It seems like no one who wants Fewell fired pays any attention to the basically crappy group of players he was dealt to work with.
Specifically, this defense's strong point was to rush the passer. Well for 2 years running, the front 4 cannot get to the passer. They are not good enough for whatever reason. There goes your defense.
Send a blitz! Right? Name a LB or D-back that can actually get there with any consistency? They don't have any.
With a crappy pass rush and perhaps the worst collection of linebackers in the NFL, no defensive coordinator can succeed at his job. "Changing things up" or whatever isn't going to negate the horrific time of possession mismatch the defense sees weekly.
IMO, a coach should be afforded at least "average" players to game plan with before you fire him. Simply replacing Fewell with some other guy and not addressing the talent level (the real problem) solves nothing.
That int in the KC game this year was like a center fielder back tracking to catch a fly ball. No giant in the tv frame, and 2 KC players, with one back tracking to catch a lazy fly ball. Fucking brutal to watch.
That int in the KC game this year was like a center fielder back tracking to catch a fly ball. No giant in the tv frame, and 2 KC players, with one back tracking to catch a lazy fly ball. Fucking brutal to watch.
Agree again. It's time.
There should be some very intriguing options for the DC position this year with some head coaches like Jim Schwartz, Ron Rivera, and possibly Rex Ryan Leslie Frazier losing their jobs. There are also some talented position coaches that deserve DC jobs.
As much as people bitch about how bad the personnel we have on this team, how the hell can you bitch about how they perform!!!
I'm not saying Fewell is very good..He actually did win here..if he is fired, so be it..I'm not to impressed with myself..But lets not act like he had a world of talent at skill positions or even somewhat mediocre talent..
BTW, how about not having a bazillion turnovers the last 2 years..maybe that might keep some heat of the defense a few moments so they can catch their breath..
So how the hell can a team play good defense when the pass rush is non-existent and the QB has about 8 seconds to throw a pass???..
And to think people want to send a CB in to blitz..You blizt Prince, who the going to cover the WR going free????
Justin Tuck is nothing more than a name now. He's not a good DE anymore. He's average at best. JPP is still working his way back from surgery. We lost Stevie Brown in preseason, we've been without half of our CB's all year, our linebackers are so bad that it took Jon Beason ONE game to look exponentially better than anyone else.
You could put LeBeau on the sidelines, you could put Belichick there.. whoever you want. I guarantee you this defense will not look good.
I'm not attached to Fewell.. if they want to move on, that's fine. But you simply cannot survive this situation as a DC and field an above average DC no matter who you are. The offense has turned the ball over so much more than any other team in football by a MILE.
I think he's a fantastic defensive coach but it'll never happen.
Rex has always had very strong talent on at least one level of his defense. I'd argue that all the Giants have right now is depth at DT. Outside of that, there are no real strengths.
How confident would anyone here be in the Giants trying to play that way with this personnel?
That's what I want. That's we need on this team. Not rush 4 and pray for the best. Ryan's blitz packages are awesome. Just watching it makes me shake my head with the shit he can do. He sucks as a HC but as a DC he has talent.
If he gets fired, we need to hire him. That's a DC you don't let go without pitching him an offer. Even with less talent he will still blitz.
We relied on the front 4 and now we are dead in the water. Fewell isn't creative enough or talented enough as a DC to come up with creative blitz packages that can at least try to get pressure and beat the pass protection.
All you see is a LB blitz and then get absorbed by the OL. The one time someone got home, JW, against Cutler, and Cutler had to throw the ball for an incomplete pass. That was good. We need a lot more of that but he is not creative enough to manufacture pressure.
1. Consistent pressure with a 4 man rush
2. a MLB that has the quicks and the skills to cover the deep/mid middle of the field
and
3. Safeties that are good in zone coverage (don't give up the homerun and take good angles when a short pass is caught)
Why in the world would you even think about running your defense out of a base cover-2?
I would say that the coaches probably expected to have #1, but unless they're watching different games than everyone else, there's no way they think they have #2 and #3- and haven't had them for 4 years.
As I see it- yes, obviously talent plays a role- but you can't expect to be good when you keep trying to put square pegs into round holes.
It makes no sense. Why hasn't the scheme been adjusted to match the talent? That's how you get the most out of the guys you have. That's how players that are JAG can actually look good.
Players aren't just a product of their talent. They are also a product of their system. This goes for ANY player.
And with Fewell, I don't believe the system is getting the most out of the talent that it has (not that the talent is all world by any means).
People automatically look at a defense's success and say 'see, there's a D that is aggressive'. When the personnel and matchups merit it, a good DC is aggressive. When they don't, they have to balance that with enough of a blanket to make sure they don't get burnt by the big play.
I've seen the zone blitz get cursed enough times that I've long lost count, but that one comes courtesy of one of those 'aggressive' DCs, LeBeau. On Sunday against the Saints, Belichick took down the aggressiveness a notch and kept them to a respectable point/yard total.
We blitz plenty, but the blitzes don't come home. It's possible we have poorly designed blitzes, just like it's possible that with our personnel there is no such thing as a well designed blitz.
Again, not trying to prolong Fewell's stay here. I think he's had his moments, but it's time to try something else. It's just that replacing the DC is not going to have some magical transformative effect on the defense, because it's more than just the scheme at this point.
In the past, people ALWAYS complained that Fewell played too much zone and played 10 yards off. This year, he's playing much more man and he's playing a lot more press because he knows the front 4 can't get there. He's trying different things but not much is working. We are seriously lacking the personnel.
It would also help if we could blitz some DB's but we're so thin there now that it's hard to even do that. Hill is a guy who I think can blitz but we're already back to playing Rolle out of position because Ross, Hosley and Webster all haven't been able to play (and Ross is done for the year).
In the past, it's been a little difficult to see that the O has let the team down, but this year it's glaringly obvious. No matter the D, this team is still 0-6.
Fewell may have, and may still, deserved hate, but this year, the Fewell hate is running on memories of years past. Watch, he'll be the scapegoat for the year, and TC/Gilbride will keep their jobs, and next year will be the same inconsistency they've always brought, but we'll have a better record, and everyone will blame Fewell for missed opportunities.
YDS: 5
PTS: 5
2009
YDS: 13
PTS: 30
2010
YDS: 7
PTS: 17
2011
YDS: 27
PTS: 25
2012
YDS: 31
PTS: 12
2013
YDS: 24
PTS: 32
And I'm sorry, if you think three years with rankings like that are enough for Fewell to keep his job, then I don't know what to tell you.
And the argument about turnovers doesn't really hold water. We are still ranked 24th in yards allowed, even with all the interceptions.
You don't think putting the defense on the field 4-5 extra times per game is going to result in more yards and more points given up?
Again. Point me to a defense that has performed at a high level with an offense that led the league in turnovers offensively. I keep asking for one and no one can give it to me. It's nearly impossible to do in this league. Especially the way it is now. You can't turn the ball over like this an expect to win football games.
Who do you realistically want to see replace Fewell if he does get the axe? Spags again?
2012: Philadelphia Eagles - 37 giveaways, 29th in points allowed
2011: Tampa Bay Buccaneers - 40 giveaways, 32nd in points allowed
2010: New York Giants - 42 giveaways, 17th in points allowed
2009: Detroit Lions - 41 giveaways, 32nd in points allowed
2008: San Francisco 49ers - 35 giveaways, 23rd in points allowed
Ironically, it was Perry Fewell's 2010 defense that withstood an offense that led the NFL in giveaways better than any other over the last 5 seasons. But you can see the obvious correlation.
Thanks.
um according to espn stats we were 3rd in takeaways last year yet our defense was horrible . . .
Remember they had Jacobs running plays designed for derrick ward. They had Hixon running plays designed for Plax..This is what most coordinators do.
So if your going to hit Fewell for that, then the same applies the head coach and OC..
And the 2012 Giants gave up less points than more than half the teams in football. So if they were "horrible", so was most of the league.
How many times did we hear from Rolle that our defense was never on the same page (much like how our offense is now)? THat is inexcusable for a team that had so many similar players on the defense and the same DC and HC.
Our third down defense has completely gone to shit. In 2010, we had the best conversion rate in the league at 31.7%. IN 2011, we fell to 17th (38.2%), and we were 30th in 2012 (42.4%) and we are again 30th this season (48.9%).
We have 5 sacks this year. That's good for dead last in the NFL and we haven't even had our bye yet. We have 7 takeaways. That's good for 14th in the NFC and tied for 25th in the NFL. We are tied for 20th with 5 other teams in forced fumbles, tied for 22nd in interceptions, 19th in passes deflected
Furthermore, for years our defense has been terrible at scoring. They don't score defensive touch downs. People can say that defensive scoring is fluky-- and to an extent it is. But compared with what other defenses are doing, the Giants are an embarrassment. The defense seemingly never gets in the end zone. And if it is fluky, you'd think the Giants would luck their way to the top part of the league somehow.
I compiled our ranks in key defensive categories since Fewell took over. Maybe some stats are better than others, and I'm sure there are other key metrics to look at. But there was only so much room to make the chart work and I didn't want to look up any more numbers, ha.
Year---DVOA*-ppg-Pts/drv--3dDwnCv--scks--Tkawy--DefTD----PenYds
2013---24----32---T29-----30-------32----26-----T24***-----T27
2012---16---T12----22-----30-------22-----3-----T20****-----21
2011---19----25----22-----17--------3-----8-----T20*****----23
2010----3----17----T8**----1--------5-----1-----T29******---25
* our weighted Defense rank was worse every season (WEIGHTED DEFENSE is adjusted so that earlier games in the season become gradually less important. It better reflects how the team was playing at the end of the season.)
** with 5 other teams
***with 9 teams, so tied for last
**** with 4 other teams, 8 were worse
***** with 8 other teams, 4 were worse
****** with 3 other teams, so tied for last
Here is what I posted a few weeks ago breaking down defensive scoring. Keep in mind the Giants haven't scored since then.
PaulBlakeTSU : 9/24/2013 7:28 pm : link
have struggled to score touchdowns not created by the offense. Since 2010, when Fewell took over as Defensive Coordinator, the Giants have one pick-six, and 2 fumbles returned for touchdowns. In that time, we also only have one special teams touchdown (Wilson KR)
TD Breakdown by year
2013: 0
2012: 3 (1 INT, 1 FMBL, 1 KR)
2011: 1 FMBL
2010: 0
-------
2009: 4 (2 INT, 1 FMBL, 1 PR)
2008: 3 (2 INT, 1 Other)
Three defensive touchdowns in the 3-plus years that Fewell has been the defensive coordinator of the Giants. For a team that struggles to score TDs in the red zone on offense, and a special teams unit that is more about ball security than big plays, it is made a lot worse that the defense can't put points on the board on their own.
For comparison, in that span, the Seahawks had 18 non-offense touchdowns ( 8 INT, 2 FMBL, 4 KR, and 4 Other). Other is defined as a TD from a blocked kick or missed FG."
I realize that Special teams touchdowns is irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but I think it relates to the entire mentality of the team.
Do you not remember what happened in the 2006 season?
Strahan was limited to 9 games because of the Lisfranc in his foot during the Giants winning streak when they got to 6-2. He came back for the Saints game, got injured again and put on IR.
Tuck only played 6 games that season and also had a Lisfranc injury that put him on IR after the Cowboys game they won in Dallas.
That was also the same game where LaVar Arrington (who the Giants gave a $50 million contract to that offseason) had his breakout night. But then he ruptured his Achilles that night and was out for the season.
Umenyiora missed 5 games in that season with a torn hip.
If you recall, they had a game at home against Chicago (who was 7-1 at the time) and the ends who started where Adrian Awasom and Kiwanuka.
Robbins, Cofield and Kiwanuka (who only cracked the lineup because of the injuries) were the healthy lineman the whole season.
So you had the strength of the team (defensive line) ravished by injuries. Of the 68 (64 + playoffs) games those 4 players could have played, they combined to play in only 26 of them.
The next season, 3 of those 4 players came back and they won the Super Bowl.
Of the the 60 games (16 games each + 4 playoff games) Strahan, Tuck and Umenyiora could have played in that 2007 season, they combined to play in...you guess it, ALL 60.
Robbins and Cofield played in EVERY game that season as well. It was an unbelievable run of good health the Giants have only seen 2 or 3 times in the last 10 years.
That sure as hell made Spags job easier knowing he had those guys in the lineup every single week.
As for Corey Webster....he was benched for poor play in 2007 and replaced by Aaron Ross. He only rejoined the starting lineup after Sam Madison got hurt in either the Washington game the week before or during the Buffalo game where he had the Pick-6.
Why were they bad in 2006?
Their best players were not on the field.
Why were they better in 2007 and to an extent 2008?
The best players who were injured the year before were back on the field and played every game.
The press coverage truthfully seems to be helping, IMO. Also- the Giants are actually stopping the run between the tackles. If the LB's could step up or if the DE's could hold the edge, the run defense would be fantastic, IMO.
GMANinDC- Agree with that 100%, but I thought this thread was about Fewell? KG's offense is the absolute best the Giants have ever had, but I think it is probably time for a change.
This is the blitz composite I created from the SB.
I miss that defense.
We actually had linebackers, too! A legit MIKE in Pierce, a solid OLB in Mitchell..
I freakin wish we still had all of that. Sending pressure when we already had a front 7 that strong was almost a sure-fire way to get to the QB. Now? Not so much.
I miss that defense.
I miss that style of defense I should say. Spags or no spags, I loved the idea of blitzing anyone or everyone. Personnel utilization to disguise coverages was great too. Seeing Ross at safety while dialing up blitzes confused QBs. Also, utilization of our front to the various 43 front alignments was good for gap control against various teams throughout the season.
We seemed to blitzed from all levels. You see we used our front 4, but didn't settle for just them. We sent anyone. All 3 Lbs were fair game as were any secondary player. We mixed and matched from any down and distance from any hash.
That's what I want. So next DC better do that. Just don't rely on the front 4 and call it a day. Create your own pressure and supplement the front 4.
There is no perfect diagnosis that says its Fewell's fault, but do we really think we will miss his talent as a coordinator if he is fired? Does he bring something to the table that is irreplaceable?
I am fairly sure the defense will not be harmed by a fresh face and different looks brought in by a new DC.
There is plenty of blame to go around the entire organization, but to exempt Coughlin or the coaching staff is the height of folly. Anyone who thinks the talent level on this team is worthy of 0-6 is completely out to lunch. The staff has done a lousy job, sticking with players way too long and sticking with an offensive scheme that the league has figured out.
Fewell's defense has been at the very bottom of the league two years in a row!! How is that "not his fault"? People really think this defense has less talent than any other in the NFL? That's nuts.
Whatever DC is brought in, after Fewell, will only be successful if we can shore up the DE, OLB and CB positions.
His own players are coming out and questioning the game plan. The D line wants to see more blitzing.
From my own experience in playing in the defensive backfield, I see things that absolutely make zero sense at all. Some of this could be put on the defensive backfield coach but the coordinator should see this on film and make adjustments. Examples...
1. Corners playing up in the face of the WRs as if they are going to jam but then make ZERO contact. This gives the WR the advantage. We have been burned numerous times this way.
2. Corners giving 8 yard cushions when the offense only needs 3 yards to move the chains.
3. Corners playing man coverage with inside position vs a running QB or a team with a strong running game. A;though this helps take the middle of the field away, it also means they can no longer see the backfield and quickly identify run or see that the QB has escaped and is running with the ball.
4. Blitzes from the defensive backfield are delayed. So, we get zero pressure and we compromised our coverage. When was the last time a DB got a sack under Fewell? exactly....
5. LB's on occasion lined up vs a WR.
I have much more but need to get back to work
But for christs sake, can we stop using ONE metric (yards allowed) as the only freaking way we evaluate a defense? It doesn't work that way. The idea is to keep teams off the scoreboard. The idea is to prevent them from scoring points. The Giants were 12th in points allowed last year. Just like the Super Bowl Champion Baltimore Ravens were. They allowed the exact same number of points. At the end of the day, that matters more than how many yards they've allowed.
If you want to say they give up too many yards, fine. But saying "the defense has been at the bottom of the league 2 years in a row!!" is stupid. They've been at the bottom of the league in that one category. People who use that number as the be-all-end-all always conveniently omit everything else.
The Giants haven't been an elite defense but they also haven't been the worst in football.
The Giants offensively have also now turned the football over more than any other team in the league in 2 of the 4 seasons Fewell has been here. And in 2011, only 6 teams gave the football away more than the Giants. You're insane if you don't think that puts the defense at a major disadvantage.
When did that happen this year?
It's not a great defense. Any given year there's only one or two great defensive teams in the league.
Every team gives up a ton of yards. It's what the NFL wants with their defensive rules adjustments. Every team struggles against the TE, but we seem to cry about that like we're the only team that has this problem. Denver is unquestionably an elite, super bowl contender. They coughed up 500 yards and 48 points to the cowboys, who are honestly a middling team this year with moments of brilliance.
1) have increased the current NYG sack total by 20% (5 to 6)
2) be tied for second on the team and only 0.5 sacks behind the leader Kiwinuka.
The boys aren't playing well no matter what the DC's gameplan is.