no, YOU'RE off topic
So this is something I pulled out of the presser with Mattison:
Tom Strobel is a guy we’re very very happy with at the end of spring because here’s a guy that plays the 5-technique and because of an injury, we moved him to the three.
I thought this was an interesting quote and bore further examination, since I hadn't heard anything about him being moved to three-tech prior to this.
For the uninitiated, the difference between Three Tech and Five Tech is as follows (Descriptions from Touch the Banner):
5-TECH DEFENSIVE END
Alignment: 5-technique, which is on the outside shoulder of the offensive tackle
Gap responsibility: C gap (between offensive tackle and tight end)
What should he look like? It's only a matter of semantics, but head coach Brady Hoke and new defensive coordinator Greg Mattison appear to be referring to this position as the 5-technique defensive tackle. Don't get caught up in the terminology - the term "5-tech" is more important than whatever comes after it. This player needs to be able to stand up to double-teams by the tight end and tackle, which will come with some regularity. He also needs to be able to rush the passer when the tight end releases or when the offense goes to the spread.
Best physical fit: Ryan Van Bergen (6'6", 283 lbs.)
3-TECH DEFENSIVE TACKLE
Alignment: 3-technique, which is on the outside shoulder of the weakside guard
Gap responsibility: B gap (between weakside guard and tackle)
What should he look like? Rather than size, the key at this position is the ability to get penetration. Whether it's by brute strength or pure quickness, it doesn't really matter. Most running plays go to an offense's strength, which means the 3-tech is expected to play the B gap while simultaneously squeezing the A gap and trying to prevent cutbacks. In passing situations, the 3-tech ought to be able to beat a single block (typically the guard) and push the pocket. Because of the job description, players of various shapes and sizes can play the 3-tech. Albert Haynesworth was a great 3-tech at 6'6" and 335 lbs., but so was Warren Sapp at 6'2" and 300 lbs.
Best physical fits: Mike Martin (6'2", 299 lbs.) and William Campbell (6'5", 333 lbs.)
So, according to Mattison, because there was some form of injury (though I don't recall of hearing about any injury to a DT), Strobel came inside. Can Strobel play the 3-Tech? Does this move make any sense? Lets find out.
According to MGoBlue.com, Strobel is currently 262 and 6'6".vs. the ideal 6:2", 299 lbs Mike Martin or 6'5" 333 Lbs William Cambell, this id not particularly good. However, Albert Haynesworth played very, very well at 3-Tech at 6'6", 335 lbs, so if Strobel can add 40 lbs from last update by start of RS Frosh year, not an unreasonable goal for a 6'6" guy, he's got a chance to fit the right mold, more or less.
However, if he's going to be Albert Haynesworth, we'd better ensure that he really does fit that mold. First of all, what does it take to be a three tech?
A: Ability to get penetration.
Unfortunately, according to scout, his areas for improvement before signing were strength and technique & moves. These are two key attributes that a player uses to get penetration. However, his highlight tape does reveal great speed for beating his man whenever not blocked properly or by design.
So, if he can add the necessary bulk to be a bull rusher, there is always the chance. Lets compare that with what he's leaving behind by leaving the 5-Tech spot.
Unfortunately, the 50 Tech sounds like a great fit for the Tom Strobel that is, a speed rusher, tall enough to take on most TE's, that can also speed rush whenever given the opportunity. There's not much to say here. Tom Strobel already really fit the role of 5-tech well, and I have trouble seeing moving a somewhat slight guy to 3-tech as a great option.
As a caveat, I came today from a funeral, and I am drunk. Perhaps there's something I'm missing. What do you guys think?