking about moving ET to play the slot for 100% of the game here. It will just be another option that the DC can use to cause confusion to the offense or allow the defense to be more flexible.

I don't get what the issue is...if it makes the defense as a whole better, then how is it bad?

If the defense as a whole is better with ET in the slot and Red Bryant at safety, then what does it matter what position they are the best at?

you still have to replace the safety position and make the defense better. Just improving the nickel position doesn't necessarily make the defense better. Who will take Thomas' spot that will make this defense better as a hole?

kidhawk wrote:

BirdsCommaAngry wrote:

kidhawk wrote:No, YOU assume that's what Earl was doing, because YOU believe it is a good idea. Neither you nor I have any idea what Earl was trying to say. With the atmosphere of the game, I find it FAR FAR more likely he was having some fun with the situation. It's the pro bowl, not REAL football. There's no way in hell that Earl Thomas believes that the "Film" provided by his play in the pro bowl has any meaning whatsoever.

I believe it COULD be a good idea and it COULD be something to take a look at in training camp and practice. The pro bowl might not match a typical football game but neither does practice, training camp, and even pre-season games, and that doesn't stop those situations from being useful in attempting to improve and prepare the team. If this move doesn't happen because we get real slot guy, ET just doesn't play it well enough to justify moving him from FS in any situation, or what have us, then fantastic! My problem is not the idea that maybe ET is better off doing what he's be doing, it's that we still have fans discounting the validity of unconventional thinking when that style of thinking is the very thing that allowed our current team to be built so well and so quickly.

It's not us discounting unconventional thinking, it's half thought out unconventional thinking. As I've posted at least twice in this thread, NOBODY has said who will fill Thomas' safety spot to a level where we can make the defense better by moving Thomas to the Nickel spot. Making the Nickel better alone doesn't make it a good idea. You have to make the whole defense better for it to be a good idea.

It doesn't matter who will replace ET at safety, that is irrelevant. In sports, its about being a team player and it isn't always about playing someone at their best suited position. If the net effect to the defense as a whole is positive, then its a good decision. Period.

EastCoastHawksFan wrote:During the Probowl Thomas was playing in the nickle slot during the second hald. He had a pick on the 2nd play of the game. This is what he had to say about it

"Hopefully, coach Carroll saw it and will let me play,” he said through a sly smile that was as good as a wink. “I wanted to put something on film, so coach Carroll can look at it and say, ‘OK, look what we’ve got. He can cover. He can play the slot.’ Maybe I’ll get some action out there.”

I've been preaching this all season! Maybe we can coach up Jeron Johnson to play the deep safety on 3rd downs.

Perfect World - We sign Ed Reed , 1st and second downs Kam will play closer to the LOS with Wright and Wagner as the only LB's on the field. 3rd downs Thomas on slot with Reed patroling the Slot! [b]imagine[/b]

This thread is silly, love how heated and serious dudes are getting on a hypothetical scenario. Keyword at the end of the OP. Can't we all just get along?!


I see no problem letting ET play slot every now and then, after all in the original quote he states "...maybe I'll get some action out there."


If there is a need for him on an important down to play nickel, say T3 or...ugh...Tru...are getting burned all game, and there's a crucial down...I say unleash him. Put some faith into his backup might be, and let him get some experience as well. If that doesn't work out, well the drawing board better be filled with solutions going into the following Monday, haha. I wouldn't read too much into it though, the Pro Bowl is worse than an exhibition...it's like looking into the NFL 15 years from now, if Roger keeps up his charades.


Personally, I'd keep him at FS and let the DBs and their coach get their act together.

Earl Thomas was a CB in high school that moved to Safety in college. At least that's what his profile at the University of Texas said. I remember seeing him line up as a corner here and there during his freshman year, but after that season, his All-American sophomore season was spent entirely at Safety. That's where he made his name in the NCAA and where he should stay in the NFL.

fridayfrenzy wrote:

kidhawk wrote:It's not us discounting unconventional thinking, it's half thought out unconventional thinking. As I've posted at least twice in this thread, NOBODY has said who will fill Thomas' safety spot to a level where we can make the defense better by moving Thomas to the Nickel spot. Making the Nickel better alone doesn't make it a good idea. You have to make the whole defense better for it to be a good idea.

It doesn't matter who will replace ET at safety, that is irrelevant. In sports, its about being a team player and it isn't always about playing someone at their best suited position. If the net effect to the defense as a whole is positive, then its a good decision. Period.

So you highlighted the section where I again ask who will fill Thomas' spot and you say it doesn't matter, then add the caveat "as long as it makes the defense as a whole better" the entire point some of us are making is that there is nobody on this team that can fill the safety spot like Thomas can, and that whomever they put there when Thomas would be filling the nickel slot would NOT make the defense better as a whole unit. Therefor, again I say that until someone can come up with the name of someone who can play Thomas' spot, then this whole idea is only half thought out and therefor useless.