Coach Tuesday Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 (edited) Based on pre-draft visits, it's clear that safety is a position they're targeting in this draft, perhaps with a high pick. They may even take two of them. They've had (or will have) 3-4 safeties in for pre-draft visits, including Vaccaro who is projected to go as high as Round 1. That leads me to think they may even take a safety with their second round pick (or with a first round pick if they trade down). Before you all freak out, consider this write-up of the Jets' defense from Football Outsiders (via ESPN.com). It makes clear that safety is perhaps the most important position in Rex Ryan's defense (which is also Pettine's defense). This would also explain why they jettisoned Wilson and re-signed the versatile Bryan Scott. (Note: I only excerpted a portion of the article). http://insider.espn....steelers-others New York Jets Pillar need: safety You look at New York's defense right now and alarms sound when your eye spots the holes at outside linebacker. Aside from journeyman backup Antwan Barnes, not a single Jet has meaningful NFL experience at this position. No coach, including Rex Ryan, can run a 3-4 scheme with lousy outside linebackers. Perhaps more troublesome, though, is New York's situation at safety. Right now, penciled in to start are last year's sixth-round pick, Josh Bush, and seventh-rounder Antonio Allen. Needless to say, the depth behind these unknowns is iffy. There's a general -- and not erroneous -- belief that outside linebackers, particularly in a 3-4, are more important than safeties. After all, linebackers are always near the ball, while safeties are usually 20 yards back in center field. But in Ryan's scheme, which is defined by its third-down pressure packages, things are a little different. The mission with the pressure packages is to send an unexpected combination of rushers at the quarterback as quickly as possible. Often this means blitzing a safety and having a slower linebacker drop into coverage. The focus is not necessarily on getting sacks, but on making the quarterback play fast. Fast quarterbacking leads to turnovers and incompletions. Indeed, in 2009, when the Jets reached the AFC Championship Game, their defense ranked tied for 18th in total sacks but first in opponent completion percentage. When they repeated the feat the next year, the defense ranked tied for eighth in total sacks and first again in opponent completion percentage. Ryan's sub packages often feature three safeties, all of whom need to be fast and versatile enough to blitz, play man coverage and tackle in space or in traffic. As it stands, the Jets have no safeties who have proved themselves in this fashion. This isn't to say Ryan and new GM John Idzik will take a safety in the first or second round. They know it's much easier to find value at that position in the middle rounds, while value at edge-rusher is usually found mostly in the early rounds. But if they do reach for a safety, it would make perfect sense. The paucity of talent on their roster at this key spot has to be troubling to them. Edited April 5, 2013 by Coach Tuesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brainiac21 Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 pffftt... i said that like 4 days ago. but that was more b/c Bills always do something so unexpected with at least one of top 3 picks. we do need one, but Buddy said it was a deep draft for safeties... tending to think they'll wait until the 4th or so. but there i go applying logic to the Bills again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missthe kgun Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Tell me again...Why we need a Safety??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Doug Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Tell me again...Why we need a Safety??? Byrd's replacement, duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 What? Not a punter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 5, 2013 Author Share Posted April 5, 2013 I was trying to ignite a football discussion here, but I seem to have attracted the Walkers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Tell me again...Why we need a Safety??? Well, we might not. But the JESTS and Pittsburg do according to the quoted article by the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 I disagree, respectfully. I think they really do think Searcy could be the answer but they are looking at some day 3 guys now for competition. The guys they are looking at appear to be 4th-6th round talents, which I'm completely cool with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 5, 2013 Author Share Posted April 5, 2013 I disagree, respectfully. I think they really do think Searcy could be the answer but they are looking at some day 3 guys now for competition. The guys they are looking at appear to be 4th-6th round talents, which I'm completely cool with. Kenny Vaccaro is expected to go in Round 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brainiac21 Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Tell me again...Why we need a Safety??? Pettine played with 3 safeties on field in the past, which means you need 4 on the roster. we only have 2 true safeties... Scott is considered a LB and Williams still a CB. maybe you move/use one as S. but it might be risky to have 2 of your safeties not used to playing there? plus your best and only proven starter unsigned beyond this year, and another never the starter before? i think they add one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Tell me again...Why we need a Safety??? because who is playing SS? all the eggs going in the searcy basket? it was also rumored pretty heavy into draft day that we would have liked to have gotten barron. add a DC that likes strong safety play and i could see it being an early pick. im not saying its going to happen, but i wouldnt be surprised at all if it did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8-8 Forever? Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 because who is playing SS? all the eggs going in the searcy basket? it was also rumored pretty heavy into draft day that we would have liked to have gotten barron. add a DC that likes strong safety play and i could see it being an early pick. im not saying its going to happen, but i wouldnt be surprised at all if it did. As long as we don't draft a WR #1, I am good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jr1 Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Bacarri Rambo from Georgia would satisfy the cool name requirement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcbillsfan Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 I bet he uses Williams at safety Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 FWIW, the Bills website has Ron Brooks listed as SS. I'm not sure how they had him listed last season, but that's where he is now. That being said, I can still see them drafting a Safety in a later round, or draft a CB and move Williams to Safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 A safety at #8 would really hurt my feelings. I mean it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 FWIW, the Bills website has Ron Brooks listed as SS. I'm not sure how they had him listed last season, but that's where he is now. That being said, I can still see them drafting a Safety in a later round, or draft a CB and move Williams to Safety. i dont think our 4th round corner that missed a bunch of his rookie season will preclude us from taking a safety early if they see a guy they want. i still dont know that its a position they will aggressively target but there is nothing about our roster making it off limits in the first round or two (assuming we dont have a shot at "our guy" at qb) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 i dont think our 4th round corner that missed a bunch of his rookie season will preclude us from taking a safety early if they see a guy they want. i still dont know that its a position they will aggressively target but there is nothing about our roster making it off limits in the first round or two (assuming we dont have a shot at "our guy" at qb) Well, it seems as though that could be said for a number of positions on this team right now (WR, TE, LB, QB, OL, not in any particular order). It will be very interesting to see what the new staff thinks by the way they draft. I think Brooks will be good at Safety - giving them 3 right now. He came out as a safety. It seems as though he has good ability to make an interception, and he also appears to like to hit by what I saw on special teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 A safety at #8 would really hurt my feelings. I mean it. It would be very hurtful. Very, very hurtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckeyeBill Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 Really need to take the BPA regardless of position in round one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts