Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Congratulations Perry Fewell!!!!!

Joey in VA : 11/12/2012 1:24 pm
Thanks a ton for that 3-4 look with JPP at ILB and Osi at RDE that left a hole you could have driven John Holmes through with no pain. Brilliant way to use your best edge rusher, on the fucking inside. I'm also pretty happy with how you haven't closed down the zone coverage at all and moved your safeties closer towards the hash marks and 2-3 yards further up the field like a real Cover 2 would, you don't need to study what a shitty team like the Bears do on offense, and certainly you wouldn't want to pattern anything after the Steelers and their rolled up C-2. Be your own man!!!

And Corey Webster being totally flummoxed 9 weeks into the season against the opponents best player? Bravo sir, why on Earth would he want to waste time playing defense when standing still is just as easy and the results are the same? I'm also particularly proud of how wide you allow your worst DL to play outside at RDE, why use gap discipline when Osi can fly upfield 8 yards past the QB and have a nice view of the Cincinnati 100 sections which are chock full of tubby midwestern goodness. Kudos as well for allowing teams free reign over the middle as you did in week one Vs. Dallas and continue to do in week 10. I predicted the night prior to the opener that our biggest issue would be deep and medium middle because you don't press your CBs, your LBs don't sink well enough usually (save for one play in the Super Bowl) and you love to stunt your tall athletic DEs inside or play them at DT so there is no WAY they could affect the wide open passing lanes that have existed since you got here.

Pressure? You don't need no stinking pressure, just send a 265 slow footed LB on a..delayed blitz on Osi's inside shoulder, that should work because the two guys who had to block #72 are really bored as he runs himself outside of the play by ignoring essentially 3 gaps at once. A gap blitz with a fast LB because double teams are aimed at JPP? Noooo JPP is inside or at LB or ..where is he?? that's a fun game. Using the talent you have at DE to open up the inside to LB, S, CB blitzes would be silly, you just keep looping them around like very slow flies swarming a carcass they may or may not want to eat. Most coaches would have watched tape, adjusted or gone back to the basics of the Cover 2 that you learned but not you big guy. You just won't let anyone dampen your creative spirit, now matter how badly you fingerpaint a all over our defense.

In your defense, you don't have much to work with, only 4 All Pro players, and certainly no high draft picks, I mean Corey Webster was a 2nd round pick...what a LOSER, Phillips, Rolle and Amukamara are all #1s so trust me pal, I feel your pain. Your DL?? Big money on Chris Canty, Rocky Bernard, premium picks in Kiwi, Tuck, Osi, JPP, Linval Joseph but your hands are tied by that confounded Jerry Reese who just keeps stockpiling OL players but won't even look to the DL or secondary. He sure never got you any LBs, he didn't sign a high priced one, draft 3, trade for another and dust one off and buff him to a big white shine so he could rescue you in the Super Bowl. What are you supposed to do when you have no talent, and the front office does nothing to help your side of the ball at all. Stay strong Perry, you'll show those bastards.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 <<Prev | Show All |
Arc. I think most of us  
LauderdaleMatty : 11/12/2012 10:38 pm : link
Get that. There are players who are playing theselves off the team. In a guy like Osi's case i bet he winds up not even getting an initial offer. It's certainly not one thing that is causing this team to look like crap. Heck IMO while Joey has some very valid points I think the offense has twice the issue the D had.

People vent. I try to ignore the knee jerk stuff. We all get a bit nutty after such a bad game. I just hate the "we won two Super Bowl" excuse. It's as silly as the FIRE AND KILL Gilbride and Fewell stuff.
The offense concerns me more as well.  
arcarsenal : 11/12/2012 10:45 pm : link
It just looks like teams know exactly how to stop us right now and that's not good. To compound the issue, the OL has 2 guys starting who can't block anyone. We can't run the football, either.

I'll feel a lot better about the state of this football team if the offense can at least get back to being the force it looked like it was earlier in the year.
Our last long-term DC prior to Fewell,  
DG : 11/12/2012 10:45 pm : link
was John Fox. I miss Fox. Heck, I miss Mike Nolan.
arc, you present no facts  
snablats : 11/12/2012 11:05 pm : link
saying "well, he has a brain" isnt an argument - though, again, its exactly what the people defending fewell said last season!

and it took perry 15 games to finally change what wasnt working...and we never lost again...why he went back to his crap scheme this season is the question we'd all like an answer to

no one does less with more than perry fewell
And what facts are you presenting?  
arcarsenal : 11/12/2012 11:12 pm : link
At least I'm using logic.

Please explain to me why he would abandon something that worked for no apparent reason. It makes zero sense. I can't wrap my brain around why you think an NFL coordinator would see something work and win a Championship and then go into the next season and completely ditch that approach.

There's way more to it than you think. I'm pretty sure if it were as simple as just being more aggressive, he would have tried that already.
Go Terps : 11/12/2012 11:17 pm : link
- The defense came up with some stops yesterday to keep the team in the game despite turnovers and a big punt return

- The defense kept the Steelers to 24 points last week despite a horrific special teams performance

- The Giants are among the leaders in sacks and turnovers since Fewell became DC

- The Giants won their last six games last year without surrendering more than 20 points in any of those games en route to a title

You don't get to just pick which facts to consider and which to ignore. The past two weeks have sucked, but excuse me if I don't freak out because the Giants aren't going 14-2. Most of us expected anywhere from 8-8 to 12-4. Don't know why we manage to be surprised when these expectations come true. Defies logic.
They lost to the Bengals 31-13.  
Dave in Hoboken : 11/12/2012 11:25 pm : link
And frankly, the game wasn't even that close. A Bengal team that was on a 4 game losing streak. It's reasonable to wonder what is going on with this team at the moment, from the coaching to the players.
Some things defensively stand out to me:  
dep026 : 11/12/2012 11:25 pm : link
I dont have the stats off hand, but a few weeks ago, we had one of the worst defenses to end a half/start a half. Even though our offense was putrid yesterday, the defense gave up TDs on 3rd and long I believe three different times.

Getting turnovers are great, and they have helped us win A LOT of games the last two years, but I think the majority of us dont feel safe with any type of lead late in games. I dont think we are confident of getting many 3 and outs (I wonder where we rank there?)

You arent going to hold teams to 17 or less evrey game, but it would be a nice change to see the defense get some more 3 and outs and be confident they can hold a lead. So far, its apparent we cant do either.
10, 8, and 4  
dep026 : 11/12/2012 11:27 pm : link
were all TDs that happened on third down. There would have been a 4th TD on thrid down but Green was missed on a WIDE open fade in the end zone and couldnt get his feet in.

Thats not good defense.
Even still..  
arcarsenal : 11/12/2012 11:47 pm : link
The offense closed out the Steeler game with 3 consecutive 3 and outs. We could have still won that game if not for that. And in the game yesterday, there were 2 terrible turnovers by Eli and the Bradshaw fumble completely destroyed the momentum we were starting to generate. You can't give the ball away repeatedly like that and expect to win.

The Giants are basically constructed as a team that will win most games if the offense plays up to par. The defense isn't going to carry us and they're going to give up some plays but they will usually generate turnovers at least.

Prior to yesterdays loss, we had allowed 24, 19 and 24 points in the 3 other losses which really isn't terrible. Our offense is good enough to win games like that.
Mighty : 11/13/2012 12:07 am : link
You are proving the point perfectly. 2 seasons ago the defense started out slow, players spoke with Fewell, he simplified things and they played better down the stretch. Last season we saw the same miscommunications and blown coverages and again the players spoke with Fewell who simplified the defense again, they started meeting at each others houses for extra filmwork and we never lost another game after that. This year we are seeing the exact same thing for the 3rd straight year. Why should anyone have to wait to see what happens. We have already seen it before and already know what the solution is and wondering why it is taking our DC so long to realize the same mistake he has made 3 years in a row now.

Lets be honest we have athletes on defense and other than chase and KP not many cerebral players. you put a complicated zone scheme with too many reads and checks and you make the player have to think too much and take away their aggressiveness. so yes the players are making a lot of mistakes but its up to the coaches to put the players in a position to succeed with a system that matches their talents. We have already seen what they can succeed in over and over but our DC always tries to go back to his roots even though it doesnt mesh with our players. Its a DC job to understand right now only Webster and Rolle have experience in his system. Brown, Hosely and Prince with his limited work last year are new to the system so to put all those complicated checks on them is not putting them in position to succeed especially when their background and playing style doesnt match the system. Hosely and Prince are aggressive man corners and Brown is a converted LB who you cant expect to have the footwork in C2 zone 1 on 1 with receivers.

The Green TD yesterday is a perfect example. A combination of Rolle and Brown at safety and Chase at MLB should NEVER be in a cover 2 zone in a multiple receiver set because 1) Chase will most likely have to be covering a WR down the deep middle. 2) one of our safeties will likely have to cover 2 WRs which means he has to split them and break on the one being thrown to. That takes footwork that neither Rolle nor Brown have. Even if brown had stayed back and covered green on that play there was another receiver that would have been wide open for the TD down the middle because there is no way chase could stay with him.

This isnt just about yesterdays game. yesterday the offense had more to do with the loss than anything else but more times than not our offense has bailed our defense out and our defense has been consistently been the weaker unit even though it has more resources devoted to it.
I just don't buy that it's as simple as some of you guys think it is.  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 12:22 am : link
What reason in the world would he have for not just "simplifying" things if he's already seen it work in the past?

Again, you're basically saying that he saw something work well and saw it help win a Championship and then he went into this season and decided to abandon that completely. Why would he do that? I've yet to hear a single person give any sort of reason as to why he'd do that.

If it was as simple as just simplifying everything, he'd have done it. I pretty strongly doubt it's that easy.
so even though  
Mighty : 11/13/2012 12:37 am : link
the exact same thing has happened the past 2 years, and is happening again this year you strongly doubt it?? Even when a player (Webster) yet again came out earlier this year with grumblings about being unhappy with the scheme??? I agree it makes no sense and someone with a brain should recognize the same mistake and fix it quickly the third time around. but thats exactly the point. why isnt he fixing it? Its pointing to the answer being he just not a very good D coordinator for this group of players.

I think Fewell is a easy scapegoat.  
Jim in Forest Hills : 11/13/2012 12:37 am : link
I don't know what's wrong right now with the team, but two weeks ago the team was the best in the league. The offense can't do squat right now and Fewell's the problem? Fewell's good enough to win with. They are in some kind of funk and have to fight their way out, at least it's mid season and not near the playoffs. They have time to figure it out.
Fewell is an average at best DC.  
Dave in Hoboken : 11/13/2012 12:43 am : link
You can win with him, but you won't win because of him. Very big difference there. With this defense, if they're not getting turnovers, they are giving up points and not getting stops. It's a problem. And you can bet your ass teams won't be knocking down the door to interview him for a head coaching job.
Joey in VA : 11/13/2012 1:47 am : link
It is Fewell's fault when in week 10 on the opening drive his FS and veteran CB look completely confused. If they can't get it right, sit them down. If you're confusing the shit out of them, figure out why. If they just suck then sure it's on them and Fewell gets absolved but Brown for a few games was by far our best defender and Webster has, at times, been our best DB and both looked utterly lost on that play.

I look at this way, if I order something at a restaurant and I get a shitty waiter, it's on the guy who hired him and stuck him on the floor. Find someone better, train them better or dont' trot them out there when it's crunch time. You've seen Brown and Webster excel and you've seen this defense excel when players admittedly do less thinking and play. So what do you blame that play on? It's damn sure someone's fault, but why? Did Fewell not make it clear who has deep responsibility on a specific formation or are Brown and Webster both just idiots?

Again, I don't mean to sound preachy, but when you play and coach enough you can see when players are tentative because they don't a) understand and b) trust what they are being told. Can I quantify it? NO. Can I draw it up? NO. But when players of that caliber are being hung out to dry weekly and you see the hang dog look and arms up in confusion, it's not because they're just bad players its because they didn't see it, weren't prepared or don't trust what they're being told. When you're asked to do anything you don't see the point in or don't quite understand it's natural to do it hesitantly and not at full bore and I think....once again, that is what we're seeing with this bunch.

If 31 points against the Bengals, Cowboys receivers running free all day long and a choked away 4th quarter lead against the Steelers doesn't bother you then we agree to disagree that something stinks. I've said this before plenty of times, but when you watch film and you practice and you see in the game what you saw on film or were taught during the week, a bell goes see it, you feel it and you get a surge because you know you have your opponent figured out and you go in for the kill. If you aren't sure, don't think it's right or wonder why you're in a certain coverage for a certain play despite your instincts you hesitate and we see a TON of that now. It's not lack of effort, it's not heart, it's not people who don't care or lack talent. It's people who don't have faith in their coach or his scheme or the play calls and it shows as plain as day. I've been on both sides of the coin, utterly confused and supremely confident because of practice, film study and game plan and the difference in how you play on both sides is staggering.
Everyone can  
mattnyg05 : 11/13/2012 7:59 am : link
Spew all the stats they'd like (and there aren't a ton of good ones anyway) but the giants d certainly doesn't pass the eyeball test. Anyone who disagrees hasn't watched the team during the era when they played phenomenal d more often than not.
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 8:34 am : link
Stevie Brown has created a ton of big turnovers but he clearly has limitations as a player. Does it really surprise you much to think a guy with his background as a player could be making mental errors? I would expect it. And how come he gets credit for all of the turnovers but none goes to Fewell's scheme that likely put him in a position to make them?

Listen, I get what you're saying.. adjustments need to be made. But it's also not as easy as "well, this guy is making mistakes he's got to sit" because we don't have enough healthy players to play that game. We're already down Phillips. Sash hasn't shown much of anything and got hurt.. if you sit Stevie Brown, who the heck is taking his place?

I guess as I keep saying, I can't think of any logical reason why if Fewell just simplified everything and saw such great results, what incentive would he have to make it complicated again? Why would any coach do that? Wouldn't Coughlin pull him aside and ask him why he completely abandoned something that worked so well for seemingly no reason?

It just seems to me like there's more to it. And of course the choked away lead to the Steelers bothered me.. and so did the Bengal game in a myriad of ways. But as I pointed out earlier.. we went 3 and out offensively THREE consecutive times to close out that Steeler game. That's a game that was easily winnable. The defense didn't play all that great but they also didn't make it so that there was an insurmountable lead for the offense to overcome. The offense didn't score a single TD in the 2nd half and only had one all game. We keep settling for FG's in the red zone. And against Cincinatti we gave the ball away 4 times. The odds of winning a football game dip down to almost nothing when you do that.

The defense has its issues. I'm not ignoring that. But there are just as many problems on the other side of the football right now. Maybe more.
Some of you refuse to see what some of us are saying  
Big Blue '56 : 11/13/2012 8:44 am : link
and instead erroneously point to us as blindly defending what we've all seen.

We agree with much of what Joey has said as of now at least eyeball test-wise..ALL we're saying is that we've seen this picture before and CHOOSE to allow it to play out BEFORE making definitive judgements.
I just hate relying  
dep026 : 11/13/2012 8:45 am : link
on a defensive scheme based on hoping the other team screws up. We let them get yards, we let them get points, and we hope for turnovers.

We were fortunate against GB last year with drops/fumbles.
We were fortunate that Brady missed a wide open Welker and they were missing their best receiver.

Sometimes you gotta nut up and stop a team from driving. We havent proven to do so yet.
We're 12th in the league in points allowed.  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 8:47 am : link
So we're above average in that regard. We're really not giving up a ton of points.
I don't get why on a thread about the defense  
chris r : 11/13/2012 8:48 am : link
those defending the defense say yeah but the offense has been as bad lately. This thread is not about the offense. And not every thread has to be about the latest greatest culprit.

Fewell being subpar has been a story for most of his tenure here. The offense sucking bad now doesnt change that.
It's relevant.  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 8:56 am : link
Because people think Perry Fewell is the reason we're losing these games, apparently. The team is playing poorly in general.
where have people said he's the only reason  
chris r : 11/13/2012 8:58 am : link
He's been catching more flak than most.  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 9:13 am : link
Or at least to me he has.

Regardless, the defense is a problem so is the offense. There's solid football discussion going on in this thread, though. I don't think there's really any reason to derail it by critiquing what's being discussed rather than simply contribute to the discussion.
The offense is no bonus, either  
Greg from LI : 11/13/2012 9:21 am : link
That much I can agree with. Doesn't absolve Fewell of running a terrible defense.
After a four turnover game  
BigBlueBuff : 11/13/2012 9:33 am : link
you don't understand how a poor offense might hurt the defense and why it is relevent? Really?
The defense hasn't looked good.  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 9:35 am : link
No one will argue that. But the reason I even brought the offense up is because they've been completely unable to sustain drives which has made the defenses job more difficult.

When the offense repeatedly goes 3 and out or turns the ball over, you increase the odds of the other team scoring and that's what we've seen happen. If the offense can sustain more drives and be more efficient in the red zone, the defense will benefit. It all goes hand in hand. It's not a matter of singling out each unit as much as it is pointing out that they each effect the other. And right now, neither is playing well. Thus, ugly losses and terrible football.
This is not a defense built to stand on it's own.  
Ten Ton Hammer : 11/13/2012 9:41 am : link
It's a defense built to protect leads. They allow a ton of yards, so putting them in short field situations constantly is disastrous.
The Giants were down 17-6  
dep026 : 11/13/2012 10:00 am : link
before their first turnover. The defense was putrid in the first half and was as much a reason why we were losing.
again offense for the most part has been good during the  
chris r : 11/13/2012 10:06 am : link
Gilbride regime. The opposite is true under PF.

Sounds more like your perception than anything else.  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 10:12 am : link
How true was that in 2010?
Les in TO : 11/13/2012 10:12 am : link
one play was the miscommunication on the td pass to green and the other was a td after the pacman return to the 10 yard line.

hopefully the communication gets cleared up/defense simplified and having kenny phillips/rivers or williams back on the field will improve run defense and elimination of the deepballs/miscommunications.
And dep...  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 10:15 am : link
No, the offense hadn't turned it over yet at that point but we did give up a huge punt return that gave the D a real short field prior to the 2nd TD. And obviously the 2 Eli turnovers a little later on did the same thing.
Why would Fewell revert back  
ghost718 : 11/13/2012 10:18 am : link
Why did Bill Sheridan come in and say we're going to do things my way now,after the success of Spagnuolo.

The same reason,ego.Maybe a little bit of stubbornness.Perhaps Fewell is conscious of how it would look to teams who are considering him as a head coach.I believe he did come out and deny he even made significant changes last year.

dep026 : 11/13/2012 10:22 am : link
the bengals didnt punt once in the first half. Drive logs:

79 yards - TD
11 Yards - TD
49 yards - loss of downs
60 yards - FG

Now the only POSITIVE thing shown there is a loss of downs. And it was a 11 play drive, took time off the clock. Good defense makes stops. I believe part of the problem with the offense is that it never gets into a rhythm.

And even the 11 yard drive, we had them 3rd and 10 - and we still couldnt stop it. Defense is a huge problem. Always has been, always will be.
So let me get this straight...  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 10:23 am : link
Perry Fewell knows that he can simplify the D, get much better results and be considered a real good DC as a result which could yield either an extension or a straight up head coaching offer somewhere else but because of his "ego" he has decided against it?

I mean, this logic just makes no sense to me at all.
You have to remember  
ghost718 : 11/13/2012 10:28 am : link
Logic and Perry Fewell don't go together,it's an oxymoron.
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 10:28 am : link
I see one bad drive there. The long TD drive.

I can't kill a defense for giving up a TD when the team starts on OUR 11.

Forcing a turnover on downs and holding a team to 3 are fine.
I see 3`  
dep026 : 11/13/2012 10:36 am : link
A 15 plays 60 yard drive for a FG is not good defense.
A 11 play 50 yard that results a loss of down isnt good either.

Two drives that take up 12 minutes is not good defense. Good defense know how to get off the field.
This is untrue  
dep026 : 11/13/2012 10:37 am : link
Forcing a turnover on downs and holding a team to 3 are fine.

These two drives took up 14 minutes of the first half. How can an offense get ANY rhythm when they are not on the field? Getting 3 and outs are good results.
You don't expect a defense to allow drives like that...  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 10:39 am : link
....throughout the course of a football game? I can pull up a box score from any NFL game more or less and find drives like those given up by either defense.

We're 12th in points allowed, were creating more turnovers than any other team. I'm annoyed by the blown assignments and lack of pressure and we need to be better. But it's not like we are giving up TDs every single time the D takes the field.
The lack of rhythm generated by the offense...  
arcarsenal : 11/13/2012 10:41 am : link also the fault of the offense. All of the 3 and outs and turnovers aren't the defenses fault.
GiantTuff1 : 11/13/2012 10:41 am : link
fewell plays passive like a pussy. I would rather get beat one on one cause our guys suck, but I want to rip my hair out with this pussy footing overthinking dog shit that takes the fate out of the hands of our players individual talents.

Hey Perry, just cause your making millions, doesn't mean you have to try to force people to think your brilliant through your schemes.


dep026 : 11/13/2012 10:45 am : link
even on the FG drive, it wasnt the defense that stopped the Bengals. AJ Green was WIDE open for an easy TD but Dalton missed him. So, its not like the defense stepped up and made a stop.

And yes you can expect offense to make long drives like that. But the Bengals were 3 for 3 in the first half. We didnt stop them once. A good/great defense forces 3 and outs. A good defense doesnt get field position flipped on them continuously.

This is about the 4th or 5th time this season where our opponent hasnt punted in a half. That is very bad. I am not absolving the offense, since they have been putrid. But its tough when you only get 2-3 chances to score in a half. Momentum is very big in football, and BOTH the offense and the defense do a bad job of maintaining it.

The thing is the defense has been doing it for 3 years, while the offense has been doing it for 3 games. Relying on other teams to make mistakes is very dangerous.
i dont see why people are constantly bringing up the offense  
Mighty : 11/13/2012 11:24 am : link
This isnt about the past three games but the entire body of Fewell's work. Nobody is giving the offense a free pass for sucking the past few weeks but this is about more than the past few weeks. Look at the resources devoted to the defense and the resources devoted to the offense and the results and you will see a defense that isnt meeting the expectations and resources its been given.

And ill say it again. its been documented in articles that the 2 years prior the players have gone to Fewell and asked for the simplification and after its done our defense has played better. Earlier this year we heard grumblings from Webster about the scheme again. If people want to wait till our backs are totally against the wall yet again to call for a change then thats your choice but that just doesnt make any sense to me.
area junc : 11/13/2012 12:41 pm : link
still have a bullet in the chamber : a package that we haven't been able to use yet due to injury. the 'bison package' a big nickel 3 S alignment like we did last year

the starting D-Line

Boley and Rivers at LB

webster - rolle - prince at CB

brown + phillips deep


this accomplishes getting hosley off the field for the stretch run (like they did with prince last year). too many mistakes from him - put it in the hands of the vets. jayron's day will come

this includes putting kiwi in the defensive end rotation

boley + rivers gives u tremendous range, instincts and tackling ability at linebacker

get ur best players on the field, in position, to defend the belt. if rivers keeps going down, hopefully j-will is ready to step in, but they really need to get the same 11 guys stringing practices together
Joey in VA : 11/13/2012 12:44 pm : link
That 11 would make me one happy mfer..
Johnny5 : 11/13/2012 12:48 pm : link
Yeah I like that idea. One thing I'm struggling with, that seems similar to what we ran against SF so successfully. Why the hell did we go away from what we did v San Francisco?
Mighty : 11/13/2012 12:55 pm : link
i love that lineup in a 2nd and 10+ or 3rd and 8+ situation. It would be pretty vulnerable to the inside run in most other situations though but against a 3 WR set in passing situations it would be dominant.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner