Could Jamaal Anderson Start At Defensive Tackle?

by Dave Choate on Oct 14, 2009 6:08 PM EDT in Falcons News

For many of you, this discussion comes after months and perhaps even years of lobbying for this exact situation. You can feel free to say something snide, such as, "oh, now we're talking about it," and then sit smugly at your keyboard. You've earned that much.

On Sunday, the coaching staff decided to give Jamaal Anderson at defensive tackle the old college try, as D. Orlando Ledbetter from the AJC reported. The result? Anderson actually looked pretty good, hurrying the quarterback twice and getting better penetration through the middle of the line than he ever did on the outside. At his size—he's 6'6" and nearly 285 pounds—it's not unreasonable to put him there, and for one game at least the strategy seemed to work well.

The real question, of course, is whether this is a long-term solution to the issue of what to do with Jamaal Anderson. We've tried him at defensive end and haven't really seen the kind of pass rushing ability everyone was hoping for, so it might be time to end that experiment. If he performs well at defensive tackle, he could at the very least start for the rest of the season and perhaps rotate in and out in the seasons ahead. We could also swing him back and forth between end and tackle, as long as the coaching staff didn't think it was going to affect his performance at either spot.

And my opinion, you ask, wide-eyed? I think this should be a permanent change. The coaching staff already likes to rotate guys out, so it's not like Thomas Johnson is suddenly going to disappear from the game entirely. This puts Anderson is a position to succeed and may just give the middle of our defensive line a needed boost against the run.

What do you all think?

Tweet Comment 41 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I like it

Versatility and adaptation is what seperates elite teams, well, that and talent, but we have to work with the talent we have!

by Trainhopper on Oct 14, 2009 6:16 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

Definitely

That gives us more time with actual pash-rushers at DE. How is that not a good idea?

by orion12 on Oct 14, 2009 6:36 PM EDT reply actions

Why would you NOT do this?

If Anderson keeps playing like that at DT, he fills a void a lot bigger than the one he leaves at DE. The improved D-line play Sunday was no coincidence IMO.

by tom slick on Oct 14, 2009 6:46 PM EDT reply actions

I think we'll continue to use him as a hybrid...

Inside on passing plays, on the edge on running plays…

I have six locks on my door all in a row. When I go out, I only lock every other one. I figure no matter how long somebody stands there picking the locks, they are always locking three.

Elayne Boosler

by NaGaNole on Oct 14, 2009 7:03 PM EDT reply actions

Yep...

The man does a better job in the middle than he does on the edge. Gotta maximize the talent of every player you have. Jamaal is a better DT than a DE.

by Thrashy Thrashy on Oct 14, 2009 7:07 PM EDT reply actions

this just seems like a no-brainer...

The guy has done virtually nothing at DE for multiple years, then all of a sudden you put him at DT and he looks fantastic – i don’t think that’s a coincidence. How could you not keep putting him there, unless you just don’t want to improve your D line? Time will tell whether it’s a long term solution, but you’d be crazy not to keep starting him at DT until you’re given a reason not to.

What I love about this is not only does it only give us a potential playmaker at DT (and yes, i know, that’s a big assumption and we have to keep seeing him produce), but it makes your DE unit better as well. The problem with having Anderson playing end is not only that he’s not producing, but he’s taking playing time away from other guys (Biermann, Sidbury) who need it so they can get better.

This just seems like a win-win.

by cheshire falcon on Oct 14, 2009 7:11 PM EDT reply actions

Oh, now we're talking about it...

Just kidding about the subject heading.

I think it’s a good move considering Falcons current defensive scheme. As we know, they like DTs to get upfield more than just take up blockers and plug gaps. Get after it, Jamaal!

by NCFalconFan on Oct 14, 2009 7:11 PM EDT reply actions

Haha

I knew at least two of you would take the bait.

by Dave Choate on Oct 14, 2009 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions

"oh, now we're talking about it,"

/commence mean-muggin’ the keyboard and screen

This is a win-win at both positions even if his performance against the Niner’s is all we ever get from him. It’s more than we’ve ever got from him before, so freeing up a spot for Beerman and El Sid is probably a good idea. The fact that he could play end when needed is also a win. More depth at two positions with one player? Umm yes please.

"This is America, if we can’t self-righteously look down on others and blame them for our faults, the commies win."-----Cormican on Bleeding Green Nation w/r/t fans overreacting to the Eagles signing of Michael Vick

by Jesse28 on Oct 15, 2009 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions

Remember all the talk in training camp about versatility on the D-line?

Looks like it wasn’t just talk. Speaks well of our FO and coaching staff.

by tom slick on Oct 15, 2009 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah

I’m glad they are smart. Maybe now I don’t have to bash JA anymore, but McKay is still on the hook for it and he’s still around, so I still have that!

by Jesse28 on Oct 16, 2009 8:16 AM EDT up reply actions

the man is 285 he is at most a 3/4 end

keep him at tackle i mean what can he do he is one of the best at stopping the run better pass rusher han most of our current tackles supposed beast why not ?

by mistab50 on Oct 14, 2009 7:18 PM EDT reply actions

I think that sums it up

We’ve tried him at end and it didn’t work, so it’s time to move him. Creative coaching staffs survive in this league.

by Dave Choate on Oct 14, 2009 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions

3-4 DE...? Who needs one?

I do like the idea of keepn’ him around as a penatrating DT in pass situations, but at what price? Certainly not at his current price tag… J. Anderson to K.C. for Derrick Johnson…maybe not, how about…J. Anderson to OAK for Asomugha… even better, he’d make an immediate impact, and OAK likes to overpay for underacheivers ( no offense to Jamaal ), even though they dont run a 3-4… Trade deadline is approaching, whats wrong with wishful thinking

by CaliFALCON on Oct 14, 2009 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Ahem

Oh, now we’re talking about it.

Driving the "Fire Willie Martinez" bandwagon since 2006

by SG Standard on Oct 14, 2009 7:39 PM EDT reply actions

I'm sure you're smirking

by Dave Choate on Oct 14, 2009 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Its a loving smirk

I don’t care who comes up with an idea, as long as it works. At the very least, this looks like it will be more successful than Anderson at DE.

Driving the "Fire Willie Martinez" bandwagon since 2006

by SG Standard on Oct 14, 2009 11:10 PM EDT up reply actions

This move could ultimately be the deciding factor between making this defense

a contender and a pretender. He can stuff inside runs AND pressure the quarterback now. Honestly, this is a genius move we’ve wanted a long time and I think the game against San Francisco proves it. If he’s back at DT this weekend, you can bet Cutler will have to hurry up on a lot of downs.

You have opinions. We all do. Some of yours may have to do with the Falcons. Sign up today and share them.

by Adam Schultz on Oct 14, 2009 9:49 PM EDT reply actions

Sometimes you just gotta say, what the f***

So sayeth Xenu

by zooker on Oct 14, 2009 10:05 PM EDT reply actions

Its a Win/Win

Kind of tired of people talking about Anderson not getting sacks. It pretty clear (right now at least) he isnt going to be that type of player. He is mainly a run stopper and is very good at it so i think the move may help. Also, he may be a below average pass rushing DE, move him inside and suddenly he isnt looking that bad.

by qthaballa on Oct 14, 2009 10:07 PM EDT reply actions

DO IT!!!

jamaal sucks at DE. anything else will be a upgrade.

by DaRealJohnLegend on Oct 15, 2009 12:15 AM EDT reply actions

Ok

Keep him there for now to see if he can keep playing at that level in the position, if not, can him altogether. We need to get something out of the guy and that is a spot that we are short at right now. He did pretty well I thought.

Life is a garden. Dig it!

by Hardcore Falcon on Oct 15, 2009 7:47 AM EDT reply actions

It's about %$&# time!

In 3rd down passing situations the line up of Abraham, Anderson, Babinieux, and Biermann is pretty nice.

"There were far too many penalties on both sides of the football," said Coach Smith. "Some things that we'll have to address and I can assure you we will."

by Pregame with Pabst on Oct 15, 2009 9:30 AM EDT reply actions

I like Bierman

at end instead of Anderson.

Life is a garden. Dig it!

by Hardcore Falcon on Oct 15, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Me too

I think a line that starts Abraham, Babineaux, Anderson and Biermann gives us our best shot to win.

by Dave Choate on Oct 15, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions

DT is needed...

I was impressed with our run D against the 9ers, but i am still concerned about our interior D-line after the Pats Game…

Remember that the Patriots, a team not know for its power run game, ran the ball up and down the field against us.

That being said I think its necessary to have fresh bodies inside at DT. This move should have happened last year, but its better late than never.

The trade deadline is coming up soon. Any chance we could make a move for Julius Peppers?? With Anderson/ Babineaux on the inside and Abraham and Peppers we could scary good on D…. I smell Superbowl!!

by VaTechDirtybird on Oct 15, 2009 4:07 PM EDT reply actions

Peppers and Abraham at DE?

STOP IT! You’re making the hair stand up on the back of my neck! Dear God, that would truly be a sight to behold.

by tom slick on Oct 15, 2009 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions

I have one major concern with Peppers

And that’s his motivation. There are times where Panthers fans will tell you that he doesn’t seem to be fighting for it like he should, and John Fox is a very good motivator as a coach. For the cost of getting him, he’d have to play hard all the time, and I’m not entirely sure we can guarantee that.

by Dave Choate on Oct 15, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Peppers IS expensive

Making $16.7M this year, not sure if we can even afford him. For that kind of money, consistent production is a must.

by tom slick on Oct 15, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions

what if he is winning games?

I really think the reason Peppers is not playing hard is being the Panther’s are losing games. If he came to an up and coming franchise like Atlanta I would be shocked if his motivation did not improve.
The cost thing is a serious issue though, but hopefully he would be willing to compromise. I get the feeling that he wants out of Carolina after all the training camp problems he had this past year.
If not Peppers…. we need to bulk up our DT’s. The loss of Jerry was HUGE, and we had the Patriots run all over us 3 weeks ago. I’m just not sure if there are any available DT’s that are worth while

by VaTechDirtybird on Oct 15, 2009 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions

I think JA98

Might prove to be the upgrade we need. I’ll grant you that our coaching staff could work miracles with the guy, but I’m not sold on Peppers at that price.

by Dave Choate on Oct 16, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions

Really Dave

How motivated would you be on that team? I wouldn’t want to be a garbage man for a garbage company either.

by Jesse28 on Oct 16, 2009 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions

This is a running concern, though

If this had just come up as a concern this year, I’d pop, lock and drop it. For years, though, there’s been talk among Panthers fans and NFL observers about the guy taking plays off and not finishing plays. Not saying he couldn’t be valuable, but at the price tag, I’m not all that interested in him.

by Dave Choate on Oct 16, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions

they're break dance fighting!

couldn’t resist.

Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I don't like that attitude. I can assure them it is much more serious than that. - Bill Shankly

by armchair quarterback on Oct 16, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Hmmm,....

Peppers is a great lineman but I think it depends on what a trade would cost us. At 16.7 million this year we might not sign him for next year and you don’t want to loose too much without looking at the long term effects.

by mwalex on Oct 15, 2009 7:24 PM EDT reply actions

i love jamaal but...

he is no longer any use for us and needs to be traded while he is worth somthing
he isnt a tackle for us because we have babs who is the only sure starter we have at tackle and we just invested in jerry so i think it would make not sense for us to add another tackle i mean there not the best but we are deep at tackle babs jerry thomas johnson who is looking good and vance walker who is decent im just saying he is getting paid starter money not third down money or anything inbetween and i have hopes for tackle and see an amazing future at end so lets trade him to the seahawks for dorsey a beast in the three who just isnt made for the five tech like ja and trade one of our other tackles to someone else for a second round pick we traded for tony g

by mistab50 on Oct 15, 2009 8:42 PM EDT reply actions

Or Kerney

And fix would should have never been broken in the first place.

by Jesse28 on Oct 16, 2009 8:25 AM EDT up reply actions

ahem,ahem

just had to say it, I know that Anderson isn’t the prolific sacker that we all hoped he would be but he is pretty good against the run . I like the idea of him being a DT on passing and a DE in running situations, it gives the birds someone with very good athletic abilities on the field , as long as they can control the situations and times they have him in .

by TRUBIRD1 on Oct 15, 2009 9:03 PM EDT reply actions