ESPN looks at Skins Def stats

[Darth Tater]

Well, part of the reason for the Eagles' worst to first success is because the rest of the NFC East (especially the Giants and Redskins) completely fell apart in 2013.

 

It isn't hard in a race to get to first if your competition is either standing still or rolling backwards.

I think that would worry me if I was an Eagles fan.  As a Redskins fan,  I saw that in 1999 and possible 2012 (though I hope not).  The Cards got a playoff in 1998 because of the power vacuum.  Had the Giants and the Redskins not fallen so hard, the Iggs could have easily started out 1 and 7.  They also got lucky and got to play a Packer team missing Rodgers,

[Darth Tater]

Yeah he didn't get to the QB as much and I'm sure he didn't have the players he wanted, what he had were schemes that forced the opposition to get rid of the ball before they wanted and his schemes forced them to call out their special teams to give our offense the ball back.

 

You don't need sacks to be successful on defense. Sacks are fan material.

I have seen many a TD drive where the offense suffered multiple sacks.  I would say GW's genius here was adapting to the skill sets of his players.  DLs who are good to great at controlling their lanes are much easy to find, are often cheap and do more damage than pure rush linemen.  The other issue was TOs.  As has been shown many times, getting fumble recoveries is more about luck but we did force an awful lot of them.

[darrelgreenie]

Id add NT and take away DE. Coefield isn't a true 34 nose but would be a perfect 34 end

Maybe so BUT Haslett likes Cofield at NT.

And if you think about it what we really need up front is more pass rush/penetration.

While Cofield isn't great against the run you'll be hard pressed to find a NT that gets more penetration/pass rush.

So the question becomes which addition or shuffle is more likely to create the most net penetration/pass rush?

Keep Cofield at NT and add another DE that can pass rush/penetrate or Move Cofield to DE and look for a NT that can pass rush and penetrate like Cofield can? 

[Cyclops]

Maybe so BUT Haslett likes Cofield at NT.

And if you think about it what we really need up front is more pass rush/penetration.

While Cofield isn't great against the run you'll be hard pressed to find a NT that gets more penetration/pass rush.

So the question becomes which addition or shuffle is more likely to create the most net penetration/pass rush?

Keep Cofield at NT and add another DE that can pass rush/penetrate or Move Cofield to DE and look for a NT that can pass rush and penetrate like Cofield can? 

That may be true but Id rather have our NT get 1-3 sacks a year having him more of a space eating 0 teq NT that commands a double team every single down. A Vince Wilkfork mold. Id like to be able to find the article KDawg made about what type of Line we run. Id rather have the line occupy the blockers and make our blitzing LBs get 80% of the sacks

[darrelgreenie]

That may be true but Id rather have our NT get 1-3 sacks a year having him more of a space eating 0 teq NT that commands a double team every single down. A Vince Wilkfork mold. Id like to be able to find the article KDawg made about what type of Line we run. Id rather have the line occupy the blockers and make our blitzing LBs get 80% of the sacks

No worries I'm well aware of the style our DL plays upfront.

However it appears we have different aims. My goal is to increase the amount of pressure from our DL, which btw is dead last for 34 defenses. Having a 2-gap plugger at NT is great but its not gonna increase the overall pass rush/pressure from the DL as much as a 34 DE that can 2-gap AND provides penetration/pass rush. And if the DL can pass rush it makes it easier for the OLB to rush the passer.

Moving Cofield to DE and adding a good 2-gap plugger NT you improve the run defense of the DL not the upfield penetration/pass rush.

 

And just to be clear I think our D would also benefit by improved run defense upfront. Either way you can't go wrong with improving the defense in any number of spots. But, net-net I'll want improved rush ability more then improved run defense.