Why don't I have the same confidence in Fewell as Spags?

But I don't think bad games just happen. Fear of pressure can make that happen. I think the Giants defense did a great job of dictating to the offenses they faced down the stretch.

but we just won the SB in no small part due to Fewell's guidance and obviously getting healthier..

When we went 1-4 after Plax went down, would Fewell have fared better than Spags did?

Duh.

Quote:

Tell me where I am wrong.

They held the Falcons, Packers, 49ers, and Patriots to an average of 13.5 points.

And if you add in the Jets and Cowboys game when the turnaround began, then they held opponents to 13.67 points per game.

For a defense to hold opponents to less than 2 TDs per game when it really matters the most against teams that are in do or die situations is pretty stunning.

I was not a fan of Fewell throughout the season, but whatever adjustments were made worked and players stepped up their game.

He's earned another shot, IMHO.

to handle the heavy passing offenses we see in the NFC right now.

just don't.

good post

how much confidence does Neelo have?

Have you checked your magnesium level lately?

The same eye test that would have had Eli Manning out of the league five years ago.

with Fewell but I am not confident in our system. I still want to see more games. I had made my decision when the defense was one big shit show. However, to Fewell's credit the players met with him, and he changed things. We got healthier, and our D played well.

I still we rely WAY to much on our pass rush. Even with that we still managed to fuck up coverages at least once a game including the super bowl.

I remember Spags bringing all sorts of pressure via A gap. Blitzing Ross from the slot, and showed great use of personnel packages. I saw something on extremeskins which made me laugh. They were ranking DCs, and someone wrote. How hard is it to tell Tuck and Osi, Hey, get the QB! The rest of you guys just play defense, lol. Obviously that's simplistic, but I think we rely way too much on the pass rush, and even then our back end still manages to fuck up.

So, even after this one, I am not confident, but now I went from fire that fool, to let's see how things shake out next year. Can we actually start playing good defense from the get go, and carry it throughout the season, even when there is more tape on what we are trying to do? I guess I will take another wait and see approach.

so long as we have Reese,Eli and TC...in that order.

for WUP...

now imagine if this defense had...

Goff playing at MLB..

Thomas playing the starting corner opposite Webster.

Ross playing the slot...

Rolle actually being able to play FS which is his natrual position...

Fewell, while he will put a clunker out there, seems better equipped to scheme against these passing attacks. Pressure from the front four, and contain the downfield chunks, increase red zone success, etc.

NYG looked to be playing into NE's hands for a chunk of the SB, but they figured it out and got it done.

It's not to say Spags couldn't evolve his schemes too, but we did just win a SB with Fewell.

Ours is and has been the pass rush. Mitigates more potential problems in the back 7, than you would have had you had a mediocre pass rush..If your pass rush is strong, than you don't necessarily have to have strong back 7s..Conversely, of you have an average to decent pass rush, you BETTER have a stronger back 7...

Too, do we rely "way too much" on Eli? ;)

One could claim they are equal, but I have just as much confidence in one as the other. They are both extremely good DC's. The defenses playoff run was phenomenal, every bit as good (if not better) than the 2007 run.

is suicide. Just look at their season opener against each other. A defensive monstrosity.

getting pressure with the front four, which is what every team in the league wants to do, but usually can't. During this SB run, we were able to clog the passing lanes, forcing teams like the Pats to dink and dunk and limiting the YAC. They never got a big play all game. That's a good front four, and good coaching.

for the most part. One thing I will say though, Fewell's defense solely relies on pressure from the front 4. We just happen to have a great front 4. You saw how his defense looked when our front wasn't 100% healthy and wreaking havoc.

I dont think his style of defense would translate to 95% of the NFL. Spags on the other hand, has shown more of an ability to mask deficiencies and create on the fly.

For the Giants, at this point, Fewell is likely the better fit but I think overall, Spags is the better coach.

The defense in SB 42 held the record breaking 18-0 Pats offense to 14 points. If you don't see the difference between that defense and this defense you should look alittle harder.

Fewell has a ring..

Right now they are equal.. period..

LOL. Going with your strength is fine. However, in this sport there are injuries, so you need to be able to have a plan B, C, and perhaps D. Why did it take so long for Fewell to change the defense? Also, I remember hearing, the players after the skins game, before the Jets game, went to Fewell to ask him for a change. He did, which is great, but what happens if they don't go to him? Does he make the change on his own, or do we keep the shit show we were running?

I understand the pass rush is our strength, but if things went to shit, I trust Spags in coming up with something creative rather than Fewell.

Fewell gets props for adjusting the defense though. But overall, for me he goes from red back to grey, meaning I will once again take a wait and see approach with him.

you hold the opposing offense under 14 points you are doing a great job.. period..

In the playoffs we shut out Atlanta's offense... and beat the top 2 QB's in the entire league en route to winning a Super Bowl.

People on this site have become WAY too enamored with Steve Spagnuolo. He was a great DC here and everyone should love what he did. But people talk about him like he's some mastermind legend who can just never be replaced.

Once we got healthy and made a couple of adjustments, this defense was very good. Even last year, in Fewell's first with the Giants, we got to the QB and forced turnovers better than anyone. That's how you combat the high powered offenses in the league today. As Terps and others have said, I think Fewell understands what you need to do in order to shut them down.

just because they both have a ring doesn't mean there isn't a discussion to be had..."period"

all high scoring offenses, to basically 12.3 pts per game. That is every bit as good. Do I see a significant difference between holding the 07 Pats to 14 versus the 11 Pats to 17, no I really don't. In fact we shut them down this year after their first drive in the 3rd quarter, with Spags the defense let them go down the field and almost blow the game with 2 minutes to go. So in fact I can say that the Giants defense this year was better than the 2007 defense in the clutch.

Anyone picking on Fewell right now is nitpicking, and anyone saying Spags was better because of facts, is stretching.

Comparing the Pats offense from 07 to the Pats offense of 2011 is a joke. Do you need to be reminded of all the records the 2007 Pats offense broke? Please.

because spags defense did not go through a 14-week period of ineptitude anywhere close to what Fewell's led defense did.

Spags team started 0 - 2 and historically awful and was buoyed by a goal line stand week 3.

For whatever reason Fewell's defense didn't get healthy and/or buy into his system until a 97-play strong showing against the Jets.

so, the end results were similar, both defenses standing up to strong offensive opponents, but Fewell's was bad longer during the regular season.

if not for that you'd probably be as confident in Fewell

That one doesn't count?

I can mention plenty of games from the regular season, as well.

the Giants intentionally went with a pretty vanilla game plan on defense

Probably the best offense of all time. Not much shame in that.

Why didn't 2011 do the same for Fewell?

Seems to me that Fewell got dealt a tough hand with the injury situation. He tried to do what any competent DC would do. He tried to scheme around the weakness and disguise them. Unfortunately, this confused the Giants more than the opposition. As the D got healthier , he was able to rely less on the disguises.

But obviously Fewell is good enough and you can win a SB with him as the DC. Spags to me had the better blitz packages and more aggressive up front.

I coached high school football for 10 years and was a defensive coordinator for 8 of them. My best season was a year we went 9-1 and only allowed a total of 61 points in 10 games. (6.1 PPG). The difference with Spags and Fewell is a massive difference in philosiphy. A lot of times, good coaches base their defense on their personell. In the case of the Giants, they are loaded up front with great pass rushers.

The LB is weak at best, and only Boley is a true blitzer. There is a lot of skill with blitzing such as timing and stunts that involve speed and quickness. Not all LB are good blitzers.

Fewell has designed a scheme based on his personell. Strong in the front four. Thus the scheme revolves around the pressure coming from up front. We had injuries and at times were down Osi and Tuck. Thus Kiwi and JPP and Tolofson played more downs then desired.

Fewell simply stayed within the scheme based on his personell and what they do. The LB's here could barely stop the run. Adding in a sophisticated blitz scheme made no sense because the LBs were weak and raw this year.

In the future that can change as players grow.

What should make you feel good is in the playoffs the Giants defense held Atlanta to 2 points, GB to 20, SF to 14 and NE to 17. That is great defense.

If you think it was luck that Rodgers had a bad game then that is just because you want to believe Spags is better. Rodgers played like crap because the defense had a great game plan and executed.

BTW, I love Spags as a D-Coord. But look at what his genius did in St. Louis?

I'm not really sure what more anyone could have expected from this defense down the stretch this year. We pitched a shutout in the WC round, held the best offense in the league to 20 points in their building (could have been even less if not for the BS calls), and then held Tom Brady to 17 in the Super Bowl.

Like I said, Spags did a great job here. I think people get carried away, though. Ultimately, he didn't accomplish anything more than Fewell has.

trying to take away from what Fewell accomplished, I'm not. He deserves alot of credit.

But if I had to answer which run I thought was more impressive by the defense, it's 2007. I think people forget just how great the 2007 Pats offense was. Brady broke the recrod for TD passes and him and Moss were unstoppable, except for SB 42, of course. Spags gets alot of credit for that. I don't know if the 2011 Giants defense holds the 2007 Pats offense to 14. I don't think I see that happening.

he defense was simply too complicated and guys were missing too many assignments. If in fact, things were simplified, the final 1/4 of the season and of course the playoffs showed a return of a dominating style of defense.

This season was bad statistically, with the exception of the playoffs, primarily because of injuries and rookies starting at critical positions on D.

I think he is a decent coordinator and has the luxury of relying on his front 4 to generate pressure. Thats what makes his D tick and he does have a tendency to stick with that sometimes too long, even if their not getting there, but his 3-safety package has proven to be effective in this pass-happy league now.

I think you'll also see vast improvement in the back 7 on D next year, as well. Many rookies in their second year; ready to add to this D.

Guy just won a freakin Super Bowl and the D played a major role. I, for one, have plenty of confidence in him!

No doubt about it. But at the same time, the 2007 Pats scored 589 points... the 2011 Green Bay Packers scored 560. They really weren't as far apart as you may think. Was what we did to the Pats in the 2007/8 SB really that much more impressive than holding the 2011 Packers to just 20 in their building aided by some horrendous officiating? I'm not so sure it is.

Add that to the fact that the Falcons offense didn't even score a point on us and Brady only got 17... I don't know. This run was pretty damn impressive.

My biggest issue w/ Fewell is when the rush wasn't getting there, he didn't seem to have the ability to adjust. To dial something different up mid-game to throw the offense off rythem.

He really didnt have to in the playoffs b/c the pass rush was doing their job. For that approx 10 game stretch in the regular season when the pass rush was virtually non-existent, nothing changed, to the ire of many of us here.

They were the second highest scoring team of all time and playing in their building. Of the 20 points they scored 14 were gifted by the refs.

I agree that we leaned heavily on the pass rushers this year. We did the same thing in 2007 down the stretch. Anyone doubting that needs to go back and watch the 2nd half of the Cowboy game. That pass rush was approaching '85 Bears levels of disruption.

Blitzing these top QBs these days is a recipe for disaster. Go back to two plays in our game in Dallas:

- 3rd and 5, Cowboys have 7 on the line, rush 6 (with a safety blitzing and Brooking backpedaling to fill his zone)...

Manningham All Alone, Eli Doesn't Miss

- 3rd and 5, Giants have 6 on the line, tip their hand pre-snap, rush 7...

Austin All Alone, Romo Ain't Eli

Good OCs identify these blitzes during the week, and they make sure their offensive players are able to spot them pre-snap and adjust accordingly.

Down the stretch the Giants had better players on defense than the opponents did on offense, and he was able to check his ego enough to let the superior talent dictate and not do anything nutty. I'll take that guy over the Rex Ryans and Dom Capers of the world every time.

when Rodgers and Smith had a ton of time to throw the ball and ended up checking down (or in Smith's case, missing someone entirely).

Getting Rodgers (or Brees) to check down to a 5 yard play is a victory for the defense.

And as I stated above, for the Giants, I wouldn't trade Fewell for Spags at this point. We saw how Fewell's defense works when our front 4 is healthy.

2007 Pats offense - 411 yds/ game, 36 pts/game
2011 Pats offense - 428 yds/game, 32 pts/game

So this year they averaged slightly more yards but slightly less points. To me this sounds about the same. In addition I can point out:

- the offenses we played in 2011 (Pats, Pack, Atl, even SF) were as good as the the offenses in 2007 playoff run overall
- the GB game in 2012 was played in good weather, the 2007 team was greatly aided by subzero temperatures
- the defense in the 2012 SB didn't let the Pats score after early in the 3rd quarter. Spags almost blew the game with a TD drive ending with 2 minutes to go.

The facts are this D was every bit as good as Spags, I don't see why anyone has an issue saying that. I could agree they are both about even. I also see nothing that says Spags is better based on track record (with and before the Giants). Again I could agree with they are both very good.

but yeah, that 2007 Pat offense was the most ridiculous offense I have ever seen week in and week out. I would take them and not blink twice.

I was talking about the two Pats offenses. The 2007 Pats offense is one of the best, if not the best of all time. The 2011 Pats offense was nowhere near as good as the 2007 Pats offense. They were a juggernaut in 2007. They were 18-0. Undefeated.

There is a reason why many people thought the Giants would win the SB this year and it was our offense, not out defense.

When? Please.

I mean once we won the NFC Championship. Not since Week 1 or anything like that.

ESPECIALLY in today's NFL...where QBs are more easily to beat the blitz because of more receivers going out into routes, rules changes favoring the offense and overall just flat out better QB play...getting your pass rush with only the front four is exactly what you WANT you defense to be able to do. How that's a bad thing is what I don't understand. If you asked every DC in the league what they'd rather be able to do I'm sure most, if not all, of them would say they'd LOVE to be able to get pressure with just the front four (unless they're a 3-4 guy of course) so that they can keep as many guys out in coverage as possible.

That said, you also have to keep in mind that if you're going to be forced to create pressure by blitzing, then you damn well better have the horses in the back end to maintain coverage...and THAT'S where Fewell's defense struggled throughout the year. As someone said earlier in the thread, you had Thomas and Goff out in preseason...lost CB after CB that was signed to help out (the former Colts DB whose name escapes me right now...Tryon?...for example)...and had rookies, or flat out not good players, filling in the blanks at LB also (which, it appeared with Blackburn coming back and steadying the defense...is a bigger factor than any of us initially thought).

As far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out with Fewell but it's interesting to see how his defense jelled and, IMO, the biggest addition wasn't some scheme change or a player coming back healthy (ie Osi)...but the re-addition of Blackburn to steady the LB corp. It's no surprise that he made one of the bigger plays of the game in the Super Bowl with that INT. I think his coming back to the team...and the effect it had on the whole defense...is actually still a bit underrated even now.

that Spags is a bit overrated due to his stint as DC here.

His defenses in STL haven't been nearly as effective nor consistent, which indicates that he too may have been helped tremendously by having a healthy and performing Front 4 here in NY.

All I know is that when crunch time came, both Spags and Fewell's D's rose to the occasion and were main componentes to why we have two rings during their tenures.

is a question mark to me.I thought I had a pretty good idea of what he was with around 3 weeks to go in the season,but that changed.

Fact is the guy won a Superbowl, and at the same time, nearly cost us the season.

I don't like a lot of the things he did personally,but I can live with it as long as the defense isn't getting picked apart in the secondary.

of people today having short memories and it being all about "what have you done for me lately?" If the Giants win the SB next year, that run will be called better than this run, according to the majority of the fans.

What have you done for me lately, that is what it is all about.

is a better over all DC than Fewell. More innovative and unpredictable. Both are very good at motivating their personnel . There was no chance TC did not keep Fewell unless PF got a HC job. Spagnuolo knew that early on that's why he took the Saints job. IMO.

take questions about this team too personally and missed the point. I wasn't crticizing Fewell, I was simply stating I thought Spagnuolo's defense was better.,

Spag didn't have a dominant offense to bail him out.

I think Spags is the better DC. However, Fewell turned the D around late, the team won the SB. Consequently, unless Fewell gets a HC gig, he has earned the right to stay as DC.

We lost probably our best all around corner in preseason when TT went down. We IR'ed about 10 more CB's.

I have confidence in Fewell because of how we ended the season.

Rolle was playing out of position.

Give me Fewell with a healthy TT, Webster, Prince at CB + Rolle & Phillips at S. I bet you'd see more blitzes and not solely rely on the front 4 to get pressure if our confidence was higher in the 2ndary.

Most of the time, as exciting and fun a blitzing defense is, the main reason that it's implemented is because you're hiding something - your front four can't do the job.

Works great against inferior teams, but then you run into guys like Eli Manning and Tom Brady, who are always looking for the one-on-one match up (ask the Ryan brothers, the current blitz masters, how it worked out for them)

The blitz is the "coup-de-grace" (exclusively implemented on 3rd and long), eminently implemented by Spags, here with a tremendously talented group of players ....

Then, on he went to the Rams; they gave him three years ? (before they tired, and threw him out).

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Spags and his passion. (Remember when he'd be on his knees, praying !); but in some ways he reminds me of Jerry Glanville (another Blitz Master), savant of the spectacular, but a bit lacking in the essentials ...

Maybe that's what Fewell is (more the boring guy) - Better founded in the fundamentals (but still willing to pull out the sword once-in-a-while).

have an ESPY because half our LB's were UFA's,
an old slow LB,3 Safeties trying to be cornerbacks,ect//
we do have a great pass rush but next year we need
some db's w/ coverage skills....Prince will be ok and we
need to draft the best cb/s in draft w/ pick 1...
and DE pick 2....

were expected to contribute this year, i.e. Thomas, Johnson, Coe, etc. Fewell did not blitz much so as not to expose our weak secondary any more than necessary. Couple that with an outstanding group of pass rushers available to him and I think he played the hand he was dealt very well. As soon as our DEs got healthy with Osi our defense really came on strong under Fewell's guidance. We won the freakin' Super Bowl after all, time to cut him some slack. Is BBI never happy??!

can get our linebacker play at peak level and our injured back then our defense should be pretty good and carry on from post season play.

If I were some of the recent linebacker draftees I would sort of be nervous about how a guy writing on a chalkboard and sitting on a couch (Blackburn) could come in a make serious defensive plays to help fuel improvements in our defense, yet those guys looked fucking lost out there.

It's also a prime example of fond memories clouding judgment.

I Fewell is more conservative, his MO is don't get beat deep.

Spags is more aggressive, his MO is get to the qb. If that meant sending a safety and/or a corner, so be it.

ADon't get me wrong he didn't blitz all the time. He's sneaky with his calls. Has good feel for the flow of the game.

Guys who play defense love to blitz, it's exciting to get the call.

I agree with you. I don't think we blitz or fake the blitz enough. I'd take Spags over Fewell in a heartbeat.

Don't let the haters get you down. They are knee jerk fans who are not into analysis or discussion.

knee-jerking or even analysis or discussion.

It is a point that is pretty hard to prove. Both coordinators have their strengths and weaknesses, but for some reason, Spags weaknesses are rarely discussed. Sort of the same way John Fox's weaknesses weren't discussed either.

Fewell and Spags employ two different philosophies, and we were able to see Fewell's at work when he had a healthy front 4. I really don't know if we can judge who is the better coordinator. Spags put his signature on the Rams D, and it was decent when people were healthy and terrible when they were injured - sort of a common theme throughout the league, and common to Fewell as well.

The 2007 defense held the best offense in NFL history to 14 points. Could the 2011 defense do that? Very doubtful. They held the 2011 Pats offense to 17. The 2007 defense deserves to be remembered like that. They were better.

What have you done for me lately.

Our offense this year was a lot better this year that in 07 and 08. The D picked it up at the end, but I'm with Anish - I'll beleive it when I see consistency at the start of this year. The biggest difference I saw was very few 3 man rushes down the stretch. The TD at the end of the half in the SB, we have JPP faking a rush and hovering at the line of scrimmage. I hope we do not zone JPP at all next year.

in a loss one month earlier.

But, it's not like Spags didn't have his warts, as others have said.

To the best offense of all time. And then 14 in the one that counts.

The 2011 Giants defense gave up 36 to the Seattle Seahawks with their backup playing most of the game.

.

to the Browns, on Monday Night Football.

Aaron Rogers, 15-1?

Take away those horrendous penalties that extended their two TD drives, they only score 6 points.

We held a good Falcons offense to zero points.

We did alright with Fewell. There were a lot of question marks around Spags up until our run there at the end, just like there were with Fewell.

.

gave up 28 to Washington. On and on. The offense carried the team this year. The defense carried the team in 2007.

this year.

I was not suggesting that getting a rush with 4 men is a bad thing, I was simply pointing out that when we don't, there doesn't seem to be any adjustments.

However, your post and anaylsis made alot of sense.

drops and poor throws by Rogers and the Packers put up 30+

It goes both ways.

to make changes (as he admitted) and you saw vets out there for weeks looking confused, I don't. And I don't think most do. Lets just be thankful he wisened up and made some changes and hope he keeps them intact for next year.

Is a little better, in my view, Spags is over rated here. Fewell had much more to overcome and the rule changes since have made it even easier for offenses. Spags has been a total failure as a head coach and his defenses, which is what they were running in St Louis were total failures but are totally overlooked here. He was given his shot, his total control of a team, HE FAILED MISERABLY! And thier defense STUNK! People here want to overlook that, its not fair to overlook it. I will take Fewell, now he has had his problems also, but he got the job done when it mattered the most, so thier stints here are a wash, they both won it all. Its Spags failures in St Louis that push me away from him.

We're talking about DCs. PaulN is one of the most brutal posters on this place.

I give Fewell a lot of credit. He hung in there with his guys and kept swinging and at one point according to the players something just clicked... It clicked at exactly the right time... and considering the injuries to key spots on defense.. To finish the way we did was AwaSome.

You guys who are Gnawing at the edges here need to get a life. If you can't enjoy what happened and the fact that the Giants played OUTSTANDING FOOTBALL ....and that includes the defense ... against the top ranked and seeded teams in the NFL to win the championship ... well nothing will ever satisfy you.

Spats did great .. But so did Fewell .. Give the guy some kudos.. He friggen deserves it!

What about the buffalo situation?

made many good points in defending Fewell. It is true he suffered an inordinate amount of key injuries.

However, this team during the regular season gave up more points than it scored. This team spent 14 weeks with a defense that seem incapable of stopping anyone.

This defense for most of the season played poorly to the point that none of us considered this a Super Bowl contender.

Rewatching the Super Bowl, all key stops in the second half were the result of a sack. I know that is a good thing. But my original point was simply that when the Giants don't get a rush with the fron four, there seems to be no answer.

That wasn't the case with Spagnuolo.

The points made about Fewell that I agree with, was that he did make some adjustments to get this defense playing to a higher level, and that maybe we will see an even bigger improvement next season if the defense stays healthy.

Yeah, it was some other guy who had the last ranked defense those years in St. Louis.

SMH. Having pro bowl players does a lot to make one look better. Too bad, the Rams couldn't bring Reese and the scouting department back in 2009, may have saved some jobs.

who can't figure out this thread is about who is the better DC. Give it a couple more days, it may sink in..

wanted to point out that in 2007, the Giants were the 17th ranked scoring defense. It was in 2008 that the Giants became a more consistent and dominant defense when they ranked # 5. Given that Fewell hasn't had a chance to get his post superbowl afterglow season in yet, let's just say that you guys are comparing apples and oranges to apples and pears

One could argue 2007 healthy front 4 > 2011
2007 LBers > 2011 Boley, Kiwi and late round rookie and UDFAs
CBs are the same except more depth on the 2007 team with veterans
The safety position is the only position that could be said to have been an advantage for the 2011 team.

Still curious as to whether anyone still counts the the GB and Dallas game anymore with Spags.

But with JPP, Fewell has a Freak of Nature playing the position

While im not a huge fan or a supporter of Fewell, he did manage to adjust somehow and make the defense play better down the stretch which in turn deserves another year. On the other hand it could of been the players stepping up as well and the dline making him look better. I think next year will be a test to see what the Giants really have in him. Was not confident with his play calling through the season at all, if it wasn't for the dline things could have been real ugly.

I apologize for misunderstanding your post.

With that being said, exactly what 'adjustments' did Spags make when his defense was getting shredded to the tune of 80 points in the first two games of the '07 season? You probably already know the answer but I'll give it to those that don't...NONE. All he did was keep grinding and knew that eventually things would fall into place. He believed in his system and eventually was proven right.

My point is that, IMO, Fewell did much the same thing. I don't think he made any huge, 'magical' adjustments...it just took that much long for the defense to jell together (along with adding some vets to the middle of the defense and getting a few back from injury). I think that people are making a bit too much of these magical adjustments that were made by Fewell towards the end of the season. I think it was just a matter of better play (and better playERS) making significant contributions to the defense. I would've loved to see if the defense would've gotten better sooner had we added Blackburn sooner in the season.

except when he would do his zone blitzes, especially dropping Strahan or Tuck. I really wanted Fewell gone until we made this incredible run; now I think he's earned some trust.

How do you know what adjustments Spags did or did not make? I would be surprised if he had such unshakeable faith in his system given that he was a first time DC and bringing in a new defense.

I wanted Fewell gone as late as 12/23 but the D's performance starting vs. the Jets all the way to the Super Bowl was pretty damn impressive. He definitely deserves praise. Now let's hope he can channel it from September to February.

they both have had defenses that played well down the stretch and won championships..

Fewell responded to the situation and more importantly his defense responded and the Giants accomplished the ultimate goal of a Super Bowl...

Thats the pinnacle.. both men have done it..

his coach on the field. Until Blackburn came there wasn't anyone really putting the defense in the right place. I say we have to wait and see what the defense looks like next year before saying who is better.

the Dallas game, the packers game and the Superbowl due to the defense...

In 2011... that really wasn't the case...

The Giants offense almost let the SF game slip away.. and the Giants Defense stiffened heroically in the second half of the Superbowl...

I think this was a harder run and the 2011 defense was better since the Jets game...

I'll see if I can find the exact quote (which I doubt I'll be able to do but I'll try) but I seem to remember Spags saying as much when asked. He said he knew the system would work because he'd seen it work while with the Eagles.

Like I said.. the 2011 Packers weren't far off from the 2007 Patriots. Nowhere near to the degree that some are making it seem and we did a damn good job against them. Not to mention it was also in their building rather than a neutral site like the SB. We also pitched a shutout against a Falcon team that was 7th in the NFL in points this season and then for good measure, held Brady's Pats who were 3rd in scoring this season to just 17 points which was about half their season average.

As I said.. Spags was excellent. I have nothing against him. But it's not like the 2007 Giants defense was the 85 Bears.

were shitting on defenses for the majority of the season, at times running up the score. They were a machine. The Packers this year were very good, but they weren't what the Pats offense was in 2007. The Pats shattered records.

There were times this year where the overwhelming majority of fans wanted Fewell fired. They got it going late in the year and had a fantastic year. But the offense was the bread and butter of this team, namely Eli Manning and the passing game. In 2007, it was the defense that bailed us out. In 2011, it was the offense.

The 2011 Packers scored 35.0.

The difference is less than 2 points per game.

that stood up for years. The Green Bay Packers did not.

There is awhole hell of alot more difference than two points per game.

they are a bunch of haters. They wanted TC fired about 4 months ago.

That Spagnuolo defense kicked in about week 3, not week 14

Also whether there were adjustments or not, Spagnuolo's schemes allowed for more variety in creating a pass rush.

Again, there were times with Fewell that it seemed all his eggs were in one basket, getting pressure from the front 4.

Do you remember well timed corner blitzes or safety blitzes from Spagnuolo that could turn a game around.

We didn't see much of that with Fewell. Maybe it was because we were better in the D-backfield in 07, I don't know.

But as I stated in the original post, and got critized for, Fewell's defense, at least for me, didn't pass the eye test in comparison to Spagnuolo.

And why would they matter more than overall scoring output?

The 2007 New England Patriots have the records for:

Most Points in a Season
Most Touchdowns in a Season
Tom Brady took over the Most Touchdowns Passing in a Season
Randy Moss took over the Most Touchdowns Receiving in a Season
Most wins in a regular season
Most consecutive wins in the regular season
Tom Brady set the record for highest completion percentage in a playoff game

Why do individual records or any of the other stuff matter? Great, they were 16-0.. the Packers this year were 15-1.

Rodgers' 2011 and Brady's 2007 also weren't all that different. Brady threw 5 more TD's, 2 more INT's and the yardage was only about 200 yards different.

There's really no major difference between the 2011 Packers and 2007 Patriots offenses. Both were tops in the league in their respective seasons and both produced similar scoring outputs. I also think the fact that we beat the Packers at Lambeau whereas we beat the Pats on neutral ground is worth mentioning.

Spags and Fewell both accomplished the same thing as DC's. 4 impressive playoff wins and a Championship. There are arguments for both.. but I don't think Spags has some massive edge and I think people tend to overrate him a tad.

it won.... period... style points dont matter... winning is winning..

But the Pats were better. More PPG and a shit ton of all time NFL records to boot. You asked what records, I supplied them.

29 points total over a 16 game span. I don't know, maybe you view that as significant. I don't.

And we're talking about one game. The 2007 Giants allowed 65 total points in the playoffs.. the 2011 team allowed 54.

They both won the SB, so the difference we are talking about is small. But if we're talking about slight edge or just plain old edge, you have to go with Spags. Beating an 18-0 team an all time great offense clinches it.

Also, the 2007 Cowboys were the best Cowboys team of this generation. We went into their house and beat them. Ditto for a very good Packers team in Lambeau in minus 30 degree weather.

..while the 2011 Falcons were 7th. The Bucs scored 14 on us and the Falcons scored zip.

It's pretty even, IMO.

that our 2007 defense held the Pats' offense to 14. Nothing.

.

the Pats averaged more PPG and broke NFL records. They were the more succesful team and offense.

It's your opinion. It's not a fact.

Like Fats said earlier in the thread.. it's a pretty hard comparison to make. You can't really just isolate DC's because there are so many other factors that come into play. For whatever reason, though.. it seems like people forgot that Spags had his warts just like Fewell did.

And why does one game define the entire run? Great, the Pats averaged a whopping 1.8 PPG more than the 2011 Packers. The other 3 games don't count?

.

But alot of longstanding NFL records held by NFL greats. We are talking about the most dominant offense in NFL history. Our 2007 defense held them to two TDs in the SB. A game in which we were the universal underdog and were picked to lose by multiple TDs by just about everybody.

It may seem like harping on it, but that point needs to be drilled home. It was that big of an achievement. I'm not trying to paint Spags out to be perfect. We are discussing which DC is better, I belive that his run here was more impressive than Perry's thus far. If Fewell wins another SB with the Giants, the better DC is undoubtedly him.

I'm not saying they aren't close. But I do think Spags' run was alittle more impressive than this one. Yes, a big part of that is beating the Pats. But the 2007 Dallas team was the best Dallas team of the 2000s and the Packers were damn good as well. Hell, we were the underdogs in the Bucs game!

Anyway, I apologize if I came off rude at all. That wasn't my intention. I just feel pretty strongly that defensively, 2007 was more impressive than 2011.

I'm just glad both ended up DCing us to a ring.

But let's not talk about facts when dealing with such subjective criteria in a debate.

Yes, the pats did do all that stuff. Is that the criteria for having more confidence in spags over fewell? I mean look at the thread start.

'Even in the Super Bowl, during the two touchdown drives by the Patriots it seemed recievers were comming off the line, untouched, going down field a few yards open and running for yards after the catch. '

Sounds like the two TD drives in SB42.


arc's right that there's a nostalgic god-like status given to spags.

Spags was amazing here. But he was no Belichick. His time with both us and the Rams has proven that. But he's still good

Fewell had a very good first season here and now he capped it with a shitty regular season (where injuries may or may not have presented a tough challenge depending on who you ask) followed by an amazing run at the end. He's no Belichick. But he seems to have proven himself pretty well.

The debate is subjective, both guys have earned lots of merit, imo. I don't necessarily know if Spags is significantly farther ahead of fewell.

our offense was much better this year than it was in 2007.

I agree with alot of your post. The only thing I would disagree with is how the Pats' offense looked in both SBs. In 2007, our defense had contstant pressure on Brady. We completely threw off his rhythm, rattled him, made him hear footsteps from behind, etc, whatever saying you want to apply. We were the only team all season long to do that to the Pats that year.

This year our defense did perform very well in the SB. However, in the 2nd and 3rd quarters the Pats offense basically did what they wanted. Brady completed 16 passes in a row, a new SB record. They never looked that good in SB 42.

I don't even really prefer one to the other so even though it seems like I'm arguing that Fewell's was better, I'm not. I have no problem with anyone who thinks Spags' was slightly better.. it's fine, it's a fair opinion. I'd also have no problem with anyone who argued the opposite.

I think solid arguments can be made both ways but again.. there are so many factors that come into play that it's hard to really isolate it enough to make a fair, fact-based comparison.

Either way, I think they're very similar... hell, they even defeated the same team in the Super Bowl with the same QB's and same HC's on both sides. Bottom line.. the Giants are World Champs again and that's all that matters.

It is close. If Fewell wins another here, he gets my vote for being the better DC without a doubt. You can go with either one because they both have a SB victory under their belts. I just tend to give Spags the edge because of beating the 18-0 Pats. People can go either way, though.

but I'll be honest, this SB felt like such a carbon copy of 42 that it was disturbing me.

Save for the 16 straight passes, this: 'However, in the 2nd and 3rd quarters the Pats offense basically did what they wanted.'

When the pats scored their two TDs in 42, it looked the same, like they did exactly what they wanted.

Save for 5 points, (pats FG, pats safety) those games were frighteningly similar.

We're swerving off topic a little bit with this post but what the hell, it was fucking eerie.

I'm greedy, I want another one.

Pierce was Spags' field general ....

Blackburn was brought back from the abyss, and accomplished the same thing for Fewell.

Some here, can't wait for Goff to come back. I'll tell you one thing, as flawed as Blackburn has been in the past; he played (especially pass defense) and directed traffic as Goff never has.

Another very good thing the happened - To took Rolle into his office, and quietly encouraged him to chill.

Spags was the perfect DC for that game against the 2007 Patriots and their vertical game.

Fewell was the perfect DC against the Pats this past year for the kind of offense they ran this year.

I would argue that Boley was the "field general" this year moreso than Blackburn.

Having a savvy guy like CB definitely helped.. but Boley was calling the shots all year (aside from when he was injured, obviously).

The SB was another example of this. The Pats didn't score after their first drive of the second half. IMO, this is a big thing. He was out coaching the opposition, and we saw this in other games too.

look this is a subjective argument. Its obvious no facts will skew someones opinion. To me, I'll take Fewell. He relies less on the blitz (which is the defensive version of the big play), and gets the same results. Also I do give him an edge in the SB because his D shut down the Pats the second half, while Spags let the Pats score with 2 minutes to go (which could have easily been the game winner). Also because of this I discredit this whole "better offense in 2011 thing", because Spags was bailed out by the 2007 offense.

offense in 2007 and a lot of references to these records they set. If that 2007 team didn't do that, the 2011 Packers would have owned the same records based on their performances this year, and Gronkowski could be substituted for Moss for receiving records.

To arc's point, the difference between the two offenses is so slight that arguing that Spags is a better DC because he beat NE and Fewell only beat GB is asinine.

Spags might very well be a better DC than Fewell. My personal opinion is that it is too difficult and close to tell right now, and it certainly won't be decided because Spags beat a supposedly better NE team.

Spags also did nothing since leaving the Giants, and his defenses have been average to bad.

People acting as if they can prove who the better DC is are the ones fooling themselves. There is no clear cut answer here - nor does there need to be. One ring for each is good right now.

Two different styles, two different rosters. Secondly, did Spags have anywhere near the injury situation that Fewell had to deal with this year? I can't remember.

Both defenses faced the cream of the crop in the playoffs and won. The end results were the same, and that's all that matters.

And it is frustrating because I might be dead-wrong--yet I can't get over it.

but I definately felt similar about Spags in 2007 before he won it all.

That defense had some major hiccups that year. Anybody who acts like Spags walked in here Day 1 and dominated isn't remembering correctly.

We remember that high note that he went out on.

but I wonder what the sentiment was about Spags after we started 0-2 in 2007 and gave up 80 combined points in those two games?

of what we're going to see in the near future. I think the name of the game on defense is going to be to try to get to the QB with three or four guys, and cover in numbers. It's the logical way to get past the rules restrictions placed on the passing defense. Both the Giants and Pats did it in the Super Bowl with great effectiveness, and the result was two high powered offenses combining for 38 points in a game with 1 turnover.

I think people are pretty dismissive of the cornerback injury situation the Giants went through this season. As someone mentioned before, it wasn't just TT but solid roleplayers including Coe and Johnson. The amount of missed games by guys in the CB rotation was extremely high according to one of the advance stats websites. They were playing the Safety Rolle who was a bust as CB at nickle corner for a good chunk of the year.

Add don't forget to add in all the following:
the diminished play of that Fraud Tuck,
the weak linebacker play before Blackburn returned,
and the lack of a running game from the offense to help keep the defense off the field.

Fewell in my opinion was doing a decent job before the turn-around and then turned in some very good work once more pieces came back.

It just seems to me that you don't have as much confidence in Fewell as you did/do Spags because he doesn't run the type of defense YOU prefer. You're saying that Fewell didn't run as many blitzes and stuff to create pressure...well, that's not really what his defense is based on. You basically asking him to do something that's not his game and then faulting him for it when it helped to produce the same result (a Super Bowl win).

that says the Giants blitz 34% of the times during the regular season but only 17% of the time during the playoffs. Hmmmm. I also seen other articles that had the Bears, Jets, Eagles, Saints, and Rams blitzing close to 50% of the time. The only high percentage blitzing team who defense I really respected was the Raven. A few articles on NFL.com stated that teams were beating the blitzs with a a spread package which also was brought up in this thread.

You can find those articles with a google search
Link - ( New Window )

.

the last point you made, is actually a very good point.

He did get the same results, but I guess I'm wondering, what happens if the front 4 doesn't get there, will there be answers?