Recruiting Hierarchy

[Chicken_N_Roffles]

Jimmy Johnson "build inside-out". This goes to the Matt Thomas discussion as well. Look throughout our history vs. FSU's. We had the dominant inside guys(DT, MLB, S). FSU probably has the better outside guys(DE,OLB,CB). Give me a Suh or Fairely(or any of our old school guys) any day of the week over a Clowney. Don't care who gets paid more in the NFL.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Its not like you get to put in an order for suhs or fairlelys over clowneys. If you did, give me jim kelly and michael irvin. Aw ****, ray lewis and sean taylor too.

All teams are going to roughly balamce their numbers across the positions. So all spots are getting recruited. If the only question is where you'd spend your money in a salary cap draft, i generally agree inside first, though as with all game theory, there's no absolute answer -- it really matters what other teams do and what the prices are -- if everyone goes for interior dl, they will be overpriced relative to other positions, net net. (Which is why they generally up in the SEC btw. )

 

[CaneSuger]

College football is even more pass-happy than the NFL. You watch a lot of college teams and they're basically playing tag football out there.

That being the case, I think it's EVEN MORE TRUE in the college ranks compared to the NFL, that if you can pressure the quarterback without committing to a blitz, you can have a really good defense.

Defensive Ends give you that pressure.

I'm gonna take the DT side here. This is college. When you have a DT that dominates it takes away the middle. You can chip and do little things to disrupt a DE. Throw quick passes and whatnot.


The Canes are the best example. When is the last time we had a dominant DT? Wilfork? We were good then. We have had DE's and still sucked. Calais Campbell, etc. Bama has DT's and they dominate. So does LSU. Oklahoma has had some DT's as well.

 

[CaneSuger]

I agree with you that football is always changing and evolving. There was a time when DT's were the most important position on defense, and I would have put middle linebacker as second most important. However, that pendulum has swung, and right now it's all about stopping the spreads and the west coast offenses of the world.

Getting a good pass rush is the single most important feature of a modern defense, IMO.

Maybe college football is ready for a power running team to just start steamrolling over people, I don't know. I don't doubt that it will swing back in that direction one day though... just not today.

The fact that offensive lines have evolved is the reason Ends are more valuable in today's game, more so than ever. Putting pressure on the QB is the focal point of the defense, and most pass pressure will come from the ends.

The fact that the NFL generally pays Defensive Ends better is evidence that I'm on to something. At least, it proves that the NFL values Defensive Ends over Defensive Tackles (though both are very important).

Also, why are offensive tackles considered to be more valuable than offensive guards? Same reason.

Then why are NFL Defensive Ends paid more than Defensive Tackles?

Wholly disagree with this, especially when you take into account supply/demand.

What's the support for your statement that DEs are more important than DTs? Is it that they're paid more in the NFL or is it that football has become a passing game?

5 of the last 7 NFL drafts have a DT (3-4 SSDE, the Richard Seymour position, counts as a DT to me) taken before a DE. I strongly believe that, whatever the glamour position may be, a defense starts inside. The reason is shockingly simple: the most efficient play for an offense (who's charged with the task of marching toward its goal, the end zone, in the most efficient way possible) is to run directly down the middle in a straight line for as many yards as possible. The defense's natural reaction is to be able to control the middle of every play.

In fact, I think you've seen general managers believe in this so much that it forced an emphasis on DTs --> which led to offenses adjusting to a spread sets --> which led to the need you've described for edge guys. However, what will you see if teams decide to de-emphasize DTs? Offenses will once again adjust for efficiency. They'll run I-Formation HB Slams for 6-8 yards at a time until defenses once again adjust.

And, therein lies the beauty of football. It's like the Free Market. Supply, demand, corrections, adjustments in the name of efficiency. And, in the end, the name of the game is whatever produces the most output (for an offense) or whatever slows down that output (defense).

Football is life?

 

[bobbo31]

I agree with Swagger that an Offensive playmaker is probably the most important piece to a team. Vince Young, Tim Tebow, Cam Newton absolutely carried their teams to win NC's. But after that a dominant DT is next on my list guys like Suh, Fairley, etc. could absolutely take over games stuffing the middle of the field and also providing pressure almost every single passing play. Shutting down the middle of the field is much more important at the college level than the NFL level in my opinion based on the quality of interior OL's in college.

 

[OkieCane]

The SEC defenses won those games, not Tebow or Newton, Oregon scored 19 (almost 30 below their avg)against Cam, who only got 22. OU scored 14 (again almost 30 below avg) against Tebow, who only got 24. Defenses win the SEC titles, not playmakers

 

[moshated305]

The SEC defenses won those games, not Tebow or Newton, Oregon scored 19 (almost 30 below their avg)against Cam, who only got 22. OU scored 14 (again almost 30 below avg) against Tebow, who only got 24. Defenses win the SEC titles, not playmakers

Newton carried that team on his back all year. Yes the defense stepped up in the title game but they were average all year. Fairly was a monster but that defense still had a lot of flaws which did not matter because Cam had one of the all-time great seasons.

 

[OkieCane]

The SEC defenses won those games, not Tebow or Newton, Oregon scored 19 (almost 30 below their avg)against Cam, who only got 22. OU scored 14 (again almost 30 below avg) against Tebow, who only got 24. Defenses win the SEC titles, not playmakers

Newton carried that team on his back all year. Yes the defense stepped up in the title game but they were average all year. Fairly was a monster but that defense still had a lot of flaws which did not matter because Cam had one of the all-time great seasons.

Never said he didn't carry them in the reg season, just stated that in title games, SEC defenses are why they win, not a single dynamic player.

Look up the avg scoring offense each season for the teams that have played against the SEC in the NC game, then look at how much below their avg the SEC defenses hold them too, that's how you win 7 in a row and dominate college football

 

[RepTheGables]

The SEC defenses won those games, not Tebow or Newton, Oregon scored 19 (almost 30 below their avg)against Cam, who only got 22. OU scored 14 (again almost 30 below avg) against Tebow, who only got 24. Defenses win the SEC titles, not playmakers

Newton carried that team on his back all year. Yes the defense stepped up in the title game but they were average all year. Fairly was a monster but that defense still had a lot of flaws which did not matter because Cam had one of the all-time great seasons.

Never said he didn't carry them in the reg season, just stated that in title games, SEC defenses are why they win, not a single dynamic player.

Look up the avg scoring offense each season for the teams that have played against the SEC in the NC game, then look at how much below their avg the SEC defenses hold them too, that's how you win 7 in a row and dominate college football

Even though I agree re: Fairley being the deciding factor vs. Oregon, I think that the phenomenon you're referencing is a result of having over a month to prepare for a single team. That's why the regular season is such a poor indicator for performance in BCS bowl games (including the title game). IMO, the common "Heisman" curse is just an extension of this.

 

[OkieCane]

I think it matters a little (the break), but sub-par non-championship Ds have been lit up in the NC game, even with the layoff (OSU twice, Texas, OU) so it doesn't quite fly. It's the SEC speed those teams aren't used too IMO

the last 6 BCCG opponents have averaged 15 a game againt them

 

[Larry]

College is a bit different than the pro game. You don't NEED an elite QB to win a championship. Sure, its really nice, but last year AJ McCarron and Jordan Jefferson were the quarterbacks of the #1 and #2 programs in the country. My personal #2 team in the country had a 28 year old former baseball player at QB. Oregon had Darron Thomas at QB. Andrew Luck was awesome and generational, as was Peyton Manning and I'd take them 10-out-of-10 times, but they never won a National Title.

IMO, keys to college football success are offensive line (units that are seasoned and battle tested, this means recruiting for these units are most important 2-3 years before you make your run) and the defensive front seven. If you take care of those two (or we can consider it three) areas...you'll consistently be at the top and with the right pieces with it, could be a National Title.

A dominant DT trumps a lot. Auburn doesn't win a National Title without Nick Fairley. Nebraska is run of the mill without Ndamukong Suh. Good college football teams constantly have good defensive tackles. Especially National Champs. Dominant D-Tackles are one of the hardest things to come by, but when you got one, you will probably be one of the top teams in the country.

 

[cowboycane]

Really, what the question comes down to is this, because we are talking archetypes.

If you had the following guys on your recruiting board and had to prioritize, who do you go after hardest?

Andrew Luck
Adrian Peterson
Percy Harvin
Suh (not even going to try and spell it)
Jarvis Jones
Patrick Peterson
Joe Thomas
Luke Kuechly

Personally, I go Luck and then Suh. Leader of the team and lynchpin of the defense. Obviously the distinction is tiny and ideally you snag one of each archetype and if not, you keep looking until you do. But the original question was about prioritizing, and I think if you have a franchise quarterback and franchise DT, you can make up for slights elsewhere on each side of the ball. For instance, a mediocre receiver corps looks better with Luck throwing dimes. A mediocre middle linebacker looks better playing behind Suh.

 

[moshated305]

Really, what the question comes down to is this, because we are talking archetypes.

If you had the following guys on your recruiting board and had to prioritize, who do you go after hardest?

Andrew Luck
Adrian Peterson
Percy Harvin
Suh (not even going to try and spell it)
Jarvis Jones
Patrick Peterson
Joe Thomas
Luke Kuechly

Personally, I go Luck and then Suh. Leader of the team and lynchpin of the defense. Obviously the distinction is tiny and ideally you snag one of each archetype and if not, you keep looking until you do. But the original question was about prioritizing, and I think if you have a franchise quarterback and franchise DT, you can make up for slights elsewhere on each side of the ball. For instance, a mediocre receiver corps looks better with Luck throwing dimes. A mediocre middle linebacker looks better playing behind Suh.

If that DT is Suh, then yes I go with him but not many DTs have the impact that Suh had this level. Every team in the country would trade their best defensive player on their entire roster for Suh LOL Once in a generation player. I think teams get in trouble because they see a guy like Suh and then go out looking for the next Suh but that next guy just isn't Suh. They prioritize that above all else because they saw the impact he had.

Example is USC with Reggie Bush, they went out and got Joe McKnight, thinking he is the next Bush. Wasn't even close. How many teams out there have been looking for a smaller back with speed and saying he can use him like Bush. We had one in Cooper. I see people already saying we can do the same with Duke. Players like Bush don't come around often and when you change your philosophy to try to emulate what him, you will fail more often than not. Another example is UF and Meyer kept trying to find the next Percy Harvin with other small, speedy WRs. They never did.