Our secondary has a real shot at being special next year.


 

If the team can re-sign Prince while drafting an elite S at #4, it shouldn't matter what scheme they run.

 

Would you favor using the first pick to draft an elite safety over a RB like Fournette or Cook?

---

That doesn't mean the fans have to.


We used to be able to talk about Henderson and Stroud without parroting the talking heads who started talking about "tech" this and "tech" that recently.


We can do without all the fake coachspeak coming from fans, IMO.

Theres nothing wrong with speaking more specifically and being more informed about schemes and alignment.

---

Theres nothing wrong with speaking more specifically and being more informed about schemes and alignment.

 

While I agree, speaking specifically and overusing jargon are two different things.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

While I agree, speaking specifically and overusing jargon are two different things.

well sure. But for whatever reason people have gravitated toward hating the leo/otto designations as if


a) were the only one who uses specific designations(were not)


b ) these designations are vastly different from the regular position(theyre different, but not by alot)


c) these designations are making it harder to find good players to play them (they dont, were just bad at drafting)

---

well sure. But for whatever reason people have gravitated toward hating the leo/otto designations as if


a) were the only one who uses specific designations(were not)


b ) these designations are vastly different from the regular position(theyre different, but not by alot)


c) these designations are making it harder to find good players to play them (they dont, were just bad at drafting)

 

Someone get this man an apostrophe!  

 

(I'm kidding)

 

I actually appreciate usage of terms indicating alignments and gap assignments for d-linemen.  

 

Two DTs side-by-side in the middle of a 4/3 front can be employed a number of different ways and I don't mind being more specific about that stuff. 

 

Leo and Otto never bugged me either.  It's not that different. Folks are just annoyed by the hype it generated but never delivered on under Bradley -  and they take it out on the jargon.

---

Would you favor using the first pick to draft an elite safety over a RB like Fournette or Cook?

 

 

Unless Fournette or Cook is the next FT... yeah.

---

'02

Someone get this man an apostrophe!  

 

, 

---

well sure. But for whatever reason people have gravitated toward hating the leo/otto designations as if


a) were the only one who uses specific designations(were not)


b ) these designations are vastly different from the regular position(theyre different, but not by alot)


c) these designations are making it harder to find good players to play them (they dont, were just bad at drafting)

 

Someone get this man an apostrophe!  

 

(I'm kidding)

 

I actually appreciate usage of terms indicating alignments and gap assignments for d-linemen.  

 

Two DTs side-by-side in the middle of a 4/3 front can be employed a number of different ways and I don't mind being more specific about that stuff. 

 

Leo and Otto never bugged me either.  It's not that different. Folks are just annoyed by the hype it generated but never delivered on under Bradley -  and they take it out on the jargon.

 

It's not the terms that bug me, either.  I agree with both of you in that sense.

 

But to the extent the paradigms of the players those terms represent reflect the lack of productivity we see on the field, people are going to be bothered by them.

 

Skuta played OTTO and was never a difference maker on the defense, therefore people will hate the OTTO position.

 

The scheme itself has proven it works.

 

It worked in Seattle for years, bringing them to two Super Bowls, winning one.

 

It worked in Atlanta, especially later in the year, to the extent they reached the Super Bowl this season.

 

It worked here to a 6th overall ranking.  Now people may quibble over whether that ranking reflects true defensive effectiveness/dominance, but the numbers objectively are there.

 

The LEO concept has been utilized since the 1980s with the 49ers (Fred Dean, Charles Haley), and they won Super Bowls with it (though they called they called their LEO the "elephant).

 

I think to maximize the playmaking effectiveness of this scheme (with all of the quirky positional nicknames), we may need to see Allen or Garrett move to LDE, Ngakoue continue to develop at LEO, and move Fowler to OTTO.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I think alot of the OTTO hate comes from the way Myles Jack didn't start the first few games of the year and played limited snaps

---

It isn't the scheme it is the poor implementation or misuse or miscast of players....

 

Like... we don't have a good "LEO"

but we're gonna keep playing guys there.

 

Or... we don't have a good FS but we're gonna leave him on an island anyway...

 

etc etc

---