Bills' Potential Safety Switch Getting More Pub

by Brian Galliford on Mar 27, 2008 8:25 AM EDT in Buffalo Bills News

One of the more controversial potential moves for the Buffalo Bills this off-season - and a move I've championed for quite some time - is the proposed shift of third-year safety Donte Whitner to free safety. For a year, my theory was passed off as valid, but unlikely to happen. Then the Bills spent part of this off-season entertaining the likes of Marlon McCree, bringing the Whitner-to-free talks back to life.

Now, Anthony Bialy of RealFootball365.com - a writer I very much enjoy - sounds off on the topic. His thought? Whitner should stay at strong safety. Since we live in a democratic society, however, I have the ability to (respectfully) poke holes in his argument; I'll do that right now:

The core trouble with the prospective change would be that Whitner has performed well in rushing support as a strong safety, as many of his 193 tackles over his two seasons have come about from stopping running backs. What's notable is that he's particularly sharp at it for a zone coverage member.

It's hard to argue here as far as Whitner goes - though he takes bad angles too frequently that result in big gains, he's generally a very solid tackler in the box. My problem doesn't lie with Whitner, however - it lies with the rush defense as a whole. If moving Whitner back to free safety and adding a safety (or using a current option) at strong makes Buffalo's defense better, how can it be considered a bad move?

It could be that the relocation would mean more opportunities to excel in pass coverage, as it would allow him to spend more time competing directly against wide receivers. But it's a risk with a clear drawback: It would hinder his impressive talent for taking on carriers.

I don't know about y'all, but I distinctly remember watching George Wilson get run over by Willis McGahee in Buffalo's victory over Baltimore last season. It's not like the free safety isn't important in run support. Whitner would be an absolute force from the position in that department - perhaps the best run support free safety in the league. If the move backward makes us stronger at free safety, better against the run and gives Whitner more chances to make big plays (something Bialy admits needs to happen), I again ask the question - how is it a bad move?

Stick with what works, namely by leaving Whitner alone so he can traumatize offenses in the same way he has in his first seasons.

That's just it - it hasn't worked, and Whitner hasn't "traumatized offenses" by any stretch of the imagination. Our defense, the past two seasons, has been dreadful, and Whitner was a part of it. He's been impressive in terms of leadership, character and intelligence, and I'm very glad he's a part of this team. But if we can make him more productive and the defense better as a whole - which is more than a "slim" hope, as Bialy puts it - it's a move you make. It's that simple.

With the Bills losing out on McCree, however, it seems more likely at this point that Whitner will, indeed, stay at strong safety (unless the team gets a superb training camp out of John Wendling). That's not the worst thing in the world, as Whitner does have the ability to improve at that specific position. I just don't understand Bialy's argument in the least - it's one thing to keep Whitner's responsibilities consistent so that he can grow, but if you're compromising the effectiveness of your defense in doing it, it's just a bad idea.

The official site updates us on the progress of Ko Simpson, Whitner's running mate as a rookie. Mr. Whitner seems very excited to have his draft-mate back; it's going to be interesting to see how Simpson responds to early strenuous workouts on his surgically repaired ankle.

More Donte Whitner: his early quote in this Buffalo News piece got me pumped up for a season that's still six months away. QB Trent Edwards had some adrenaline-inducing comments as well (discounting the fact that he shaved his rookie beard).

Free agent linebacker Josh Stamer has signed with the Tennessee Titans. That's one special teams linebacker to bite the dust; if the Bills can't re-sign Mario Haggan now, they'll almost certainly look for a depth strong-side linebacker with special teams potential in the draft. Unless, of course, they're comfortable with Blake Costanzo in that role.

As it's planned out now, sireric will have a post up this afternoon about this year's tight end prospects. We're going to be asking for a lot of community input from y'all on this, so stay tuned. And if sireric gets busy, Kurupt will take his place - we're loaded with content, so keep your browsers locked in to Buffalo Rumblings.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

This is a classic example

Of why there is such a need for strong DTs. Without strong DT play, you are forcing your LBs to shed blocks to make tackles. You are also forced at times to bring a SS into the box just to maintain some semblance of control in the opponents run game.

With strong DT play, your LBs can make plays unimpeded. It also allows your safeties to stay back some, and make plays from the pressure the front seven created.

As long as Stroud can stay healthy, the LBs and DBs should have a much better year. For this reason, I say it'd be sound thinking to keep Whitner where he is, and let Wilson/Simpson fight it out for the FS spot.

by krytime on Mar 27, 2008 8:57 AM EDT reply actions

That's very true

And exactly what the coaches are thinking: get stronger up the middle, get stronger everywhere else. If these moves allow Whitner to play strong safety from deeper in the field, in the "creeping" role that Bialy outlined, that I'm fine with. I'm not fine with him being anchored in the box, because he's much more effective making plays coming forward.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Mar 27, 2008 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions

Agreed.

There's a difference between having to have a guy in the box, and choosing when to have a guy in the box. Last year, the Bills HAD to have a guy in there to stop the run. This year, they should be able to pick and choose when to run blitz.

by krytime on Mar 27, 2008 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions

That's what we need to hope for

If Stroud and Co. on the line hold up well and our new LB trio proves to be as stout as we hope, we can afford to let Whitner roam in the defensive backfield more often.

The move of Whitner to FS doesn't have to be permanent or an every down move. He's smart enough and a good enough player to rotate between the two positions. Would anybody have a problem with Bryan Scott playing more in run situations with Whitner at FS, and Simpson/Wilson replacing him on pass downs pushing Whitner back to SS? I wouldn't, especially with the below average FS we have.

Also, aren't the safeties in a cover 2 scheme supposed to be somewhat interchangeable? Whitner already plays deep in certain pass downs in the Cover 2 or 3 scheme we utilize. It's not like he hasn't had the opportunity to play "centerfield" for us yet. It's just he's never produced any big plays, which is why I don't know if a move to the free safety position is going to do a whole lot at improving that...

by Kurupt on Mar 27, 2008 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Simpson for strong safety

If I remember coorectly, Ko Simpson was no slouch of a tackler when he played free safety. Looking at the other options we have right now I would take a long look at simply switching Ko and Donte. After going through leg injuries lots of athletes build their upper body strength because of their workout limitations. I would think he would have just as good of a shot as Barnes and Wendling of being a physical force after watching his interview and seeing how well built he seems to be. He's at 205 now and he wants to get up to 208. That's good size for a strong safety. If he can gain that mental edge after coming back from his injury, I would give him a chance to earn the starting SS spot.

by jj24 on Mar 27, 2008 9:18 AM EDT reply actions

I worry about

Simpson's ability to sift through traffic. That's something that Whitner is very adept at; Simpson, not so much. He's a very good one-on-one tackler, which makes him a better fit at free. If Simpson is starting, it's at free safety, and if Whitner is playing back more often as a strong safety, it's the ideal scenario for the Bills.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Mar 27, 2008 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions

On the fence

As the author of the article, as well as debating against the other author, you seem to be rather unclear as to your stance, my friend. Do you "champion the move"?

by jj24 on Mar 27, 2008 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions

I champion

Whitner getting away from the line of scrimmage. He's not an in-the-box safety like Bob Sanders or Sammy Knight - he's a rover; he has the ability to make plays all over the field. Buffalo needs to let him do that. If they accomplish that by keeping him at strong safety but lining him up next to Simpson deep, that's fine by me. He just needs to be more than a run defender, as Bialy seems to have posited.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Mar 27, 2008 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions

If I'm starting both Whitner and Simpson

Why would I switch them now? I say let them stick to what they know.

Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Mar 27, 2008 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions

Agreed

They're the best players and they both have the skills to tackle and cover.

by jj24 on Mar 27, 2008 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions

Ridiculous

If we are moving Whitner to FS that means Ko is about to ride the pine. No, he is not a bad tackler but at 205 he is hardly good size for a SS. If Whitner shifts I see Scott, or Wendling winning the SS job in camp. Why would we do a complete switch and move our FS to to SS and vice versa?, just doesn't make sense to me.

Playoff Bound in '08!

by SP @ Buffalo Rumblings on Mar 27, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions

Switching Donte and Ko

Sounds like a good idea because they are both good athletes and it would seem like you would want both to be on the field at the same time. On paper it looks good and Ko has the size to do play SS. Last years two pro bowlers were Bob Sanders- 5'8" 206 pnds. and Darren Sharper-6'2" 210 pnds. Ko is 6'1" and a possible 208 pnds so he should be able to handle the physical aspects of the position. My concern is, would Ko have the willingness to consistently step up to RB's and lower his shoulder like the Sanders or even Whitners of the league? Hopefully the front seven has improved enough where he wouldn't have to do it that often like Whitner did last year.

I personally would love to see both Donte and Ko on the field at the same time because they are great athletes as well as friends. The friendship leads to chemistry, and the athleticism leads to playmaking, two things that we desperately need to take the next step as a team. They came in the league together and I would like see them both continue to roam the defensive backfield making plays for the bills for years to come.

by LuBAR on Mar 27, 2008 9:58 AM EDT reply actions

Agree and disagree

If Simpson and Whitner are on the field together, it will be as the free and strong safeties respectively. As I said in an above comment, Simpson doesn't have the ability to sift through the trash, avoid/take on blocks like Whitner does. He's a much better fit at free safety, where everything is more one-on-one, while Whitner can do either. If Whitner is moved to free safety, Simpson will be a reserve brought in in nickel situations, most likely.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Mar 27, 2008 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions

Agree with you

I think you are absolutely correct. I was just saying it would be great to keep both of them on the field if possible. Sifting through traffic to make tackles is a skill and i doubt that Ko can do right now. Do you think he could be like George Wilson last year and try to learn a position so Donte could make the move to FS? Cause if not and Donte makes the move, then yes, Ko will be a backup..... However i would still be comfortable with them both playing their current positions.

by LuBAR on Mar 27, 2008 10:11 AM EDT reply actions

Safety switch

This to me is one of the perfect examples of how an improved d-line helps the whole defense. When I say d-line I'm referring to not only the DT position but the DE position.
With a better pass rush, the QB is hurried and he makes poorly aimed/timed throws that the safeties can turn into turn-overs. With better play from the DT position the Linebackers are in better position to help with the run, allowing the SS to play back more and giving the opposing QB another obstacle to work around. If Stroud can stay healthy and the Bills can improve the pass-rush, Whitner will make more plays regardless of which safety position he is playing.

Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Mar 27, 2008 12:50 PM EDT reply actions

The over/under on this comment was 12:30.

I lost; I bet the under that you would definitely bring up DEs by the time most people finished their lunch...

We both acknowledge how important it is to have a dominate D line. Personally, I feel thagt if you have a top notch O line, and D line, the rest of your roster will take care of itself.

I'm off of the subject, so I'll make this quick. I prefer a deep and flexible D line. On run downs, I'd like 3 big guys and a fast one. Vice verse for passing downs. This is one reason I'm high on Spencer Johnson - his ability to play both DT and DE.

by krytime on Mar 27, 2008 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions

You should have let me know

I would have posted it earlier and we could have split the loot.

In my opinion O-line and D-line are the most critical parts of your team. I don't care how good your QB is, if he's scrapping himself off the turf after every play what good is he?

Man do I miss #78

by sireric on Mar 27, 2008 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Sireric...

I could not agree more with you!

What's the reasoning behind wanting to switch Whitner to FS? To give him more room to make plays.

Improving the quality of the starters in front of him, the front 7 defenders, allows Donte to make more plays (from the SS spot) without him having to learn and play the FS position. In fact, he then has the luxury of playing his position in the Tampa 2 the way it was designed to be played. It also plays to his strengths as a player.

So what I'm trying to say is that improving the defensive front 7 (especially the D-line) makes the safety switch totally unnecessary.

I'm really looking forward to seeing Whitner have an even better year in 2008 when he can have space to do his thing!

Get the Bills back to the big game!

by Blitz on Mar 27, 2008 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm pulling

for Wendling to show he can play SS this summer.

by Kumario! on Mar 27, 2008 1:41 PM EDT reply actions

Wendling

It says a lot about your scouting staff when you can find guys in lower rounds/FA who can contribute. Butler, Greer, Williams, and Peters are perfect examples. If you can find one or two of those guys every year, I tip my hat...

by krytime on Mar 27, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Nothing against Wendling

But i would still like to see what Ko and Donte can do with an improved D-line. Ko to me is a better option that Wendling.

by LuBAR on Mar 27, 2008 2:29 PM EDT reply actions

All safeties, all positions

After thinking about it a little longer it seems more logical that we use Donte, Ko, and Wendling at both safety positions with George Wilson as passing situation free safety specialist and Bryan Scott as our run sitation strong safety specialist. This gives our secondary great versatilty in the event of injury and also allows us to disguise our defense and keep the offense thinking a little more.

by jj24 on Mar 28, 2008 8:49 AM EDT reply actions