for a FanShot. Actually 2 questions. 1st of all, what is this Jump shit for? Jkjk but I'm tired of it.
Okay, here we go!
So! Now that we have successfully jumped, I want to see if I can change or alter some opinions, but my PRIMARY goal is to see the reasoning of the people who disagree.
First, lets get the subject and education out of the way..
Cover 2, 3-4, and 4-3. We've run all 3 in the last few years. The subject is the Safety position, specifically the Strong Safety.
Traditional 4-3 defenses utilize the Strong Safety as a run supporter. Think of a LB that plays a little deeper than the LB position. I'm going to keep this general so I'm not going to elaborate here because this is already known.
Cover 2 D's basically treat both safeties as a Free Safety. They both drop coverage and are the over-the-top defenders. Again, this is just a general explanation.
3-4 defense utilizes the SS much like the cover 2. Not exactly the same, but identical. Because of 4 LB's, the SS usually doesnt need to help as a run supporter so he's used more for coverage.
ALRIGHT. Thats out of the way. If you havent figured it out yet, I'm going to discuss Pollard, and why he SHOULD have been cut. Now if you're a Pollard fan, understand that I am/was too. Dont be so quick to go comment about how dumb of a cut it was until you finish reading this. Pollard is a traditional SS. He fits in a traditional 4-3 defense. He did NOT fit in the Cover 2 and will NOT fit in a 3-4. He hits hard, yes, but he cant cover and THAT can't be denied by anyone. Hes had 3 picks in 3 seasons compared to 7th rounder Jarrad Page's 10 INT's in 3 years. Herm Edwards was a good secondary scout, but he obviously wasnt thinking correctly in picking a hard hitting, run support, traditional Strong Safety, KNOWING he wouldnt fit in the Cover 2. At first, I thought Pollard would beast in the 3-4, because he was miscast in the Cover 2. But then I realized, he's miscast in the 3-4 as well. So have I convinced you that he doesn't fit in the 3-4 defense? I hope so. Now for the hard part..convincing why him being cut was actually a GOOD move.
Contrary to what people seem to believe, Brown was actually a Free Safety in Chicago. He's good in coverage, but he can also come down and lay the hit on a RB if necessary. He's a perfect fit for the SS in a 3-4. Brown has a history of Injuries, and Morgan is the only backup and thats why people say Pollard should not have been cut. So here's my explanation. Morgan is a good hitter also. Coming out of college, they said he has limitations in coverage. BUT, think about it this way. He was injured for alot of camp, got healthy, and made some plays. He got in a game and made some plays. He showed me that he can cover better than Pollard ever has. He still needs some work, but hes a good work in progress. He benefits because he's so much alike Mike Brown in the way he plays. Theyre nearly the same size, they both hit hard, but Brown is better in coverage. Brown's going to be helping Morgan ALOT over the course of the season. Morgan had injuries last year and at the start of this year. So now there's concern that both our starting and backup Strong Safety are injury prone and we should have kept Pollard.
Pollard had attitude problems. Look at DBowe. DBowe was a loudmouth on the field and Haley silenced him. Maybe not silenced but he brought it down to a minimum. Pollard was a loudmouth FAR past the extent that Bowe was. Haley had to tell him to shut his mouth at one point in camp, and then at another point, he got in Clancy Pendergasts face because of a disagreement. We arent the Oakland Raiders. We dont need ANY players OR coaches having altercations with eachother. I know that players have their issues and scuffles, but getting in a coaches face over a disagreement is a little too much. THEN he tried to go running to Haley who is trying to run a football team. Haley is NOT going to let ANY player be a distraction anyone, player or coach.
So, he didnt fit the scheme, another player was better fit for the scheme, and theres a young backup (though Pollard is young himself) who is showing that he can play the position thus far.
The ONLY thing I agree with on the Pollard arguement, is the trade thing. I think there are several other players on the team who could have been cut at the expense of keeping Pollard longer to get a trade done. When you start nearing the deadline to make cuts, and you start trying to throw trades around, teams back away because they want to see if you just cut them. Had we kept Pollard through the cuts, i think he would have gotten some interest.
I wonder if Gunther tries to scoop him up in Detroit.
Anyways, I just wanted to put that out there. I'm tired of the Pollard talk..thought maybe I can help silence it. But if you STILL dont agree that we should have cut Pollard, how would he fit?