Earl Thomas and his Brilliant solution.

[BirdsCommaAngry]

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.

 

[kidhawk]

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.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

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.

 

[kidhawk]

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.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

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. :roll:

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?

 

[kidhawk]

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?

 

[fridayfrenzy]

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.

 

[SouthSoundHawk]

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] :thirishdrinkers:

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?! :mrgreen:


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.

 

[Zowert]

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.

 

[kidhawk]

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.

 

[Basis4day]

It does when your talking about an all-pro. Our defense is better with ET playing his native position at FS, period. Our defense is better with Richard Sherman playing outside CB, period.

It's easier to find a CB to play nickel, than to find another safety that can do what ET does. We get burned in the slot because ET, Sherm and Browner have their areas locked down. Every team has a weak spot.

And to quote Jon Schneider: "We usually try not to move Pro Bowl players to different positions". And we're talking All-Pro here.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

If they did replace ET in those situations, I really don't care who it is as long as he's a DB with potential who had competition for the position and there's a net benefit in our teams ability to cover. If ET can cover the slot in man, it puts him in a position to deceive our opponents with what he's going to do at the line of scrimmage, like giving the appearance of a mismatch when there isn't one, producing a corner blitz, etc.

 

[Scottemojo]

Earl Thomas had a pick in each playoff game from the safety spot. He isn't going anywhere.

But...his words put all on notice that he is well aware Triple OG isn't getting the slot job done, and needs to be replaced.

 

[Basis4day]

If they did replace ET in those situations, I really don't care who it is as long as he's a DB with potential who had competition for the position and there's a net benefit in our teams ability to cover. If ET can cover the slot in man, it puts him in a position to deceive our opponents with what he's going to do at the line of scrimmage, like giving the appearance of a mismatch when there isn't one, producing a corner blitz, etc.

Why can't we find your hypothetical DB with potential to play nickel corner? How is that not simpler or easier or more logical?

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

It does when your talking about an all-pro. Our defense is better with ET playing his native position at FS, period. Our defense is better with Richard Sherman playing outside CB, period.

It's easier to find a CB to play nickel, than to find another safety that can do what ET does. We get burned in the slot because ET, Sherm and Browner have their areas locked down. Every team has a weak spot.

And to quote Jon Schneider: "We usually try not to move Pro Bowl players to different positions". And we're talking All-Pro here.

That Schneider quote is referring to full-time position changes, which is another topic and even within that topic he doesn't completely rule out the possibility of moving a player. By your absolute logic, teams are foolish for moving players around in any fashion, and Jared Allen has no business lining up at RDE, Carlos Rodgers and Revis have no business moving inside to cover Welker, and under no circumstance should an offensive coordinator include plays that call for an unbalanced line or putting a TE like Zach Miller in at HB (which absolutely killed WASH btw).

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Why can't we find your hypothetical DB with potential to play nickel corner? How is that not simpler or easier or more logical?

We can but moving ET around may prove to be better (even if only in certain match-ups), and it's not about simple, easy, or subjective ideas pertaining to logic; it's about what's best for the team.

 

[Basis4day]

It does when your talking about an all-pro. Our defense is better with ET playing his native position at FS, period. Our defense is better with Richard Sherman playing outside CB, period.

It's easier to find a CB to play nickel, than to find another safety that can do what ET does. We get burned in the slot because ET, Sherm and Browner have their areas locked down. Every team has a weak spot.

And to quote Jon Schneider: "We usually try not to move Pro Bowl players to different positions". And we're talking All-Pro here.

That Schneider quote is referring to full-time position changes, which is another topic and even within that topic he doesn't completely rule out the possibility of moving a player. By your absolute logic, teams are foolish for moving players around in any fashion, and Jared Allen has no business lining up at RDE, Carlos Rodgers and Revis have no business moving inside to cover Welker, and under no circumstance should an offensive coordinator include plays that call for an unbalanced line or putting a TE like Zach Miller in at HB (which absolutely killed WASH btw).

No, what i am saying is that our entire defensive philosophy is based around ET playing the free roaming FS which is he. His centerfield coverage skills are what allow our other defensive backs like Kam and Browner to be effective.

We have the FS position set, covered, end of story. What isn't settled is the nickel corner. Find me a DB to play nickel corner and don't offer ET as a solution. We need a permanent solution to upgrade nickel corner from Trufant, not a situational solution.

 

[Basis4day]

Why can't we find your hypothetical DB with potential to play nickel corner? How is that not simpler or easier or more logical?

We can but moving ET around may prove to be better (even if only in certain match-ups), and it's not about simple, easy, or subjective ideas pertaining to logic; it's about what's best for the team.

Whats best for our team is finding a 1st string nickel corner. Hopefully one that doesn't involved situational rotation of our starters.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

No, what i am saying is that our entire defensive philosophy is based around ET playing the free roaming FS which is he. His centerfield coverage skills are what allow our other defensive backs like Kam and Browner to be effective.

We have the FS position set, covered, end of story. What isn't settled is the nickel corner. Find me a DB to play nickel corner and don't offer ET as a solution. We need a permanent solution to upgrade nickel corner from Trufant, not a situational solution.

No, a large chunk of our defensive philosophy is based around ET's versatility. You cite his more typical role of being a roaming, deep safety, but one of the more dominant reasons why ET gets the honors he does is his ability to get after RBs and make all those other plays that most safeties don't. Most importantly, he knows when and where to put himself beyond of his typical role with remarkable consistency. He's a master of calculated risks.

Whats best for our team is finding a 1st string nickel corner. Hopefully one that doesn't involved situational rotation of our starters.

What's best for the team is overall improvement. Finding a better nickel back would suit this but we can do much more beyond this in preparation for events with this new nickel back like him sucking worse than Trufant, getting completely outmatched against certain players, getting injured, or if we want to give our opponents more and more to prepare for when facing us, or we want another trick up our sleeve for key situations. Get the picture?

 

[kidhawk]

With our current roster, we are a better defense with Thomas at Safety and Trufant at Nickel than we are with Thomas at Nickel and anyone else at that safety spot. Now, we may not even have Trufant next year, and I'm sure JS and PC are looking to fill that role, be it through Thurmond (god I wish he'd stay healthy) or a second tier free agent pickup, or perhaps through better overall depth allowing for us to move someone else from backup corner to Nickelback. Any of these options seem far better and more likely than situationally moving Thomas and weakening our defense as a whole.