I don't care what he has done outside of this organization. I'm talking about when he was here. I said I was not comparing the two guys. It was more of an example of guys playing above their ability as opposed to guys under achieving. That's all. It doesn't have to be Spags. It can be anybody. Spags is just the last guy we had that did that.
I'm a season ticket holder. I go to all the home games. I specifically watch the secondary. I even pointed it out to my girl friend. I would point out other defenses and show her all the movement they have. When the giants were on the field I would point out how they almost never move. She saw it and understood it. I'm not saying that if you disguise it that it will definitely work. What I am saying is that if you don't do it you are putting your defense in a bad position.
robbie, the run defense suffering during Fewell's time Â
hasn't occurred in a vacuum. This team has had a remarkable amount of injuries along the interior line and at the LB position over the last 3 seasons. We haven't had a healthy, legitimate player at the MLB position since Antonio Pierce.
It's not even really just responding to your comment in particular.. it's just that there seems to be this perception that Spags is some sort of defensive minded God amongst a lot of posters and I just don't understand how if he's as good as everyone thinks he is, why was his defense so horrifically bad last year?
I agree that it seems logical to counter a short passing game by playing press but I find it hard to believe that all of us could make that simple observation but the guy running the defense can't. Not that I assume Perry Fewell always makes the right call.. but I have to believe an adjustment that simple would have crossed his mind. I can't say I know why he more often than not chose to play off but my guess is that he doesn't think our CB's were best suited playing up regardless of what they've done in the past. I really don't know.
I would just like to see the players know and execute Â
their assignments on a much more consistent basis. I won't be pleased, but I can live with, a player getting physically beat, but I can't stand the mental mistakes. Especially once the inevitable injuries come, we need the system and preparation for everyone to know what the hell they're doing.
What I don't get is you have people saying "Fewell's defense is too complicated.. the only reason they got hot at the end of 2011 was because he simplified everything and made it so players didn't have to think so much and could just play".. and then you have other people saying the defense isn't creative and no one's moving pre snap and nothing's getting disguised and all of the blitzes are too vanilla.
There is so much that I see that I don't like with Fewell. It seems like simple corrections that aren't made not even just within a game but made throughout the season. Yes, he has battled injuries but so does every team. Injuries should never be an excuse (at least if you want to last in the NFL). It just boggles my mind how vanilla this defense looks. The problem is it isn't and that is causing a lot of confusion. What I don't like is that we don't dictate to the offense. We are a reactive defense which is why I think he wants people stationed where they are supposed to be post snap. It seems like we run complicated coverages which is a reason for the miscommunication or blown coverages. Instead of being a defense that says we are going to do this so we can disguise it, it seems like we run a defense that says if this receiver goes here we will be in one coverage but ifthis happens then we go yto a different coverage, etc. I have no idea if that is the case but that seems the most logical to me.
I still can't get over the time we played the Colts and we only dressed like two DTs. I know TC has to sign off on all of that stuff but that was Fewell's gameplan. Peyton said, lets run the shit out of the ball. There was nothing you can do about that. That was ridiculous.
Arc, I understand your concerns and saying if we can think of it then he must have thought about it. I agree with that. I just think he coaches scared and wants to play it safe. That doesn't work in the NFL. He plays deep off coverage not to give up the big play but we led the league last year in most big plays given up. We play where we are supposed to play post snap because he wants everybody in position but with the bad communication people aren't where they are supposed to be. We struggle with up tempo offenses because we can't make the proper substitutions and we can't relay the calls. He doesn't want to jam because I firmly believe he believes we don't have guys that can do it. Instead we play a lot more zone and guys have proven to struggle in that area. We wait for the turnover but if we don't get it then we kill any offensive momentum because our offense is sitting on their ass (yes, it works both ways if the offense is going three and out).
The one thing he does well is generate turnovers. I don't think that happens on accident. But there needs to be a balance between turnovers and a defense that can force a three and out.
I'm hoping Fewell can give me and all other doubters a big FU.
he better, because this is his contract year. If the defense is a shit show again, he won't get re-signed. This is a year when he needs to the defense to be top 10 or mid range in total defense.
Here's my point re: getting beat vs. blown assignments Â
In my opinion, Tyron Cole (sp?)was being physically beatten by the Cowboys Ogletree in the season opener as was Webster by Boldin when the Giants played the Ravens. Those two examples stick out for me but I know there were others.
Now some posters on this board felt differently and one of you guys went back and reviewed the Cowboy tape and came to a different conclusion about how the defense played Ogletree. I respect that and adjusted my opinion according due to him putting in the work to support his viewpoint.
Based on this, I strongly suspect that we are all guessing about which defensive failure was due to the guy getting beat or off of a blown assignment and will never agree except for the super obivious ones. In addition, I remember the posted interviews where Fewell covered for a td given up by either Role or Webster by stating that someone mis-read the play to cover both players. Just saying it was a blown coverage isn't digging in deep enough because most would like to place the blame for most blown coverages on the coach while I would like to assign the majority of the blame to the players
Good last post about the complicated vs. simplifying. I think it is too vanilla pre snap but too complicated post snap. There is nothing complicated about his pre snap alignments. There is nothing complicated about his blitzes. The complication is from calling and executing the coverages. I think he has a bunch of different coverages which is fine but when do you use them. Are they going with one coverage when the are in certain formations? Is it based off of personnel? Is it based off of their routes? Is it based off down and distance? I don't know that. But it seems like whatever it is based off of that is leading to the miscommunication and blown coverages and that is why I think it is complicated in that aspect.
Sometimes I just feel like there are so many freakin' variables at play to really know exactly what the problems always are. I always see posters here say that the defense will always suck for as long as Fewell is here but there have been plenty of instances where that wasn't true. I'm ok with Fewell getting blame sometimes but I don't think the personnel is nearly as good as others do.
Aside from that Colts game in 2010 and a couple others, the defense was very solid. They were like 7th in yards allowed and around league average in points. Between that and how well the D played down the stretch in 2011-12, I just have too much of a hard time when people definitively say that Fewell's defense doesn't work and sucks because if that were true, how did it succeed in those instances? Besides last year, we got a ton of sacks in 2010 and 2011. We were getting to the QB, we've always been able to force turnovers.
I think when it comes down to it, it's just a lot of factors combined.. which sometimes seems like an easy way out or a dismissal but I still really think that's the case here.
Chip Kelly's offense is going to haunt us unless we fix our problems from last year. His philosophy is to have the QB get the ball out of his hands in less than two seconds. That means our pass rush is basically negated. You can say that the DL should win their battles. It is damn near impossible. So, how do you stop it? You are going to have to throw off the timing of the receivers. In today's NFL you either need to attck the QB or attack to receivers. You can't play off coverage and say when they catch it I'm going to knock their head off. Ronnie Lott would be broke in today's NFL. That means you need to take advantage of the five yard zone. Hit/bump these receivers. Make that QB make his second and third read.
On top of that we struggle with up-tempo offenses. We are not going to be able to sub in and out. If we don't force three and outs our defense is going to be shot. You can't sit back and wait for the turnover against them. You have to be aggressive and say fuck it if you give up a big play. They practice and they are going to make some plays. You can't be afraid of giving up the big play against them otherwise you are guaranteed of a slow death.
I guess I can just use your excuse from earlier in the thread when you said "no one was stopping their offense at that point".
The 2010 Giants defense was good overall. I didn't call them an all world defense or an elite team. But they were 7th in yards allowed, 5th in sacks and 1st in turnovers. You wouldn't sign up for that from the 2013 defense right now?
from being a C/S myself and coaching for awhile
robbieballs2003 : 3:13 pm
There is so much that I see that I don't like with Fewell. It seems like simple corrections that aren't made not even just within a game but made throughout the season. Yes, he has battled injuries but so does every team. Injuries should never be an excuse (at least if you want to last in the NFL). It just boggles my mind how vanilla this defense looks. The problem is it isn't and that is causing a lot of confusion. What I don't like is that we don't dictate to the offense. We are a reactive defense which is why I think he wants people stationed where they are supposed to be post snap. It seems like we run complicated coverages which is a reason for the miscommunication or blown coverages. Instead of being a defense that says we are going to do this so we can disguise it, it seems like we run a defense that says if this receiver goes here we will be in one coverage but ifthis happens then we go yto a different coverage, etc. I have no idea if that is the case but that seems the most logical to me.
I still can't get over the time we played the Colts and we only dressed like two DTs. I know TC has to sign off on all of that stuff but that was Fewell's gameplan. Peyton said, lets run the shit out of the ball. There was nothing you can do about that. That was ridiculous.
Arc, I understand your concerns and saying if we can think of it then he must have thought about it. I agree with that. I just think he coaches scared and wants to play it safe. That doesn't work in the NFL. He plays deep off coverage not to give up the big play but we led the league last year in most big plays given up. We play where we are supposed to play post snap because he wants everybody in position but with the bad communication people aren't where they are supposed to be. We struggle with up tempo offenses because we can't make the proper substitutions and we can't relay the calls. He doesn't want to jam because I firmly believe he believes we don't have guys that can do it. Instead we play a lot more zone and guys have proven to struggle in that area. We wait for the turnover but if we don't get it then we kill any offensive momentum because our offense is sitting on their ass (yes, it works both ways if the offense is going three and out).
The one thing he does well is generate turnovers. I don't think that happens on accident. But there needs to be a balance between turnovers and a defense that can force a three and out.
I'm hoping Fewell can give me and all other doubters a big FU.
Quote:
Well
AnishPatel : 3:16 pm
he better, because this is his contract year. If the defense is a shit show again, he won't get re-signed. This is a year when he needs to the defense to be top 10 or mid range in total defense.
was a disaster. aaron Rodgers was the best QB in the league against the blitz that year, and what did fewell do? He called that game as if aaron Rodgers were Michael vick the week before, and the giants got shredded
it wasn't just the blitz in that packer game. the corners kept playing press bail or some cover 3 stuff. the packers kept hitting quick slants, comebacks, square ins, hitch routes. NO PRESS COVERAGE (unlike the week before where maclin/Jackson were shutout in press man by t2 and webster). It was an atrocious defensive game plan that ruined what could have been a superbowl berth for the giants that year.
in 2011 the defense was allowing an absolutely mind blowingly ridiculous 385 yards and 27 pts per game thru the first 14 games. Theres no excuse for that, the injuries were not that devastating for the defense to be that bad. outside of a half against new England and philly week 3, the defense stunk. his play calling against the seahawks, cardinals, eagles, and redskins was indefensible. but again, they won the 'bowl, all is forgiven, contract extension
in 2012, we blitzed against the cowboys week 9. witten, Austin, Bryant, romo shredded the defense a new playbook. they blitzed against Baltimore; disaster. Those are the only two games of the year where fewell called an extremely aggressive game with tight man to man coverage parallel with the blitzing. they got torched both ways.
I think in years past (2010 and 2011) lack blitzing or just tight man-to-man coverage was a legitimate criticism of fewell. there are so many games the giants would have played better and likely won if fewell called things differently (Who cares they won the superbowl) although 2010 was a lost opportunity. 2012? No, Fewell has an excuse for last year. No matter what he could have done, the defense was too shitty and banged up. His blitzes against the ravens however were poorly designed. And for whatever reason, in that raven game he tried to do what he did against san Francisco with the 8 man box thing with some run blitzing and guys were running themselves out of plays. herzlich and paysinger looked overmatched on many occasions. The Baltimore game was a confusing game plan on his part, maybe he wanted to do something new (but why with the young LBs)? its tough to defend that raven game on his part, but overall 2012 was a lost year for fewell. its now or never. I couldn't give a monkeys nut sack if the giants are a top 10 team in forcing tunrovers, you can't be at the bottom of the league in big plays and yardage given up. You just can't...
ignore fewells horrific game plan against the colts. jim Caldwell essentially said after the game they knew the giants defensive game plan just by the giants player inactive list (DTs inactive if anyone recalls). peyton probably saw some old buffalo film and knew fewell was going to go all in on the nickel packages. peyton kept running to deon grant at will, fewell got spanked. that game shouldn't define that defense
it was a fantastic year. the giants had a franchise record for tunrovers, led the league in turnovers. for the majority of the entire season, they were top 3 in defense, for about 11 or 12 consecutive weeks. for most of the year they were the best pass defense in football. the defense led the nfl in pressures per pass play. ignoring the Michael vick games, the defense was tremendous against the run for the most part. tuck was great, canty/cofield were awesome against the run, deon grant had a great year playing down low, Webster was good. they accomplished a hell of a lot and im not gonna get into the offense. its still so frustrating to think that fucking team didn't make the postseason. so talented and couldn't even compete in the nfc playoffs, disgraceful. Should have won home games against tenneessee/dallas, and obviously against philly. they had no such games in 2010 where they were pulling 4th qtr comebacks like 2011 except that Jacksonville game, that team was dominant for a good stretch
I used to think 'oh they weren't going to go anywhere without a healthy steve smith'. but, eh, nah. that team could have made noise in the postseason, the defense alone could win them a game against the likes of seattle or Chicago.
For my work this summer, I was asked to go back and review the tapes on all the 30+ yard pass plays
Take a look for yourself. Pick the plays you believe are the coordinators fault. At most, I only found 2. Some of the plays they gave up last year were really good individual plays by the offensive team and there were others where Giants defenders simply got beat. What else can you do? Why was Webster peeking into the backfield while he's guarding Dez Bryant and AJ Green? That is anyone's guess.
These guys need someone to get in their face and be pissed. That's what I want Perry to do. He should be on the sidelines with steam coming out his ears/nose. Just pissed the hell off. This defense has got to play nasty.
There will obviously be times when players get beat one on one. From watching that it doesn't change my opinion of players being asked to do things that aren't comfortable to them. Too often we play a cover three. That is middle and HS stuff. You don't see that too often in the NFL. The reason for that is that your corners will get abused. There is a phrase that says when you are even you're leaving. What that means is that when as a WR if you get even with a DB you won. Fewell is asking his corners to play a third of the field. That is fine but we give up too much stuff underneath. When a corner tries to close the gap underneath they run vertical and there is no help. Tim Lewis ran a lot of the same stuff with his zone blitzes. In theory it is nice but doesn't often work. You are asking a corner to drop back, stop his momentum, maybe break forward and then turn and run. These WRs are too fast and too good at attacking the ball in the air.
Another problem I see too often and I believe this is the way they teach it because this used to happen to TT a lot is that when they play deep they are asking the Corners to play inside leverage. IMO, there is no good leverage in cover three. IF you pay outside leverage the advantage is that you see the QB, WR and ball all at the same time. It is much easier to play the ball in the air this way. The problem is that if the WR runs any inside route it is extremely hard to defend. If you play inside leverage you are making the throw a little more difficult for the QB and you have the sideline as an extra defender. The problem is you lose sight of the WR and you are trying to feel for him and never know when to time your jump for the ball. This comes across as players being "in position to make a play" but I look at it as they are doing what is asked of them but you are making their life extremely difficult to actually make that play.
From the video you can see that most of the time we are in off coverage or we bail out giving the receivers anything they want. Their momentum is always moving backward. You are giving them poor angles to take on the ball. When you go to a cover two you should funnel the WRs INSIDE to your safeties. We seem to do the opposite. We either play off and let the WR run where they want and we squat underneath them or we funnel them OUTSIDE. This has positives and negatives to it as well. If you funnel them outside you are spreading the field. Instead of having he safeties cover from the middle of the field to maybe the numbers you are expecting them to cover from the middle of the field to the sideline. That is the difference between a completed pass and either a kill shot or an interception. If you want to funnel them outside then your safeties need to get wider. If your safeties get wider then you need to protect the middle of the field. This is where the Tampa 2 comes into play. WHen you funnel outside though the CB takes his eyes off of the ball and then he has to relocate it and try to digest the play. Do you think it is easy to jam a receiver, turn away from the play, feel for the receiver behind you with your arm, get your head back to the QB and decide what is going on? Is it a run, Is it a pass? Is there another receiver entering my zone? It is crazy hard. If you funnel inside they CB can always read his keys (the OL to the QB to the other receivers) while sill jamming the WR. You get your hands on number 1 and look to number 2 (the receivers from the sideline is how they are numbered) while still being able to see the QB. The CB should have the best view on the field because their head doesn't need to be on a swivel.
I can go on and on but I feel like I am rambling now.
Disclaimer: I am not saying Fewell is 100% at fault. I am just pointing out some flaws that I see.
Players need to play better, and the coach needs to coach better. I don't think anyone can sit here and say that one of the two should be free of blame for fielding a defense that was atrocious.
This is the fourth year of Fewell. I am praying that the continuity will lead to a defense that can at least finish in the top 20 and give you a shot to go out and win 10 or more games. When you finish 31st, you end up in situations like last year or even 2011-you barely get in or you barely stay out. I really feel like despite all the little plays that could have gone our way that affected games, simply having a 20th or better ranked defense would have given us 2 or 3 more games. You had so little chance of making a stop last year. I don't give a shit who's fault it is, but it has to get better.
There were times when players got flat out beat which happens and is understandable. There were times when players did the right thing but then made a rookie mistake like looking back to the QB in man coverage and then it looks like you are the worst player in the world.
there are games where the defense was torched in multiple ways, like the game in dallas. romo threw 400+ but only two long plays were shown in the video. Austin made a living in the zones and witten abused anyone who covered him man to man. that's not all on fewell (altho some underneath coverage on witten could've helped), hosley made some mistakes in his zones, stevie brown was playing way too deep leaving the intermediate zones too wide open, etc. But the short gains like those easy quick slants fewell gives up when the corners bail, the 3rd down conversions, struggles in red zone, and those 20 yd pass plays (that may not necessarily go for 30+ but very significant) where a receiver runs a dig while keeping the drive going can be just as indicative of a scheme or personnel issue as the very long explosive gains as well. hell that Baltimore game they gave up 500 yards to the ravens, but only 3 pass plays were shown altho they ran for a good amount of those yards to be fair
we had problems in the middle of the field last year Â
You can hide guys for a few games; you can't hide them all season.
Teams with an inside running threat, like the Redskins and the Ravens, made us pay. You move personnel or call formations to counteract the shitty play in the middle, and you leave other areas open.
The reason (as it was presented to me before the project) the 30+ yards number was used was because many of the articles written after the season focus primarily on this yardage number.
Bob Papa always mentions that stat as well on the radio broadcast. He almost never mentions 20 yard gains given up on passes, but primarily uses the 20 yard barometer for running plays. I believe that is because a 20 yard pass play is far more common than is a 20 yard rushing play.
The video was made for the running plays as well. Also one for our sacks if you want to see how the pressure came, along with interceptions.
Ya it can't be the coach right ? At the end of the day, Fewell is responsible for the defense and the talent did not drop off the way the performance has... its mostly the same guys..
The light went on at the end of 2011 with those same guys . .
Last year the light was out all year. Fewell will figure it out or we will suffer 2012 again and he will be gone.
I was surprised how often Rolle seemed to be running around without purpose. Doesn't look like he finds the ball in the air easily when the play isn't in front of him. Hopefully hi playing deep more often will help.
Its so crazy about Fewell because I always want to begin my bashing him by saying "aside from when he won the Superbowl...". But seriously, aside from when he coached a Superbowl winning defense, when has Fewell ever distiguished himself as a D-co? I just don't think he's a good coach.
Our best hope is that the defense is average and our offense carries us.
On the subject of Rolle, I don't know you had seen the story where he gave an interview this month and wondered if he was going to be cut.
He probably was seeing what the Giants saw on the game tape. It struck me too when I reviewed it as well.
I referred to Rolle as "chasing air" in a number of the plays that broke down.
Probably the most glaring play I noticed was the one where it was against New Orleans (14:24 of video) where he was "chasing air" as the receiver Morgan goes for 62 yards.
Deep safety pass coverage with both Brown and Rolle have me concerned this season.
2008 team kind of faded down the stretch giving up a 20 points and above in six out of the final seven games including the playoff lose to Philly. Many on here felt that a huge problem was how badly the DL (especially the DT's) finished the season. This led to the Signing of Canty and Rocky Bernard.
other than the general "the defense has underachieved under him" are that his blitzes rarely seem to be successful and that there seem to be an inordinate amount of communication breakdowns on his defense. Maybe we have bad blitzers and dumb players, but we've had enough different players under his watch that I've got to think some of its on him.
100%. I dont despise Fewell and a lot of what he does can sometime work. I just really dont care for his overall philosophy. He clearly plays a bend but dont break style that gives up a ton of yards and tries to limit the scoring and hope for the eventual turnover. Aside from 2010, a typical Fewell season for any team he's coached looks exactly like this. He is routinely in the top third in the NFL in yards given up. As you mentioned his blitzes almost never hit home and can be seen coming from miles away. The miscommunication between players, especially in the secondary has been a problem for years now.
of Fred Robbins and Barry Coefield the last couple seasons. Hopefully we'll have some better luck with keeping most of the DT's healthy this year - I think there's a lot of potential that exists with the Joseph / Jenkins tandem.
That's my bold prediction.
I agree that it seems logical to counter a short passing game by playing press but I find it hard to believe that all of us could make that simple observation but the guy running the defense can't. Not that I assume Perry Fewell always makes the right call.. but I have to believe an adjustment that simple would have crossed his mind. I can't say I know why he more often than not chose to play off but my guess is that he doesn't think our CB's were best suited playing up regardless of what they've done in the past. I really don't know.
I still can't get over the time we played the Colts and we only dressed like two DTs. I know TC has to sign off on all of that stuff but that was Fewell's gameplan. Peyton said, lets run the shit out of the ball. There was nothing you can do about that. That was ridiculous.
Arc, I understand your concerns and saying if we can think of it then he must have thought about it. I agree with that. I just think he coaches scared and wants to play it safe. That doesn't work in the NFL. He plays deep off coverage not to give up the big play but we led the league last year in most big plays given up. We play where we are supposed to play post snap because he wants everybody in position but with the bad communication people aren't where they are supposed to be. We struggle with up tempo offenses because we can't make the proper substitutions and we can't relay the calls. He doesn't want to jam because I firmly believe he believes we don't have guys that can do it. Instead we play a lot more zone and guys have proven to struggle in that area. We wait for the turnover but if we don't get it then we kill any offensive momentum because our offense is sitting on their ass (yes, it works both ways if the offense is going three and out).
The one thing he does well is generate turnovers. I don't think that happens on accident. But there needs to be a balance between turnovers and a defense that can force a three and out.
I'm hoping Fewell can give me and all other doubters a big FU.
Now some posters on this board felt differently and one of you guys went back and reviewed the Cowboy tape and came to a different conclusion about how the defense played Ogletree. I respect that and adjusted my opinion according due to him putting in the work to support his viewpoint.
Based on this, I strongly suspect that we are all guessing about which defensive failure was due to the guy getting beat or off of a blown assignment and will never agree except for the super obivious ones. In addition, I remember the posted interviews where Fewell covered for a td given up by either Role or Webster by stating that someone mis-read the play to cover both players. Just saying it was a blown coverage isn't digging in deep enough because most would like to place the blame for most blown coverages on the coach while I would like to assign the majority of the blame to the players
P.S. I apologized for the length
Sometimes I just feel like there are so many freakin' variables at play to really know exactly what the problems always are. I always see posters here say that the defense will always suck for as long as Fewell is here but there have been plenty of instances where that wasn't true. I'm ok with Fewell getting blame sometimes but I don't think the personnel is nearly as good as others do.
Aside from that Colts game in 2010 and a couple others, the defense was very solid. They were like 7th in yards allowed and around league average in points. Between that and how well the D played down the stretch in 2011-12, I just have too much of a hard time when people definitively say that Fewell's defense doesn't work and sucks because if that were true, how did it succeed in those instances? Besides last year, we got a ton of sacks in 2010 and 2011. We were getting to the QB, we've always been able to force turnovers.
I think when it comes down to it, it's just a lot of factors combined.. which sometimes seems like an easy way out or a dismissal but I still really think that's the case here.
Skill Set. Skill Set. Skill Set. Skill Set. Skill Set. Skill Set.
Trying to match the Skill Set….
Skill Set didn’t match up…wasn’t the same as we expected…
Mix and match the Skill Set….
On top of that we struggle with up-tempo offenses. We are not going to be able to sub in and out. If we don't force three and outs our defense is going to be shot. You can't sit back and wait for the turnover against them. You have to be aggressive and say fuck it if you give up a big play. They practice and they are going to make some plays. You can't be afraid of giving up the big play against them otherwise you are guaranteed of a slow death.
The 2010 Giants defense was good overall. I didn't call them an all world defense or an elite team. But they were 7th in yards allowed, 5th in sacks and 1st in turnovers. You wouldn't sign up for that from the 2013 defense right now?
robbieballs2003 : 3:13 pm
There is so much that I see that I don't like with Fewell. It seems like simple corrections that aren't made not even just within a game but made throughout the season. Yes, he has battled injuries but so does every team. Injuries should never be an excuse (at least if you want to last in the NFL). It just boggles my mind how vanilla this defense looks. The problem is it isn't and that is causing a lot of confusion. What I don't like is that we don't dictate to the offense. We are a reactive defense which is why I think he wants people stationed where they are supposed to be post snap. It seems like we run complicated coverages which is a reason for the miscommunication or blown coverages. Instead of being a defense that says we are going to do this so we can disguise it, it seems like we run a defense that says if this receiver goes here we will be in one coverage but ifthis happens then we go yto a different coverage, etc. I have no idea if that is the case but that seems the most logical to me.
I still can't get over the time we played the Colts and we only dressed like two DTs. I know TC has to sign off on all of that stuff but that was Fewell's gameplan. Peyton said, lets run the shit out of the ball. There was nothing you can do about that. That was ridiculous.
Arc, I understand your concerns and saying if we can think of it then he must have thought about it. I agree with that. I just think he coaches scared and wants to play it safe. That doesn't work in the NFL. He plays deep off coverage not to give up the big play but we led the league last year in most big plays given up. We play where we are supposed to play post snap because he wants everybody in position but with the bad communication people aren't where they are supposed to be. We struggle with up tempo offenses because we can't make the proper substitutions and we can't relay the calls. He doesn't want to jam because I firmly believe he believes we don't have guys that can do it. Instead we play a lot more zone and guys have proven to struggle in that area. We wait for the turnover but if we don't get it then we kill any offensive momentum because our offense is sitting on their ass (yes, it works both ways if the offense is going three and out).
The one thing he does well is generate turnovers. I don't think that happens on accident. But there needs to be a balance between turnovers and a defense that can force a three and out.
I'm hoping Fewell can give me and all other doubters a big FU.
AnishPatel : 3:16 pm
he better, because this is his contract year. If the defense is a shit show again, he won't get re-signed. This is a year when he needs to the defense to be top 10 or mid range in total defense.
it wasn't just the blitz in that packer game. the corners kept playing press bail or some cover 3 stuff. the packers kept hitting quick slants, comebacks, square ins, hitch routes. NO PRESS COVERAGE (unlike the week before where maclin/Jackson were shutout in press man by t2 and webster). It was an atrocious defensive game plan that ruined what could have been a superbowl berth for the giants that year.
in 2011 the defense was allowing an absolutely mind blowingly ridiculous 385 yards and 27 pts per game thru the first 14 games. Theres no excuse for that, the injuries were not that devastating for the defense to be that bad. outside of a half against new England and philly week 3, the defense stunk. his play calling against the seahawks, cardinals, eagles, and redskins was indefensible. but again, they won the 'bowl, all is forgiven, contract extension
in 2012, we blitzed against the cowboys week 9. witten, Austin, Bryant, romo shredded the defense a new playbook. they blitzed against Baltimore; disaster. Those are the only two games of the year where fewell called an extremely aggressive game with tight man to man coverage parallel with the blitzing. they got torched both ways.
I think in years past (2010 and 2011) lack blitzing or just tight man-to-man coverage was a legitimate criticism of fewell. there are so many games the giants would have played better and likely won if fewell called things differently (Who cares they won the superbowl) although 2010 was a lost opportunity. 2012? No, Fewell has an excuse for last year. No matter what he could have done, the defense was too shitty and banged up. His blitzes against the ravens however were poorly designed. And for whatever reason, in that raven game he tried to do what he did against san Francisco with the 8 man box thing with some run blitzing and guys were running themselves out of plays. herzlich and paysinger looked overmatched on many occasions. The Baltimore game was a confusing game plan on his part, maybe he wanted to do something new (but why with the young LBs)? its tough to defend that raven game on his part, but overall 2012 was a lost year for fewell. its now or never. I couldn't give a monkeys nut sack if the giants are a top 10 team in forcing tunrovers, you can't be at the bottom of the league in big plays and yardage given up. You just can't...
it was a fantastic year. the giants had a franchise record for tunrovers, led the league in turnovers. for the majority of the entire season, they were top 3 in defense, for about 11 or 12 consecutive weeks. for most of the year they were the best pass defense in football. the defense led the nfl in pressures per pass play. ignoring the Michael vick games, the defense was tremendous against the run for the most part. tuck was great, canty/cofield were awesome against the run, deon grant had a great year playing down low, Webster was good. they accomplished a hell of a lot and im not gonna get into the offense. its still so frustrating to think that fucking team didn't make the postseason. so talented and couldn't even compete in the nfc playoffs, disgraceful. Should have won home games against tenneessee/dallas, and obviously against philly. they had no such games in 2010 where they were pulling 4th qtr comebacks like 2011 except that Jacksonville game, that team was dominant for a good stretch
I used to think 'oh they weren't going to go anywhere without a healthy steve smith'. but, eh, nah. that team could have made noise in the postseason, the defense alone could win them a game against the likes of seattle or Chicago.
Take a look for yourself. Pick the plays you believe are the coordinators fault. At most, I only found 2. Some of the plays they gave up last year were really good individual plays by the offensive team and there were others where Giants defenders simply got beat. What else can you do? Why was Webster peeking into the backfield while he's guarding Dez Bryant and AJ Green? That is anyone's guess.
I uploaded the pass defense video as a tool to use. I put replays in it as well (except for one play).
Giants Defense - Pass Plays of 30+ yards - ( New Window )
There will obviously be times when players get beat one on one. From watching that it doesn't change my opinion of players being asked to do things that aren't comfortable to them. Too often we play a cover three. That is middle and HS stuff. You don't see that too often in the NFL. The reason for that is that your corners will get abused. There is a phrase that says when you are even you're leaving. What that means is that when as a WR if you get even with a DB you won. Fewell is asking his corners to play a third of the field. That is fine but we give up too much stuff underneath. When a corner tries to close the gap underneath they run vertical and there is no help. Tim Lewis ran a lot of the same stuff with his zone blitzes. In theory it is nice but doesn't often work. You are asking a corner to drop back, stop his momentum, maybe break forward and then turn and run. These WRs are too fast and too good at attacking the ball in the air.
Another problem I see too often and I believe this is the way they teach it because this used to happen to TT a lot is that when they play deep they are asking the Corners to play inside leverage. IMO, there is no good leverage in cover three. IF you pay outside leverage the advantage is that you see the QB, WR and ball all at the same time. It is much easier to play the ball in the air this way. The problem is that if the WR runs any inside route it is extremely hard to defend. If you play inside leverage you are making the throw a little more difficult for the QB and you have the sideline as an extra defender. The problem is you lose sight of the WR and you are trying to feel for him and never know when to time your jump for the ball. This comes across as players being "in position to make a play" but I look at it as they are doing what is asked of them but you are making their life extremely difficult to actually make that play.
From the video you can see that most of the time we are in off coverage or we bail out giving the receivers anything they want. Their momentum is always moving backward. You are giving them poor angles to take on the ball. When you go to a cover two you should funnel the WRs INSIDE to your safeties. We seem to do the opposite. We either play off and let the WR run where they want and we squat underneath them or we funnel them OUTSIDE. This has positives and negatives to it as well. If you funnel them outside you are spreading the field. Instead of having he safeties cover from the middle of the field to maybe the numbers you are expecting them to cover from the middle of the field to the sideline. That is the difference between a completed pass and either a kill shot or an interception. If you want to funnel them outside then your safeties need to get wider. If your safeties get wider then you need to protect the middle of the field. This is where the Tampa 2 comes into play. WHen you funnel outside though the CB takes his eyes off of the ball and then he has to relocate it and try to digest the play. Do you think it is easy to jam a receiver, turn away from the play, feel for the receiver behind you with your arm, get your head back to the QB and decide what is going on? Is it a run, Is it a pass? Is there another receiver entering my zone? It is crazy hard. If you funnel inside they CB can always read his keys (the OL to the QB to the other receivers) while sill jamming the WR. You get your hands on number 1 and look to number 2 (the receivers from the sideline is how they are numbered) while still being able to see the QB. The CB should have the best view on the field because their head doesn't need to be on a swivel.
I can go on and on but I feel like I am rambling now.
Disclaimer: I am not saying Fewell is 100% at fault. I am just pointing out some flaws that I see.
This is the fourth year of Fewell. I am praying that the continuity will lead to a defense that can at least finish in the top 20 and give you a shot to go out and win 10 or more games. When you finish 31st, you end up in situations like last year or even 2011-you barely get in or you barely stay out. I really feel like despite all the little plays that could have gone our way that affected games, simply having a 20th or better ranked defense would have given us 2 or 3 more games. You had so little chance of making a stop last year. I don't give a shit who's fault it is, but it has to get better.
There were times when players got flat out beat which happens and is understandable. There were times when players did the right thing but then made a rookie mistake like looking back to the QB in man coverage and then it looks like you are the worst player in the world.
Teams with an inside running threat, like the Redskins and the Ravens, made us pay. You move personnel or call formations to counteract the shitty play in the middle, and you leave other areas open.
Bob Papa always mentions that stat as well on the radio broadcast. He almost never mentions 20 yard gains given up on passes, but primarily uses the 20 yard barometer for running plays. I believe that is because a 20 yard pass play is far more common than is a 20 yard rushing play.
The video was made for the running plays as well. Also one for our sacks if you want to see how the pressure came, along with interceptions.
Giants defense - Runs of 20+ yards - ( New Window )
The light went on at the end of 2011 with those same guys . .
Last year the light was out all year. Fewell will figure it out or we will suffer 2012 again and he will be gone.
Our best hope is that the defense is average and our offense carries us.
He probably was seeing what the Giants saw on the game tape. It struck me too when I reviewed it as well.
I referred to Rolle as "chasing air" in a number of the plays that broke down.
Probably the most glaring play I noticed was the one where it was against New Orleans (14:24 of video) where he was "chasing air" as the receiver Morgan goes for 62 yards.
Deep safety pass coverage with both Brown and Rolle have me concerned this season.
eclipz928 : 1:47 pm
was that he had the luxury of Strahan, Tuck, and Umenyiora all functioning at a high level.
2008: No Strahan. No Umenyiora. 5th-ranked defense.
What you didn't mention was that season Tuck was an All-Pro and Webster played like a borderline one as well. You have to take that into account.
Understated in that season was the play of Fred Robbins and Cofield. I believe Robbins was a Pro-Bowl alternate that season as well.
We can't portray this as Spags turned a bunch of nobodies into a top 5 defense.
Just shoot me an email (carlmart13@gmail.com) and I'll hook you up with the info. I live in Lakeview as well, so we're neighbors already.
Your post doesn't really change anything about the truth of my post.