kurgan's Coach/Film room

[kurgan]

Ok, on the eve of watchable training camp, I wanted to go ahead and get this out.

Replacing Mark Barron.

So, this is a film-less review, and more of a look at what I think might happen coach-wise.  So, putting on my coaching hat, I want to look at how I might think that the Steelers are going to replace the biggest hole in the defense... the 60% of snaps that Mark Barron played last year.

Let's look at basics... we are talking about OUR standard nickel alignment (4-2-5, or 2-4-5 depending on your positional definitions).  Quite frankly, the 30% of 'base' snaps will have Devin Bush and VWill (or UG3 in a pinch), and the 10% of dime/dollar will only have one LB (Bush) on the field.  We are talking about nickel, which we are in more than base, but less than dime.

Quick rabbit hole, we actually play two different nickel packages... the standard 4-2-5 and the 'big safety' 3-3-5.  For the purposes of 'this' argument, the personnel is very similar, but the extra safety comes at the expense of the traditional nickel-backer.  (You are keeping the nose in, and replacing the second MLB with a bigger cover safety.) . While this is certainly on the table to use, the personnel would be the same.  What I mean is that whether we are talking about a nickelbacker or big safety, I see them as being the same person.

OK, so for me... the numbers are easy.  The 60% of the snaps that Barron played were roughly the 60% of nickel snaps.  While there are some outliers, the basic formula is the following for converting from Base to Nickel (in addition to taking the NT off and Hilton on):

Base 3-4 (MLB):  Bush, VWill

Nickel (MLB): Bush, Barron

 

So, how do we replace the Barron position?  There are two clear paths, and I will talk about each.

Option #1: Replace with a LB-type.  Really only one option here, and that is the ascention of UG3 to be Barron

Option #2: Drop a safety in to nickelbacker to run with Bush.

 

The issue with both of these is depth and personnel.  We have 2 playable LB's in nickel (Bush and UG3) and 2 safeties (Fitzpatrick and Edmunds).

So, as a coach, I am taking option #2 and thus the whole scheme depends on Justin Layne.

 

I can see the confusion from here.  Allow me to explain.  The actual answer is Cam Sutton, but it is way more complicated than that.  Right now, Cam Sutton is the backup CB, backup nickel, and backup safety (Apologies to Curtis Riley).   I can tell you that is a full plate.  Sutton, in 2019, was too valuable to use as a nickel defender.  Having one dude be the backup to everything is crazy, and therefore he was not available to be used in such a way that would be best for him. 

So, this is where Layne comes in.  He has to take the backup outside CB duties off of Sutton.  That way, if Haden or Nelson break a shoelace, Layne goes in.  If we are using Sutton somewhere else, it does not affect the whole defense.  Sutton CAN function as the backup NB in nickel, since you would need a backup for him anyway, and he can slide to NB.  But, if you have two go down, this is why you need Justin Layne.  (In this scenario, I might use UG3 as the backup nickelbacker if Sutton has to move)

So, how would you deploy this set?  For one, I am not moving Fitz from FS.  I would probably use Sutton as a safety as well, so that means Edmunds rolls down.  He could move to the coverbacker/TE eraser role and be closer to the LOS.  Like I said above, there would be no change in personnel to the big safety 3-3-5, other than Sutton plays closer to the LOS and Edmunds goes back to the Cover 2 safety.  I am not a fan of moving Edmunds as I actually think he is improving as a player and is only 23, but I think he can be a killer closer to the LOS and as the nickel backer.  Conversley, you could leave Edmunds and Fitz deep, and play Sutton as more of a box guy, but I don't think that matches his skill set.

Regardless, if I were in the defensive room today, I would be advocating for Layne to step up, and pound the table for Sutton on nickel and dime.  In reality, using Sutton in this way blends nickel, dime and big nickel so we could really cause some issues with offenses.

Looking forward to 2021, hopefully we could resign Sutton as HIlton walks, and Sutton becomes full time NB, and UG3 rolls into the nickelbacker role.  But, if I were a betting man, the Barron snaps are going to be soaked up by Sutton.  BUT, only if Layne can prove himself to be a functional CB #3.  If Layne is not able to do that, I imagine Riley is the next best bet, but that does not inspire me at all.  This is because Sutton would really be too valuable to play so much base.

Thoughts??

 

1. Offensive Line Breakdown aka Where does Feiler play? 
2. Replacing Mark Barron
3. Breaking down the rookies pt.1--Fits and roles--DONE
4. Breaking down the rookies pt. 2--Ceilings and Floors
5. Breaking down the rookies pt.3--UDFA's camp bodies or projects?--1/2 DONE
6. The Enigma of Terrell Edmunds
7. "Can I Cover;" the Mike Hilton Story

 

Edited August 17, 2020 by kurgan

[Dcash4]

Good write up, @kurgan, per usual. Though, while I understand the though process, I do have to disagree with some of it.

I don’t think Sutton wasn’t used last year as a nickel backer because he wore so many hats. I don’t think he was used there because, well, I doubt he fits that role (but as you even mentioned dropping Edmunds does to a T) and we drafted Bush and paid good money to Barron. Basically, I think you can stick a period at the end of the second statement - I don’t think there was any room at the inn of nickel backer due to our committed assets. 

I also don’t agree because of the way I, personally, think that NFL depth is often over analyzed. You will always find Dcash4 in a quote following a complaint of depth with a “yeah, but that’s kinda how the NFL works”. I just don’t think in this scenario that coaches will be afraid to use guys in what might be their best set/scheme/fit/whatever, because of potential injury that may never happen. I’m pretty sure they would all live by - we will cross that bridge when we come to it. I’m not gonna not use Sutton if I think it’s my best option because I’m worried how my defense changes if Haden pulls a hammy in 3 weeks. If that happens, I probably just play less Sutton-Nickle and Dime. I think they will always role with the best option and figure it out later the same way I would expect if Feiler is the best LG and Banner is the best RT that they won’t start Chucks because Banner is also our top back up LT. 

I do agree it would be in our best interest for Layne to be able to step up and allow Sutton to play that Jack of all role, but it’s not something that could concern me enough to not use Sutton in a way that I think makes the team dynamic. 

[kurgan]

While I might buy your first point (Barron essentially being better than the idea of Sutton/Edmunds), I wholeheartedly disagree with the second.

Your backup situation is always a concern, not so much week to week, but in a game.  If Sutton was/is the backup Outside CB, NickelCB and Safety, that is an issue and can take a whole formation/set and throw it out the window.  You can move one guy and slot in another (usually in that spot) but if it happens twice, it is totally off the table.  If someone is gone for a length of time, you have time to figure it out.  In game, that is totally different.  Sutton might be a better CB than Layne, and if someone goes down week to week, he might be the better option and coaches can coach around it.  But, if things happen in game, that is a different thing altogether. 

So much of the gameplan/keys depends on dudes knowing what calls are.  If you are the dime/nickel guy AND the backup FS, you have to know everything.  That goes out the window if you have to take reps at CB.  We essentially had one guy to play all the backup roles last year, and when we had to go even deeper, it was bad.  Now, if you have a specified dude who is the backup CB (Layne), you can use Sutton as a move guy AND backup NB/Safety.

In today's NFL, there is just so much difference when it comes to secondary slots.  Hell, on my high school coaching staff, we have a different coach for safeties than corners.  Safeties do all the adjusting/moving/calls, and yes, the nickelbacker/slot corner is part of that.

Lemme give you a hypothetical.  Nickel alignment has some form of Haden, Nelson, Hilton, Sutton, Bush, Edmunds and Fitz on the back 7.  Haden breaks a shoelace.  IF Sutton now has to go over to outside CB, that kills dime and even some nickel, because he is the adjuster/high safety while Edmunds moves.  Then Riley/Dangerfield come in and are they up to the challenge?  They are less players AND didn't get reps during the week.  However, if you can play Layne as the backup CB, you can leave Sutton alone.  You don't have to replace 2 guys, just 1.  Just like if Minkah breaks a shoelace, you might want to put Riley in, if its short term. 

I hope this makes some sense...

 

[Dcash4]

It definitely makes sense and I get what you are driving at...I just largely think it’s a perfect world view and not applicable in the NFL so often.

Sutton is a 4th year guy who has for three years been the backup outside and inside...starting games at both spots at various times. This will be his second year (that we know of) taking snaps at safety. Regardless of snaps per week, these are not foreign concepts to him. I expect a back up in the NFL to play, know, and understand multiple positions - specifically because roster sizes are so small. 

Edmunds is in his third year as the SS. We are really only asking him to take Nickel backer snaps, which is ultimately  just his box safety role by another name. I understand that The Who’s and when’s and where’s will vary, but again, it’s not a foreign concept. If he NEEDS the snaps at one specific spot by now in order to understand the defense....we got bigger issues to worry about. 

I just don’t buy the Steelers Depot “Sean Davis was bad only because he played different positions” theory.  All three of the positions apply the same concepts and none of that causes his issues understanding angles. At the end of the day, to me, it’s the NFL. Guys have been playing higher level football for at least 7 years (I include most high school). I think Joe Haden can tell you what Minkahs doing on every play. I think Cam Heyward can probably do that too. I’m pretty sure I could walk into an NFL huddle as a former QB with my limited lower level verbiage say “trips left flex Z jet 34 60’s 689 Y Seam” and have the guys understand the concepts. 

I just don’t think this stuff is THAT difficult, but maybe I just have higher expectations. Like I get situational issues early on like how James Washington didn’t understand the route tree coming into the NFL because it’s a big learning curve but it’s even bigger when you come from a college that might run 3 routes. But if he doesn’t understand the tree and it’s variations by year 3...good night.

The Nickel we are talking about has Edmunds, Sutton, Vince Williams, and UG3 as the main swappable guys (at this point). Vince is in what, Like year 8? UG3 is the only one I really concern myself with understanding of role, but that’s still just one role. We have the same coordinator and the same head coach. This should be the easy part  

This doesn’t even cover how I just flat out believe you MUST be flexible and varied in general - so we will have Guys moving around week to week regardless based on opponent, not sitting in one subset. We can’t survive against the Ravens, Bills, or Titans in a 3 safety nickel all game just as we couldn’t survive the Chiefs with Vince Williams in the field. 

3 hours ago, kurgan said:

Your backup situation is always a concern, not so much week to week, but in a game.  If Sutton was/is the backup Outside CB, NickelCB and Safety, that is an issue and can take a whole formation/set and throw it out the window.  You can move one guy and slot in another (usually in that spot) but if it happens twice, it is totally off the table.  If someone is gone for a length of time, you have time to figure it out.  In game, that is totally different.  Sutton might be a better CB than Layne, and if someone goes down week to week, he might be the better option and coaches can coach around it.  But, if things happen in game, that is a different thing altogether. 

I feel like I have been way too long winded but, yay football! So I’m just gonna use a Tomlin-ism to wrap up what I believe is your main concern above.

Such is life. 

Injuries cause change. You have to adapt and move on whether that’s with a weeks notice or a snaps notice. NFL rosters are too small, the talent disparity is too little, and a single game importance is too significant not to use your best guys when you can. That’s what I mean when I say I’m not gonna not use Sutton because what might occur. I’m not folding pocket aces because I think my luck will run out later when I might need it. I’m using Sutton if I think it’s best and if something occurs down the line, we will worry about it then. 

Again, I completely get what you’re saying...but if 3rd and 4th year guys lack understanding and we lack an ability to be flexible, we got much, much bigger fish to fry. The only guys we need to worry about are Layne and UG3...both of which would be playing in singular positions. 

[Dcash4]

3 hours ago, kurgan said:

Lemme give you a hypothetical.  Nickel alignment has some form of Haden, Nelson, Hilton, Sutton, Bush, Edmunds and Fitz on the back 7.  Haden breaks a shoelace.  IF Sutton now has to go over to outside CB, that kills dime and even some nickel, because he is the adjuster/high safety while Edmunds moves.  Then Riley/Dangerfield come in and are they up to the challenge?  They are less players AND didn't get reps during the week.  However, if you can play Layne as the backup CB, you can leave Sutton alone.  You don't have to replace 2 guys, just 1.  Just like if Minkah breaks a shoelace, you might want to put Riley in, if its short term.

Sorry for the double post here, but I meant to respond to the hypothetical directly. I just don’t see the big deal. Move Sutton outside, Slide Edmunds back to his normal SS role (where he should be super comfortable) and being in your next nickel backer - VW or UG3. Are we as good as that starting group? No, but it happens. It actually puts Sutton, Edmunds, and the linebacker into their original roles. There’s a drop off in things going can do, but no limitations in play book understanding. 

You are right about eliminating the key Dime, but that just depends really if you destroy that play page all together (only playing around what, 10% anyway?). Is Layne fall on his face bad or is playing with a limited athlete VW more of an issue in passing downs? 

[Dcash4]

Third post in a row then I promise I’m done. I was looking at the schedule when going through my reply and we can talk about nickel and dime all we want but....god lord we better be ready to stop the run.