We MUST have Speed at DT

[Dibs]

Here's the recap.

 

1. Buffalo is not good at run defense.

2. Buffalo likes penetrating DT's.

3. The best run defenses usually have a P. Williams type anchor

4. That type of player is not a penetrating DT 

5. Buffalo should not restrict themselves with who they go after at DT, because of the system.

802456[/snapback]

1. Last year we were 31st in the league with bigger DTs. So far this season(keeping in mind new scheme & rookies) we are 19th & improving.

2. Yes.

3. Often....but often not. The 3-4 will certainly want a big guy in the middle but in the 4-3 it's basically down to ability.

Last season

Seattle #5 with Bernard(293) & Darby(298)

Tampa Bay #6 with Hovan(298) & McFarland(300)

Arizona #10 with Dockett(293) & Davis(306)

Chicago #11 with Harris(300) & Scott(305)

4. Generally yes, but Adams(in his prime) was certainly a penetrating DT at 350....they can be found & you are only assuming that DJ is basing player selection on weight rather than ability/performance.

5. This is really the crux of your argument. When a team(Buffalo in the past) goes to a 3-4 defence, they are restricting themselves the other way....i.e. in the 3-4, a wide-body is required to run it effectively. A west-coast offence requires certain abilities pass catching from it's FB, TE & RB to be effective. The 'ball control' offence requires a smash-mouth type RB rather than a nifty sort. Jerry Greys defence required a lot of man coverage ability by the CBs where-as a cover2 or tampa2 not so much.

Every system has 'requirements' from certain positions which if met, help the system to excel.....i.e. in the tampa2, the SS position is far more important than other defensive schemes.

We should not restrict the potential of a system by trying to waste athletic ability by using it incorrectly.

It seems to me you are still smouldering over us not getting N'Gata.

[Mikie2times]

1. Last year we were 31st in the league with bigger DTs.  So far this season(keeping in mind new scheme & rookies) we are 19th & improving.

2. Yes.

3. Often....but often not.  The 3-4 will certainly want a big guy in the middle but in the 4-3 it's basically down to ability.

Last season

Seattle #5 with Bernard(293) & Darby(298)

Tampa Bay #6 with Hovan(298) & McFarland(300)

Arizona #10 with Dockett(293) & Davis(306)

Chicago #11 with Harris(300) & Scott(305)

4. Generally yes, but Adams(in his prime) was certainly a penetrating DT at 350....they can be found & you are only assuming that DJ is basing player selection on weight rather than ability/performance.

5. This is really the crux of your argument.  When a team(Buffalo in the past) goes to a 3-4 defence, they are restricting themselves the other way....i.e. in the 3-4, a wide-body is required to run it effectively.  A west-coast offence requires certain abilities pass catching from it's FB, TE & RB to be effective.  The 'ball control' offence requires a smash-mouth type RB rather than a nifty sort.  Jerry Greys defence required a lot of man coverage ability by the CBs where-as a cover2 or tampa2 not so much.

Every system has 'requirements' from certain positions which if met, help the system to excel.....i.e. in the tampa2, the SS position is far more important than other defensive schemes. 

We should not restrict the potential of a system by trying to waste athletic ability by using it incorrectly. 

It seems to me you are still smouldering over us not getting N'Gata.

802465[/snapback]

1. I'm not arguing size as much as style

3. I noticed the 5th, 6th, 10th, and 11th teams. I wonder how many of the others fit this trend. Probably few, but for arguments sake lets say that’s not the case. The teams you mentioned have way more penetrating talent then we do. Maybe next year we get lucky and one of these types falls in our lap.

4. You assumed meant weight, what I meant was ability and performance. It just so happens that generally speaking, the DT's that I'm talking about are heavier.

5. Who said anything about a 3-4?

 

You sound a bit like Gregg Williams in your philosophies, but systems don't win championships, players do. I don't mind staying within the restraints of a system if I had any confidence we could get a difference maker within the next couple years. I just don’t. I also love having Whitner, this has nothing to do with who we drafted. I just think stopping the run is just about the most important thing in football.

[Dibs]

1. I'm not arguing size as much as style

3. I noticed the 5th, 6th, 10th, and 11th teams. I wonder how many of the others fit this trend. Probably few, but for arguments sake lets say that’s not the case. The teams you mentioned have way more penetrating talent then we do. Maybe next year we get lucky and one of these types falls in our lap.

4. You assumed meant weight, what I meant was ability and performance. It just so happens that generally speaking, the DT's that I'm talking about are heavier.

5. Who said anything about a 3-4?

 

You sound a bit like Gregg Williams in your philosophies, but systems don't win championships, players do.  I don't mind staying within the restraints of a system if I had any confidence we could get a difference maker within the next couple years. I just don’t. I also love having Whitner, this has nothing to do with who we drafted. I just think stopping the run is just about the most important thing in football.

802477[/snapback]

3. So you discount the players we have???? Tripplet is considered a good/penetrator & was one of the top FA DTs last year. We selected McCargo in the 1st round! How can you just brush that away as if he has no obvious potential? And what about Williams? How is it possible that you can know he is not going to be good? BTW, Bernard was a 5th rounder, Darby an UDFA, Dockett a 3rd, Davis a 2nd, & Scott a 4th. It is ridiculous to say that the players we have now definitively will not become good/great.

 

4.

I mentioned the 3-4.....

You argue the point that the Tampa2 is overtly restrictive in its nature particularly towards DTs.

My point of mentioning the 3-4(along with other systems) is that any team that chooses a 3-4 is restricting the type of DT they can chose.....more-so than ours is.

You could not put 80+% of the FA DTs as the NT in a 3-4 & expect good results.

I showed multiple systems (O & D) that 'need' certain types of players at certain positions....just as our defensive scheme does....as does our offensive scheme....as does pretty much every teams O & D schemes.

Your point on the restrictive nature of our D scheme is not an aberration.....it is in fact the norm for most teams on both sides of the ball.

 

Players don't win championships.....teams do.

What's the point of having a Randy Moss if you cannot throw deep down the field to him?

What's the point of having a Deon Sanders if you play zone all the time.

What's the point of having a Montana if you play the deep vertical passing game?

What's the point of having a Sapp if you stick him in the 3-4 NT position?

The objective is to get all the players to play in harmony together achieving the best out of their abilities. You imply that you just have to put 11 athletes onto the ground & let them go for it & you'll win.

 

Honestly, what makes you think that just because you've prematurely given up hope that our DTs can become difference makers that everybody else has?

We have a 1st round DT, a diamond in the rough 5th round DT & a previously 2nd round pick & highly sort after FA DT. Why are they all duds?

[frogger]

we can't lump the 2 DT as being the same the 3 tech and the NT have very different roles in the defense.

Please do not say that Pat williams or Ngata do not fit this defense, both are better than Anderson or Kyle Williams at NT. Anderson does not have the quickness and is not strong enough to anchor, anytime he makes a play, I can just assume that he was a forgotten block, I refuse to give him credit on any tackle.

Tank Tyler, yet another DL from NC State would be a good addition next year, hopefully he falls into the 2nd round.

[Bill from NYC]

Ngata was far less of a sure thing than Whitner

802443[/snapback]

 

Says who?

[Dibs]

Says who?

802499[/snapback]

You are quite correct.......just because a majority of analyst say so does not mean squat....(I'm not being facetious, I'm serious about that).

That being said, there were quite a lot of detractors in regards to N'Gatas' drive & abilities...I'm sure you remember the arguments at the time.

 

I'm not too sure whether to take it as a compliment or an insult that out of all the words I have written on this thread, that one sentence is the one you draw attention to.

[Bill from NYC]

You are quite correct.......just because a majority of analyst say so does not mean squat....(I'm not being facetious, I'm serious about that).

That being said, there were quite a lot of detractors in regards to N'Gatas' drive & abilities...I'm sure you remember the arguments at the time.

 

I'm not too sure whether to take it as a compliment or an insult that out of all the words I have written on this thread, that one sentence is the one you draw attention to.

802504[/snapback]

 

No insult nor compliment intended. My point is that both of these highly regarded kids have played all of 5 games.

 

As for a "majority of analysts," I don't recall ever seeing Whittner predicted to go higher than Ngata, but that means little either.

 

Time will tell us which one was a better choice.

[Dibs]

No insult nor compliment intended. My point is that both of these highly regarded kids have played all of 5 games.

 

As for a "majority of analysts," I don't recall ever seeing Whittner predicted to go higher than Ngata, but that means little either.

 

Time will tell us which one was a better choice.

802509[/snapback]

 

I never meant that Whitner was considered the greater pick....as we all know, he was considered a 'reach' at the #8 spot. What I meant was that Whitner was considered to be one of the most ready to play draftees(which seems to have been on the money). I personally believe that this factor helped his #8 selection....& why not? You get better value out of a player who produces faster.

N'Gata might well end up having the bigger impact career....as you said, we'll see.

 

Your 5 game statement.

Totally agree.....can you tell it to those stating that McCargo & Williams won't become impact players.

[Pyrite Gal]

Here's the recap.

 

1. Buffalo is not good at run defense.

2. Buffalo likes penetrating DT's.

3. The best run defenses usually have a P. Williams type anchor

4. That type of player is not a penetrating DT 

5. Buffalo should not restrict themselves with who they go after at DT because of the system.

802456[/snapback]

 

 

I agree with Dibs that I find your arguments a bot difficult to grasp as perhaps this is because of my own limitations I find the general points and the specific applications somewhat contradictory.

 

I agree with the general point thathaving a good run stuffer is a very good thing. I also agree with your specific point that Sam Adams is a talented player.

 

However, I think if one agrees with the first point about the need for a run stuffer and particularly if one does not want to emphasize going after penetrators at DT (folks like a Triplett or the lighter weight DTs we have) then I think clearly you do not pass GO and you cut Sam Adams as quick as you can.

 

The thong which makes Adams such a singular player is not at all his stoutness against the run, nuy his ability to rush and be disruptive. In fact he is the quintessential type of player you seem to suggest that Jauron has an interest in with our system. My sense is that Jauron followed your suggestions exactly in this case as despite Adams having all the features he would seem to want in our system (besides him weighing more than the norm which you flat out say in a post above that you are not insisting that he dogmatically chooses by weight).

 

Sam Adams by most judgments (and likely by Jaurion's and Levy's since they appeared to give deep consideration to keeping Adams) plays the type of game that fits the Cover 2 scheme, however, the Bills braintrust decided not to keep him because other factors indicated to them he would not be a good player for us.

 

Specifically, Adams is clearly an older player on borrowed time on the backside of his career and if you are trying to build a team which at best will compete in 06 but actualy achieve in 07 and win it all in 08 it is questionable whether Adams is your guy since there is a fair chance he is not in the league in 07 and really doubtful he will be around in 08.

 

Using the arguments you seem to present it would lead to a cut of Adams.

 

Perhaps instead you want to argue that run stuffer Phat Pat is the guy a Jauron should have kept, but even this argument makes no sense as it was TD the year before who bollicked the PW resigning issue and there is no evidence whatsoever that Jauron is opposed to having PW as a player.

 

It simply is confusing that the two specific players you site seem to either cut against the point you are making (Adams) in terms of Bills actions or were dealt with on a timeline (PW) not relevant to the point you are making.

[Mikie2times]

3. So you discount the players we have????  Tripplet is considered a good/penetrator & was one of the top FA DTs last year.  We selected McCargo in the 1st round!  How can you just brush that away as if he has no obvious potential?  And what about Williams?  How is it possible that you can know he is not going to be good?  BTW, Bernard was a 5th rounder, Darby an UDFA, Dockett a 3rd, Davis a 2nd, & Scott a 4th.  It is ridiculous to say that the players we have now definitively will not become good/great.

 

4.

I mentioned the 3-4.....

You argue the point that the Tampa2 is overtly restrictive in its nature particularly towards DTs. 

My point of mentioning the 3-4(along with other systems) is that any team that chooses a 3-4 is restricting the type of DT they can chose.....more-so than ours is. 

You could not put 80+% of the FA DTs as the NT in a 3-4 & expect good results.

I showed multiple systems (O & D) that 'need' certain types of players at certain positions....just as our defensive scheme does....as does our offensive scheme....as does pretty much every teams O & D schemes. 

Your point on the restrictive nature of our D scheme is not an aberration.....it is in fact the norm for most teams on both sides of the ball. 

 

Players don't win championships.....teams do.

What's the point of having a Randy Moss if you cannot throw deep down the field to him?

What's the point of having a Deon Sanders if you play zone all the time.

What's the point of having a Montana if you play the deep vertical passing game?

What's the point of having a Sapp if you stick him in the 3-4 NT position?

The objective is to get all the players to play in harmony together achieving the best out of their abilities.  You imply that you just have to put 11 athletes onto the ground & let them go for it & you'll win.

 

Honestly, what makes you think that just because you've prematurely given up hope that our DTs can become difference makers that everybody else has?

We have a 1st round DT, a diamond in the rough 5th round DT & a previously 2nd round pick & highly sort after FA DT.  Why are they all duds?

802485[/snapback]

3. I like Williams a lot, he has more then enough speed for us to sit a anchor type next to him. As for who else we have Tripplett never made a difference in run stopping for Indianpolis, and he won't here. It's not his game, and never was. McCargo is just another draft pick, may or may not pan out. Sorry if his presence gives me little faith our run defense will turn around next year. Tom Brady was late draft choice, Jason Peters was undrafted, Antonio Gates etc. Difference makers can be found at every level, but it's more improbable to get one of these types then probable. I'm preaching a proactive stance, that gives us options, look what waiting for development has done for our offensive line.

 

4. 3-4 requires 1 DT, and usually teams will make the switch because they already have that player, and LB's to spare. Most teams don't restrict themselves to needing specific players as long as you don't make it as extreme as you are. Running off extreme examples of players not fitting a system like Moss or Montana has no relevance to this conversation. Your talking about gross exaggerations of putting players in the wrong system. The cover 2 refers to the type of coverage you have, not who you must use at DT. It's up to each team to decide that. I promise this system will not fall apart if we get a DT that demands two blockers, instead of having a high motor and a good first step.

 

For the rest of your comments show me. Show me why we should believe we will turn the corner at run defense with Anderson, Tripplett, McCargo, and Williams. The only player in that group who even remotely resembles a run stopping DT is Williams. Look at the Colts run defense in the same system, with Tripplett. Look at the Bills run defense with Anderson. Now look at the run defense now. It's more of a leap to expect them to turn it around, then continue to struggle.

[Dibs]

3. I like Williams a lot, he has more then enough speed for us to sit a anchor type next to him. As for who else we have Tripplett never made a difference in run stopping for Indianpolis, and he won't here. It's not his game, and never was.  McCargo is just another draft pick, may or may not pan out. Sorry if his presence gives me little faith our run defense will turn around next year. Tom Brady was late draft choice, Jason Peters was undrafted, Antonio Gates etc. Difference makers can be found at every level, but it's more improbable to get one of these types then probable. I'm preaching a proactive stance, that gives us options, look what waiting for development has done for our offensive line.

 

4. 3-4 requires 1 DT, and usually teams will make the switch because they already have that player, and LB's to spare. Most teams don't restrict themselves to needing specific players as long as you don't make it as extreme as you are. Running off extreme examples of players not fitting a system like Moss or Montana has no relevance to this conversation. Your talking about gross exaggerations of putting players in the wrong system. The cover 2 refers to the type of coverage you have, not who you must use at DT. It's up to each team to decide that. I promise this system will not fall apart if we get a DT that demands two blockers, instead of having a high motor and a good first step.

 

For the rest of your comments show me. Show me why we should believe we will turn the corner at run defense with Anderson, Tripplett, McCargo, and Williams. The only player in that group who even remotely resembles a run stopping DT is Williams. Look at the Colts run defense in the same system, with Tripplett. Look at the Bills run defense with Anderson. Now look at the run defense now. It's more of a leap to expect them to turn it around, then continue to struggle.

802623[/snapback]

Colts run D last year with Tripplett was 16th in yards/game(110.1) & 28th in yards/carry(4.4)

Colts run D this year without Tripplett is 31st in yards/game(166.8) & 32nd(last) in yards/carry(5.2)

 

ME show you????

You started this thread by saying that DJ is locking himself into a certain type of player. You continued it by saying we should basically scrap Tripplett(one of the highest rated FAs last year)...scrap McCargo(3rd best rated rookie & a 1st rounder) & implied that Williams cannot become an impact player.

YOU show me how these things are so.

I have repeatedly shown you that the Tampa2 is no different to any other system in that it has preferences in styles of players.

I have continually argued that to give up on our DTs is waaaaay premature....that they are only rookies.

 

Basically, why should we scrap an entire year of DT rebuild?

[bills_fan]

Mike-

 

I think you just nervous, and I am too, that we won't be able to become a good run stuffing team without a Pat Williams/Ted Washington type. When we had great D's in 98/99 and 03/04 we had those guys.

 

I'm willing to give this new system a chance. They won't learn it overnight. It will take some time. Hopefully, they have it down for next year.

[Mikie2times]

Colts run D last year with Tripplett was 16th in yards/game(110.1) & 28th in yards/carry(4.4)

Colts run D this year without Tripplett is 31st in yards/game(166.8) & 32nd(last) in yards/carry(5.2)

 

ME show you????

You started this thread by saying that DJ is locking himself into a certain type of player.  You continued it by saying we should basically scrap Tripplett(one of the highest rated FAs last year)...scrap McCargo(3rd best rated rookie & a 1st rounder) & implied that Williams cannot become an impact player.

YOU show me how these things are so.

I have repeatedly shown you that the Tampa2 is no different to any other system in that it has preferences in styles of players.

I have continually argued that to give up on our DTs is waaaaay premature....that they are only rookies.

 

Basically, why should we scrap an entire year of DT rebuild?

803133[/snapback]

Corey Simon is twice the run stopper Triplett was in Indianapolis, and as people have mentioned he’s probably more of a pass rusher. What's that say? It’s convenient that you completely left out his absence from your findings. If we sign Darnell Dockett we can end this debate all together. I just don't want to get complacent and limited. We can't afford to wait on Run Stoppers to develop. The Cover 2 is a notoriously soft run defense, and it will put a ceiling on this team unless it gets much better.

[Mikie2times]

Mike-

 

I think you just nervous, and I am too, that we won't be able to become a good run stuffing team without a Pat Williams/Ted Washington type.  When we had great D's in 98/99 and 03/04 we had those guys. 

 

I'm willing to give this new system a chance.  They won't learn it overnight.  It will take some time.  Hopefully, they have it down for next year.

803144[/snapback]

You’re dead on. Plus when you exclude some of the great all around defenses in Chicago and Tampa Bay, the Cover 2 has been known to be weak inside. Dibs is arguing our about our talent developing, even with great results will do our DT's compare to those two great Cover 2 defenses? I mean this is a weakness strong enough to stifle the Colts last year, who had one of the great regular seasons of all time.

[IDBillzFan]

The Cover 2 is a notoriously soft run defense, and it will put a ceiling on this team unless it gets much better.

803151[/snapback]

And that's the key to this whole discussion. There will naturally be a ceiling on this team based on new coaches, schemes and a roster of 20 new players. Adding a fat DT isn't going to raise the ceiling that much.

 

Marv has been specific: defense first, then OL. What this means is while our offense struggles to put points on the board (for the time being), the defense has it's hands full because by the time we're sucking hind tit, the other team is running on us like crazy. That's where our inability to stop the run hurts. Right now.

 

Fix the offense next, and we can put some points on the board, and...in theory...teams will stop running because suddenly they have to throw to catch up to us...and by next year, you're NOT going to want to throw against this defense for the sake of catching up to the points the offense has put on the board.

 

Wishful thinking, maybe. But that's the way I see the blueprint.

[Dibs]

You’re dead on. Plus when you exclude some of the great all around defenses in Chicago and Tampa Bay, the Cover 2 has been known to be weak inside. Dibs is arguing our about our talent developing, even with great results will do our DT's compare to those two great Cover 2 defenses? I mean this is a weakness strong enough to stifle the Colts last year, who had one of the great regular seasons of all time.

803154[/snapback]

Oh come on dude....you asked me to look at the Colts run D last year(with Tripplett) compared to this year(without Tripplett). I did...& I posted them. I made no 'findings'.

 

I would think the percent of success with the cover2(Tampa2) D has been pronounced enough that many teams are following suit & switching to them.

2 great Defences out of how many? 6 teams? That is a pretty impressive results.

Why not just relax & give the team some time to develop. If it doesn't work....whinge about it then.

[Mikie2times]

Oh come on dude....you asked me to look at the Colts run D last year(with Tripplett) compared to this year(without Tripplett).  I did...& I posted them.  I made no 'findings'.

 

I would think the percent of success with the cover2(Tampa2) D has been pronounced enough that many teams are following suit & switching to them. 

2 great Defences out of how many?  6 teams?  That is a pretty impressive results.

Why not just relax & give the team some time to develop.  If it doesn't work....whinge about it then.

803162[/snapback]

Here ya go. This is a list of rushing yards, and rushing avg rankings from teams I know were Cover 2 in those years. If you notice the team Larry Triplett played for has been among the worst in football the last 5 years. Now factoring in that, with Tim Anderson, Williams, and McCargo who do we resemble more Tampa Bay and Chicago, or Indianapolis?

 

Years Team Yards AVG

2001 Rams 6 17

2002 Rams 16 14

2003 Rams 21 30

 

2004 Bears 24 16

2005 Bears 11 8

2006 Bears 6 18

 

1996 Bucs 22 27

1997 Bucs 7 12

1998 Bucs 6 9

1999 Bucs 4 10

2000 Bucs 11 16

2001 Bucs 16 19

2002 Bucs 3 5

2003 Bucs 14 11

2004 Bucs 19 15

2005 Bucs 5 1

2006 Bucs 30 31

 

2002 Colts 22 21

2003 Colts 20 27

2004 Colts 26 31

2005 Colts 15 26

2006 Colts 31 32

 

2006 Bills 19 21

[Dibs]

Here ya go. This is a list of rushing yards, and rushing avg rankings from teams I know were Cover 2 in those years.  If you notice the team Larry Triplett played for  has been among the worst in football the last 5 years. Now factoring in that, with Tim Anderson, Williams, and McCargo who do we resemble more Tampa Bay and Chicago, or Indianapolis?

 

Years Team  Yards  AVG

2001    Rams 6 17....

2004    Bears 24 16....

1996 Bucs 22 27....

2002 Colts 22 21....

2006 Bills 19 21....

803171[/snapback]

To answer your question.....it's waaaay too early to tell. Let me put that another way......It's waaaaaaaaaaay too early to tell.

 

*I imagine the DJ Bears team of 2001 had an awesome D too*

 

WOW!!!!

Out of the 4 Cover2 Ds that you list, 2 of them were GREAT defences(1 winning a superbowl....& this years Bears now one of the front-runners for the superbowl.)

I like those odds.

 

As I said last post.....

Why not just relax & give the team some time to develop. If it doesn't work....whinge about it then.

[Mikie2times]

To answer your question.....it's waaaay too early to tell.  Let me put that another way......It's waaaaaaaaaaay too early to tell.

 

*I imagine the DJ Bears team of 2001 had an awesome D too*

 

WOW!!!!

Out of the 4 Cover2 Ds that you list, 2 of them were GREAT defences(1 winning a superbowl....& this years Bears now one of the front-runners for the superbowl.) 

I like those odds.

 

As I said last post.....

Why not just relax & give the team some time to develop.  If it doesn't work....whinge about it then.

803174[/snapback]

Dude, stop comparing us with the Bucs and Bears. The only similarity is the type of defense we run. The difference in the front 7 is not something you just happen to make up. They had/have dominating DT's, DE's, OLB's, and MLB's. Not good, Dominating, in the prime of their careers. Tim Anderson is a flat out bad football player. Triplett is a situational pash rusher coming from a team that got killed verse the run. McCargo proved absolutely nothing before breaking his foot. Williams is a huge pick up, and should develop. But even then paired with Denney/Kelsey, Schobel, and whoever else we go with were still not close to TB or Chicago. Trust me, it should scare me. Especially if we get complacent. We shouldn't consider going after a run stopping DT extreme.

[Dibs]

Dude, stop comparing us with the Bucs and Bears. The only similarity is the type of defense we run. The difference in the front 7 is not something you just happen to make up. They had/have dominating DT's, DE's, OLB's, and MLB's. Not good, Dominating, in the prime of their careers.  Tim Anderson is a flat out bad football player. Triplett is a situational pash rusher coming from a team that got killed verse the run. McCargo proved absolutely nothing before breaking his foot. Williams is a huge pick up, and should develop. But even then paired with Denney/Kelsey, Schobel, and whoever else we go with were still not close to TB or Chicago. Trust me, it should scare me. Especially if we get complacent.  We shouldn't consider going after a run stopping DT extreme.

803178[/snapback]

*sigh*

It takes time for players to become dominating.

TKO/Fletcher/Crowell is a 1st class(dominating) LB corp.

McCargo may well become a dominating player.

Williams may well become a dominating player.

We are good at DE(I'd like to see Schobel play with top talent around him).....& maybe add another(better) DL next year.

 

You do realize don't you that you cannot just Magic up a great DL? It takes time.