BDL Discussion Thread 2022

[VigilantZombie]

For the most part I see people using nickel corners as nickel corners slot receivers as slot receivers et cetera. there are situations Where we are differing from a player's actual position in the NFL where they might be And outside linebacker and we are using them as an inside line backer or they are a 4-3 defensive tackle and we are using them as a 3-4 defensive end. But there is reasonable logic to that 

[MWil23]

1 minute ago, Scoundrel said:

In this league you would be

Got it. So I'd get penalized for having both L.T. and T.J. Watt and having them occasionally drop into coverage since they were never asked to do it...that's just weird to think about.

And I suppose having Tomlinson or Marshall Faulk as a slot WR in some situations if I had another dynamic HOF level RB would also be a bad decision.

...I don't get it

[Whicker]

2 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

 I think it's fair to Say that we disagree with you I think that suggesting a player that's never really played the slot can play the flat or Nickelback back doesn't make a lot of sense. I mean that's almost like saying it makes sense to you the defensive tackle at linebacker even though he weighs 300 pounds and hasn't ever done it because it's creative and this is a fantasy league.

You are really far away from what we're arguing. You disagree and that's fine. 

[Scoundrel]

Just now, MWil23 said:

Got it. So I'd get penalized for having both L.T. and T.J. Watt and having them occasionally drop into coverage since they were never asked to do it...that's just weird to think about.

And I suppose having Tomlinson or Marshall Faulk as a slot WR in some situations if I had another dynamic HOF level RB would also be a bad decision.

...I don't get it

I hear you

[Ragnarok]

7 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

DUDE, those weren't even CLOSE to the same systems and you know it. The scheme was still very predicated upon the short game while utilizing Moss's ability to hit homeruns. It wasn't an intermediate/deep passing attack like Tampa Bay at all. As a matter of fact, that would have been the Big Ben Steelers years or the late Manning years in Indy

More on this in a second

I'm having fun

That's all I'm saying, is that there should be the opportunity to preface things with a few caveats of understanding schematically of what team x is trying to do (IRL or here) as opposed to "Nuh uh that's a totally separate position".

To be honest, I'd argue that a RT in a ZBS can absolutely play RG or LG depending upon the system and who that player is.

See: Joel Bitonio, Quentin Nelson, and a bunch of those early 2000s Chiefs OL

Which is fine as long as people aren't closed minded to selective application of the "separate positions".

"Depending on the system and who the player is"

That i agree with.  However, doing it in college is not evidence for me.

[Whicker]

3 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

I'd argue that in this scenario, due to those other two being elite athletes with elite ball skills and man ability, you should absolutely have Sherman on the outside with either Champ or Revis in the slot.

Sherman doesn't have the athleticism (and never did) laterally to excel in man slot situations, but in terms of playing press man on the outside or as a Cover 3 corner, he was hard to beat in any of that.

JMHO

.................

[Whicker]

2 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Got it. So I'd get penalized for having both L.T. and T.J. Watt and having them occasionally drop into coverage since they were never asked to do it...that's just weird to think about.

And I suppose having Tomlinson or Marshall Faulk as a slot WR in some situations if I had another dynamic HOF level RB would also be a bad decision.

...I don't get it

So this applies to any position not named CB? 

[Whicker]

3 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

For the most part I see people using nickel corners as nickel corners slot receivers as slot receivers et cetera. there are situations Where we are differing from a player's actual position in the NFL where they might be And outside linebacker and we are using them as an inside line backer or they are a 4-3 defensive tackle and we are using them as a 3-4 defensive end. But there is reasonable logic to that 

There's reasonable logic that a CB would play CB, yes, I agree 

[MWil23]

1 minute ago, Ragnarok said:

"Depending on the system and who the player is"

That i agree with. 

Excellent

1 minute ago, Ragnarok said:

However, doing it in college is not evidence for me.

Which is absolutely FAIR. However, you specifically asked if he played inside IN BUFFALO, and then used that answer to dictate whether or not that fit into this specific situation.

 

[VigilantZombie]

Just now, Whicker said:

There's reasonable logic that a CB would play CB, yes, I agree 

 Except that you are choosing the narrative that you want not responding to what I actually said. Richard Sherman is not a nickel corner he his o'corner he has never been a nickel corner. He has always been a one side zone coverage corner On the outside does that mean he cannot play nickel not necessarily but does it make it illogical for him to be played at Nicole yes I think it does.

[MWil23]

2 minutes ago, Whicker said:

.................

Okay, let's say you have Bailey, Revis, and Deion all in their prime. Who says any of those guys can't play inside? I agree with you here.

Sherman has always been an outside guy or a S due to his skill-set, whereas those other 3 guys that I just named are all better and more versatile.

[Whicker]

Just now, wwhickok said:

 Except that you are choosing the narrative that you want not responding to what I actually said. Richard Sherman is not a nickel corner he his o'corner he has never been a nickel corner. He has always been a one side zone coverage corner On the outside does that mean he cannot play nickel not necessarily but does it make it illogical for him to be played at Nicole yes I think it does.

The fact that he plays CB makes him eligible for CB in BDL. 

[Whicker]

Just now, MWil23 said:

Okay, let's say you have Bailey, Revis, and Deion all in their prime. Who says any of those guys can't play inside? I agree with you here.

Sherman has always been an outside guy or a S due to his skill-set, whereas those other 3 guys that I just named are all better and more versatile.

 

Just now, Whicker said:

The fact that he plays CB makes him eligible for CB in BDL. 

 

[MWil23]

2 minutes ago, Whicker said:

So this applies to any position not named CB? 

(I was agreeing with your heart behind what you were saying just not necessarily Sherman himself. I'm saying those other two guys would absolutely fit into playing slot CB or outside)

[Whicker]

Just now, MWil23 said:

(I was agreeing with your heart behind what you were saying just not necessarily Sherman himself. I'm saying those other two guys would absolutely fit into playing slot CB or outside)

So this is specifically about Sherman and not about the fact that I believe CBs should play CB in BDL