What kind of CB do we need?

[Archer]

Many people noted how Ballard seemed to like Seattle-style CBs.  But that was before we switched our defensive system.  As I remember from our Tampa-2 days, we preferred feisty run defenders who were physical, but not the stickiest of cover men (Marlin, Jennings, Hayden).  Sounds a bit like Seattle guys to me, though we never prioritized length in the old days.  What type of CB do we need in the mix, and who fits the mold in this draft?

[krunk]

8 minutes ago, Archer said:

Many people noted how Ballard seemed to like Seattle-style CBs.  But that was before we switched our defensive system.  As I remember from our Tampa-2 days, we preferred feisty run defenders who were physical, but not the stickiest of cover men (Marlin, Jennings, Hayden).  Sounds a bit like Seattle guys to me, though we never prioritized length in the old days.  What type of CB do we need in the mix, and who fits the mold in this draft?

If Quincy Wilson is any indication then we'll probably be looking for something like that.   Nate Hairston also.  Somebody that is 6'0" or better,  who can take the ball away, has good to great instincts, good in coverage and is a willing tackler.

[chad72]

If we don't have CBs that play sticky all the time, we need safeties that can jump the ball. We need a scheme that protects the CBs too (like if you don't blitz, at least play some sticky coverage from time to time and vary your zones underneath). Tackling is a must for all our CBs, no doubt in my mind.

 

Whether it was Dexter Jackson & John Lynch with the Bucs SB winning squad, or Antoine Bethea & Bob Sanders for the Colts SB winning squad, the safety position is critical to the success of our CBs too, IMO. Recently, using 3 safeties to play the run and cover TEs, has become more important than it used to be, with the pass friendly rules. Belichick's last 2 SBs - he has used 3 safeties constantly through his playoff run.

 

This allows us to vary how our CBs are used. Tracy Porter can jump the ball if he knows Darren Sharper is backing him up, same with Asante Samuel jumping when he knows he has safety help.

[stitches]

In the traditional Tampa 2, the CBs don't need to be great in man-to-man coverage, but need to be physical and great tacklers because 1. they need to jam the receiver to take away the short pass to the sideline and to make it easier for the safeties with coverage help and 2. they have a ton of run support responsibility in forcing the runs to stay inside. If they are not able to beat the block by the WR and force the run inside, it usually spells long runs to the outside. 

 

In Tampa 2 the CBs can use the sideline as an extra defender by squeezing the WRs out and making passes on the boundary much harder. This also allows them to jump routes for INT. 

 

In a way it's easier to find this type of players than it is to find great man-to-man cover CB. 

 

So yeah... look for physical players who can tackle and have good instincts to jump routes for turnovers. 

[Boiler_Colt]

It's been stated several places that the Colts are high on Denzel Ward. It seems to me like he's more of a man to man guy, but I suppose if he's good enough he could play both. It just seems like he doesn't fit the tall corner mold that Ballard likes though.

[stitches]

I was just thinking about the top receivers in this draft. I posted a big board for the Colts yesterday and even though I mentioned Ward is probably not a great fit for our scheme I put him kind of high. I think this was a mistake. The more I think about it the more I think he's practically undraftable for us(this high) if want to run Tampa 2. He has troubles with the exact things that are most important for the CB in the scheme - jamming the receiver and getting off blocks on run plays. In my next big board I think he will be much lower. 

 

In a weird way... Minkah might actually be a good outside corner in that system. He's physical and willing tackler, he beats blocks well... has good instincts. Hm...yeah... 

 

Here's some others that might be good fit:

- Josh Jackson if he fixes his tackling

- Carlton Davis

- Mike Hughes 

- Duke Dawson

- MJ Stewart

- CJ Jackson(Maryland)

- Kevin Tolliver 

- Isaac Yiadom 

- Holton Hill 

- Davontae Harris(Illinois State) 

- Quenton Meeks

- Michael Joseph

- Kamrin Moore

 

[The Peytonator]

Charles Tillman is pretty much the prototype for cover 2 corners. Coincidentally, he’s also the prototype for a cover 3 press the way Seattle is known for running it. I don’t believe we’ll be strictly one or the other, but I think we can kind of expect our corners to fit that mold. Size isn’t as important as we all make it out to be, but it’s nice to have that size to make it easier to jam receivers and give yourself that much more of a coverage radius. 

 

Quincy Wilson is going to be great in the new system. I was beyond stoked to get him last year. This year, if Josh Jackson falls to the second, I really hope we grab him. We’d be set for a while. 

[Defjamz26]

3 hours ago, The Peytonator said:

Charles Tillman is pretty much the prototype for cover 2 corners. Coincidentally, he’s also the prototype for a cover 3 press the way Seattle is known for running it. I don’t believe we’ll be strictly one or the other, but I think we can kind of expect our corners to fit that mold. Size isn’t as important as we all make it out to be, but it’s nice to have that size to make it easier to jam receivers and give yourself that much more of a coverage radius. 

 

Quincy Wilson is going to be great in the new system. I was beyond stoked to get him last year. This year, if Josh Jackson falls to the second, I really hope we grab him. We’d be set for a while. 

Ballard is the one that said he likes long corners.

[The Peytonator]

23 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Ballard is the one that said he likes long corners.

 

Yeah I know, I just don't think it should be some sort of barometer for determining if we should go after a guy. I think people use 'prototypical' size as a yard stick for when they rank guys. For instance, it's taken Antonio Brown about five years of being the best WR in the game to be recognized as the best WR in the game. Our own board members talk about how TY isn't a 'real #1 receiver' and it's because he's 5'9. Never mind the fact that he led the league in yards a year ago. Chris Harris Jr has been one of the best CBs in the game for half a decade but he never gets put in the same category as Richard Sherman or Patrick Peterson. Some of it has to do with personality/market, but it's just a minor peeve of mine that the bigger, brasher players are perpetually higher rated than the quiet, smaller guys of better caliber. 

 

Anyway, not that you were arguing any point with me, just wanted to clarify where I stood on that. 

[shasta519]

Put this guy in zone and let him do his thing:

 

[BProland85]

In my opinion we need a fluid, fast, uber athletic CB with great ball skills. We already have our corner with size in Wilson, and we have our gritty physical slot corner in Hairston.

 

Now we need a corner that can run with any WR in the league. I like Mike Hughes early round 2 for us to fill that role. 

[ColtsBlitz]

We need a smart Chris Ballard, a real genius.... wait, you meant cornerback? Sorry, the abbreviation throws me off from time to time.

 

aaaaand a zone corner, but can play good man to man in 3& long situations so we can rush the passer. We also need a pass rush.  

[crazycolt1]

Is this a trick question?

I would imagine we would like a CB that plays like an all pro.

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, The Peytonator said:

 

Yeah I know, I just don't think it should be some sort of barometer for determining if we should go after a guy. I think people use 'prototypical' size as a yard stick for when they rank guys. For instance, it's taken Antonio Brown about five years of being the best WR in the game to be recognized as the best WR in the game. Our own board members talk about how TY isn't a 'real #1 receiver' and it's because he's 5'9. Never mind the fact that he led the league in yards a year ago. Chris Harris Jr has been one of the best CBs in the game for half a decade but he never gets put in the same category as Richard Sherman or Patrick Peterson. Some of it has to do with personality/market, but it's just a minor peeve of mine that the bigger, brasher players are perpetually higher rated than the quiet, smaller guys of better caliber. 

 

Anyway, not that you were arguing any point with me, just wanted to clarify where I stood on that. 

I hear you, but it doesn’t change the fact that certain GMs and Coaches have certain prototypes they like at positions. 

[tvturner]

7 hours ago, krunk said:

If Quincy Wilson is any indication then we'll probably be looking for something like that.   Nate Hairston also.  Somebody that is 6'0" or better,  who can take the ball away, has good to great instincts, good in coverage and is a willing tackler.

I know a guy by the name of Duke Dawson who fits that mold (other than height)

College teammate of Wilson's and would be available round 3 or 4... 

[neug3246]

8 hours ago, stitches said:

In the traditional Tampa 2, the CBs don't need to be great in man-to-man coverage, but need to be physical and great tacklers because 1. they need to jam the receiver to take away the short pass to the sideline and to make it easier for the safeties with coverage help and 2. they have a ton of run support responsibility in forcing the runs to stay inside. If they are not able to beat the block by the WR and force the run inside, it usually spells long runs to the outside. 

 

In Tampa 2 the CBs can use the sideline as an extra defender by squeezing the WRs out and making passes on the boundary much harder. This also allows them to jump routes for INT. 

 

In a way it's easier to find this type of players than it is to find great man-to-man cover CB. 

 

So yeah... look for physical players who can tackle and have good instincts to jump routes for turnovers. 

 

8 hours ago, The Peytonator said:

Charles Tillman is pretty much the prototype for cover 2 corners. Coincidentally, he’s also the prototype for a cover 3 press the way Seattle is known for running it. I don’t believe we’ll be strictly one or the other, but I think we can kind of expect our corners to fit that mold. Size isn’t as important as we all make it out to be, but it’s nice to have that size to make it easier to jam receivers and give yourself that much more of a coverage radius. 

 

Quincy Wilson is going to be great in the new system. I was beyond stoked to get him last year. This year, if Josh Jackson falls to the second, I really hope we grab him. We’d be set for a while. 

 

Ok this is a question I have had for a while now. I have heard on here and some other media sites that we are switching to a cover 3 press but have also heard the tampa 2 like we used to have with Dungy and co. From my understanding they take 2 very different DB personnel to run  successfully but we have the safety's for the cover 3 press, yet everyone keeps talking about tampa 2. I guess my question is what is the difference between the two different defenses and  is it possible for us to play more cover 3 press then a tampa 2 zone?

[FalseStart]

Fitzpatrick, Ward, Jackson, Hill, Davis, etc...

[The Peytonator]

6 hours ago, neug3246 said:

 

 

Ok this is a question I have had for a while now. I have heard on here and some other media sites that we are switching to a cover 3 press but have also heard the tampa 2 like we used to have with Dungy and co. From my understanding they take 2 very different DB personnel to run  successfully but we have the safety's for the cover 3 press, yet everyone keeps talking about tampa 2. I guess my question is what is the difference between the two different defenses and  is it possible for us to play more cover 3 press then a tampa 2 zone?

 

In my opinion, the only coverage player on our defense that is likely to get a lot of snaps who doesn't fit with a cover 2 all that well is Clayton Geathers. He's not someone I want playing a deep half. In a cover 3 he's a perfect fit dropping down into the box and playing the rover  or flat role. Depending on personnel, I could see him playing one of the middle zones in a cover 2, in sub sets especially where he'd be more of a linebacker. I know a lot of people hate on Green, but he was a LOT better last year and I think his best fit is as a deep safety, playing opposite of Hooker in a cover 2. I think we're going to see a lot of three safety sets, as it's one of the deepest positions we have. 

 

Also, I'm thinking (and hopeful) that Eberflus mixes up our coverages a lot. We'll definitely be a zone based team, I just don't want to be too predictable using the same coverage shell all game. One thing I feel certain about, we will not see Tony Dungy's Tampa 2, bend but don't break style. It'll be a more aggressive defense. Ballard wants guys that can force turnovers, not give receivers ten yard cushions and easy catches. 

[chad72]

2 hours ago, The Peytonator said:

 

In my opinion, the only coverage player on our defense that is likely to get a lot of snaps who doesn't fit with a cover 2 all that well is Clayton Geathers. He's not someone I want playing a deep half. In a cover 3 he's a perfect fit dropping down into the box and playing the rover  or flat role. Depending on personnel, I could see him playing one of the middle zones in a cover 2, in sub sets especially where he'd be more of a linebacker. I know a lot of people hate on Green, but he was a LOT better last year and I think his best fit is as a deep safety, playing opposite of Hooker in a cover 2. I think we're going to see a lot of three safety sets, as it's one of the deepest positions we have. 

 

Also, I'm thinking (and hopeful) that Eberflus mixes up our coverages a lot. We'll definitely be a zone based team, I just don't want to be too predictable using the same coverage shell all game. One thing I feel certain about, we will not see Tony Dungy's Tampa 2, bend but don't break style. It'll be a more aggressive defense. Ballard wants guys that can force turnovers, not give receivers ten yard cushions and easy catches. 

 

Yeah, you almost have to use Clayton Geathers like an ILB in this new D, it seems like. He does not have the range like a Bob Sanders or Kam Chancellor to drop back into deep halves. That is why getting another strong safety like Terrell Edmunds (the other Edmunds brother) may not be a bad idea in round 3 to augment what we have. Terrell played CB as a freshman, moved to Rover as a sophomore and then free safety as a junior at Virginia Tech, so he will understand responsibilities fast, IMO.

 

[ColtsBlitz]

Check this guy out: Isaiah Oliver. 

 

Is he available in the 2nd though?

 

Edit: taking him at #6 isn’t out of the question to me either. I just don’t know how much noteriety he has, and if he’d not even be considered in the first round by anyone. 

[krunk]

5 minutes ago, ColtsBlitz said:

Check this guy out: Isaiah Oliver. 

 

Is he available in the 2nd though?

 

Edit: taking him at #6 isn’t out of the question to me either. I just don’t know how much noteriety he has, and if he’d not even be considered in the first round by anyone. 

I really like Oliver but I think he's more of a Day 2-3 prospect.  If we take a corner at those points I think he'd definitely be one of the ones we had on our list.

[krunk]

3 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Yeah, you almost have to use Clayton Geathers like an ILB in this new D, it seems like. He does not have the range like a Bob Sanders or Kam Chancellor to drop back into deep halves. That is why getting another strong safety like Terrell Edmunds (the other Edmunds brother) may not be a bad idea in round 3 to augment what we have. Terrell played CB as a freshman, moved to Rover as a sophomore and then free safety as a junior at Virginia Tech, so he will understand responsibilities fast, IMO.

 

Mostly makes sense but then I look at guys like John Lynch who played the position at a high level in the same/very similar scheme.  Don't recall him having a whole lot of range.  I mean Lynch was like a 4.6 forty guy.  Dont know if we should rule clayton out just yet.  For todays game I think Clayton would be like Keanu Neal.  Clayton is actually a bit faster than Neal.

[ColtsBlitz]

11 minutes ago, krunk said:

I really like Oliver but I think he's more of a Day 2-3 prospect.  If we take a corner at those points I think he'd definitely be one of the ones we had on our list.

If he is still there day 2, I’ll be extremely happy if we take him

[chad72]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

Mostly makes sense but then I look at guys like John Lynch who played the position at a high level in the same/very similar scheme.  Don't recall him having a whole lot of range.  I mean Lynch was like a 4.6 forty guy.  Dont know if we should rule clayton out just yet.  For todays game I think Clayton would be like Keanu Neal.  Clayton is actually a bit faster than Neal.

 

You can get away with it if you mug pass catchers past 5 yards, which they were doing at the time Lynch played safety, so he can get help from the WILL with an extra jab before Lynch makes up ground, you know what I am saying . It then evolved to Bob Sanders and Kam Chancellor, someone who could lay the wood and drop back enough times and be effective. But then, Lynch made up for a lot with his IQ, not sure Geathers is on that level yet.

 

Clayton Geathers' speed does not however translate to the coverage like Keanu Neal's does, IMO.