PDA

View Full Version : Breaking down Safety (ESPiN)


Needa Pass Rush
02-11-2006, 07:59 PM
ESPN.com

Saturday, February 11, 2006

Polamalu is leader of the new school

By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

HONOLULU -- The man who perhaps first represented the "New Age Safety" in the NFL glanced around at the assemblage of talent here following a Thursday practice, nodded and smiled, then agreed that, yeah, the ongoing evolution at the position continues to go pretty nicely, indeed.
Philadelphia Eagles star Brian Dawkins, with creative defensive coordinator Jim Johnson using him as a versatile wind-up toy, was a catalyst for the makeover of the safety position. For years, he was the face of change, the man who most represented the redefinition of a position that had waned in significance around the NFL. Now there are a lot of fresh and compelling faces in the roll call of outstanding safeties in the NFL.

And most of them will be on display in the Pro Bowl on Sunday evening.

None is more familiar than Troy Polamalu, the Pittsburgh Steelers' mane man, and a bit of a Pied Piper here the last couple of days, given his long, black tresses and his Samoan heritage. And none, Dawkins acknowledged, has so much potential to further elevate the profile of the safety position. Polamalu is a consummate hybrid player, so multi-dimensional in his skills set that even veteran coordinator Dick LeBeau is challenged when conjuring up new and devious ways to deploy him.

"You look at a safety like Troy," said Dawkins, "and think, 'Is there anything that this guy can't do?' He can cover. He plays the run tough. You blitz him and he simply does not stay blocked. He just might take the [safety] position to another level."


Brian Dawkins was a key figure in the safety revival.
Truth be told, it seems the safety spot has been uplifted in general over the last few seasons, in part by the seven men here for the Pro Bowl game.

Teams still don't spend a lot of money on safeties, and in the last five years, only seven have been chosen in the first round of the draft. When the NFL Players Association released the "franchise" and "transition" figures for 2006 during Super Bowl week, only two position categories, tight end and punter/kicker, registered lower values. The "franchise" qualifying offer for a safety is $4.109 million, or 30 percent less than that of a cornerback.

But that might be changing, at least a little, with the re-emergence of the safety position.

"For a lot of years, it seems, [safeties] have been on the back burner," said Minnesota Vikings free safety Darren Sharper, whose nine interceptions in 2005 ranked as the third most in the NFL, and who is making his third Pro Bowl appearance. "But coordinators are getting more inventive with how they use safeties. Teams are drafting differently, because they're asking [safeties] to perform so many tasks now. Look at the young guys here and you definitely see where the safety position is going."

Or, in the cases of players such as Polamalu, Bob Sanders of Indianapolis or Roy Williams from Dallas, where it has already arrived.

Said Williams: "I'm sort of [prejudiced] but, with all the responsibilities a safety has now, I think it's become a critical position for any defense. You're going to see a lot of safeties going higher in the draft, I think, in coming years."

Of the seven safeties in the Pro Bowl, none was chosen lower than the third round, and six were either first- or second-round selections.

Counting Mike Brown of Chicago, who will not play because of injury, the seven safeties here demonstrated notable diversity in 2005. The group averaged 76.1 tackles, topped by the 100 stops recorded by Polamalu, and all but two had more than 70 tackles. More importantly, safeties made more game-altering plays in 2005, in part because coordinators often put them in advantageous play-making situations.

Time was, and not all that long ago, that safety was considered the equivalent of playing right field in a Little League game. You plugged a guy, held your breath, and prayed the ball didn't come his way.

"No more," said Carolina Panthers secondary coach Rod Perry, who is part of the NFC staff for Sunday's game. "The way the game is played now, you can't hide your safeties. They're back to being playmakers again."


The safety position has become critical to any defense.
In 2005, the seven Pro Bowl safeties averaged two sacks, 3.3 interceptions, 7.6 passes defensed, 2.1 forced fumbles and 1.3 recoveries. Five of the men here recorded at least one marker in each of the major defensive statistical categories. Even an old, dogged safety like 13-year veteran John Lynch of the Denver Broncos learned some new tricks.

A liability in coverage at age 34, Lynch was used more as a blitzer in 2005, and had four sacks, after notching only eight sacks in the first dozen seasons of his career. He also forced a career-high four fumbles.

Lynch wasn't the only older safety taking advantage of the new emphasis on the position. In his 10th season, Dawkins, 32, was as good as ever. He had 77 tackles, 3.5 sacks, four forced fumbles, two recoveries, three interceptions and an amazing 19 passes defensed. That's more pass break-ups than most starting NFL cornerbacks recorded in 2005.

"I don't know how [a defense] can line up anymore without a safety who has some cornerback-type coverage skills," Dawkins said. "Having a guy like that means that you can play your 'base' defense more, you don't have to substitute nearly as much, and things are less confusing. I really feel like it's becoming kind of a golden age for safeties again. The fact there are so many great safeties here is an indication of that."

Len Pasquarelli is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com. To check out Len's chat archive, click here .

SpringStein
02-11-2006, 08:06 PM
Time was, and not all that long ago, that safety was considered the equivalent of playing right field in a Little League game. You plugged a guy, held your breath, and prayed the ball didn't come his way.

"No more," said Carolina Panthers secondary coach Rod Perry, who is part of the NFC staff for Sunday's game. "The way the game is played now, you can't hide your safeties. They're back to being playmakers again."


The safety position has become critical to any defense.

Why I'd love to see us use an early pick to get an impact safety!

shakenbake
02-11-2006, 08:35 PM
Michael Huff !!!!

Dr. Broncenstein
02-11-2006, 08:59 PM
Michael Huff !!!!

Agreed....

I want a ballhawk safety with linebacker size and corner speed....

watermock
02-11-2006, 09:30 PM
Wow...he must of read a comments I made here over the last half year.

With all the spread offenses, having a Safety that can man up of a fast WR/TE is critical. This is no longer the last line of defense, it's becoming a critical position. You can't just have a bruiser like the old days, they will just get penalties.

You need a cover safety that just tackles.

watermock
02-11-2006, 09:31 PM
I don't see safety as an an immediate need this year honestly.

ludo21
02-11-2006, 09:38 PM
I don't see safety as an an immediate need this year honestly.


me neither. Maybe next year.

Guess what, we get a solid DL, we can put whoever we want back there and we will rule. Lynch and Fergy were NOT liabilities this season, they played great. MAybe drafting a guy with potential in the later roudns, but first day, i dont htink so.

RMT
02-11-2006, 09:38 PM
we sure were spoiled by the Atwater & Smith combo in the secondary all those years.

Dr. Broncenstein
02-11-2006, 09:56 PM
me neither. Maybe next year.

Guess what, we get a solid DL, we can put whoever we want back there and we will rule. Lynch and Fergy were NOT liabilities this season, they played great. MAybe drafting a guy with potential in the later roudns, but first day, i dont htink so.

Look at what Palomalu does for Pittsburg. That defense is nowhere near as good if they had Nick Ferguson instead. I like Fergy... he's servicable. When you can put a 9th guy in the box who can drop and cover the whole field, it changes the entire game.

eddie mac
02-11-2006, 10:02 PM
I heard our coaches will be looking at this guy at the combine.

Play2win
02-11-2006, 10:07 PM
Who would you rather have, RIGHT NOW, Palomalu or ED REED?

Dr. Broncenstein
02-11-2006, 10:09 PM
Who would you rather have, RIGHT NOW, Palomalu or ED REED?

Palomalu....

Dr. Broncenstein
02-11-2006, 10:11 PM
Who would you rather have, RIGHT NOW, Palomalu or ED REED?

Don't get me started about Ed Reed... He should be a Bronco... Would have been a Bronco if I was GM on that fateful day. Makes me want to puke.....

ludo21
02-11-2006, 10:12 PM
Who would you rather have, RIGHT NOW, Palomalu or ED REED?

Reed, but its almost a push, both are awesome!

Plamalu is more aggressive and ths more suspectable to big plays.

I agree Troy is a beast and is awesome, but our safeties are both good. Maybe we should draft a youngster for the future, but with Browner already having the system down, i dont see anyone outside the first round who is better for us.

Odysseus
02-11-2006, 10:20 PM
"I don't know how [a defense] can line up anymore without a safety who has some cornerback-type coverage skills," Dawkins said. "Having a guy like that means that you can play your 'base' defense more, you don't have to substitute nearly as much, and things are less confusing. I really feel like it's becoming kind of a golden age for safeties again. The fact there are so many great safeties here is an indication of that."

I would rather have Palomalu than Reed. A holy man? Come on now. What's not to love about 10 feet of hair?

ncjmirabile
02-11-2006, 11:01 PM
Denver has schemed to hide the lack of coverage by our safeties. It always seems to get exposed in one way or another. Denver has to take care of this.

Play2win
02-11-2006, 11:04 PM
Can you imagine a backfield with both Ed Reed and CHAMP!!!

I mean, holy ****e !!!!

Dr. Broncenstein
02-11-2006, 11:06 PM
Denver has schemed to hide the lack of coverage by our safeties. It always seems to get exposed in one way or another. Denver has to take care of this.

By scheme you must be referring to blitzing every play while backing the corners 10 yards off the ball in man coverage..... and Pittsburg figured it out.

Play2win
02-11-2006, 11:08 PM
Denver has schemed to hide the lack of coverage by our safeties. It always seems to get exposed in one way or another. Denver has to take care of this.
If you think about it, our defense the last 3 years has schemed against this or that weakness. Really ever since COYER has been in charge. First it was the CB's, Then it was the DLINE and now its The Safeties. If we can just get a full unit without any noticable weakness, with the talent we already have, imagine what COYER can do!!

Really the GLUE that has been and continues to hold our Defense together is our LINEBACKERS!! Long Live AL WILSON!!!!!

watermock
02-11-2006, 11:12 PM
"I don't know how [a defense] can line up anymore without a safety who has some cornerback-type coverage skills," Dawkins said. "Having a guy like that means that you can play your 'base' defense more, you don't have to substitute nearly as much, and things are less confusing. I really feel like it's becoming kind of a golden age for safeties again. The fact there are so many great safeties here is an indication of that."

I would rather have Palomalu than Reed. A holy man? Come on now. What's not to love about 10 feet of hair?

Took the words out of my mouth. Dawkins speaks the truth. Your safties have to be able to cover to keep the base defense in, or at least in a nickle.

crazyhorse
02-12-2006, 06:49 AM
Have you people forgotten you have no pass rush? There is no safety in the league that would flourish behind the Browncos.

ludo21
02-12-2006, 08:37 AM
Have you people forgotten you have no pass rush? There is no safety in the league that would flourish behind the Browncos.


even a cheffie fans knows this guys, its simple!!!

Tombstone RJ
02-12-2006, 10:22 AM
The Broncos need two things out of this draft: a blue chip DE and a blue chip Safety.

If they get these two players, and, perhaps an olineman in the later rounds, I'll be happy.

Florida_Bronco
02-12-2006, 03:06 PM
Have you people forgotten you have no pass rush? There is no safety in the league that would flourish behind the Browncos.

That's just a bit extreme.

Our problem isn't pass rush, our problem is consistency and actually getting to the QB, our players just have trouble finishing the job.

OrangeShadow
02-12-2006, 03:20 PM
Don't get me started about Ed Reed... He should be a Bronco... Would have been a Bronco if I was GM on that fateful day. Makes me want to puke.....

reed wasnt even next on the board for denver,if it wasnt ash it would have been javon walker

that said


HUFF IN 06!!!

watermock
02-12-2006, 03:27 PM
reed wasnt even next on the board for denver,if it wasnt ash it would have been javon walker

that said


HUFF IN 06!!!

Were you in Denver's War Room? Did Shanny PM you to tell you who was next up on the board? We drafted Ed Reed that year, but I do agree we may of not taken him...he was slotted a few spots down...I was talking a slight downtrade to get him...but when Reeves took Duckett you had to take Lelie...so weird...Vick and lelie was the perfect fit, and Reeves passes...he's on the golf course now basically...

It's a crap shoot...I hope we dont get shot by Cheney this year....

crazyhorse
02-12-2006, 06:32 PM
That's just a bit extreme.

Our problem isn't pass rush, our problem is consistency and actually getting to the QB, our players just have trouble finishing the job.

I appreciate your point. But it is, simply put, homeristic.

The numbers may be a bit off. But you went from 25 or so sacks, which was the worst, or one of the worst in the league last season to 16 or 18 or so this season. Which was by far the worst in the league.

The Broncos were a blitzing team this season for that reason. If you cant get a sack sending the house, then you cant get a sack. Looking at the passing defense numbers are also a strong indicator that I know what I'm talking about.

The Chiefs game at Invesco not withstanding, the Browncos should be embarassed with thier pass rush. Hell the Chiefs had a better front 4, and that aint sayin much.