Syracusecards
DA's pass went that way
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2004
- Posts
- 4,314
- Reaction score
- 4,504
You must be the smart one, Maryland is a hell of a lot nicer than Syracuse.
Clancy on 910 am this morning
- Thread starter football karma
- Start date
You must be the smart one, Maryland is a hell of a lot nicer than Syracuse.
cardsfanmd
ASFN Icon
There aint much like coming home though. Its geting warm enough now that I can go up there to visit everyone without having to worry about driving through a snowstorm.
cardsfanmd
ASFN Icon
My wife was scared out of her mind the first time I brought her up there.
JeffGollin
ASFN Icon
Syracuse - isn't that where the school with the losing lacrosse record is located?
PS Hope the fish are biting in Lake Casanovia this Spring.
:hijacked:
Scot1
Registered
Before this gets shut down, I have a question: if ILBs (KD) aren't going to be asked to cover TEs in the 3-4, and OLBs (Okeafor/Berry) also aren't going to be asked to (as summaries of Clancy on p. 1 indicate), just who IS going to cover the TE? Dockett? Watson? If we rely on Wilson because we need the LBs elsewhere, don't we get pretty thin in pass defense?
I ask simply out of desire to know.
I ask simply out of desire to know.
BigRedArk
ASFN Lifer
Interesting. BigWatson kept telling me in no uncertain terms that Branch is not a NT, rather a DE only in another thread earlier this week.
uh yeah...because thats what he is. what did you expect him to say? "branch sucks at NT. damn. we will have to move him to DE"?
if he KNOWS branch can be a dominant nose tackle, which is exactly what we need right now, why move him to DE? why even consider it? doesnt make any sense.
Last edited:
cardsfanmd
ASFN Icon
No, its the school with the most National Championships in College Lacrosse. 5 of the best players ever wore the Blue and Orange. The Gait Bros. and the Powells. Regrettably, they also had Jim Brown at one time.
JeffGollin
ASFN Icon
Back in the day. What's the Orangemen's record this year?
(Smoke 'em, Jays!!!!)
joeshmo
Kangol Hat Aficionado
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2004
- Posts
- 17,247
- Reaction score
- 1
In the summary it did not say that Dansby wont be covering a TE in pass D. I think you are reading it wrong. It stated, "wont have to deal with being head up on a TE all the time". It doesnt mean Dansby or Hayes wont be covering a TE, it means they wont be facing the TE as a blocker.
BigRedArk
ASFN Lifer
uh yeah...because thats what he is. what did you expect him to say? "branch sucks at NT. damn. we will have to move him to DE"?
if he KNOWS branch can be a dominant nose tackle, which is exactly what we need right now, why move him to DE? why even consider it? doesnt make any sense.
Huh? We have Watson for NT and Clancy could rotate in there too and be decent at it (although he is somewhat on the light side for it). You said that he is not a NT even though he played that position in college if I am not mistaken. So what is he then? Are you saying he is a DE that will masquarade as a NT? Do you know more than Pendergast?
i'm not saying he can't play NT at all. he probably can. but why move him to NT? we already have our NT in gabe watson. what we need right now is a big, talented DE opposite dockett. now that would be one heck of a line. brach is very similar to richard seymour and nobody has ever thought about moving seymour to NT. that would be insane. get him in shape, make him lose about 10 pounds and he would be a terrific 3-4 DE.
BigRedArk
ASFN Lifer
Yeah he needs to make an impact somewhere this year. We gave up a lot for him I think.
JeffGollin
ASFN Icon
but why move him to NT? we already have our NT in gabe watson.
You need at least 2 NT's. They wear down after continually occupying 2 blockers at POA. From the standpoint of pure physical talent, Branch is said to be a better NT than Watson; so ideally (at least at this early point in the offseason) a depth chart consisting of Branch and Watson at NT would make a lot of sense.Clancy, Dockett, Kolodziej, Cooper and possibly Lewis are big enough yet still mobile enough to move outside in the traditional 3 - 4. And there might be a rare scheme or two where you could still wind up with both Branch and Watson on the field at the same time.
You need at least 2 NT's. They wear down after continually occupying 2 blockers at POA. From the standpoint of pure physical talent, Branch is said to be a better NT than Watson; so ideally (at least at this early point in the offseason) a depth chart consisting of Branch and Watson at NT would make a lot of sense.Clancy, Dockett, Kolodziej, Cooper and possibly Lewis are big enough yet still mobile enough to move outside in the traditional 3 - 4. And there might be a rare scheme or two where you could still wind up with both Branch and Watson on the field at the same time.
IMO, this is a fairly good take.
I never was all that much of a Kolodziej fan, but I have to admit some of his best play seemed to come once they moved him out to DE.
I've said it many times before, we are probably going to see all sorts of combos personnel-wise and hybrid formations with 3-5 if not more at times literally on the line of scrimmage, depending on the team we play, and the game-time situation.
I expect to see a lot of bodies moving on and off the field constantly.
Welcome 4devil to ASFN.
