Quote:I feel like he can take Odricks spot opposite of Yannick
He is a quality player, without question.
However, TC has given indications that the scheme will change.
To what degree is uncertain at this point. But if one of the changes involves the abandonment of the big DE concept we've been running these past few years, then Richardson would not be a fit at DE, unless the switch was to a 3-4 (unlikely given the personnel on the team and TC's history).
Quote:He is a quality player, without question.
However, TC has given indications that the scheme will change.
To what degree is uncertain at this point. But if one of the changes involves the abandonment of the big DE concept we've been running these past few years, then Richardson would not be a fit at DE, unless the switch was to a 3-4 (unlikely given the personnel on the team and TC's history)
.
As an aside, doesn't this seem odd, given Coughlin's exposure / length of experience with Parcells? Granted, three seasons may not have been enough to leave that much of an impression, and Coughlin is more of an Offensive coach, but you would think that a scheme that helped him win a Super Bowl title would carry more weight. It just seems like an oddity to me that he never adopted a 3-4 and even went so far as to push Capers into a 4-3 while he was on staff.
Trading a 3rd for a one year $8M rental for a player who's shown he's lazy on the field and is a load of trouble off the field seems like a really bad idea.
Quote:Trading a 3rd for a one year $8M rental for a player who's shown he's lazy on the field and is a load of trouble off the field seems like a really bad idea.
It would be contingent on extending the contract I think. Much like Thomas taking a pay cut to go to Miami
At least it should be IMO
Quote:Trading a 3rd for a one year $8M rental for a player who's shown he's lazy on the field and is a load of trouble off the field seems like a really bad idea.
Go ask Baltimore how they liked doing this with Eugene Monroe a while back. They gave up a Fourth and a Fifth, signed the guy to a $37 million dollar deal after a year, and got less than a dozen games out of him if I remember correctly.
Granted, Richardson seems like more of a knucklehead than Monroe, but those one-year trade types make my teeth itch.
Quote:As an aside, doesn't this seem odd, given Coughlin's exposure / length of experience with Parcells? Granted, three seasons may not have been enough to leave that much of an impression, and Coughlin is more of an Offensive coach, but you would think that a scheme that helped him win a Super Bowl title would carry more weight. It just seems like an oddity to me that he never adopted a 3-4 and even went so far as to push Capers into a 4-3 while he was on staff.
It is odd.
I have long wondered how coaches arrive at their particular philosophies.
I know some adopt approaches based upon personnel.
But I know some have a preferred philosophy and bring in players to fit the scheme. Historically, defensive minded coaches often prefer a conservative, ball control offense.
If I could talk with coaches, one of the things I'd ask is why the preference of one philosophy over another.
I have a buddy I've debated 3-4 v. 4-3 with for as long as I've known him-about 23 years.
I'd love to get head coaches' perspectives on these things. Concocting theories about it is fun, but ultimately I'd love to one day hear from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Quote:I used to hate 3-4 defenses because when DEs were moved back to OLBs, they struggled with the position change. If the Jets want to run their defense that way, they should have four real linebackers.
Draftniks have gotten so bad at projecting rush OLBs vs RDEs they've given up and now call them the mythical "EDGE" creature.
Laziness on their part, because not all players are suited one or the other (or both) positions. Takes the homework out of the equation, not having to analyze which would be the best fit (depending on what position they are drafted to play.) You can't do analysis on "edge" because it's not a position that exists. It's either RDE or OLB, but the homework doesn't go that far anymore.
Quote:Draftniks have gotten so bad at projecting rush OLBs vs RDEs they've given up and now call them the mythical "EDGE" creature.
Laziness on their part, because not all players are suited one or the other (or both) positions. Takes the homework out of the equation, not having to analyze which would be the best fit (depending on what position they are drafted to play.) You can't do analysis on "edge" because it's not a position that exists. It's either RDE or OLB, but the homework doesn't go that far anymore.
As a general rule, I believe in keeping players in their "native" positions.
If you play with your hand on the ground in college, you should keep it on the ground in the NFL. If you played in a two point stance in college, you should stay in a two point stance in the NFL.
Of course there are exceptions, and athletes that are athletic enough and versatile enough to do both.
But as a rule of thumb, I think players should stay where they are-positionally.
a 4th and a 7th I would do. Only because we won't make a splash DL signing like we did with jackson last year. This way we can go Fournette round 1 if we fix the OL up.
I'll take Sheldon Richardson and Bryce Petty for Blake Bortles
Either way, Allen is going to be better player than Richardson so I'm not giving up more than a 3rd & 5th for a player who is unreliable and had a drop off in production
Quote:As an aside, doesn't this seem odd, given Coughlin's exposure / length of experience with Parcells? Granted, three seasons may not have been enough to leave that much of an impression, and Coughlin is more of an Offensive coach, but you would think that a scheme that helped him win a Super Bowl title would carry more weight. It just seems like an oddity to me that he never adopted a 3-4 and even went so far as to push Capers into a 4-3 while he was on staff.
Not that it's been rendered meaningless, but the debate between 4-3 vs 3-4 philosophy isn't as important as it used to be. Based on the continued growing percentage of snaps league wide with 5 DBs on the field, nickel has supplanted both of them as the new base D.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/heres-...n-the-nfl/
On topic: Richardson is intriguing, but looking at arguments from both sides I think I'd have to lean toward passing on that trade scenario at that price.