sbk92

2
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
6
Posted by nickeatman at 2/10/2011 4:50 PM CST on truebluefanclub.com


For the last year or so, there has been plenty of discussion – mostly fans and media conjecture – regarding a possibly position move for Jay Ratliff.

Despite his three straight Pro Bowl selections at nose tackle, it’s long been discussed that he eventually move back to defensive end, opening the middle for a true nose tackle. And when I say true, I’m talking about the stereo-type of 3-4 tackles, the huge, run-stuffing, space-eating pluggers that usually weigh in the 330-350 range. And obviously, that’s not Ratliff (6-4, 303).

It’s come up again with the release of Shaun Rogers, who fits that nose tackle stereo-type just fine, and spent the last two years with Rob Ryan in Cleveland.

But let’s not just assume that Ratliff is going to be 100 percent on board with a move. Remember, he’s done his job rather well if he’s making three straight Pro Bowls. And since Ratliff has just two years left on his current contract and you can make the case that he’s outplayed his contract already, he may not be too thrilled about moving out to 3-4 end, where stats seem to be even harder to come by.

Now, obviously a position change isn’t really his decision. Anyone can say “tough, just deal with it” if the Cowboys decided to move Ratliff, but a player’s happiness should at least be one factor into a move.

Last week when asked about it on our radio show “The Lunch Break,” Ratliff didn’t exactly address the question with open arms, just stating that he’s heard it for two years. It almost sounded like he’d be disrespected by the move, considering he’s done so well at that spot.

Personally, I think moving Ratliff out to end would be one step into prolonging his career.

But like any position, you can only think about that if you’ve got an ample replacement. Josh Brent has some work to do before he gets to that point. But let’s just not assume that moving Ratliff out to end will just solve all problems.
 

sbk92

2
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
6
Now, obviously a position change isn’t really his decision. Anyone can say “tough, just deal with it” if the Cowboys decided to move Ratliff, but a player’s happiness should at least be one factor into a move.

Eatman is terrible. Just a complete waste of space lap dog for the GM.

Yes. A player's happiness should factor into personnel moves.

Lord knows we have to keep this group of losers happy.

What happens when they're unhappy? Do they start winning?

Just an embarrasment to have this guy writing for the team website.
 

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
How is playing DE in a 3-4 any harder to get sacks than NT? Especially a 2-gap NT now that Ryan is on board as DC.
 

Plymkr

2
Messages
2,126
Reaction score
0
Ratliff should shut up and do his ****ing job. Where ever they place him. Dallas doesn't need another Ellis on their hands.
 

Cythim

2
Messages
3,919
Reaction score
0
Stanback didn't want to play WR... now he is sitting on IR for the Seahawks.
 

MichaelWinicki

In the Rotation
Messages
782
Reaction score
0
To me it comes down to what's easier to find, a good quality NT or a good quality 3-4 DE?

I think the DE is easier.

Thereby you leave Ratliff at NT.
 

SixisBetter

Anywhere on the line.
Messages
4,211
Reaction score
370
Nick is full of it.

First of all,I'd bet when Ratliff sees what Ryan's scheme is,he'll be happy wherever he lines up.

Ryan will play a 2 gap,mostly.

But he'll throw in some 1 gap,stand up linemen,zone blitzes or whatever.

It's all about the pressure,and Ryan doesn't care where he gets it from.

2nd of all,there's no direct quote from JRat.

Mr.Jones needs his dry cleaning picked up,Nick.
 

sbk92

2
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
6
To me it comes down to what's easier to find, a good quality NT or a good quality 3-4 DE?

I think the DE is easier.

Thereby you leave Ratliff at NT.

You're developing a pattern of being wrong.

It's not what's easier to find. It's what's best for your defense.

Ratliff belongs at end. We'll never have a dominating 3-4 defense until we have a true NT in the middle. You're making Ratliff better in the process.
 

MichaelWinicki

In the Rotation
Messages
782
Reaction score
0
You're developing a pattern of being wrong.

It's not what's easier to find. It's what's best for your defense.

Ratliff belongs at end. We'll never have a dominating 3-4 defense until we have a true NT in the middle. You're making Ratliff better in the process.

But our defense won't be THE defense until the first game of the next season (whenever that is) and there are many opportunities between now and then to find players. If a NT becomes available who's as good as Ratliff, then so be it. But if a DE becomes available who can provide some legit pass rush (even for a 3-4 DE) then that's wonderful too.

Finally, if Ratliff would be unhappy moving to DE, then that could have an affect on the final decision, be it if you like it or not...

So hard cheese.
 

sbk92

2
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
6
But our defense won't be THE defense until the first game of the next season (whenever that is) and there are many opportunities between now and then to find players. If a NT becomes available who's as good as Ratliff, then so be it. But if a DE becomes available who can provide some legit pass rush (even for a 3-4 DE) then that's wonderful too.

Finally, if Ratliff would be unhappy moving to DE, then that could have an affect on the final decision, be it if you like it or not...

So hard cheese.

Why would a player being unhappy factor into any quality football team's decision with personnel? WTH are you talking about? Who runs this team?

The problem with your scenario is if you end up with Ratliff manning the nose again next season, you are still short changing your defense. Just like you need to have active disruptive OLBs to run that scheme, you have to have a big nasty mountain in the middle to take up space and free up your ILBs.
 

MichaelWinicki

In the Rotation
Messages
782
Reaction score
0
Why would a player being unhappy factor into any quality football team's decision with personnel? WTH are you talking about? Who runs this team?

The problem with your scenario is if you end up with Ratliff manning the nose again next season, you are still short changing your defense. Just like you need to have active disruptive OLBs to run that scheme, you have to have a big nasty mountain in the middle to take up space and free up your ILBs.

And what if that 330lber isn't any better than average? Is that an improvement? And is Ratliff a determinant to the defense as a NT? You say he is. That's not conclusive.

If team can't find a 330lber who's better than average to play the nose, then keep Ratliff as a NT and look for a better DE than Olshansky.
 

sbk92

2
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
6
And what if that 330lber isn't any better than average? Is that an improvement? And is Ratliff a determinant to the defense as a NT? You say he is. That's not conclusive.

If team can't find a 330lber who's better than average to play the nose, then keep Ratliff as a NT and look for a better DE than Olshansky.

Sorry. I don't agree. I'd rather have an average 330 lb. NT in there and Ratliff at end. You're focusing just on the production at NT and ignoring the upgrade at DE with Ratliff.

As the roster stands right now, Josh Brent would play NT. At the minimum, we can find a guy to rotate with him.
 

sbk92

2
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
6
For what a NT is supposed to do in this defense, it wouldn't be hard to find someone to play it better than Ratliff. Just take up space, hold the fort and keep the ILBs clean.

Ratliff can be his same penetrating self. Just at DE.
 

MichaelWinicki

In the Rotation
Messages
782
Reaction score
0
Sorry. I don't agree. I'd rather have an average 330 lb. NT in there and Ratliff at end. You're focusing just on the production at NT and ignoring the upgrade at DE with Ratliff.

As the roster stands right now, Josh Brent would play NT. At the minimum, we can find a guy to rotate with him.

Well, the coming months will sort this I'm sure.
 

MichaelWinicki

In the Rotation
Messages
782
Reaction score
0
And plus you're also ignoring Ryan's two gap scheme vs. Wade's one gap.

You think Ratliff fits a two gap NT?

To me it's not necessarily all to do with bulk. What's a normal NT? Like 330? Ratliff is what 305? Yeah, there's a little difference there, but is it enough to make Ratliff a bad choice for NT?

On top of that there have been a couple references that Ratliff is one of the stronger guys on the team, plus he has exceptional quickness. Again, does that lack of 25lbs make him a bad NT in a two-gap scheme? The other point is, how much 1-gap vs. 2-gap did the Cowboys actually play under Phillips? I don't think it was all 1-gap all the time... Not by the shatty number of sacks the DE's had (3.5 for ALL of them).

I don't think the Brent kid is much bigger than Rat... Maybe what like 315? And he seems more like a "speed" NT himself.

It's possible that the behemoth that you think the Cowboys need isn't even on this team yet... And they may not find one that can play the position to a level that is acceptable.

Oh heck, let's just eliminate the NT position all together and go with a 2-5 front... But, then our ends suck, so I guess it's a 1-6 defense with Ratliff playing any damn position on the defensive line he wishes.
 
Last edited:

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
To me it's not necessarily all to do with bulk. What's a normal NT? Like 330? Ratliff is what 305? Yeah, there's a little difference there, but is it enough to make Ratliff a bad choice for NT?

On top of that there have been a couple references that Ratliff is one of the stronger guys on the team, plus he has exceptional quickness. Again, does that lack of 25lbs make him a bad NT in a two-gap scheme? The other point is, how much 1-gap vs. 2-gap did the Cowboys actually play under Phillips? I don't think it was all 1-gap all the time... Not by the shatty number of sacks the DE's had (3.5 for ALL of them).

I don't think the Price kid is much bigger than Rat... Maybe what like 315? And he seems more like a "speed" NT himself.

It's possible that the behemoth that you think the Cowboys need isn't even on this team yet... And they may not find one that can play the position to a level that is acceptable.

Oh heck, let's just eliminate the NT position all together and go with a 2-5 front... But, then our ends suck, so I guess it's a 1-6 defense with Ratliff playing any damn position on the defensive line he wishes.

Quickness is negated in the 2-gap as they are supposed to hold gaps, as opposed to splitting them. IDK looks to me that Ratliff wore down from the double teams and got pushed back this year. That can't happen when you supposed to hold down your blocks every snap of the ball.
 

MichaelWinicki

In the Rotation
Messages
782
Reaction score
0
Quickness is negated in the 2-gap as they are supposed to hold gaps, as opposed to splitting them. IDK looks to me that Ratliff wore down from the double teams and got pushed back this year. That can't happen when you supposed to hold down your blocks every snap of the ball.

I'm not sure about the "wore down" statement.

The first 8 games of the year the Cowboy defense gave up 4.40 ypc.

For the last 8 games the average was 4.20 ypc.

But really the problem with this defense is so much more against the pass than it is vs the run. Yeah, the run defense needs a little help... Getting Brookings off the field would help immensely. But it's the pass rush/pass defense that fell off the table and needs the most help, regardless of what's done at NT.
 
C

Cr122

Guest
For what a NT is supposed to do in this defense, it wouldn't be hard to find someone to play it better than Ratliff. Just take up space, hold the fort and keep the ILBs clean.

Ratliff can be his same penetrating self. Just at DE.

This is exactly where I want Ratliff to be moved. We need a bigger NT.
 
Top Bottom