Sculpt
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 8,625
- Liked Posts:
- 2,879
Reading up on the "3-4 Nickel" defenses, comparing the 2-4 and 3-3 Nickels (link), it notes...
"Without access to the kind of elite pass-rushers that can attack the edge and overcome an offense's best efforts at pass protection, the 2-4-5 is not a superior nickel package."
Not only do we not have two elite passrushers, I don't know that I would say we even have one in Floyd.
With Hicks and Goldman, we are more on track with what the 3-3 Nickel can offer the passrush, which is collapsing the pocket to help the edge OLB(s). I don't know if Hankins is good at collapsing the pocket (or Jenkins for that matter) but if he can to a reasonable extent, having Hankins allows Fangio the (additional) option of employing the 3-3 Nickel to collapse the pocket and give one or two OLB a better chance to pressure/strip/sack the QB.
With the addition of Smith, we certainly have boosted our coverage in the nickel, 2-4 or 3-3. We can have a little more confidence running a 3-3 nickel.
In this regard, it's not really a Hankins issue, but looking at the team's assets and deficits, it points more to a 3-3 nickel. Perhaps Nicoles also offers more inside passrush, pointing more towards a 3-3 nickel package.
Not to mention, with Hankins, the other 40% of snaps (non-nickel) become stronger, keeps all the DL fresher with less snaps, and helps protect against Goldman and Hicks missing games due to injuries.
Not only do we not have two elite passrushers, I don't know that I would say we even have one in Floyd.
With Hicks and Goldman, we are more on track with what the 3-3 Nickel can offer the passrush, which is collapsing the pocket to help the edge OLB(s). I don't know if Hankins is good at collapsing the pocket (or Jenkins for that matter) but if he can to a reasonable extent, having Hankins allows Fangio the (additional) option of employing the 3-3 Nickel to collapse the pocket and give one or two OLB a better chance to pressure/strip/sack the QB.
With the addition of Smith, we certainly have boosted our coverage in the nickel, 2-4 or 3-3. We can have a little more confidence running a 3-3 nickel.
In this regard, it's not really a Hankins issue, but looking at the team's assets and deficits, it points more to a 3-3 nickel. Perhaps Nicoles also offers more inside passrush, pointing more towards a 3-3 nickel package.
Not to mention, with Hankins, the other 40% of snaps (non-nickel) become stronger, keeps all the DL fresher with less snaps, and helps protect against Goldman and Hicks missing games due to injuries.
With Hicks, Goldman, Bullard, RRH, Nicoles… we would need another NT (unless they have Nicoles or Bullard in mind for that, where they are a bit small at 290-300lbs), so it's either Jenkins, Coward or Hankins.