gonzo1105 Posted May 9, 2006 Posted May 9, 2006 As a football coach the 3 technique lines up on the outside shoulder of the guard. The 3 technique is supposed to be a really quick kid who penetrates the B gap in the offensive line. His job is too blow up the play as quickly as possible with speed into the backfield. The 1 technique or the Nose tackle lines up on the inside shoulder of the guard. He tends to be a bigger guy. A guy who can plug up the middle a little bit but also good enough to defeat two guy the center and the guard if need be. He usually holds up at the point of attack and tied up blockers so the MLB who has control of the strongside A gap can make as many plays as possible. Obviously this differs in the Tampa 2 as the 1 or Nose would be smaller but still bigger then the 3 and is also looking to get in the backfield. The 3 technique always lines up to the strongside or the strength of the formation while the nose or 1 technique lines up to the weakside of the offensive formation. Just thought I'd give ya a little football 101
Jon in Pasadena Posted May 9, 2006 Posted May 9, 2006 This article does a decent job of explaining: http://football.calsci.com/Positions8.html 687329[/snapback] I know the guy who runs that site. Smart dude. Interpersonal skills somewhat lacking, however.
The Dean Posted May 9, 2006 Posted May 9, 2006 I know the guy who runs that site. Smart dude. Interpersonal skills somewhat lacking, however. 687599[/snapback] Crap Throwing Monkey? I KILL me.
gobillsinytown Posted May 9, 2006 Posted May 9, 2006 From the site, which is awesome: "Sometimes instead of the safeties dividing up their jobs in terms of run support and pass support, instead the safeties will divide up the field into a left half and a right half, and each will be responsible for anything that comes into his half of the field. This type of division of responsibility is becoming more and more common, and is called a "cover-2" defense." Now we know why they drafted so heavily toward Saftey/DB. That's a lot of ground to cover, so you need players fast enough to do it, and big enough to handle the run support.
Pyrite Gal Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 As a football coach the 3 technique lines up on the outside shoulder of the guard. The 3 technique is supposed to be a really quick kid who penetrates the B gap in the offensive line. His job is too blow up the play as quickly as possible with speed into the backfield. The 1 technique or the Nose tackle lines up on the inside shoulder of the guard. He tends to be a bigger guy. A guy who can plug up the middle a little bit but also good enough to defeat two guy the center and the guard if need be. He usually holds up at the point of attack and tied up blockers so the MLB who has control of the strongside A gap can make as many plays as possible. Obviously this differs in the Tampa 2 as the 1 or Nose would be smaller but still bigger then the 3 and is also looking to get in the backfield. The 3 technique always lines up to the strongside or the strength of the formation while the nose or 1 technique lines up to the weakside of the offensive formation. Just thought I'd give ya a little football 101 687573[/snapback] This sounds like a good theory to me. However, theory is certainly what one has before reality sets in and if the theory is a bad one or is beaten reality can turn out to be a bad thing. The thing which interests me regarding the little we know about how the Bills 06 D will operate is that I agree with the cliche often quoted by Marv that this game starts with running and being able to stop the run. If you fail in either area your team is proably in for a world of hurt. The Cover 2 is a good version of an essential switch we need to make as tape had allowed the NFL to catch up with the zone blitz as we employed it. I expect we will have some initial success with the Cover 2 switch if only because there will be no film on it and our tendencies will not be clear for a while. However, my main fear as we go back to a D whose bend but don't break tendencies will likely drive TSW folks crazy is that it is unclear to me how well we will do at stopping the run.. Folks are making a variety of assumptions about how the 06 Bills will like up and play based on Jauron's tendencies with the Bears and knowledge of the classic Cover 2 gleaned from websites like football 101. All of us fans (including me love throwing out phrases likw 3 technique and Tampa 2 to pretend we know more than we do (if we really did then likely someone would pay us for our knowledge or we would make a living winning bets and thus would not share knowledge with potential marks on TSW). Actually, if our cover 2 is alot like what Jauron has used traditionally which opponents long ago caught up with leading to Jauron gettin canned then we will be lost. I expect the way the Bills line up on D and employ our cover 2 in 06 will be quite different from classic models or what Jauron did in Chicago. We have the opportunity to merge Jauron's knowledge of the cover 2 with Fewell's knowlefge of the Tampa 2 with a dash of Marv knowledge on top of it to come up with a D which will need to be very different from the classic models sited if we are successful.' If this works the 06 Bills D like the Tampa 2 or the 46 will deserve and get its own name. As best as I can tell at this too early date, what will mark the Buffalo D an its implementation will be that just like Denver developed a way to run effectively with seemingly underweight OL players, Jauron seems to want to run the cover 2 effectively with a full set of underweight 3 technique DTs and with DEs who excelled in a zone blitz where they were athletic and underweight enough to do pass coverage, I can see theoretically how this will be devastating against the pass as our quick penetrating DTs and our white guys with motors at DE blow up plays, pressure and sack the QB. However, what I do not see is how these undersize guys (the heaviest of our top 4 DTs is Anderson at 304 and both Denny and Schoble excelled at the zone blitz because they could pass cover not only short but even in the medium zone) are gonna stop the run. I'm sire with diligence and great attitude they can do it, but against a good OL with player capable of neutralizing the penetration of a Triplett or McCargo, our DCs are gonna have to cover for a long long time. We will see.
gonzo1105 Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 i understand what you mean about lighter guys not being able to stop the run, but stopping the run is not solely based on how big guys are. Teams with great team speed on defense dont necessarily need to have big run pluggers because they are so quick that they swarm to the football and bring down the ball carrier with 5 or 6 people. Football is not just about playing with the biggest guys. As a coach i've seen many young men who can bench press 400 pounds or so and weigh about 270 but do not even come close using those strength numbers on the field. What they say about heart and passion is not just a cliche in the game of football. The man who wants it more will almost all the time win out in the game of football. These 305 pound DT's that your worried about if they have a strong will and passion and use the power they have on the field can get excellent leverage against o-lineman and be a much more disruptive force than a 340 pound guy who is told to basically not move. As for the cover 2 of course its not just a base cover 2 all the time. Technically the cover 2 requires bigger CB's who may not have top line speed but are very physical corners. The safeties dont need to be big guys in a cover 2 but they have to have great team speed and need to be able to fly up in the alleyways to support the run when need be. In the cover 2 a CB will tend to be in the face of the WR with an outside leverage(outside of the WR). They will run with the WR most of the times for 10 yards or so and then come back to the flat usually occupied by LB's in most defenses. The reason why the Corners play outside of the WR in the press is because the CB's want to funnel everything back inside. By doing this it makes the job on the safeties much easier. If a WR were to get outside of the CB say on a fly route(straight down the field), it would be a much much longer run for the safety and the chances of getting there in time are slim. In a base cover 2 the safeties have each half of the field. Most of the time the safeties will line up inside the hashes and then run to the outside. Try to visualize it in ur head because its hard without a picture. If u visualized it right, you would probably be thinking well wow then the whole middle of the field should be wide open. This is where offenses usually try to pick apart a cover 2 defense. This is why you hear so much that the cover 2 has to have a smaller yet athletic MLB. This is because the MLB is responsible for getting a deep drop into pass coverage and they have to get a good 20 yards back to cover the middle of the field. Without an athletic MLB this defense doesn't work. Now obviously not all cover 2 defenses are like this. You can play a press or a soft cover 2(playing off the WR). You can play man to man on one side of the field and still play a cover 2 on the other. There are many different variations. Bills fans are so used to seeing bigger more stout defenses to stop the run which is probably why most go well if we dont have a big DT we can't stop the run but that can't be further from the truth. A team, even if smaller, if they fly to the football can easily stop the run just as or more successfully then a bigger defense. I believe the cover 2 will eventually be a good defense here but be patient you need the right talent to run it and we may not have it right now.
The Dean Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 i understand what you mean about lighter guys not being able to stop the run, but stopping the run is not solely based on how big guys are. Teams with great team speed on defense dont necessarily need to have big run pluggers because they are so quick that they swarm to the football and bring down the ball carrier with 5 or 6 people. Football is not just about playing with the biggest guys. As a coach i've seen many young men who can bench press 400 pounds or so and weigh about 270 but do not even come close using those strength numbers on the field. What they say about heart and passion is not just a cliche in the game of football. The man who wants it more will almost all the time win out in the game of football. These 305 pound DT's that your worried about if they have a strong will and passion and use the power they have on the field can get excellent leverage against o-lineman and be a much more disruptive force than a 340 pound guy who is told to basically not move. As for the cover 2 of course its not just a base cover 2 all the time. Technically the cover 2 requires bigger CB's who may not have top line speed but are very physical corners. The safeties dont need to be big guys in a cover 2 but they have to have great team speed and need to be able to fly up in the alleyways to support the run when need be. In the cover 2 a CB will tend to be in the face of the WR with an outside leverage(outside of the WR). They will run with the WR most of the times for 10 yards or so and then come back to the flat usually occupied by LB's in most defenses. The reason why the Corners play outside of the WR in the press is because the CB's want to funnel everything back inside. By doing this it makes the job on the safeties much easier. If a WR were to get outside of the CB say on a fly route(straight down the field), it would be a much much longer run for the safety and the chances of getting there in time are slim. In a base cover 2 the safeties have each half of the field. Most of the time the safeties will line up inside the hashes and then run to the outside. Try to visualize it in ur head because its hard without a picture. If u visualized it right, you would probably be thinking well wow then the whole middle of the field should be wide open. This is where offenses usually try to pick apart a cover 2 defense. This is why you hear so much that the cover 2 has to have a smaller yet athletic MLB. This is because the MLB is responsible for getting a deep drop into pass coverage and they have to get a good 20 yards back to cover the middle of the field. Without an athletic MLB this defense doesn't work. Now obviously not all cover 2 defenses are like this. You can play a press or a soft cover 2(playing off the WR). You can play man to man on one side of the field and still play a cover 2 on the other. There are many different variations. Bills fans are so used to seeing bigger more stout defenses to stop the run which is probably why most go well if we dont have a big DT we can't stop the run but that can't be further from the truth. A team, even if smaller, if they fly to the football can easily stop the run just as or more successfully then a bigger defense. I believe the cover 2 will eventually be a good defense here but be patient you need the right talent to run it and we may not have it right now. 687811[/snapback] whitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespace whitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespace whitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespace whitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespace whitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespacewhitespace whitespace white space white space
Cal Bill's Fan Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 Maybe a zone blitz using our DEs as LBs? kind of like a 3-4 but in this case to get pressure on the running game? I do worry about cold weather = running game, with smallish DL we lose.
Pyrite Gal Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 i understand what you mean about lighter guys not being able to stop the run, but stopping the run is not solely based on how big guys are. 687811[/snapback] Thanks for the thoughtful and full response (though even as one who generally pours stuff out to think things through I agree with Dean that though my lack of proofreading makes my stuff a tough read, your lack of formatting and white space probably is even tougher its yoo bad since your content is an interesting read). Your description sounds a bit more like the Tampa 2 rather than the traditional Cover 2 as my understanding of the difference is that the Tampa 2 improved on results by introducing the MLB into the deeper pass coverage. In the classic Cover 2, the two are the safeties who divide the centerfielder role of the deep zones into two halves. The introduction of the MLB into the mix divides the field into thirds rather than halves and takes a lot of pressure off the safeties who now have much field to cover. I think Jauron's employment of this D style will actually prove to be a challenge for commentary on TSW as proper use of this D style (though we will need to see what variants on the classic cover 2 or the Tampa 2 we employ) actually will challenge a few pieces of conventional wisdom on this board and challenge some false conclusions posters have drawn, For example: 1. Some folks claim that Vincent is about to be or should be cut when actually he is likely far more valuable to the Bills now with the Cover 2. This conclusion will likely only turn out to be true if TV suddenly hits the wall because he is older or falls in the shower and a muscle pull from this heals slowly. Actually the shift from zone blitz to the cover 2 may even add to the length of his career. TV played FS in the zone blits and admirably tied for the team leads in INTs and FRs. However, the zone blitz did not play to his strengths which were as a CN cover guy which got him deserved Pro Bowl berths. With the switch to the cover 2, the new D plays to TV stengths as he now will be primarily called upon to be a centerfielder ball hawk which are the talents that earned him acclaim in his youth and led to him leading the team in combined turnovers. Even better for TV, he will be called upon as a safety to provide some run support amd one of the things which comes with his age is that he has seen a lot of football and correct diagnosis will be his forte. A third item which makes him even more important to the Bills is that he is a bright guy (he organized a bunch of NFL players including TKO to attend business management courses at an Ivy league school. He was voted Pres of the NFLPA by his peers. With us drafting folks like Whitner, Yobouty, and Simpson teaching DBs will be critical for the Bills and TV will be an on field teacher to these youngsters. I'm certain he has lost a step or two from his youth, but given that he was speedy enough to cover the other team's #1 WR at Pro Bowl levels as a youth and that the demands for speed on him are lower at safety than CB he has a step or two he can lose and still be adequate. TV has far less cap savings from cutting him than Milloy or most players and I think the conventional wisdom he is done is probably completely wrong. In fact it will not surprise me if barring the nicks of age related injury he leads the Bills in INTs this year. 2. A couple of folks have posted on TSW that Fletcher cannot pass cover. Again this observation does not strike me as correct and I think our use of the Cover 2 as you describe it will show why. The rap on Fletcher is that he is a bit undersized, and though true he easily makes up for this with monility and football intelligence. Think about what does Fletcher do or have that has allowed him to be credited with more tackles over the last 5 years than any other player in the NFL. Folks looking to retire him and replace him need to recognize and acknowledge that he led the Bills in tackles credited to him on the Bills (yet again) by a longshot. I find it amusing that some posters have grown to whine about Fletcher tackling folks 5 yards downfield, since these tackles have not come with Fletcher hitting folks at the LOS and being dragged for a massive gain, him hitting guys well behind the LOS says more about our DTs getting blocked out of the way or not staying home so an RN runs straight through to Fletcher. Even though NFL credited tackles are an inexact science at best, he consistently gets credited and this is not a bad thing. He is the captain of the D for a reason and it is Fletcher who routinely when their is a controversy seems to immediatelt grasp the situation and is there making arguments after the play. Just as I expect one of the strongest parts of our Cover 2 to be TV making vet judgments, I expect Fletcher to do the same in his pivotal MLB role in the cover 2. 3. Some posters have stated before the draft that Ngota was a one gap DT who did not fit our D scheme or that Trips and Mccargo both play the same style so only one of them will be on the field at a time. My onloy response is what is the Bills 06 D scheme and how will it be implemented. All we know is that we are giving up the zone blitz for the cover 2, but thats about it. We won't really know the nature of the Bills D scheme until we see it so all thse stone cold locl pronouncements may be right but are probably wrong until we see how the scheme will be implemented. My sense is that given that our top 4 DTs max out at 304 lbs with Anderson (a good motor but not a run stuffer the last two years in my recollection) that in fact all four may be best utilized as 3 technique form and rather than a rigid addiction to a particular DT role Jauron is going to put his best 2 DTs on the field. I hope that McCargo will merit us trading up for his his first round choice that both he and Trips will prove to be our two best DTs and will often be on the field toggether at crunch time. The whole thing will be fascinating.
AKC Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 This article does a decent job of explaining: http://football.calsci.com/Positions8.html 687329[/snapback] And this might serve as a "Powerful" addendum ;-) DTs
nick in* england Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 Thanks. So, a 3 technique guy can be trapped until his ears bleed. 687340[/snapback] Yup!! My team does this all the time.
nick in* england Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 thanks, i just learned a lot. but i dont see how a team can have 2 "3-tech" guys on the field together. (tripplett and McCargo). both would be lined up on the outside sholder of the OGs. on a run play the C would not be touched untill he hit a linebacker. 687484[/snapback] It's all down to defensive formations and what you are trying to defend against primarily. On Passing downs, for example you may choose to rush the edge of the pocket from 3techs and 5/6 techs: hence 2 3tech DTs on the field. It looks like the cover 2 we will run is going to be a strong side overloaded D, the 1tech playing weakside and the 3 tech on the strong side. You can shift to an under - flipping the 1 to the SS and 3 to the WS but this would mean shuffling LBs and the SS into stronger run support positions... In truth there will be so many formations and packages none of this is rote - it's just the base package that it all starts from. You vary from your base...
nick in* england Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 Actually - one more thing... If you want to get into the weeds of it - you might expand the numbering system as explained in this article and in this explanation of the derivation of the 'technique' approach to defensive alignments: technique definition When he was a high school coach, Bum Phillips invented a clever way of numbering the alignment of defensive linemen. Bear Bryant is often given credit for this incorrectly. How do I know this? Bear Bryant told me on page 29 of his book Building a Championship Football Team. I must add that many football coaches garble his system by assigning slightly different numbering, probably unknowingly. I will also add that there was a lot more to Bum Phillips’ system than just alignment numbering. He had the linebackers on each side call out numerical alignments for the defenders on their side before every play. Certain combinations were forbidden as unsound. Each change in the defensive line configuration required a complimentary change in the alignment of the linebackers behind them. The best explanation of the system is in Bryant’s above-mentioned book. I think it is cumbersome terminology. The word “technique” suggests a way of battling with an offensive lineman. But it’s just where the defender aligns in relation to the offensive linemen before the snap. Some coaches other than Phillips also add a zero to the number to indicate that it refers to the alignment of a linebacker. In most systems, a 0 technique would mean a nose tackle aligned nose-to-nose with a center. A 00 technique would mean a linebacker lined up nose-to-nose with the center, only several yards off the line of scrimmage. Because there are more than ten possible alignments, Phillips screwed up using numbers instead of letters. Had he used letters, every conceivable alignment could have been covered by a universal version of this way of identifying defensive line alignments. Since the letters A through D are already used for gap identification, I would identify the various shades starting with E and I suggest the following improved terminology: Alpha = A gap Bravo = B gap Charlie = C gap Delta = D gap (just outside shoulder of tight end Echo = nose of center Echo strong = strong shoulder of center Echo weak =weak shoulder of center Foxtrot = inside shoulder of guard Golf = nose of guard Hotel = outside shoulder of guard India = inside shoulder of tackle Juliet = nose of tackle Kilo = outside shoulder of tackle Lima = inside shoulder of tight end Mike = nose of tight end November = outside shoulder of tight end I am using the phonetic alphabet (alpha, bravo, charlie,…) instead of just the letters (a, b, c,…) for the same reason the military and others do: to prevent confusion between letters that sound similar like B and D. I prefer the words “strong” and “weak” to “positive” and “negative” to designate strong or weak sides because of fewer syllables and because there is no need to invent additional words for strong and weak. 1 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 1 technique was in the middle of the A gap. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. For example, at Monte Vista High School in Danville, CA where I coached from 2003 to 2005, a 1 technique meant that the nose of the defensive lineman was on the inside shoulder of the offensive guard. Furthermore, the strong-side techniques were referred to as “positive” while the weak-side techniques were referred to as “negative.” For example, a positive 1 technique meant a defensive lineman who was aligned with his nose on the inside shoulder of the strong-side offensive guard. 2 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 2 technique was nose-to-nose with the offensive guard. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. For example, some coaches refer to the strong-side techniques as “positive” while the weak-side techniques “negative.” See the discussion under 1 technique above. definition 3 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 3 technique was in the middle of the B gap. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. For example, at Monte Vista High School in Danville, CA where I coached from 2003 to 2005, a 3 technique meant that the nose of the defensive lineman was on the outside shoulder of the offensive guard. definition 4 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 4 technique was nose-to-nose with the offensive tackle. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. For example, at Monte Vista High School in Danville, CA where I coached from 2003 to 2005, a 4 technique meant that the nose of the defensive lineman was on the inside shoulder of the offensive tackle. definition 4i technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, there was no 4i, however many coaches wanted to align there so they invented the 4i terminology. A 4i technique usually means that the nose of the defensive lineman is aligned on the inside shoulder of the offensive tackle. definition 5 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 5 technique meant that the defensive lineman had his nose on the outside shoulder of the offensive tackle. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. For example, at Monte Vista High School in Danville, CA where I coached from 2003 to 2005, a 5 technique meant that the defensive lineman was nose-to-nose with the offensive tackle. definition 6 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 6 technique was nose-to-nose with the offensive tight end. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. For example, at Monte Vista High School in Danville, CA where I coached from 2003 to 2005, a 6 technique meant that the nose of the defensive lineman was on the outside shoulder of the offensive tackle. definition 7 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 6 technique meant the defensive lineman had his nose on the inside shoulder of the offensive tight end. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. For example, at Monte Vista High School in Danville, CA where I coached from 2003 to 2005, a 7 technique meant that the nose of the defensive lineman was on the outside shoulder of the offensive tight end. definition 8 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 8 technique meant that the defensive lineman was aligned on air outside the outside shoulder of the offensive tight end. Some coaches make slight, but important-to-understand, changes while seemingly using the same terminology. definition 9 technique definition position where defensive lineman is located before the snap. In the original Bum Phillips’ version (See definition of 0 technique above) of this terminology, a 9 technique meant that the defensive lineman has his nose on the outside shoulder of the offensive tight end. definition 10 technique definition same as 1 technique only at linebacker depth 20 technique definition same as 2 technique only at linebacker depth 30 technique definition same as 3 technique only at linebacker depth 40 technique definition same as 4 technique only at linebacker depth 50 technique definition same as 5 technique only at linebacker depth 60 technique definition same as 6 technique only at linebacker depth 70 technique definition same as 7 technique only at linebacker depth 80 technique definition same as 8 technique only at linebacker depth 90 technique definition same as 9 technique only at linebacker depth
LynchMob23 Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 For everyone who think this defense won't work against the cold and the run-game of the AFC East think about this: when Dungy assembled this defense, it wasn't predicated on where you play it, but on how you play it. Here's his 98/99 Playbook if you want to take a gander at it: http://mav.homeftp.net:5080/GP/defense/Oth...s%20Defense.pdf The key to me is the 5th point of the Defense as he sees it: Quickness. "The quicker the defense, the harder it is for the offensive team to score. it only makes sense if your defense has overall team quickness the better the opportunity to swarm and gang tackle. The best of both worlds is size and quickness but if something has to give, take the quickness. What is more important than size is strength and that is why your weight program is important".
obie_wan Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 However, my main fear as we go back to a D whose bend but don't break tendencies will likely drive TSW folks crazy is that it is unclear to me how well we will do at stopping the run.. 687724[/snapback] How can you possibly say this will be a bend but don't break philosphy? Thw whole emphasis of the D is speed which will be used to disrupt plays in the backfield. Speed to play press coverage. Speed to blitz fropm every angle. This will be an attacking defense desinged to produce take aways. Your mind must be mush from writng too much swill.
OnTheRocks Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 You new here? His stories are usually (almost always) pretty good and worth the read. 687555[/snapback]
The Dean Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 And this might serve as a "Powerful" addendum ;-) DTs 687860[/snapback] Very nice.
OnTheRocks Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 688170[/snapback] My was because I think the proper pronoun there would have been "her"...... no?
The Dean Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 My was because I think the proper pronoun there would have been "her"...... no? 688256[/snapback] Well, no. As I'm sure you know by now, Pyrite Gal=Fake Fat Sunny=Barry Brady=Dik Smub=Yvel Vram
Recommended Posts