Interesting perspective re: Saints blocking scheme

I was thinking something along these lines. I didn't have it all figured out.

it didn't work.

from a non-expert's perspective

not send Pierce. He isn't even a good blitzer. Its on the DTs or a cross blitz.

they just got beat physically. Sometimes it really is that simple. Our line got outmatched in this game.

if we start to see a streak of this in the next few weeks, then we'll know we have a problem.

They could have attacked the "A" gaps more. Don't know if it would have worked tho.

Same here.

The commenter put into words what I was thinking the whole game, I wasn't able to connect all the dots and put it into a coherent thought. I kept watching Osi and Tuck get shoved up field all game while watching a giant pile of bodies scrunched together in the middle and couldn't quite figure out what was going on. I couldn't figure out, for the life of me, why the defensive ends were on an island all game.

It sounds like, if there were a rematch in 3 weeks, you would stunt the defensive ends often, attempting to leave the tackles alone on their island. and sow some confusion on their interior blockers as to who their responsibility is. That would be one possible scheme adjustment, I guess.

That's all for naught without vastly improved play from the interior defensive linemen (whether its the actual DTs or Tuck lined up inside).

None of this is to absolve the players of their responsibility, as its quite clear that if there's no push up the middle against a blocking scheme worried most about that, you're screwed.

sow some confusion on the inside is good analysis IMO.

You have to get pressure up the middle or your edge rush is useless. That's football.

creating confusion when there are more rushers than blockers or giving that appearance. You get 2 OL on 1 guy and someone is free.

To be fair Good OL don't fall for it but someone is left free.

The point here is that the Saints up their blocking scheme specifically to negate the interior rush and, for all intents and purposes, ignore the outside rush. They devote more resources to interior protection by not devoting those resources to helping their tackles on the outside.

Assuming this understanding of the Saints OL is correct, you're left with the Saints content to turn games into a 9 on 9 of sorts (simplified to hell here), whereby the two edge rushers are taken out of the picture by scheme and they leave the rest of the blocking up to execution. Scheme out the edge rush and rely on your inside guys to man up and win the battles. We lost on both counts.

An interior push, in this instance, jumps from merely assisting the edge rush to being the key to the outside rush.

While not earth-shattering, its certainly eye-opening.

great thread.

played Tuck at DT more with Kiwi and Osi on the Ends? Maybe.

Seems logical enough to me.

I think the Giants were playing vanilla so as not to tip their hand when we play them again, and SMASH them. In the playoffs.

a whisper of sanity.

you now, sometimes i wonder if that really happens ...

of course I was kidding, but you know, nothing would surprise me at this point.

i really think both of those guys have done that, play a team very vanilla in the regular season that they know they will play again in the playoffs. Probably doesn't happen with division rivals; but outside the division ...

I was thinking very much along these lines this afternoon as I struggled to put my finger on exactly how the Giants pass rush was neutralized. I knew it had to do with the lack of pressure up the middle, and although we do not have an Albert Haynesworth type, I couldn't figure out how the center of our Defense could not move the interior of the Saints O-line one bit. This post hits the nail on the head. So maybe I was wrong in a previous post, maybe Canty does make a very big difference.

got stone-walled? Nicks and Evans are great OGs and Goodwin is a bruising C.

.

I was disappointed that we had no pressure up the middle but our whole defensive line failed miserably. The bottomline is that we can't just pin this poor play on our DTs because our whole defensive unit was "subpar"--and that last discription is being kind. Good teams come back from an ass whipping and I hope to see this, however, we will continue to be vulnerable against deep passes if C.C. Brown continues to start for us.

There were quite a few plays that saw Tuck rushing from the inside and Kiwi from the outside and still there was zero pressure on Brees. I still think the D just lacked intensity in this game and that 90 oercent of thier short comings can be corrected or hidden in the future.

aren't 100%.
Robbins was facing double-teams most of the time and one of his strengths (timing the snap) was neutralized by Brees' mixup of the count.

never even heard Rocky Bernard's name.

they want to block to the outside allowing Brees (all 5-11 of him) to step up into the pocket. Makes sense and it looks like it works very well.

we needed Canty for. Unfortunately he wasn't on the field this time.

Hopefully he'll get a second shot at the Aints down the road.

it explains what they did
Link - ( New Window )

that in the week 17 matchup with the patriots, the Giants specifically held back some on defense because they thought there was a chance of seeing them again.