the NFC East DEFENSES ratings

[newsbroker]

Now, after controversy involving the offenses. Here's what I got for the defenses. Again, it's May 19th, even HORSE RACING has got more going on right now that football, this is for novelty purposes only since there is nothing going on in football right now.

DT- C. Simon (8), L. Glover (7), D. Walker/H. Thomas (6), C. Griffin (5), W. Joseph (4), W. Blade (3), B. Noble/J. Haley (2), F. Robbins/M.Chase (1)

DE- M. Strahan (8), J. Kearse (7), G. Ellis (6), M. Wiley (5), J. McDougle/ND Kalu (4), P. Daniels (3), U. Umenyiora (2), R. Wynn (1)

MLB- D. Ngyuen (4), M. Barrow (3), M. Simoneau (2), N. Griesen (1)

OLB- L. Arrington (8), D. Coakley (7), C. Emmons (6), N. Wayne (5), M. Washington (4), D. Jones (3), A. Singleton (2), B. Green (1)

DB- W. Allen (8), T. Newman (7), F. Smoot (6), W. Peterson (5), L. Shephard (4), S. Springs (3), S. Brown (2), P. Hunter/D. Mitchell (1)

S's- B. Dawkins (8), R. Williams (7), M. Lewis (6), D. Woodson (5), S. Taylor (4), S. Williams (3), M. Bowen/Iffy (2), O. Stoutmire (1)

Scoring:

Philly: 55

Dal: 54

NYG: 40

Was: 40

Total scoring (offense AND defense)

Philly: 105

Was: 91

Dal: 84

NYG: 73

[Eagles_Legendz]

Though I'm not sure how relevant much of this will be, I do appreciate the objectivity that you've exhibited in these ratings. Seem fair to me.

[Eparadox]

I still don't like your point system...I mean, a DE and a S should not be weighted equally. There needs to be some sort of balancing system...I think it should be 10xDE, 9xDT, 8xCB, 8xOLB, 7xMLB, 6xFS, 5xSS

[Tom [Giants fan]]

I love it. Rank the Giants last because that is usually when they finish first.

[bulldog]

the Redskins won't have the worst defense in the NFC East come late December folks

defense more so than offense is often a matter of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts

The Redskins front four coming out of training camp in 1991 was Fred Stokes, Tim Johnson, Eric Williams and Charles Mann.

Only Mann was a name commodity and no one would have rated the Redskins defensive front near the top of the heap and yet when all was said and done the '91 Skins set the team mark for fewest points allowed and amassed over 50 sacks.

[Fifty Gut]

Originally posted by newsbroker

Total scoring (offense AND defense)

Philly: 105

Was: 91

Dal: 84

NYG: 73

Funny, that's exactly how I see the NFC East playing out this upcoming season.

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by bulldog

The Redskins front four coming out of training camp in 1991 was Fred Stokes, Tim Johnson, Eric Williams and Charles Mann.

Only Mann was a name commodity and no one would have rated the Redskins defensive front near the top of the heap

I love when people write stuff like this. You know what my response to that is? "so what."

There is no correlation between the defensive line of 1991 and this years other than you deciding to choose that one. I can arbirtarily do the EXACT SAME thing and compare this year's defensive line with, oh I dunno, LAST YEAR's defensive line. It's just as arbitrary and it's just as fair to do.

[Art]

I don't mind the rating system, but a few of the ratings seem somewhat strange here. For example, how can you rate Barrow below Nguyen when Barrow has simply done more every year since Nguyen has been in the league? I understand Nguyen had a very strong year last year, but, last year the best middle backer in the division on the field was Barrow. Why would that be immediately different?

As for Emmons, he is largely considered a player with specific skills -- like coverage -- but not really a linebacker who has been known to do a lot of different things. Since Washington became a starter in the league the last three seasons, he has been more productive making plays behind the line of scrimmage, had more sacks, caused more fumbles, more passes defensed and one more interception, not to mention more overall tackles, yet you give Emmons the nod?

So, based on performance you can't do that and unlike Nguyen who you could rate ahead of Barrow on speed, perhaps, Washington is a better athlete than Emmons and they both play strongside linebacker so the comparisons are more apt than comparing a strongside backer to a weakside backer. I could quibble with Wayne and as he's a weakside backer he's going to have more tackles in that role, but, at least Emmons seems odd if not Wayne.

I'm not sure I'd rate Blade in Dallas ahead of the guy in Dallas he couldn't start ahead of and the guy Dallas wanted to keep around to start in Noble, unless you are making the presumption that Noble won't return anywhere near full strength, which is a fine presumption to make.

The scouting group over at TSN rate Daniels pretty handily above Wiley. Not that it is all you need, but, why would you have Daniels not only below him, but, below an unproven player like McDougal? Wynn is probably at least one spot up and likely two.

While I'd put Smoot higher, I can understand not doing so since this is his first year in a primary coverage role. However, you've got Springs awfully low considering having "Shephard" above him. Even if that's accurate, the fact that you don't know it's Sheppard likely means you don't know enough to offer that rating.

I like the effort though. These are always fun.

[Jay Master Jay]

I'm with you Art how is Newman over Springs? He has been hurt but Newman is a 2nd year player.

[Jay Master Jay]

Oh I forgot Newman had that career game against us last year.:laugh: He isn't that good and it will show this year I think Springs is injury prone but better all around. :logo:

[Helmet Head]

I love when people write stuff like this. You know what my response to that is? "so what."

FOOTBALLGOD, Well if your response to that is "So What?."

Then what is your response when i say Bulldog was only trying to say that the coaching in 1991 made a bunch of no names into a pretty good D-Line. And good coaching could do the same for the Redskins this year.

Although this ranking is better then the offensive one. I doubt Noble will return full strenght will probably be lucky to win the starting job back.

[HeHateMe]

How is Newman ahead of Springs? Please, how is Allen ahead of either of them?

And Newman is'nt that good? Come on man. He went to the Pro Bowl this year (albeit as a reserve). He was a rookie and played every down as the #1 CB on the #1 D in the NFL.

[Jay Master Jay]

I'm sorry HHM you'e right maybe Smoot should be #1:laugh: Where is Champ when you need him?:cool: I think Walt Harris is better then Newman.

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Art

a few of the ratings seem somewhat strange here. For example, how can you rate Barrow below Nguyen when Barrow has simply done more every year since Nguyen has been in the league?

Well, it's just my opinion. It's an opinion that can best be described as a combination of who do I think is the best player at each position (and 2nd best, 3rd best, and so on) as well as who would you most want on your team right now at that position.

While Barrow may have had a better past, as 2004 approaches and beyond, given the choice between the two, I think they are very close at this point and Barrow is going to be 35 (35!!) years old this season. I'd take Nyguen as the best in the division now at MLB.

In addition, I'm not a big fan of stats. Particulary on defense. As some will point out the number of tackles any particular MLB has rung up, I can alternatively explain how number of tackles can actually be an indicator of POOR defense. (I.E. you're not making the play when it counts the most, on 3rd downs, therefore you're on the field more than you should which can boost your tackles stats but not neccesarily mean you are the better player because of those numbers).

This is all subjective obviously. At MLB, I'd take Nguyen first in the division at this juncture.

As for Emmons, he is largely considered a player with specific skills -- like coverage -- but not really a linebacker who has been known to do a lot of different things. Since Washington became a starter in the league the last three seasons, he has been more productive making plays behind the line of scrimmage, had more sacks, caused more fumbles, more passes defensed and one more interception, not to mention more overall tackles, yet you give Emmons the nod?

Well I disagree with how Emmons is being characterized. I see a player who has got very speed and skills that keeps him on the field as a 3-down player. His body was always around the ball as an Eagle, I like his motor. What I remember of Washington is that there were more obvious flaws in his game. Whereas Emmons could do a little of everything and always had himself near the ball in Philly (plus he was very good in coverage, to me the #1 attribute in an OLB in football in this era), Washington is more of a line of scrimmage guy who is mismatched in coverage. I gave a slight advantage to Emmons (although I *am* aware of serious injury he's coming back from this season as he joins the Giants)

I'm not sure I'd rate Blade in Dallas ahead of the guy in Dallas he couldn't start ahead of

Blade missed time last year because he was hurt. He's got a skillset above the players I listed below him. If he's healthy, he'll start, like he did in the 2nd half of the season last year for Dallas when their defense really took flight. He's an up and coming player as opposed to a Noble, who ceiling is already established (not to mention an extrememly serious injury he's trying to come back from which I doubt he can be 100% at any point in 2004)

The scouting group over at TSN rate Daniels pretty handily above Wiley. Not that it is all you need, but, why would you have Daniels not only below him, but, below an unproven player like McDougal? Wynn is probably at least one spot up and likely two.

Well, that's their scouting group. I'm sure there's other scouting groups would rate the reverse between the two. Wiley's high end is certainly better than Daniels'. Someone can make a case that he never got comfortable in SD but you cant make that case in Daniels career. He is what he is...a 4-7 sack guy a year type player. Wiley is better than that and I think you'll see that in Dallas in that aggressive system with Parcells there.

Wynn gets the low rating for similar reasons as Noble. Those two guys are of the same age and their ceilings in the career have long been establised. At best, Wynn will get 3 sacks and provide decent run support. I'm guessing that McDougle/Kalu will accomplish that by the half way point.

However, you've got Springs awfully low considering having "Shephard" above him. Even if that's accurate, the fact that you don't know it's Sheppard likely means you don't know enough to offer that rating.

That decision was calculated. If I was to take a look at all 44 defensive starters for the 4 teams combined and was asked to predict which of them will have a breakout season, my choice is Lito Shephard (Newman too). I believe Shephard has the skills to be much better than what he showed a year ago.

As for Springs, I hate to say this but I'm wavering on whether he'll be good for the Redskins or he'll be Cris Dishman, the 2nd season. Sources I've read have not suggested, they've stated, that Springs is half the corner he was when he came out of college at this point. That's a problem.

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Helmet Head

Then what is your response when i say Bulldog was only trying to say that the coaching in 1991 made a bunch of no names into a pretty good D-Line. And good coaching could do the same for the Redskins this year.

That is a common practise amongst fans. What that excerise can be called is an "arbitrary excuse"

If the Redskins were weak at QB, you could arbitrarily point to the Panthers last year (who run a very similar system) and say "what about Jake Delhomme, they got to the SB with him".

If the Redskins were weak at RB, you could arbitrarily point to some team, any team, maybe the Patriots, and say "look at NE, they won a SB without a great running back"

All this doing is ignoring the basis of this post which is to rate the individual players based on the INDIVIDUAL PLAYERS. Of course, I can point to some ARBITRARY example for every weakness on every team ever. Some team sucks at WR? So what, the Patriots won a SB with average ones. I can always point to some arbirtary example, like that person did, an example of 14 years ago, but that doesnt change who THESE players are TODAY.

In addition, that defensive line as rag-tag as you might suggest, they were still much, MUCH more talented than this group. Fred Stokes alone would be the best player on this defensive line. That defense also, since that person took the incorrect route of talking about it in general (the 4 players) as opposed to (which is why his argument is wrong in the 1st place) how I'm talking about each particular player at each particular position for this excercise.....but that defense went 8 deep of good solid players. Jumpy Geathers, Jason Buck, Bobby Wilson were all contributors.

With all that said, its' still way off topic. This is about the individual players and how I see them. To arbritarily point to a defensive line of FOURTEEN years ago and say "a bunch of no-names (mann was never a no name; it would take 4 renaldo wynns to equal one charles mann) had a good season, therefore this group can do the same thing" defeats the purpose of this. Because then I can make that excuse for EVERY TEAM in THE NFL that has a certain weakness. I can point to some place back in time where a supposed weakness for a team was okay and say the same thing. Fact is Griffin-Noble-Daniels-Wynn was rated the way they were rated not because of 1991, or Charles Mann or Richie Petitbone or anything else unrelated...I rated them where I did because that's who *THEY* are.

Although this ranking is better then the offensive one. I doubt Noble will return full strenght will probably be lucky to win the starting job back. [/b]

[OURYEAR#56]

Originally posted by Tom [Giants fan]

I love it. Rank the Giants last because that is usually when they finish first.

This is not the gimpy NFC East of 2000. You better buckle up that chin strap, because you're going to have to earn it this year.

[jrfriedm]

For the most part I like what you've done. However, Strahan over Kearse? And Taylor the #5 saftey in the league? I don't think so.

[Deeisel44]

Some of the placings are questionable like:

Will Allen rating as the highest DB and Springs low rating but it seems like a fair assessment of the D.

Here's a good question!

Of the players listed above who do u predict will perform above/below those ratings?

I predict Wiley will return to his All Pro Form and while I like Emmons something tells me he will be dinged up all year for the Giants.

[flashback]

Have you seen either Strahan or Kearse play? Strahan is a complete DE. Kearse is a pass-rush specialist and he's not even better at that than Strahan! Maybe you were thinking of Strahan vs. Kearse in Basketball or Tennis or something, because it couldn't possibly have been football.

[jrfriedm]

Originally posted by flashback

Have you seen either Strahan or Kearse play? Strahan is a complete DE. Kearse is a pass-rush specialist and he's not even better at that than Strahan! Maybe you were thinking of Strahan vs. Kearse in Basketball or Tennis or something, because it couldn't possibly have been football.

No I was defenitly thinking of football, and yes I have seen them both play. Kearse, is a beast and cause a whole lot of disturbance, while Strahan can easily be handled by Jansen. Strahan is like five to seven years older, and he is reached his peak and is on the down slope, while Kearse is still climbing, and has a higher potential than Strahan. Kearse is actually a very good run stopper especially when opposing teams try to get to the outside of him. He is much faster than Strahan, and will much more productive.

Not to mention that Strahan himself has said that he feels that he doesn't have to work out with the team that he can do his own workouts.

[NavyDave]

newsbroker

The point of Bulldog's post was that a Dline without name players doesnot mean we will suffer and isnt it interesting that Gibbs had a no name D line then as he has today?

Coaching is the key to the current NFL

And speculating about the team not having a QB or RB in the weak attempt to dismiss the Dline comparison is silly because we have strength and depth at both positions

Kearse will be manhandled by Jansen this year and there isnt enough credit given to Strahan who is a complete player.

[Art]

Originally posted by newsbroker

That decision was calculated. If I was to take a look at all 44 defensive starters for the 4 teams combined and was asked to predict which of them will have a breakout season, my choice is Lito Shephard (Newman too). I believe Shephard has the skills to be much better than what he showed a year ago.

As for Springs, I hate to say this but I'm wavering on whether he'll be good for the Redskins or he'll be Cris Dishman, the 2nd season. Sources I've read have not suggested, they've stated, that Springs is half the corner he was when he came out of college at this point. That's a problem.

NB,

Let me just focus on this outrageous part of what you wrote as much of the rest is perfectly reasonable. You say that sources you're read have stated that Springs is half the corner he was when he came out of college. Well, have you read sources like Gibbs and Williams who said when weighing the decision on Bailey, they watched film of EVERY free agent corner and decided Springs was a good replacement and far better than the other free agent corners?

Does that factor in at all? Remember, Williams coached Winfield. most of us thought we'd have Winfield here as we needed a corner. But, at 12:01 we called Springs. Why? As our staff and personnel people have been quoted as saying, they watched film and came away knowing Springs was the best available player.

It is especially meaningful that Williams wanted Springs so badly when he had a previous relationship and close knowledge about Winfield. My guess is the sources and factors behind Springs being here trump any laughable sources you have. What do you think?

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by Art

NB,

Let me just focus on this outrageous part of what you wrote as much of the rest is perfectly reasonable. You say that sources you're read have stated that Springs is half the corner he was when he came out of college. Well, have you read sources like Gibbs and Williams who said when weighing the decision on Bailey, they watched film of EVERY free agent corner and decided Springs was a good replacement and far better than the other free agent corners?

I understand they chose him. It doesn't mean they got it right. I got news for you, teams *do* make mistakes in free agency. Now, I don't know if he'll go down as a "mistake" (I'm not going to compare him to another CB that this franchise was giddy over signing back in 2000), but you ask a Seahawks fan about Shawn Springs and he'll tell you that he's been a detriment to his team lately. That's all. Yes, the Redskins liked him over the other corners available, it still doesnt mean I'd rank Springs over the CB's in the NFC East, which is what this is about (not Springs vs. Winfield or any other free agent CB but Springs and the ranking I gave him vs. the other NFC East corners who, obviously, I think are either pretty good or I am expecting to have better seasons in 2004 than Springs.

[newsbroker]

Originally posted by jrfriedm

No I was defenitly thinking of football, and yes I have seen them both play. Kearse, is a beast and cause a whole lot of disturbance, while Strahan can easily be handled by Jansen. Strahan is like five to seven years older, and he is reached his peak and is on the down slope, while Kearse is still climbing, and has a higher potential than Strahan. Kearse is actually a very good run stopper especially when opposing teams try to get to the outside of him. He is much faster than Strahan, and will much more productive.

I put Strahan above Kearse because he belongs there. Strahan has been a top of the line DE for the last several seasons. Kearse, in the last several seasons, has been injured and played off and on.

I remember back during the playoffs, I knew Kearse was going to be a free agent so I wanted to watch him closely. I watched him go up one on one against Jonathan Ogden all day (anyone got the tape of that game?) and Ogden absolutely erased Kearse from that game. Ogden dominated him. The Titans won the game, however. The next week I wanted to watch Kearse's matchups closely again, thinking the Redskins might be interested in him during the offseason. Against the Patriots, again, he was eliminated. Not a factor whatsoever.

Maybe he was injured. Maybe a big all pro offensive tackle like Ogden would just dominate him anyways. All I know is he did nothing in January. That left an impression with me.

For Strahan, on a bad team, he is still playing every game (unlike Kearse) getting his double digit sacks (unlike Kearse) and being more than solid vs. the run. (I believe running right AT Kearse will be a gameplan next season).

You cannot be better than Strahan if you're not on the field as much. Simple as that. Someone said Jon Jansen "owns" Michael Strahan. That's an absolute lie. I've got the games on tape. I will say this: early in his career, Jansen had good success against Strahan. The last couple of seasons, he's struggled against Strahan. Mike has a couple of sacks, going one on one with Jansen of late, including last season's games. They are good battles for sure, but one thing is 100% true: Jansen does NOT own Strahan.

Back to the topic, Kearse cannot be ranked higher in my opinion when he's MOST noted for being banged up the last couple of seasons whereas Strahan has rung up a serious amount of sacks during that time which is due to always playing and being the premier pass rusher in the NFC the last few years as down lineman.

Kearse's career started off great. He doesnt deserve to be ranked higher right NOW than Strahan though. Not until he plays 16 games, and shows more than Mike has the last couple of seasons and that will NOT be easy to do.

[Art]

NB,

It's CERTAINLY true that teams make mistakes in free agency. Fortunately the Redskins really haven't made a mistake in free agency the last four years of any consequence -- other than Trotter apparently.

We've had a good run of free agents that directly improved our team and that has been through various staffs. That's a credit to the work Cerrato has led the last couple of years. The concern over a mistake with Springs, though, tends more towards his health than his ability.

Clearly Williams knows Winfield like no one else. Yet just watching film caused him to want Springs. The skills have never been in question for Springs. It's the skills we were drawn to and needed. If he gets hurt, it will have a negative impact on us, which is why we signed two other corners to protect somewhat against that.

If Springs performs as well as Deion did here in his one season, though, we'll be thrilled. Remember, Deion was part of a successful free agent overhaul that improved our defense 26 spots overall. The reason I mentioned Winfield is because you CERTAINLY wouldn't rate Sheppard or Peterson over him. If you would, there are greater problems with your assessment than I realized initially.

As I think you are reasonably sound for the most part I hope that's not the case.