The Safety position in college football.

[CadaverDawg]

Just saw Saban talking on SEC Nation. He said they have essentially 4 Corners in the secondary, because their safeties are good cover guys.

I'm far from an expert on this stuff, but I have always wondered why teams don't want their safeties to be just two more corners? I mean, I know you probably want a few bigger safeties as options for when you play a Bama or LSU where they'll be helping in run support a lot...but the way the ground game has gone from power to spread over the last several years, it seems very smart to just recruit and play 4 corners with the 2 most physical corners being your safeties.

I'm sure some will tell me that our safeties played CB in high school...but think about what I'm saying. Conan and Market aren't good cover guys. Meanwhile we have guys like Cleveland and Jiles that are pretty good cover guys. So I'm saying, how much better would our pass coverage be if we had Jiles and Cleveland at Safety, and Redmond and Calhoun at Corner this year so far? Yes, it would make us smaller on the back end, and we might not be as physical in run support...but would it be a huge benefit against the A&M's, OM's, etc?

And are Peters and McLaurin going to be that perfect combo of size and coverage ability? Or are they going to be more your typical safety that are great in run support and over the top, but not great in one on one type coverage situations?

Thoughts? Just wanting to discuss...I think you could approach it several ways I guess.

[ShotgunDawg]

Good thoughts

It seems to me that this is something that TCU has been doing for a years. I like the idea playing corners at safety, but I would say that they still need to above average tacklers. It's true that you may want bigger safeties that play in the box against LSU, Bama, & Ark, but you also need good tacklers that prevent YAK yards against LSU, Ole Miss, etc... Regardless of how much you want your safeties to be good in coverage, they've still got to tackle better than true corners. So, there is a balance.

As for Peters, Bryant, & McLaurin, I think they may meet that balance. I feel pretty good about Bryant & Peters in coverage going forward. McLaurin may be the question mark & may be more of a Matt Wells type player.

[Tripp McNeely]

Look at our 16' recruiting class, especially the secondary...apparently Mullen's taking good notes. Between Charles, Morgan-Walker, Nelson, Dantzler and Allen, we seem to be recruiting a LOT of those "hybrids"

[Westdawg]

One of the biggest concepts we implemented at the last school I coached at was that we had two very legit LBs , and a true free safety. Our Stud and Blood guys, or the OLBs for those of you more in line with the 4-4 defense were hybrid safeties. Guys that had really good coverage ability by that could also break the wood in run defense. The years we had above average OLBs were great years for our teams. Made us very versatile and potent on defense. This is where a guy like tony Connor at OM has succeeded. With the advancement of the spread offense, teams should focus more on these type players. Guys that weren't quite big enough for a Mike position, but didn't quite fit the true mold of a Free. I think McLaurin and especially Peters fit this mold and will provide the versatility needed for defense today.

[CadaverDawg]

One of the biggest concepts we implemented at the last school I coached at was that we had two very legit LBs , and a true free safety. Our Stud and Blood guys, or the OLBs for those of you more in line with the 4-4 defense were hybrid safeties. Guys that had really good coverage ability by that could also break the wood in run defense. The years we had above average OLBs were great years for our teams. Made us very versatile and potent on defense. This is where a guy like tony Connor at OM has succeeded. With the advancement of the spread offense, teams should focus more on these type players. Guys that weren't quite big enough for a Mike position, but didn't quite fit the true mold of a Free. I think McLaurin and especially Peters fit this mold and will provide the versatility needed for defense today.

Great points. I agree. Would love to see Peters and McLaurin sting in that "Rover" position with their skill set and being able to do so many things well