2-DL plays and EDGE players

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I've always viewed these as being similar to Barry Odom's defense rushing 3 and dropping 8. I'd be in favor of allowing 2 dl plays generously in all passing categories.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

My ideal version of the rule I proposed would be:

DEs can be anywhere between or on the field numbers and have no limits on dropping back into pass coverage. Before the snap, they cannot be further than 5 yards from the LOS. DE1 must always be the furthest DL to the left.

DTs must always defend the LOS and are not allowed to drop into pass coverage. Before the snap, DTs must always be in a 3-point stance between or on the hashmarks.

Not in favor the way it is written as I think many of these plays may not even have a DT. I'd add two words to it.

If used, DTs must always defend the LOS and are not allowed to drop into pass coverage. Before the snap, DTs must always be in a 3-point stance between or on the hashmarks.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

Isn't the current rule for a minimum of 3 players to defend the LOS? If so, keep that in place, just allow more 2-DL plays to be used in gameplans since the NFL is using more hybrid/edge players vs traditional DEs.

No one has given any strong argument explaining how having more 2DL defenses in a gameplan and allowing them in the run categories equates to DEs being treated as EDGE.

I don't think that is the answer.

The only way to truly do this right is to edit the play design rules to give DEs more flexibility to be further away from the OL in 4DL, 3DL and 2 DL plays.

[Jerry-Redskins]

I think what Mitch is getting at is the NFL is using smaller DL/LB type guys in what were traditionally DE positions. The idea I believe is that what are LB's in the NFL are the edge guys now. It simple puts a player with more speed on the end of the DL. You would sacrifice ST for speed. The rules already require the extra LB with 2 DL plays.