Revis or Suh

[BuffaloBlitz83]

Who helps the pass rush more if either ore was a Buffalo Billl?

I say it is Suh without question. The Jets biggest weakness is the pass rush. And they have a Cromartie whose better than any other corner we have besides the best in business in Revis.

Fairley over Peterson ALL DAY

[Night Train]

Building from the lines out.

Only Dick Jauron would argue that.

[Billz_fan]

Personally I would take the big man. However either of those 2 players is a huge difference maker and have there upsides.

But if we pick a defensive secondary player at #3 I will most likely shut off the tv crawl in bed and lay in the fetal position for a day or 2. Just from the # of DB's we have drafted in the last 10 years in the 1st or 2nd and answer the "Where are they now" question or the "It's not there fault they were drafted so high" I will just feel down right ill.

[ddaryl]

I'm a take care of the trenches 1st guy...

Odds of winning increases when you own the trenches

[mikemac2001]

Suh isn't in this draft nor is he there at 3

Stop using players names who arnt even there

If fairly and darius are taken at 1-2 then it's bowers or Paterson

That's a better question to ask compare those guys

[TacklingDummy]

Who helps the pass rush more if either ore was a Buffalo Billl?

I say it is Suh without question. The Jets biggest weakness is the pass rush. And they have a Cromartie whose better than any other corner we have besides the best in business in Revis.

Fairley over Peterson ALL DAY
A pass rush helps the secondary and creates turnovers.

[better days]

Suh isn't in this draft nor is he there at 3

Stop using players names who arnt even there

If fairly and darius are taken at 1-2 then it's bowers or Paterson

That's a better question to ask compare those guys

He was making a point that a great DL player will have a greater impact than a great DB. I think most of the board would agree with him.

[Prov401]

Who helps the pass rush more if either ore was a Buffalo Billl?

I say it is Suh without question. The Jets biggest weakness is the pass rush. And they have a Cromartie whose better than any other corner we have besides the best in business in Revis.

Fairley over Peterson ALL DAY

Fairley will be gone. I can live with the Peterson pick, but I understand how some can be angered by such a decision. Bottom line is we are weak at every level defensively. Our line is suspect, our linebackers are atrocious, and our secondary is on the decline whether anybody sees it or not. Nix's philosophy of drafting BPA is something I'm buying into.

Some aren't really realizing this but, next year we are finally going to see our 2010 rookies play. Carrington, Troup, Spiller, Easley, Batten, and Moats. These guys practically sat and watched last year for the most part. Add in Merriman, and I'm starting to get a little curious. We really don't know what we have yet in last years draft. Add a guy like Peterson, or Bowers/Dareus to those players, and we have a brand new defense.

[Nighthawk]

CBs do not dramatically improve a bad defense, but they do make a good defense better. That is why I would never take a CB over a big man of equal value.

[Pinkerton Security]

Suh is a extremely unique player...he is the best DT prospect since Warren Sapp and Fairley couldnt even hold up Suh's jock strap, so this argument is going nowhere.

[better days]

Suh is a extremely unique player...he is the best DT prospect since Warren Sapp and Fairley couldnt even hold up Suh's jock strap, so this argument is going nowhere.

Maybe Fairly is nowhere near as good as Suh, but nobody knows how good Peterson will be either. The point is it is more important to fix the DL & LB groups first before worring about the DB's.

[Kicker22705]

This can go both ways. A great pass rush from a linemen allows more players to stay in coverage, but a great cornerback can allow a team take a defender out of coverage to blitz to create pressure or drop them in the box for run support.

Considering our linebackers are better pass rushers than out in coverage, I'm fine with getting Revis if that means they blitz more and have to cover less.

As far as stopping the run, Revis will allow us to drop Whitner/Scott into the box for run support.

[better days]

This can go both ways. A great pass rush from a linemen allows more players to stay in coverage, but a great cornerback can allow a team take a defender out of coverage to blitz to create pressure or drop them in the box for run support.

Considering our linebackers are better pass rushers than out in coverage, I'm fine with getting Revis if that means they blitz more and have to cover less.

As far as stopping the run, Revis will allow us to drop Whitner/Scott into the box for run support.

Yeah because Whitner/Scott can provide the same run support as a good DL & LBs.......................NOT.

[tomz]

Fairley will be gone. I can live with the Peterson pick, but I understand how some can be angered by such a decision. Bottom line is we are weak at every level defensively. Our line is suspect, our linebackers are atrocious, and our secondary is on the decline whether anybody sees it or not. Nix's philosophy of drafting BPA is something I'm buying into.

Some aren't really realizing this but, next year we are finally going to see our 2010 rookies play. Carrington, Troup, Spiller, Easley, Batten, and Moats. These guys practically sat and watched last year for the most part. Add in Merriman, and I'm starting to get a little curious. We really don't know what we have yet in last years draft. Add a guy like Peterson, or Bowers/Dareus to those players, and we have a brand new defense.

You might add in Wang. (In the spirit of most Wang comments, it's always good to put in a little Wang.) RT?

Also, on the main thread topic, just look at Green Bay if we need anymore argument. Their disruptive D-line/blitz packages make fairly ordinary corners look good with plenty of picks.

[Prov401]

This can go both ways. A great pass rush from a linemen allows more players to stay in coverage, but a great cornerback can allow a team take a defender out of coverage to blitz to create pressure or drop them in the box for run support.

Considering our linebackers are better pass rushers than out in coverage, I'm fine with getting Revis if that means they blitz more and have to cover less.

As far as stopping the run, Revis will allow us to drop Whitner/Scott into the box for run support.

I'm not sure why your talking about Revis like we have him on our team, but I understand what your getting at.

Anybody here watch the Pats/Jets playoff game? If you did, how many times did you count Tom terrific standing in the pocket for 5-9 seconds just patting the ball, waiting, patting the ball, waiting....? That's the result of ELITE CB play. That's what Peterson can help us accomplish, and that is why I wouldn't be sick if we drafted him.

I understand the other side of the coin as well. If you saw the Steelers/Jets game, the Jets couldn't sniff Roethlisberger, and the first half proved to be all Pitt needed to move on to the SB. The Jets d-line lost them that game. So I am aware it goes hand in hand, but with our defense as it is right now, we are weak at all positions.

Troup, Carrington, Batten, and Merriman will be added to our team next year. These guys didn't even factor into our team last year, and it seems some are still forgetting about these guys. Our secondary is weak whether anybody would like to admit it or not. Mcgee is on the fast decline. Florence is probably going to get a better offer, and Mckelvin is Mr. inconsistency. We are losing Whitner, so there's another hole. If Peterson is the next Woodson as many are saying, than I see no reason why anybody would be that pissed at this pick. Especially when we have essentially another 1st rounder with a very high 2nd round pick that will likely go defense as well.

[Prov401]

You might add in Wang. (In the spirit of most Wang comments, it's always good to put in a little Wang.) RT?

Also, on the main thread topic, just look at Green Bay if we need anymore argument. Their disruptive D-line/blitz packages make fairly ordinary corners look good with plenty of picks.

GB's secondary is anything but ordinary. They are considered the best in the league. They blanket everybody. The pass rush helps for sure, but the secondary is the reason that GB is able to blitz all the time.

[Philagape]

Yeah because Whitner/Scott can provide the same run support as a good DL & LBs.......................NOT.

You don't want another defender in the box?

[better days]

You don't want another defender in the box?

If you already have a GOOD DL & LB's then yes a safety in the box is a good thing when expecting the run. When the DL & LB's are not good however a safety in the box is like putting a band aid on an artery that has been severed.

[Philagape]

If you already have a GOOD DL & LB's then yes a safety in the box is a good thing when expecting the run. When the DL & LB's are not good however a safety in the box is like putting a band aid on an artery that has been severed.

Disagree ... an undefended safety should be able to stop a RB, so having him closer is good under any circumstances.
In fact, a weak defense needs the safety even more because the safety often ends up making the tackle anyway (which is why Whitner has so many tackles). Moving him closer would save several yards on those plays.

[better days]

Disagree ... an undefended safety should be able to stop a RB, so having him closer is good under any circumstances.

My point is if you have a GOOD DL & LB group, you will be better at stopping the run than with a poor DL & LB group even with a Safety in the box.

If you have a GOOD DL & LB group & a good safety in the box that team should be top 10 at least against the run.

A poor DL & LB group with a good safety in the box would be lucky to be in the top 20. Most likey be about 28-32

[Philagape]

My point is if you have a GOOD DL & LB group, you will be better at stopping the run than with a poor DL & LB group even with a Safety in the box.

If you have a GOOD DL & LB group & a good safety in the box that team should be top 10 at least against the run.

A poor DL & LB group with a good safety in the box would be lucky to be in the top 20. Most likey be about 28-32

I already disagreed with that assessment, but even if that were so, it will take a lot more than one player to make this front 7 "GOOD," whereas one stud corner will give you that extra safety in the box.

Case in point:
In 2009 Cleveland allowed 4.6 YPA rushing, 29th in the league.
In 2010 they draft CB Joe Haden first. Their run defense improves to 4.1 YPA, 12th in the league, and they allow the third-fewest rushing TDs, dropping from 15 to 7. (Their overall run yards allowed remained high because their offense was abysmal)

[Michael82]

None of the above! I'd rather have Dareus or Bowers.

[better days]

I already disagreed with that assessment, but even if that were so, it will take a lot more than one player to make this front 7 "GOOD," whereas one stud corner will give you that extra safety in the box.

Case in point:
In 2009 Cleveland allowed 4.6 YPA rushing, 29th in the league.
In 2010 they draft CB Joe Haden first. Their run defense improves to 4.1 YPA, 12th in the league, and they allow the third-fewest rushing TDs, dropping from 15 to 7. (Their overall run yards allowed remained high because their offense was abysmal)
So your assessment is a POOR DL & LB group with a good safety is better than a GOOD DL & LB group with a good safety? Explain that to me.

So you are telling me Joe Haden was the only addition to the Browns defense from 2009? I think you forgot about a couple LB's they added to that defense, they are what made the difference as much as Haden if not more.

So because it will take more than one player to make the front 7 good we shouldn't draft ANY? That is just stupid.

[Philagape]

So your assessment is a POOR DL & LB group with a good safety is better than a GOOD DL & LB group with a good safety? Explain that to me.

That wasn't the choice. The comparison was a good front 7 by themselves or a bad front 7 with a safety.


So you are telling me Joe Haden was the only addition to the Browns defense from 2009? I think you forgot about a couple LB's they added to that defense, they are what made the difference as much as Haden if not more.

Ah, so there's a way to improve the run defense besides using a top-10 draft pick on DL?? Thanks for making my point.


So because it will take more than one player to make the front 7 good we shouldn't draft ANY? That is just stupid.

You are the king of straw men. Where did I say they shouldn't draft ANY front 7???

[better days]

That wasn't the choice. The comparison was a good front 7 by themselves or a bad front 7 with a safety.



Ah, so there's a way to improve the run defense besides using a top-10 draft pick on DL?? Thanks for making my point.



You are the king of straw men. Where did I say they shouldn't draft ANY front 7???

Go back & read my post. I did compare a good DL & LB group to a bad one. You talk about drafting CB, not a safety, so the safety would be the same in either case.

Yes the Bills could use free agency but Nix has said they will resign their own players rather than sign expensive free agents.

You are saying to draft a CB over any DL or LB's in the 1st rnd where the greatest talent should be.

[Philagape]

Go back & read my post. I did compare a good DL & LB group to a bad one. You talk about drafting CB, not a safety, so the safety would be the same in either case.

Your words:
My point is if you have a GOOD DL & LB group, you will be better at stopping the run than with a poor DL & LB group even with a Safety in the box.

You compared a good front 7 to a bad front 7 + a safety. Why would anyone compare a good front 7 to a bad front 7 if the safety factor is equal?
The whole point was if you have a stud shutdown corner, you can put the safety in the box more often.


You are saying to draft a CB over any DL or LB's in the 1st rnd where the greatest talent should be.

No I have not said that. But I would consider the best CB prospect in years over this year's 2nd or 3rd-best DL.
And Nix did say they needed bigger ILBs, so he sees where the improvement is needed.

[better days]

Your words:
My point is if you have a GOOD DL & LB group, you will be better at stopping the run than with a poor DL & LB group even with a Safety in the box.

You compared a good front 7 to a bad front 7 + a safety. Why would anyone compare a good front 7 to a bad front 7 if the safety factor is equal?
The whole point was if you have a stud shutdown corner, you can put the safety in the box more often.



No I have not said that. But I would consider the best CB prospect in years over this year's 2nd or 3rd-best DL.
And Nix did say they needed bigger ILBs, so he sees where the improvement is needed.

If you read the entire post instead of just the 1st sentence, I did include the safety in the box in both instances. Why can the Bills not put a safety in the box with the corners they have now if they expect a run?

I agree Nix did say they need bigger LB's & he knows where improvement is needed. I did not read anywhere he said they need better corners.

[Philagape]

If you read the entire post instead of just the 1st sentence, I did include the safety in the box in both instances. Why can the Bills not put a safety in the box with the corners they have now if they expect a run?

Because that invites a play action and leaves a CB one on one. You need a top-shelf CB in that case.
Teams do pass when a run is expected. It happens.

Again, why would anyone compare a good front 7 + safety to a bad front 7 + a safety? How is that an issue? Who would disagree with that?

[better days]

Because that invites a play action and leaves a CB one on one. You need a top-shelf CB in that case.
Teams do pass when a run is expected. It happens.

Again, why would anyone compare a good front 7 + safety to a bad front 7 + a safety? How is that an issue? Who would disagree with that?

Well teams may pass when run is expected, but unless the Bills CB's are terrible which they are not, they can defend against the pass.

I agree, who would disagree with that? That is why I was supprised you did.

[Philagape]

Well teams may pass when run is expected, but unless the Bills CB's are terrible which they are not, they can defend against the pass.

I agree, who would disagree with that? That is why I was supprised you did.

I told you what I took your post to mean; in addition to actually saying it, I figured it must mean that because to say it the other way would be pointless.

McGee and Florence will turn 31 during next season, McGee can't stay healthy and Florence is a FA.
McKelvin can't even crack the starting lineup unless someone gets hurt.
And they've almost always had help from the safeties, since they've played Cover 2 for most of their time here.
It's a need.

[better days]

I told you what I took your post to mean; in addition to actually saying it, I figured it must mean that because to say it the other way would be pointless.

McGee and Florence will turn 31 during next season, McGee can't stay healthy and Florence is a FA.
McKelvin can't even crack the starting lineup unless someone gets hurt.
And they've almost always had help from the safeties, since they've played Cover 2 for most of their time here.
It's a need.

Yeah I agree it is a need, but not a great need in my opinion. If Nix & Gailey think Peterson is as good as Revis & draft him so be it, but unless he is that good I would rather they went with a DL or LB myself with the #3 pick. My first choice would be to trade down in this draft.