Jump to content

The Future Is Bright For Falcons' Grady Jarrett


Recommended Posts

http://profootballspot.com/_/nfl/nfc-south/atlanta-falcons/the-future-is-bright-for-falcons-grady-jarrett-r9607

It was a bitter sweet NFL Draft for Clemson Tigers DT Grady Jarrett, in more ways than one.

Less than 24 hours after evading a house fire that severely damaged his childhood home in Conyers, Georgia, the Atlanta Falcons picked Jarrett 137th overall; the first pick of the fifth round. Many consider Jarrett an absolute steal on the third day of the draft, which was another reminder of the bitter sweet feeling surrounding this dynamic prospect. Many projected him in the second round, or at least somewhere on day two.

What more could you ask out of the 2014 first team All-ACC defensive lineman?

Coming off a senior season in which he tallied 73 tackles and 1.5 sacks, Jarrett showcased his quickness and agility against the run and flourished as a relentless pass rusher with nasty hand work. His performance at the combine raised eyebrows. 30 reps on the bench press; 5.06 at the 40-yard dash; 31-inch vertical jump and a 4.56 20-yard shuttle all jumped out on scout's report cards for a 6"1', 305-pound defensive tackle.

Yet, that was always going to be his downfall: his size. It's not that 6"1' is small, nor that 305 lbs is too light. But the manner and positional preference of Grady Jarrett is something that you would normally see out of a 6"5' nose tackle. He's a one-gap penetrator, solely on the one-gap in the 4-3 scheme. Ultimately, the height factor forces him to match up on the center, but many would be concerned at the idea of double teaming an undersized nose tackle.

This is why Grady Jarrett fell. There's not doubt that he will bring instant contribution to the Falcons squad. His quickness and leverage for someone of that mass is impressive, as long as he plays his way out of scenarios that aim for his undersized status for a one-gap defensive tackle.


Jarrett's selection immediately puts the veteran starters ahead of him on notice. Tyson Jackson and fan favorite Jonathan Babineaux will have to watch their backs and step up in summer mini-camps if they are to maintain their playing time from the potential steal in Jarrett.

The idea of seeing Jarrett line up on the one-gap with sophomore Ra'Shede Hageman filling the three-gap is not only incredible, but it's also potential for it to become reality before the end of the year. A perfect combination of finesse and rampage within two raw talents.

And with third year defensive end Malliciah Goodman making some noise in his offseason workouts in order to adjust to the 4-3 scheme, the stars are aligning for a reunion of three crucial parts of the Clemson Tigers' 2012 ACC and Chick-Fil-A Bowl Championship winning defence. Jarrett, Goodman and this year's eighth overall pick Vic Beasley were standout contributors at Clemson in 2012.


Jarrett had 8.5 tackles for loss, Goodman notched seven sacks while Beasley tallied eight sacks in a memorable championship season.

The traumatic ordeal of handling a decline in draft stock and handling the fire of his home will no doubt leave grey clouds on Grady Jarrett's welcoming into the NFL. But with the potential scenarios opening up for both him and the Falcons defence as a whole, many clear skies are forecasted for this diamond in the rough prospect out of the fifth round of the draft.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really excited about every one of our likely DL starters. Think Clayborn was a terrific pickup, Hageman has worlds of potential, Beasley is a no-brainer, and Soliai/Jarrett/Babs all bring unique talents to the DL rotation. Then Schofield and Biermann...I know everyone hates him, but as a backup he was pretty darn good. I feel like our DL is close to being a strength...I couldn't imagine that before this offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really excited about every one of our likely DL starters. Think Clayborn was a terrific pickup, Hageman has worlds of potential, Beasley is a no-brainer, and Soliai/Jarrett/Babs all bring unique talents to the DL rotation. Then Schofield and Biermann...I know everyone hates him, but as a backup he was pretty darn good. I feel like our DL is close to being a strength...I couldn't imagine that before this offseason.

Somebody pinch me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://profootballspot.com/_/nfl/nfc-south/atlanta-falcons/the-future-is-bright-for-falcons-grady-jarrett-r9607

The idea of seeing Jarrett line up on the one-gap with sophomore Ra'Shede Hageman filling the three-gap is not only incredible, but it's also potential for it to become reality before the end of the year. A perfect combination of finesse and rampage within two raw talents.

Umm, what kind of football writer doesn't understand the difference between a 1-gap and a 1-tech? Not to mention that a "three-gap" is something nonexistent in football. Certainly not one I would think had anything to teach most other football fans.

I assume he's referring to the 3-tech position where Hageman will be line up, and where Jarrett will be vying for backup snaps behind him. Pioli and Quinn already said Jarrett is a 1-gap penetrator, which is the role of the 3-tech, not the 1-tech.

Edited by RandomFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but the phrase "perfect combination of finesse and rampage" is inspiring inappropriate feelings in me right now.

If there's one word I would want to apply to our defensive line, the word "rampage" is damned sure up on the list!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Umm, what kind of football writer doesn't understand the difference between a 1-gap and a 1-tech? Not to mention that a "three-gap" is something nonexistent in football. Certainly not one I would think had anything to teach most other football fans.

I assume he's referring to the 3-tech position where Hageman will be line up, and where Jarrett will be vying for backup snaps behind him. Pioli and Quinn already said Jarrett is a 1-gap penetrator, which is the role of the 3-tech, not the 1-tech.

Yeah I noticed that too. No such thing as a "3-gap".

Gaps are categorized by letters and there's two of each, one on each side of center . Defensive positioning is categorized by "number-technique", and the further you get from center the higher your technique. And on offense, you have "numbered-holes", with odds being left and evens being right, essentially giving specific numbers to each "gap" that exists along with the "edge" also having it's own number.

I'm pretty sure he was trying to talk about technique.

That said, your continual insistence that a "1-gap penetrator = 3-technique position" is still wrong.

A 1-gap penetrator ONLY means that he doesn't line up directly in front of an offensive lineman. He lines up in front of a single gap. When you line up directly in front of an offensive lineman, you are a 2-gap penetrator because you have a gap on your left and your right you could stunt towards.

A nose tackle that doesn't line up directly in front of the center, but instead lines up directly in front of the A-gap on either side, is a 1-technique 1-gap penetrator. A defensive tackle in the 4-3 or defensive end in the 3-4 who lines up directly in front of the B-gap between the OG and OT is a 3-technique 1-gap penetrator. If the NT/DT/DE lines up directly in front of the OC or OG or OT, they are a 2-gap penetrator.

Read this: http://www.xsosfootball.com/one-gap-and-two-gap-techniques/

Example of a 1-gap penetrator

1gapdefenders1.jpg

Example of a 2-gap penetrator

2gapdefenders1.jpg

Jarrett has played the 1-tech 1-gap/A-gap NT his entire college career. They are not grooming him to compete with Hageman. Jarrett will put on some weight and compete with Soliai at NT.

Edited by Beef
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mostly on Oxford campus and surrounding area. I admit what I saw was extremely filtered.

Buddy of mine works there, nice campus for sure.

I'm a rare Clemson fan in a UGA world, but I'm dang excited to see these boys play with each other. People don't give enough credit to familiarity, and for a couple rookies to have that already will do nothing but help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extremely excited about Grady.

I like Conyers too. Neat little town. My brother went to Oxford of Emory there his first two years of college. Really cool campus.

I was accepted to Emory at Oxford, got pissed that I didn't get into Emory proper,and went to UGA instead. I ended up finishing at Georgia College.

I really wish I had just gone to Oxford in the first place, Probably would've finished school a lot sooner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I noticed that too. No such thing as a "3-gap".

Gaps are categorized by letters and there's two of each, one on each side of center . Defensive positioning is categorized by "number-technique", and the further you get from center the higher your technique. And on offense, you have "numbered-holes", with odds being left and evens being right, essentially giving specific numbers to each "gap" that exists along with the "edge" also having it's own number.

I'm pretty sure he was trying to talk about technique.

That said, your continual insistence that a "1-gap penetrator = 3-technique position" is still wrong.

A 1-gap penetrator ONLY means that he doesn't line up directly in front of an offensive lineman. He lines up in front of a single gap. When you line up directly in front of an offensive lineman, you are a 2-gap penetrator because you have a gap on your left and your right you could stunt towards.

A nose tackle that doesn't line up directly in front of the center, but instead lines up directly in front of the A-gap on either side, is a 1-technique 1-gap penetrator. A defensive tackle in the 4-3 or defensive end in the 3-4 who lines up directly in front of the B-gap between the OG and OT is a 3-technique 1-gap penetrator. If the NT/DT/DE lines up directly in front of the OC or OG or OT, they are a 2-gap penetrator.

Read this: http://www.xsosfootball.com/one-gap-and-two-gap-techniques/

Example of a 1-gap penetrator

1gapdefenders1.jpg

Example of a 2-gap penetrator

2gapdefenders1.jpg

Jarrett has played the 1-tech 1-gap/A-gap NT his entire college career. They are not grooming him to compete with Hageman. Jarrett will put on some weight and compete with Soliai at NT.

very well said

i said jarrett was a 1-tech NT and was bombarded saying he isn't a NT because he's not 6-5 350 but to many really don't understand there are differences and yes he is a NT when he plays the 1 tech he'll just line up offset to the center even angled sometimes

his best position might be the 3 tech though him and hageman are interchangeable in what they can do hageman could play pretty much anything inside and jarrett is a 3 or 1 tech

babs skillset is very similar to jarretts what hurts him is all the missed tackles because he can get in the backfeild anytime he just struggles to make plays

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I noticed that too. No such thing as a "3-gap".

Gaps are categorized by letters and there's two of each, one on each side of center . Defensive positioning is categorized by "number-technique", and the further you get from center the higher your technique. And on offense, you have "numbered-holes", with odds being left and evens being right, essentially giving specific numbers to each "gap" that exists along with the "edge" also having it's own number.

I'm pretty sure he was trying to talk about technique.

That said, your continual insistence that a "1-gap penetrator = 3-technique position" is still wrong.

A 1-gap penetrator ONLY means that he doesn't line up directly in front of an offensive lineman. He lines up in front of a single gap. When you line up directly in front of an offensive lineman, you are a 2-gap penetrator because you have a gap on your left and your right you could stunt towards.

A nose tackle that doesn't line up directly in front of the center, but instead lines up directly in front of the A-gap on either side, is a 1-technique 1-gap penetrator. A defensive tackle in the 4-3 or defensive end in the 3-4 who lines up directly in front of the B-gap between the OG and OT is a 3-technique 1-gap penetrator. If the NT/DT/DE lines up directly in front of the OC or OG or OT, they are a 2-gap penetrator.

Read this: http://www.xsosfootball.com/one-gap-and-two-gap-techniques/

Example of a 1-gap penetrator

Example of a 2-gap penetrator

Jarrett has played the 1-tech 1-gap/A-gap NT his entire college career. They are not grooming him to compete with Hageman. Jarrett will put on some weight and compete with Soliai at NT.

Seriously dude? After I schooled you last time so bad that you ran away, you try in another thread to correct my accurate descriptions with your misunderstandings once again? You've already demonstrated you don't have a single clue what you're talking about regarding alingment, technique, and gaps. Sigh...OK, I'm done giving you the benefit of the doubt and talking to you like you might understand what I'm trying to inform you. So this is for the benefit of everyone else so that they don't become as misinformed and wrong as you.

A 1-gap penetrator ONLY means that he doesn't line up directly in front of an offensive lineman. He lines up in front of a single gap. When you line up directly in front of an offensive lineman, you are a 2-gap penetrator because you have a gap on your left and your right you could stunt towards.

This is one of the stupidest things I've ever read. You are trying to twist something that is a frequent outcome of how these DL's align themselves in these different schemes, and instead are making it the defining characteristic. I've seen similar from you before. And it is wrong here too...

Lets assume a normal 4-3 defense that plays 1-gap for all 4 down linemen for a moment. It doesn't matter where these players choose to place themselves in relation to an offensive lineman - whether it's head up, off of an OLs shoulder, or in between a gap - it's still a one-gap role where they are responsible for their assigned gap with the LBs and Safeties filling the other gaps behind them. Now lets consider a 3-4 where all 3 down linemen are responsible for 2-gaps each. Again, it doesn't matter if the NT lines up in a 0-tech right over the Center, or a 1-tech shaded to the side of either shoulder of the Center, he's still responsible for his two gaps on either side of the Center. Same thing with the 2 DE's. Whether they line up in a 3, 4i, 4, or 5-tech, they are still responsible for their 2 gaps on either side of the OLineman they are closest too. Notice closest too does not indicate "head up" on. For example a 5-tech will be lined up on the outside shoulder of the OT; but will still be responsible for the gap on both sides of that OT. Meaning he will sometimes have to cross the face of that OT in order to fill that gap if a RB comes that way.

DL_Techniques_2.png

Now this is where I'm sure your confusion comes from - while it is true that in a 1-gap scheme a DL will often be lined up on the shoulder of an OL instead of head-up, and in a 2-gap scheme the DL will often be lined up directly over an OL in order to make it easier to perform their duties - this is in NO way a requirement, much less the defining characteristic as you 100% wrongly claim.

A 1 gapping 4-tech that is head up on the LT could either 'penetrate' the B gap or the C gap, depending on which one he is assigned. A 2 gapping 4-tech that is lined up on the LT will not penetrate, but will instead hold up his OL at the point of attack in order to be able to toss him to either side and stop the RB if he comes in either the B gap or the C gap. In both cases you have a DL lined up directly over the LT in a 4-tech position that places the DL directly in between the B gap and the C gap. The only difference is if they are 1-gapping or 2-gapping, which greatly changes their role and body-type requirements.

I will allow that it is unusual to see a 1 gapping DL lined up at a 4-tech, or any other head-up alignment because it gives the OL an advantage by letting him get his hands on the DL easier - and also allows for easier double team blocks. But I must stress that when the DLs often line up in a 1-gap scheme to not be directly over an OL, that is a function of making the DLs job easier, not the defining characteristic of what a 1-gapping or 2-gapping DL means - as you wrongly claim.

That said, your continual insistence that a "1-gap penetrator = 3-technique position" is still wrong. A nose tackle that doesn't line up directly in front of the center, but instead lines up directly in front of the A-gap on either side, is a 1-technique 1-gap penetrator.

Completely wrong. The 2nd sentence deals with your continued misunderstanding of alignment, gap, and technique. The 1st sentence deals with your lack of understanding of our base defense and the roles of the 3 big DL's Quinn uses. Let's address the 2nd sentence first.

As we've just seen, it doessn't matter one iota where the nose tackle lines up in his technique when determining 1-gap or 2-gap responsibilites. To make this easier to comprehend, Brandon Mebane is the NT for Seattle. He lines up almost exclusively in a 1-tech alignment - which means instead of being directly over the Center, he is instead one step sideways in either direction which places him on either outside shoulder of the Center. For one thing this doesn't place him directly in the center of the A gap, it only shades him that way. But the most important thing is that he's most often not playing a 1-tech 1-gap penetrator as you wrongly claim. He is in fact almost exclusively 2-gapping both A gaps on either side of the Center. They will very rarely change it up and make him a 1-gapper and make the 3-tech a 2-gap just so they don't become 100% predictable. But even in doing so, that disproves your claim that a 1-tech role is defined by being a 1-gap penetrator.

Returning to your first sentence. The technique the DL is aligned in has absolutely zero to do with defining whether he is 1-gapping or 2-gapping. The scheme defines those roles. And the roles of our DL's in this Carroll/Quinn base defense are what you continually are unable to grasp. Let me emphsize this is the "base defense" we are talking about here; not a nickel package, not a pass rush package, not a hybrid package - but the base defense, that Seattle ran a little over 50% of the time.

In the base D, there are a few general guidelines for the front 4. One typical guideline that they follow an overwhelming majory of the time, but as I said earlier not 100% so they don't become completely predictable, is as follows: one side of the DL is 1-gapping, while the other side is 2-gapping. 2 DLs 1-gap, the other 2 DLs 2-gap. The 5-tech DE and the 1-tech NT are 2-gapping on the strong side of the offensive formation; the 3-tech DT and the 7/9-tech LEO DE are 1-gapping on the weak side. Those are the defined roles of the front 4 for this scheme in every article Carroll or Quinn has ever done. This is not debatable. So my insistence that the 1-gap penetrator role for a DT = the 3-tech in this scheme is grounded in the FACT that this is how the architects of this scheme define it. This is scheme specific to what we will be running here; which in turn means that other team's schemes can and will define a 1-gap penetrating role in a different manner.

So while it's true that Jarrett played a lot of 1-gapping NT in college because they ran a different scheme. No, Jarrett will not be putting on weight and competing with Soliai at NT here. Not when both Pioli and Quinn flat out said Jarrett is going to be a 1-gap penetrating disruptive player, which is completely opposite of the job requirements of the 2-gap responsibilites of the 1-tech in THIS SCHEME. The two places that a 1-gap penetrator fit in this scheme are either at the 3-tech DT, or as one of the two interior pass rushing DL's in nickel and sub packages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think Jarrett wants to be in Atlanta just as Beasley does and that makes players play harder. When you are happy on the job you perform better. I am excited for the coming season and think DQ and the Falcons have something truly awesome brewing in the ATL. After the coming season you will see a lot of free agent players wanting to come here and play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh we got an internet tough guy over here!

You didn't school squat and I certainly didn't run away. I continued to post in a bunch of threads. You clearly have an insecurity complex and can't take being wrong or contradicted, so you sat there just saying the same crap over and over and over, which I'm sure you'll do here again. And I wasn't going to sit there and waste my time on you when it was clear you weren't going to stop. So when I stop debating with you again, its not because you won something, its because I don't waste my time on know-it-alls with tiny weenie syndrome who need the internet to make themselves feel better.

Some of what you say is correct, but then you turn right around and virtually contradict yourself immediately after.

Lets assume a normal 4-3 defense that plays 1-gap for all 4 down linemen for a moment. It doesn't matter where these players choose to place themselves in relation to an offensive lineman - whether it's head up, off of an OLs shoulder, or in between a gap - it's still a one-gap role
I will allow that it is unusual to see a 1 gapping DL lined up at a 4-tech, or any other head-up alignment because it gives the OL an advantage by letting him get his hands on the DL easier - and also allows for easier double team blocks. But I must stress that when the DLs often line up in a 1-gap scheme to not be directly over an OL, that is a function of making the DLs job easier, not the defining characteristic of what a 1-gapping or 2-gapping DL means - as you wrongly claim.

I mean C'mon, man. There's a reason we virtually never see a 1-gap scheme line up straight over the OL and a 2-gap scheme line up over a gap.

Occasionally it appears as if a DL lined up over a gap crosses the face of an OL as if shooting a different gap, but 99.9% of the time it only looks like this because the DL is flowing with the ball movement OR the OL blocked them off assignment OR the defense is running a Stunt OR the defense is running a LB blitz and the DL's assignment is to pull an OL out/away from his gap to create a lane for the LB to shoot.

If there's a defensive coordinator in existence who says he's running a 1-gap assignment scheme but lining all his DL's straight on with the OL's, then he's not going to be a defensive coordinator very long. And if there's a defensive coordinator who says his base is a 2-gap assignment scheme and he's lining his DL's up in the gaps, then he's also not going to be a defensive coordinator very long.

Watch this clip of Brandon Mebane at the 1:22 mark line up in the strong-side A-gap and blow right through it.

https://youtu.be/xOFr4UuAEcs?t=1m21s

Now UNLESS he's running a STUNT or the LB is running a Red Dog, Mebane isn't ALWAYS going to be covering 2 gaps like you insist. Stunts and Red Dog blitzes are not the norm. Lining up in the middle of a gap and crossing over to a completely different gap is not the norm for Quinn's NT.

MuthHawks-1.jpg

The above pic is Quinn's base defensive alignment. And you're insisting that the 5-tech DE and the 1-tech NT are 2-gap assignment while the 3-tech DT and the LEO are only 1-gap. And that simply isn't true. The left side/strong side is the "Closed" side. Why the **** would Quinn 2-gap on the side we are stacking and only 1-gap on the side we have the fewest defenders?

You want to be monumentally predictable? Then go right ahead and classify your 3-tech as a 1-gap penetrator only in your base D that you run 50% of the time.

In other words, you insisting the 3-tech DT in our base defense is a 1-gap penetrator ONLY and our 1-tech NT is a 2-gap penetrator ONLY is non-sense.

And here is Quinn's 2-gap defense. You'll notice he lines the 3-tech directly over the OG and the 5-tech directly over the LT. And AGAIN, the 3-tech DT is a 2-gap assignment. Meanwhile, the 1-tech NT is in the A-gap in BOTH formations. Which means the NT is WAY more likely to be the 1-gap penetrator. I seriously doubt Mebane is covering both A-gaps while McDaniel is only covering the B-gap when he's lined straight up on the OG.

underSEA.PNG

And then here is a 3-4 running a PURE 2-gap assignment scheme with the NT in a 0-tech, which Quinn does NOT run because Quinn's NT is ALWAYS a 1-tech or 2-tech over a gap.

9dedcb0995ebd2faed5bc0551deadb15_origina

And here's Dallas running a 4-3 Under, just like Quinn's base. You'll notice yet again that not a single guy is lined up directly in front of an OL. They are all lined up in a gap and shading the strong-side.

4dacb66d6955a754bf88f4ef3143ddf4_origina

The 5-tech DE and the 1-tech NT are 2-gapping on the strong side of the offensive formation; the 3-tech DT and the 7/9-tech LEO DE are 1-gapping on the weak side. Those are the defined roles of the front 4 for this scheme in every article Carroll or Quinn has ever done. This is not debatable. So my insistence that the 1-gap penetrator role for a DT = the 3-tech in this scheme is grounded in the FACT that this is how the architects of this scheme define it.

Let's see some of these "articles" from Carroll and Quinn saying this then. Prove to me that the NT in Quinn's scheme is never a 1-gap penetrator and the DT is always only a 1-gaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...