PFF: Current and Former Browns Safeties Thrive at Tackling
by Chris Pokorny on Jan 25, 2012 9:00 PM EST
Email
Print
Pro Football Focus' latest review of the 2011 season takes a look at how well the safeties in the league tackled. Thankfully, none of the members of the Browns were ranked among the worst in tackle efficiency. In fact, it was quite the contrary -- both current and former Browns were among the league's best in this regard.
Let's start with this category covered by PFF: the top 20 tackling safeties in coverage, and how many tackles they missed. Coming in first place on the list was former Browns safety Abram Elam. There were 37 times in which he had an opportunity to make a tackle in coverage, and he didn't miss a single one. Eight other safeties shared this same achievement (not allowing a missed tackle in coverage), including Mike Adams. Adams had 20 attempts and made the tackle every time. Not too far behind was Usama Young, placing at No. 10 overall. He was the only player who missed just 1 tackle in coverage (on 27 attempts).
The other category that PFF featured was "The Surest Twenty." This included every possible play, not just pass plays. Adams wasn't on this list, but T.J. Ward and Young were. Young missed just 3 tackles all season on 57 attempts, coming in at No. 4 on the list. Ward ranked No. 6 overall, missing just 2 tackles on 34 attempts. PFF specifically pointed out this achievement by the duo:
The Browns also find themselves with a pair of players inside the Top 10, with Usama Young and T.J. Ward combining for just five missed tackles. To put that into some perspective, Tanard Jackson missed five tackles in a single game, against the Saints in Week 9.
Nice. Adams is a free agent this offseason, but I don't think the position will undergo much change next season unless Sheldon Brown makes the switch to safety.
92 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’m not sure how accurate this is but I did feel Young’s missed tackles were epic fails and that’s what earned him a somewhat undeserved rap as a bad tackler. He could be a very aggressive tackler so when he does miss, it looks really bad?
Jauron seemed to single him out as a guy who was a good tackler throughout the season. I would assume he knows his own players pretty well but those misses definitely stand out for some reason.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
This makes a lot of sense to me. Perhaps safety isn’t as big of a need as we thought?
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 11:11 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
This is all good n well until we can stop the run. There’s a reason DQ wasn’t voted comeback player. Everyone in our “secondary” is awesome.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 25, 2012 10:45 PM EST reply actions
Also some of the hate on our run defense is pretty odd. It needed to get much better against the Texans (a very good running team) and that one game against the ravens. For most of the other games it was not terrible. Not always great, but not terrible.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
What?
I mean I guess it could be debated that the statistic could be exaggerated for the fact many teams didn’t bother passing. But It’s pretty sad for someone to think that the run defense wasn’t terrible.
And I don’t know whats more ridiculous, someone trying to convincing themselves the run defense wasn’t bad itself or the fact that they would be bold enough to think such a thing considering we gave up 150 yards rushing ypg, 125 first downs, had many games where the opponents had close to 100 yard before halftime, or the fact that this happened against a soft group of competition. If that isn’t “terrible”, I don’t know what the heck is. Giving up 5.6 ypc to leon washington is pretty scary.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Jan 26, 2012 2:09 AM EST up reply actions
I agree with TLP, although I do think our run defence will be solid next season. After all, we did have a new and largely inexperienced line. And our LBs got better as the season went on.
by JohnW81 on Jan 26, 2012 4:13 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I agree that there is a lot of reason to be optimistic about our run defense. We have a lot of young players, we’ll get better.
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 11:14 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
The YPA was tied for 19th at 4.4 yards. I agree that isnt good, but I wouldnt call it terrible. I think the fix is more in the front 4. Taylor needs to do a better job and we need to improve RDE. Getting TJ back helps a lot too.
Don’t even bother, he’s made up his mind after watching the games once.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
by rufio on Jan 28, 2012 1:06 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
7 carries for Leon Washington. Care to find a smaller sample size?
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 27, 2012 8:29 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t hate him….I have called him a consummate pro. I just want a Harrison type back there at mike. And obviously I would rather not be 29th in the league in rush yards allowed at 147.4.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 8:49 AM EST up reply actions
Harrison is not a middle linebacker.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Jan 26, 2012 2:05 PM EST up reply actions
I know, I’m still thinking headhunter.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:36 PM EST up reply actions
DQ was not the reason for our poor rush D. It had more to do with having 3 linemen and 2 linebackers who were below average against the rush.
I agree. That is why I still would not be shocked to see us trade down and look at defensive side of the ball when drafting. Our defense was improved but it was not where it needs to be. If they do not take Griffin, I could see some more wheeling and dealing and acquiring more defensive talent.
Yeah, I totally agree with this. If they don’t go with Griffin it would be nice to see them turn that pick into more.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 10:07 AM EST up reply actions
If you say so, apparently on this team the mike isn’t responsible for tackling runners that get past the D-line or making it to the QB on blitzes.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:38 AM EST up reply actions
Probably not….I see what I see…..my hate on him isn’t that thick, and Joe Thomas only knows why we went to a 4-3 defensive front when the best defenses use a 3-4. Jauron obviously. But it doesn’t ease my frustration at our inability to stop the effin run.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:54 AM EST up reply actions
the 4-3 is what Holmgren and Heckert are comfortable with as well. It’s not like our defense as a 3-4 was any better at stopping the run over the last 5-6 years.
I totally agree. We have had a serious lack of talent at linebacker and DE. I was just saying the best defenses are 3-4s. SF, BAL, HOU. Where’s Jamir Miller when you need him? lol
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 10:16 AM EST up reply actions
There’s no intrinsic advantage in running a 3-4 rather than a 4-3. It just depends on what kinds of talent you have and can get to fit either scheme.
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 11:18 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
Eh. There is intrinsic advantage in the fact that a DC does either or, not what fits. Obviously, people think one or the other has an advantage or else we would still have Ryan here running our new 4-3
XBL - TheRabbit087. Get at me.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 26, 2012 11:31 AM EST up reply actions
Well of course you should have coaches that can teach the scheme, that’s why we don’t have Marty running our WCO. That has nothing to do with one scheme or another being superior.
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 11:49 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
Then why choose 3-4 over a 4-3 and still with it throughout your career? It’s because there are ideals that one is superior to another. It has everything to do with it.
XBL - TheRabbit087. Get at me.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 26, 2012 11:53 AM EST up reply actions
Because most coaches feel it’s better to master one scheme rather than being decent in several? Tell me, what advantages are there in running a 3-4? Also, just as a 3-4 is different from a 4-3, there are multiple variations of those as well. There is not a “one true” 3-4 that is superior.
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 12:25 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
3-4 are extremely more versatile. You can actually fit more player types into a 3-4 than 4-3. I like a defense with more roaming LB, than trench DL.
XBL - TheRabbit087. Get at me.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 26, 2012 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
Ryan severly limted our D but I think if we would’ve finally seen DQ in it, the LB corps would’ve improved immensely.
XBL - TheRabbit087. Get at me.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 26, 2012 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
Ah, there it is. YOU like more roaming linebackers in your defense. It comes down to preference. I prefer putting athletes in a simple scheme and letting them play without having to think much. Neither scheme is intrinsically superior.
Also, I don’t believe that more players can fit a 3-4 as opposed to a 4-3. What proof of this do you have?
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 12:50 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
All I’m saying is that preference wise, this is always superiority. You don’t learn the scheme of the WCO because you flipped a coin, you picked it because you thought it had advantages over other schemes.
XBL - TheRabbit087. Get at me.
by SpecialBrownie on Jan 26, 2012 12:57 PM EST up reply actions
There is not an objective advantage to either of these schemes, though. Coaches are generally brought up in a certain way and they stick with the general ideas that their “school” trained them in. Some coaches are more suited to one scheme or another, but that doesn’t mean that a 3-4 is actually better than a 4-3.
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 5:06 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
the reason Houston got better on D has little to do with switching to a 3-4.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
But switching to the mindset of flooding the front 7 with good players and high picks, and getting after the QB from anywhere and everywhere.
I’d like to see us draft more pass rushers and turn into a Spagnuolo/Johnson style D. It probably won’t happen.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I agree. I would like that style too.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
That Under front and all those fronts with two 3-techs and both LBs showing blitz up in the A-gaps are my favorite.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I have always liked 4-3s that blitz. Jim Johnson, Spags (I belive their schemes though are significantly different)
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
also, 5 out of the top 10 Ds in points are 4-3 teams.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
Can you check how they fared in W/L?
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:40 PM EST up reply actions
NM I did…there were 4 teams in the top ten in rush yardage allowed running a 4-3….Cincinnati and Atlanta were the 2 successful teams. Of the remaining teams playing, one runs a 4-3 and one runs a 3-4. This is a wash in my opinion.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 10:41 PM EST up reply actions
Joe Thomas only knows why we went to a 4-3 defensive front when the best defenses use a 3-4
We tried the 3-4 for something like 7 seasons. It wasn’t working. Why force your front office to fill a defense that is broken, and out of their norm?
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 27, 2012 8:31 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry if I sounded like a dick here Dorn.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:56 AM EST up reply actions
He is partially responsible and did an admirable job considering he was among the league leaders in tackles.
I am not sure that is best measurement of how good a job a LB is doing, didn’t Andra Davis lead the league in tackles a couple times?
If he didn’t lead, he was amongst the leaders…
Much like DQ, they don’t let anyone by them (admirable as that is).
But they don’t seem poised to attack the way you see other teams MLBs doing.
This may be what the scheme calls for. OR it may be the way the particular individuals play.
Only Jauron would know (Joe Thomas too, of course)
by mr.saturday.night on Jan 26, 2012 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
yeah it seems to me that DQ reads and diagnoses plays well and then gets to a spot where he know he can make a sure tackle and stop the runner. it’s just that usually that spot is 3-4 yards past the LOS and rarely in the backfield or right at the LOS. He also doesn’t make many game changing plays. He is just average in coverage. I mean he is the best LB we have but that doesn’t make him much better than above average as I see it.
I am curious where you get this 3-4 yard downfield information, because DQ was also doing a phenomenal job in TFL all season long.
I think it might be a holdover from DQ’s reputation pre-injury.
by Legoman0721 on Jan 26, 2012 12:27 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
I can’t seem to locate TFL stats anywhere. I just don’t recall many plays were DQ had TFL. I guess it’s just my perception that he is constantly in position to make a tackle but that it is rarely in the opponents backfield.
Jackson was 23rd in TFL which is pretty impressive given the names ahead of him are almost exclusively DE/OLB. I think only Navarro Bowman was a Mike linebacker to finish higher.
I believe Daryl Washington played ILB in a 3-4, but that’s also a different scheme. He is still easily top 5 out of guys who don’t rush the passer (3-4 OLBs, Kiwanuka, Vonn miller)
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
My biggest knock on DQ coming into this season was that he never seemed to make impact plays. That changed in a big way this season.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jan 27, 2012 8:34 PM EST up reply actions
it’s just that usually that spot is 3-4 yards past the LOS and rarely in the backfield or right at the LOS
this is all sorts of wrong right now. I understand if you are talking about previous years, but he had 12 TFLs this year which is a great number. That’s about 3rd among all mlbs/ilbs.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
This is not the point……150 yards allowed a game is the point.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:48 PM EST up reply actions
The mike for lack of a better definition is the QB of the D. It’s not getting done.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:52 PM EST up reply actions
This is not the point……150 yards allowed a game is the point.
Completely the wrong way to look at it. First of all, the yards per game is skewed because the offense sucks and teams just keep running.
Secondly, mike is far from fitting the definition of a QB on D. a great QB affects every other position on the field. It frees up the run game, Lineman have to hold their blocks for shorter, and WRs have easier catches.
How does mike affect the play of the DTs? Or the Safeties? Heck, even a guy like Urlacher doesn’t have a hugely discernable impact on his fellow LBs.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
And why do teams keep running?
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 11:57 PM EST up reply actions
This is a kindergarten answer…because they can. Mike brings the d-play into the huddle and should be the audible guy. We don’t stop the run…..I can’t say it any more clearly.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 27, 2012 12:00 AM EST up reply actions
To think that because our rush D was poor means that every one of the 11 players on defense sucks at stopping the run means you aren’t seeing things very clearly at all.
I like you, you’re well thought out and intrinsically spot on most of the time, but I never said anything about the other ten guys on D.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 28, 2012 6:33 PM EST up reply actions
Or because they are up 20 points and don’t have to worry about the offense scoring. Stop being so condescending.
Rushing yards don’t correlate 100% with MLB performance.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I apologize, the kindergarten thing was a little condescending.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 28, 2012 6:30 PM EST up reply actions
like I pointed out, because they have the lead. If it’s the 3rd quarter and a team is up by over a TD, what is the incentive to pass? They want to keep the clock running because it’s a numbers game and if they can keep us from scoring before the time runs out, they win. Its simple strategy.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
and 19th in YPA with 4.4 yards. Its not all on DQ. I think Mitchell/RDE and Taylor share a lot of the blame at the point of attack. Holding assignments, not getting pushed out of your whole, staying put when needed, etc. How many runs were gashed through the right side of our D? Improving RDE will improve the run D. Also, improving our offense will improve the run D. Think about that one (ehhh? yaa?).
An offense that puts points on the board will improve the run defense by forcing opponents to pass more. We’ve seen that many coaches lose their nerve and abandon the run if they go down by 10 points.
by Legoman0721 on Jan 27, 2012 11:01 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
ehhhh yaa You single handedly changed my whole (hole?) perception of our run D. Thanks. I’m good now.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 28, 2012 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
The MLB is responsible for his gap based on back flow. And flocking to the ball once the play has broken (this is everyone on defense’s responsibility). DQ took care of both things quite well.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
The mike definitely isn’t a blitzer, so I don’t know where you got that from.
And he did tackle the guys who got past the line. That’s why he was second in the league in tackles.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Jan 26, 2012 2:07 PM EST up reply actions
They freed him up to blitz this year. As soon as he read run against some teams he would knife the A-gap. And he had more sacks this year than just about every other year combined.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
same with TFLs and possibly overall QB pressures.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
3.5
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:54 PM EST up reply actions
Everyone is a blitzer on an all out blitz.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:47 PM EST up reply actions
tackling runners that get past the D-line
what? He racked up tons of tackles on runners past the D-Line…but not way far downfield.
making it to the QB on blitzes.
few LBs who weren’t “pass rushing LBs” got more pressures on the QB. I can only go by Advanced NFL Stats’ numbers which only include sacks and QB hits but he ranks high. He is second among 4-3 mlbs and still top 5/top 10 when you include 3-4 ILBs and 4-3 OLBs.
I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013
The Texans made us look like fools all game long.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
No doubt. Houston made us look like a Pop Warner team early. We won the second half though.
by Brownie's Year on Jan 26, 2012 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
With all due respect to PFF’s analysis, read this story from PFW and tell me that Young is the type of guy that can fill that role for the Browns.
Maybe it’s too much of a luxury pick to take Smith/Martin/Iloka with a day two selection when there are other more pressing concerns, but if one of these guys is BPA when we’re picking, pull the trigger and take them.
The great (terrible?) thing about the lack of talent on this team right now is that there are lot of acceptable choices that can be made in this draft. The front office just can’t afford to reach for need when there are so few positions out there that couldn’t stand to be improved.
Iloka….I love this guy.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 9:55 PM EST up reply actions
I disagree with “so many” we have a nice core set-up…..I truly believe we are on the cusp of turning it around….this brings me back to coaching. Joe Thomas knows I hope we get an apt OC.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 10:03 PM EST up reply actions
You know…if you read into the double negative.
We'll be kicking ourselves if we don't get Burflict.
by The New Kardiac Kids on Jan 26, 2012 10:05 PM EST up reply actions
I’m just thinking we NEED a QB, WR, DE, WLB, and S. Cases could be made for both a G and a T on offense and a MLB on defense, not to mention that we may need another RB.
Taking this a step further, as any team trying to progress from bottom of the barrel status, this team needs to be deeper. If we’re worried about the level of talent of the starting LBs, what does that say about their backups?
by SpotOnSpotwood on Jan 27, 2012 9:24 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.
Related FanPosts on Dawgs By Nature
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow DBN on Twitter
Browns Links
Local Media Sources
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities/Blogs
The Watercooler
Waiting for Next Year
Dawg Scooper
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- The Shutdown Corner Podcast: Greg Cosell on the NFC South Draft
- BREAKING: Tim Tebow did not become a great quarterback today
- Jerry Jones says Cowboys championship window is closing; Tony Romo disagrees
- Lawrence Taylor was told his Super Bowl ring was bought by Charlie Sheen
- Chad Ochocinco gets robbed, mourns loss of Starbucks gold card
