kbuckley9091 Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Both seem to be Ball-hawks, but they may be weaker against the run. Byrd also seem to bring a load when he hits people. Your thoughts??
SuperKillerRobots Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I'd like to see Byrd/Whitner I think that's the ticket. Ever since Ko was traded that had to be what they had in mind. Byrd picking off passes and Whitner stopping the run. Byrd looks like he knows hwo to hit people and even Whitner has looked decent in pass coverage so far.
stuckincincy Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Both seem to be Ball-hawks, but they may be weaker against the run.Byrd also seem to bring a load when he hits people. Your thoughts?? Well, if you play a fair amount of Cover 2 defense, your safeties are covering the back zone. So they really don't get much into the run defense mix. So the theory goes...
/dev/null Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Well, if you play a fair amount of Cover 2 defense, your safeties are covering the back zone. So they really don't get much into the run defense mix. So the theory goes... Until the RB blows thru the DL and LBs...
stuckincincy Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Until the RB blows thru the DL and LBs... Details, details....
kbuckley9091 Posted October 20, 2009 Author Posted October 20, 2009 Until the RB blows thru the DL and LBs... LMAO! Good point.... Man, I wish we had some big nasty mofo's up front. I really do like our secondary....
papazoid Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 at some point it will be Byrd(FS)/Whitner(SS)
Corp000085 Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Byrd also seem to bring a load when he hits people. Until the RB blows thru the DL and LBs... Details, details.... I'm not totally in love with the direction that this thread is leading.
stuckincincy Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I'm not totally in love with the direction that this thread is leading. 10 to 15 yards upfield?
GripnRip Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 If i had a nickel for every time the term "ball-hawk" was used here in the past 2 days.....
Leonidas Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 If i had a nickel for every time the term "ball-hawk" was used here in the past 2 days..... I've been shouting "the ballhawk!" every time I see Byrd make any sort of play, no matter how meaningless. I've been wondering why, too. And yes, I think Byrd/Whitner is the goal, and now that Byrd is (or should be, at least) all caught up on the plays with all that missed time, I would imagine he'll be starting - or at least seeing some significant playing time - at FS. I think Whitner is more of a SS anyway, and I'm glad we finally admitted it when drafting Byrd. Scott never seemed like starting material to me, although he's great depth to have. Finally we can ignore the secondary (laugh if you want to - we both know it won't happen, but a man can dream) in the 2010 draft. LB's, pass-rushing DE (I still think Maybin's a bust), depth on the OL...and maybe a QB, unfortunately.
bills_red Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 There were a few plays I saw Whitner up in the box and Byrd playing deep. That should become a nice duo for us.
Alphadawg7 Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Both seem to be Ball-hawks, but they may be weaker against the run.Byrd also seem to bring a load when he hits people. Your thoughts?? Honestly, I think the best combo would be Whitner at SS and Byrd at FS. Whitner brings better run support and Byrd has the ball hawk skills.
sharper802 Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Both seem to be Ball-hawks, but they may be weaker against the run.Byrd also seem to bring a load when he hits people. Your thoughts?? I can think of a little over 300 reasones why George Wilson should not be the starting SS. Let's see if you can guess what those are. I would like to see Whitner at strong and Byrd at free if Whitner is healthy. In obvious run downs Scott can come in and play SS and Whitner can move back to FS. Scott and Florence may actually be decent FA pick-ups. Hope Scott's ankle heels soon.
puente Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I can think of a little over 300 reasones why George Wilson should not be the starting SS. Let's see if you can guess what those are. I would like to see Whitner at strong and Byrd at free if Whitner is healthy. In obvious run downs Scott can come in and play SS and Whitner can move back to FS. Scott and Florence may actually be decent FA pick-ups. Hope Scott's ankle heels soon. Funny, I have Byrd/Whitner on my 360 online Depth chart
ishouldbegm Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 id go with byrd and wilson... both can cover and tackle... wilson is very underrated always seems to make plays when hes in more so than whitner or scott
Recommended Posts