Jacksonville Jaguar Arik Armstead-DT Thread

Originally posted by 91til:
Just cause you're not getting 10 sacks doesn't mean you're trash as a run defending DE. If Ford's healthy all year in his 3rd down role that'll more than make up for losing those 10 sacks. Or even if Ford gets you 8 and Blair or someone else rotating in gets you 4. There's your replacement of his production.

Meanwhile Thomas/Street/Taylor are your run defending DL in Base along with of course Bosa Buckner and Jones. The point is, just because Armstead is better than those guys doesn't mean that we can't lose him and still maintain a great defense.

Also I'm not saying I want Armstead to leave. I'm just saying if he leaves, we have guys that can play the run in base and we have guys (and can still add guys) to get the edge on 3rd down.

Dee Ford won't be healthy. You can bank on that. The years he's been healthy are outliers. Being injured is par for the course with Dee Ford. So if we lose AA, expect the lion's share of the pass rush to come from Defo and Bosa. That's a lot of pressure on two guys and a good way to burn them out.

As for replacing AA with a bunch of turds, it ain't going to work. This isn't the Billy Beane A's where you piece together a bunch of bums who excel at one thing to make a whole that's greater than its parts. Kentavius Street was awful, Julian Taylor doesn't even play edge, and Solomon Thomas hasn't shown a god damn thing. While AA's base run defense is excellent, it's his ability to get after the QB in base that makes our DL incredibly difficult to go against. It forces teams to pick their poison between nickel and base because the 49ers base defense would stuff the run AND get after the quarterback. And teams certainly didn't want them to unleash the hounds in nickel.

Here's the reality: the defensive line will be worse without AA. By how much? Nobody knows for certain. My guess is by a lot. But what we can say for certain is that the DL will be worse in every facet of the game.

I can't believe I'm defending AA.

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by 91til:
Just cause you're not getting 10 sacks doesn't mean you're trash as a run defending DE. If Ford's healthy all year in his 3rd down role that'll more than make up for losing those 10 sacks. Or even if Ford gets you 8 and Blair or someone else rotating in gets you 4. There's your replacement of his production.

Meanwhile Thomas/Street/Taylor are your run defending DL in Base along with of course Bosa Buckner and Jones. The point is, just because Armstead is better than those guys doesn't mean that we can't lose him and still maintain a great defense.

Also I'm not saying I want Armstead to leave. I'm just saying if he leaves, we have guys that can play the run in base and we have guys (and can still add guys) to get the edge on 3rd down.

Dee Ford won't be healthy. You can bank on that. The years he's been healthy are outliers. Being injured is par for the course with Dee Ford. So if we lose AA, expect the lion's share of the pass rush to come from Defo and Bosa. That's a lot of pressure on two guys and a good way to burn them out.

As for replacing AA with a bunch of turds, it ain't going to work. This isn't the Billy Beane A's where you piece together a bunch of bums who excel at one thing to make a whole that's greater than its parts. Kentavius Street was awful, Julian Taylor doesn't even play edge, and Solomon Thomas hasn't shown a god damn thing. While AA's base run defense is excellent, it's his ability to get after the QB in base that makes our DL incredibly difficult to go against. It forces teams to pick their poison between nickel and base because the 49ers base defense would stuff the run AND get after the quarterback. And teams certainly didn't want them to unleash the hounds in nickel.

Here's the reality: the defensive line will be worse without AA. By how much? Nobody knows for certain. My guess is by a lot. But what we can say for certain is that the DL will be worse in every facet of the game.

I can't believe I'm defending AA.

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by 91til:

Just cause you're not getting 10 sacks doesn't mean you're trash as a run defending DE. If Ford's healthy all year in his 3rd down role that'll more than make up for losing those 10 sacks. Or even if Ford gets you 8 and Blair or someone else rotating in gets you 4. There's your replacement of his production.

Meanwhile Thomas/Street/Taylor are your run defending DL in Base along with of course Bosa Buckner and Jones. The point is, just because Armstead is better than those guys doesn't mean that we can't lose him and still maintain a great defense.

Also I'm not saying I want Armstead to leave. I'm just saying if he leaves, we have guys that can play the run in base and we have guys (and can still add guys) to get the edge on 3rd down.

Dee Ford won't be healthy. You can bank on that. The years he's been healthy are outliers. Being injured is par for the course with Dee Ford. So if we lose AA, expect the lion's share of the pass rush to come from Defo and Bosa. That's a lot of pressure on two guys and a good way to burn them out.

As for replacing AA with a bunch of turds, it ain't going to work. This isn't the Billy Beane A's where you piece together a bunch of bums who excel at one thing to make a whole that's greater than its parts. Kentavius Street was awful, Julian Taylor doesn't even play edge, and Solomon Thomas hasn't shown a god damn thing. While AA's base run defense is excellent, it's his ability to get after the QB in base that makes our DL incredibly difficult to go against. It forces teams to pick their poison between nickel and base because the 49ers base defense would stuff the run AND get after the quarterback. And teams certainly didn't want them to unleash the hounds in nickel.

Here's the reality: the defensive line will be worse without AA. By how much? Nobody knows for certain. My guess is by a lot. But what we can say for certain is that the DL will be worse in every facet of the game.

I can't believe I'm defending AA.

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Yeah it would be great to keep him, but I'm not going to begrudge the guy for cashing in or blame our FO if they trade/let him leave.

That's a ton of money to invest in the DL. Maybe too much.

Originally posted by JaggedJ:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by 91til:
Just cause you're not getting 10 sacks doesn't mean you're trash as a run defending DE. If Ford's healthy all year in his 3rd down role that'll more than make up for losing those 10 sacks. Or even if Ford gets you 8 and Blair or someone else rotating in gets you 4. There's your replacement of his production.

Meanwhile Thomas/Street/Taylor are your run defending DL in Base along with of course Bosa Buckner and Jones. The point is, just because Armstead is better than those guys doesn't mean that we can't lose him and still maintain a great defense.

Also I'm not saying I want Armstead to leave. I'm just saying if he leaves, we have guys that can play the run in base and we have guys (and can still add guys) to get the edge on 3rd down.

Dee Ford won't be healthy. You can bank on that. The years he's been healthy are outliers. Being injured is par for the course with Dee Ford. So if we lose AA, expect the lion's share of the pass rush to come from Defo and Bosa. That's a lot of pressure on two guys and a good way to burn them out.

As for replacing AA with a bunch of turds, it ain't going to work. This isn't the Billy Beane A's where you piece together a bunch of bums who excel at one thing to make a whole that's greater than its parts. Kentavius Street was awful, Julian Taylor doesn't even play edge, and Solomon Thomas hasn't shown a god damn thing. While AA's base run defense is excellent, it's his ability to get after the QB in base that makes our DL incredibly difficult to go against. It forces teams to pick their poison between nickel and base because the 49ers base defense would stuff the run AND get after the quarterback. And teams certainly didn't want them to unleash the hounds in nickel.

Here's the reality: the defensive line will be worse without AA. By how much? Nobody knows for certain. My guess is by a lot. But what we can say for certain is that the DL will be worse in every facet of the game.

I can't believe I'm defending AA.

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Yeah it would be great to keep him, but I'm not going to begrudge the guy for cashing in or blame our FO if they trade/let him leave.

That's a ton of money to invest in the DL. Maybe too much.

That's alot for a non edge rusher.

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by JaggedJ:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by 91til:

Just cause you're not getting 10 sacks doesn't mean you're trash as a run defending DE. If Ford's healthy all year in his 3rd down role that'll more than make up for losing those 10 sacks. Or even if Ford gets you 8 and Blair or someone else rotating in gets you 4. There's your replacement of his production.

Meanwhile Thomas/Street/Taylor are your run defending DL in Base along with of course Bosa Buckner and Jones. The point is, just because Armstead is better than those guys doesn't mean that we can't lose him and still maintain a great defense.

Also I'm not saying I want Armstead to leave. I'm just saying if he leaves, we have guys that can play the run in base and we have guys (and can still add guys) to get the edge on 3rd down.

Dee Ford won't be healthy. You can bank on that. The years he's been healthy are outliers. Being injured is par for the course with Dee Ford. So if we lose AA, expect the lion's share of the pass rush to come from Defo and Bosa. That's a lot of pressure on two guys and a good way to burn them out.

As for replacing AA with a bunch of turds, it ain't going to work. This isn't the Billy Beane A's where you piece together a bunch of bums who excel at one thing to make a whole that's greater than its parts. Kentavius Street was awful, Julian Taylor doesn't even play edge, and Solomon Thomas hasn't shown a god damn thing. While AA's base run defense is excellent, it's his ability to get after the QB in base that makes our DL incredibly difficult to go against. It forces teams to pick their poison between nickel and base because the 49ers base defense would stuff the run AND get after the quarterback. And teams certainly didn't want them to unleash the hounds in nickel.

Here's the reality: the defensive line will be worse without AA. By how much? Nobody knows for certain. My guess is by a lot. But what we can say for certain is that the DL will be worse in every facet of the game.

I can't believe I'm defending AA.

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Yeah it would be great to keep him, but I'm not going to begrudge the guy for cashing in or blame our FO if they trade/let him leave.

That's a ton of money to invest in the DL. Maybe too much.

That's alot for a non edge rusher.

More sacks in his contract year than the rest of his career combined. I've seen this play before. I just don't count on him reproducing his 2019 production, but the cap space will certainly be gone.

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by 91til:

Just cause you're not getting 10 sacks doesn't mean you're trash as a run defending DE. If Ford's healthy all year in his 3rd down role that'll more than make up for losing those 10 sacks. Or even if Ford gets you 8 and Blair or someone else rotating in gets you 4. There's your replacement of his production.

Meanwhile Thomas/Street/Taylor are your run defending DL in Base along with of course Bosa Buckner and Jones. The point is, just because Armstead is better than those guys doesn't mean that we can't lose him and still maintain a great defense.

Also I'm not saying I want Armstead to leave. I'm just saying if he leaves, we have guys that can play the run in base and we have guys (and can still add guys) to get the edge on 3rd down.

Dee Ford won't be healthy. You can bank on that. The years he's been healthy are outliers. Being injured is par for the course with Dee Ford. So if we lose AA, expect the lion's share of the pass rush to come from Defo and Bosa. That's a lot of pressure on two guys and a good way to burn them out.

As for replacing AA with a bunch of turds, it ain't going to work. This isn't the Billy Beane A's where you piece together a bunch of bums who excel at one thing to make a whole that's greater than its parts. Kentavius Street was awful, Julian Taylor doesn't even play edge, and Solomon Thomas hasn't shown a god damn thing. While AA's base run defense is excellent, it's his ability to get after the QB in base that makes our DL incredibly difficult to go against. It forces teams to pick their poison between nickel and base because the 49ers base defense would stuff the run AND get after the quarterback. And teams certainly didn't want them to unleash the hounds in nickel.

Here's the reality: the defensive line will be worse without AA. By how much? Nobody knows for certain. My guess is by a lot. But what we can say for certain is that the DL will be worse in every facet of the game.

I can't believe I'm defending AA.

LMAO. You've definitely flipped a 180 BUT AA has earned that. Period.

Like you noted, Ford's unreliable health is the biggest issue here. In the Bucs game, first game of the year, he played 60% of the snaps. It was all down hill after that.

IF we could rely on him, throwing in a run defending DE in base wouldn't be as big of a deal if moving on from him. And we definitely don't have anyone who can produce 10 sacks inside the T's either.

It's a tough spot. But like Eric Davis said, if they want you, they'll find a way...there's always a way.

Originally posted by mayo49:

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Equivalent production? What?

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:
I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Equivalent production? What?

Meaning, we can find someone similar to Erik that we don't have to pay a ton. Be it our own guys, the draft or FA.

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:
I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Equivalent production? What?

Meaning, we can find someone similar to Erik that we don't have to pay a ton. Be it our own guys, the draft or FA.

It's definitely not our own guys. That much we already know. It's difficult to image them going DL in the 1st. Even if they did, there's basically zero chance somebody at #31 would provide what Armstead does on day 1. As for FA... the point of contention (for some posters) is that we can't afford him. If we can't afford Armstead, how are we going to afford somebody with similar production?

Still not sure where the "we can't afford him" thing is coming from. Not only can the Niners easily create space in the short term... the salary cap is set to increase $30-$40M in the next two years.

Salary cap is not an issue.

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:
I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Equivalent production? What?

Meaning, we can find someone similar to Erik that we don't have to pay a ton. Be it our own guys, the draft or FA.

It's definitely not our own guys. That much we already know. It's difficult to image them going DL in the 1st. Even if they did, there's basically zero chance somebody at #31 would provide what Armstead does on day 1. As for FA... the point of contention (for some posters) is that we can't afford him. If we can't afford Armstead, how are we going to afford somebody with similar production?

Maybe, we can find someone who we pay $10M to, as apposed to the $18M-$19M we'd have to pay AA.

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Equivalent production? What?

Meaning, we can find someone similar to Erik that we don't have to pay a ton. Be it our own guys, the draft or FA.

It's definitely not our own guys. That much we already know. It's difficult to image them going DL in the 1st. Even if they did, there's basically zero chance somebody at #31 would provide what Armstead does on day 1. As for FA... the point of contention (for some posters) is that we can't afford him. If we can't afford Armstead, how are we going to afford somebody with similar production?

It boils down to : do we want that "best in the league DL and front 7" that can harass anybody and everybody in the league...or do we want to throw in the towel and say,, "Welp, we can't afford Arik, so we trade him"? If we do this, it will make the best DL in the league just a mid level DL with Buck and Bosa. Problem with that is with Arik playing we were just a very good DL but couldn't nail the qB...UNLESS Dee was healthy and on the field. When he was in we had the studest DL in the league. When not, we had a terrific DL that really couldn't put serious pressure on the QB with any kind of regularity. Well, with Dee playing 226 snaps, he was on the field roughly 1/4 of the time. And we proved beyond reasonable doubt, that wasn't good enough. He gutted it out in SB, which we really appreciated, but he was injured and played like it.

Talk of letting Arik walk is just silly in my opinion. If he goes, we not only don't have Dee most of the time, but AA at either 3t or wide 9 is an incredible force. If Arik is gone, we got a guy (Dee) on the field way less than half the time and meanwhile we are screwing around trying to find another Arik...who is as good outside as he is inside.

So Mayo, let Arik go and we spend the next 5 yrs trying to replace an absolute stud inside and outside, which is just about as rare as hen's teeth in the NFL. You keep ignoring that
Arik is one of those rare birds who can play both. As it turns out, Nick can play both also. But take Arik away and our DL is just ordinary with two all pros. We not only need Arik for absolute certain but we need a replacement for Dee. Arguing about Arik seems goofy to me. We should be working on finding someone to replace our real problem, Dee. Check out how many ERs come up every yr and you will find a very meager amount...and the demand for ERs is always thru the roof.

So let's focus on where we should be and that is RDE, or Dee. When he plays and is healthy we have the best DL in the league and every QB is under attack all game. But counting on that is at best 50% and this yr it was 226 snaps....and that wasn't enough to be effective. Therefore, let's get some backup for Dee who has shown he just isn't able to play full time and if he remains on the team, we better find a FA , trade or draft pick who can. Dee on his own? Just not reliable. It is painfully obvious why Andy Reid let him go. I liked the trade, figuring we could use him in spots for 3rd down pass plays. Well, that isn't so helpful against a team...oh say the Chiefs...who pass on 1st and 2nd downs also. As it turns out what i thot was a great "get" was a big flop.

Talk about not keeping Arik is just ignoring the huge pink elephant in the room which is Dee's inability to be counted upon. He's fantastic when healthy but this yr that was roughly about 1/4 of the time. Any thots about letting Arik go is just completely ignoring we already have lost Dee to injury. So no way in the world do we do anything but pay Arik. Ok, so we end up with one quarter of our cap going to DL? So what? If it gets us the best DL then we are in great shape the next 4-5 yrs to return to the SB. What we really should be talking about is who we get to replace Dee. That is the problem....not that we can't afford Arik.

Folks who lose sight of that fact are begging for a mediocre DL when we have two of the real DL stars in the league that need TWO more studs to become unbeatable. We keep Arik and we find a replacement for Dee...that is taking care of the problem...not adding to it.

As for "equivalent production"...Mayo i am sorry but that just isn't out there. Somehow you have missed or dismissed the obvious fact. AA is not only a stud inside he is a stud outside. We have no choice but to keep him. Our big problem will be finding "equivalent production " for Dee. I know letting him go or trading him (if even possible) would cost us about $4.5 mil against the cap...a big hit. But keeping Dee and counting on him to help out Buck and Nick or Buck, Nick and Arik....just isn't in the cards.

Health wise, one thing goes, then something else goes. To wit, bad knees complicated by a hammy. Both are long term issues and it would be unwise to think Dee's health is going to be way better this season. Let's focus on the problem here, Dee. If anything his inability to stay on the field makes the case for absolutely keeping Arik and trying to find a replacement/ backup for Dee.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by mayo49:

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

Equivalent production? What?

Meaning, we can find someone similar to Erik that we don't have to pay a ton. Be it our own guys, the draft or FA.

It's definitely not our own guys. That much we already know. It's difficult to image them going DL in the 1st. Even if they did, there's basically zero chance somebody at #31 would provide what Armstead does on day 1. As for FA... the point of contention (for some posters) is that we can't afford him. If we can't afford Armstead, how are we going to afford somebody with similar production?

It boils down to : do we want that "best in the league DL and front 7" that can harass anybody and everybody in the league...or do we want to throw in the towel and say,, "Welp, we can't afford Arik, so we trade him"? If we do this, it will make the best DL in the league just a mid level DL with Buck and Bosa. Problem with that is with Arik playing we were just a very good DL but couldn't nail the qB...UNLESS Dee was healthy and on the field. When he was in we had the studest DL in the league. When not, we had a terrific DL that really couldn't put serious pressure on the QB with any kind of regularity. Well, with Dee playing 226 snaps, he was on the field roughly 1/4 of the time. And we proved beyond reasonable doubt, that wasn't good enough. He gutted it out in SB, which we really appreciated, but he was injured and played like it.

Talk of letting Arik walk is just silly in my opinion. If he goes, we not only don't have Dee most of the time, but AA at either 3t or wide 9 is an incredible force. If Arik is gone, we got a guy (Dee) on the field way less than half the time and meanwhile we are screwing around trying to find another Arik...who is as good outside as he is inside.

So Mayo, let Arik go and we spend the next 5 yrs trying to replace an absolute stud inside and outside, which is just about as rare as hen's teeth in the NFL. You keep ignoring that
Arik is one of those rare birds who can play both. As it turns out, Nick can play both also. But take Arik away and our DL is just ordinary with two all pros. We not only need Arik for absolute certain but we need a replacement for Dee. Arguing about Arik seems goofy to me. We should be working on finding someone to replace our real problem, Dee. Check out how many ERs come up every yr and you will find a very meager amount...and the demand for ERs is always thru the roof.

So let's focus on where we should be and that is RDE, or Dee. When he plays and is healthy we have the best DL in the league and every QB is under attack all game. But counting on that is at best 50% and this yr it was 226 snaps....and that wasn't enough to be effective. Therefore, let's get some backup for Dee who has shown he just isn't able to play full time and if he remains on the team, we better find a FA , trade or draft pick who can. Dee on his own? Just not reliable. It is painfully obvious why Andy Reid let him go. I liked the trade, figuring we could use him in spots for 3rd down pass plays. Well, that isn't so helpful against a team...oh say the Chiefs...who pass on 1st and 2nd downs also. As it turns out what i thot was a great "get" was a big flop.

Talk about not keeping Arik is just ignoring the huge pink elephant in the room which is Dee's inability to be counted upon. He's fantastic when healthy but this yr that was roughly about 1/4 of the time. Any thots about letting Arik go is just completely ignoring we already have lost Dee to injury. So no way in the world do we do anything but pay Arik. Ok, so we end up with one quarter of our cap going to DL? So what? If it gets us the best DL then we are in great shape the next 4-5 yrs to return to the SB. What we really should be talking about is who we get to replace Dee. That is the problem....not that we can't afford Arik.

Folks who lose sight of that fact are begging for a mediocre DL when we have two of the real DL stars in the league that need TWO more studs to become unbeatable. We keep Arik and we find a replacement for Dee...that is taking care of the problem...not adding to it.

As for "equivalent production"...Mayo i am sorry but that just isn't out there. Somehow you have missed or dismissed the obvious fact. AA is not only a stud inside he is a stud outside. We have no choice but to keep him. Our big problem will be finding "equivalent production " for Dee. I know letting him go or trading him (if even possible) would cost us about $4.5 mil against the cap...a big hit. But keeping Dee and counting on him to help out Buck and Nick or Buck, Nick and Arik....just isn't in the cards.

Health wise, one thing goes, then something else goes. To wit, bad knees complicated by a hammy. Both are long term issues and it would be unwise to think Dee's health is going to be way better this season. Let's focus on the problem here, Dee. If anything his inability to stay on the field makes the case for absolutely keeping Arik and trying to find a replacement/ backup for Dee.

Great post! Hit the nail on the head. We NEED to keep Arik. In my opinion, it's much easier to find a speedy edge rusher to replace Ford then a beast that can rush both inside and out. Not only that, but Arik has just begun to figure it out. Imagine him next year in a system he is comfortable in with a coach who figured out how to maximize his talents. Sky is the limit.

Our core on the d line in my opinion is AA, Bosa, Buckner and DJ Jones. Ford is great when healthy but that is a big IF and something we can not rely upon. It's best we start looking for a future replacement for Ford now. Not saying first round but perhaps in the 3rd or 4th after a trade down.

D linemen are hard to predict. Over the years some of the best college prospects have been complete busts or just average in the NFL. Alabama has had several in recent years who never became the player everyone envisioned when they were drafted. Then you get guys that come out of nowhere and dominate when they get in the NFL because they are a little undersized and get passed over but their speed surprises and they become good players. It took AA 3+ years to become a good player. There may be guys in this draft that are late picks that could do the same. I know it's a gamble but it's one the Niners may have to make.

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by 91til:

Just cause you're not getting 10 sacks doesn't mean you're trash as a run defending DE. If Ford's healthy all year in his 3rd down role that'll more than make up for losing those 10 sacks. Or even if Ford gets you 8 and Blair or someone else rotating in gets you 4. There's your replacement of his production.

Meanwhile Thomas/Street/Taylor are your run defending DL in Base along with of course Bosa Buckner and Jones. The point is, just because Armstead is better than those guys doesn't mean that we can't lose him and still maintain a great defense.

Also I'm not saying I want Armstead to leave. I'm just saying if he leaves, we have guys that can play the run in base and we have guys (and can still add guys) to get the edge on 3rd down.

Dee Ford won't be healthy. You can bank on that. The years he's been healthy are outliers. Being injured is par for the course with Dee Ford. So if we lose AA, expect the lion's share of the pass rush to come from Defo and Bosa. That's a lot of pressure on two guys and a good way to burn them out.

As for replacing AA with a bunch of turds, it ain't going to work. This isn't the Billy Beane A's where you piece together a bunch of bums who excel at one thing to make a whole that's greater than its parts. Kentavius Street was awful, Julian Taylor doesn't even play edge, and Solomon Thomas hasn't shown a god damn thing. While AA's base run defense is excellent, it's his ability to get after the QB in base that makes our DL incredibly difficult to go against. It forces teams to pick their poison between nickel and base because the 49ers base defense would stuff the run AND get after the quarterback. And teams certainly didn't want them to unleash the hounds in nickel.

Here's the reality: the defensive line will be worse without AA. By how much? Nobody knows for certain. My guess is by a lot. But what we can say for certain is that the DL will be worse in every facet of the game.

I can't believe I'm defending AA.

I like AA - but, all that money when we can find equivalent production via the draft or FA.

If it were that easy, teams would do it all the time. AA can be retained unless he wants top dollar and I don't think he does. I also do not expect AA to play out more than 3 years of the deal if we do extend him. He should still be playing at a high level in 2022 so the trade value will be there if we need to move on.