Fewell video explaining why the Giants call SAM the Will

the Giants should put to rest.

In comment 11720025 Torrag said:

Quote:

the Giants should put to rest.

Agreed.

They do the same thing with Free Safety and Strong Safety.

for his front 4 personnel used on here before.

The S/SAM/Strong-side and the W/WILL/Weak-side have meaning. If you are going to change how they align based on the DT alignment, then change the names of the OLB to maybe the over-LB and the under-LB.

I guess the Giants' linebackers needed things to be more challenging. It was too easy for them prior to this change.

thanks for posting.

used by different defenses?

Aztec, Warrior, Joker, Viper, Rock, Bandit, Rover, Buck, Whip, Jack, Sting, Snake, Bob, Robber, Cobra... the list goes on.

Not to mention the Maroon Zone.

The Giants are pretty tame.

Free and Strong. In the Giants' system they have different meaning than in other systems, simply.

Red zone/green zone. Well TC wanted to focus on the positive in an area where we were lacking at the time. Simply.

We could call the linebackers Moe, Larry and Curly

what a joke. the giants have been worse inside the 20 since coughlin called it the green zone. he calls it that because he wants to go after TDs yet they get super conservative and run way too often there or throw fades. idk, maybe get more creative there. hopefully Mcadoo will help out there.

As far as the defense, they were 8th in the league last year so i don't really care what confusing system they have. it seemed to work last year.

makes perfect sense to me. It clarifies whether you are talking about defending the end zone (red) or attacking the end zone (green).

that was an incredibly jargonistic explanation, which I imagine turns the crank for a lot of folks here.

If that is 101, they should have an 001

In comment 11720158 Jay in Toronto said:

Quote:

that was an incredibly jargonistic explanation, which I imagine turns the crank for a lot of folks here. If that is 101, they should have an 001

Yeah, sign me up for the 001

.

but it seems plausible -


click - ( New Window )

I agree this is the first time Fewell has ever really opened the window into the defense at all. I assume this is part of a longer video. Somebody should try to track the full version down.

just an FYI, this isn't a new video. It was done a couple of years ago and has been posted several times on BBI. So Perry isn't "opening up" about his defense just now.

Beyond that, the over/under stuff is pretty basic for all NFL defenses.

The confusing part of Perry's defense (to me) is his nomenclature of the weakside/strongside backer positions. I still get e-mails from readers telling me I have it backwards but that's because the press now uses Perry's definitions.

is that regarding how the ends/tackles line up, or their technique?

Sign me up for the 001 as well. No reflection on PF, but that was a bit over my head.

shade technique is discussed here...
Football 101: The Defensive Front Seven - ( New Window )

Makes sense now. Going to have to circle back to that page and read it when I have some time, that's pretty much the 001 I was looking for.

Iforgot what agreat resource that is.

But "Damane Duckett/Jonas Seawright" -- my oh my.

watching it, you can see how a 46 (one with full sized DEs, not the stud lb on TE side, in jargon) could be used as the basis for a

5-0-6

the mike being a weak point vs, for example, RB as receiver and covering middle zone, you replace him with a true free safety

also keep in mind, the Nose may not need 2 be as huge as a 3/4 nose, you can see why


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgtfyYb33kY

to anyone who has even a basic knowledge of football. The d line techniques are football 101. Just goes to show the gulf of knowledge between a football expert and the fans/media that watch the game from the inside.


If you never played the game at a high level. If you never coached the game at all. Then you are not a football expert and never will be until you educate yourself.

This is why most fans don't understand football, because they are ignorant. Ignorance is no excuse.

watch the game from the outside, not the inside.

In comment 11720039 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

for his front 4 personnel used on here before.

I've personally used them dozens of times on this mb and others have as well. The nose tackle and 3 technique are two different positions. I've seen some roster projections where the poster thinks we will keep one NT and four 3 techniques which will never happen. Those terms are oft used on this forum and are common knowledge for anyone who has even a hint of football knowledge.

Try decafe....

your choice, but make it snappy!

another self proclaimed expert.
On the internet, you can be anyone you want to be.

In comment 11723689 lono801 said:

Quote:

Try decafe....

Hoopy the Huddle Hound is Celtic FC's mascot. Ignorance is no excuse.

In comment 11723714 dorgan said:

Quote:

another self proclaimed expert. On the internet, you can be anyone you want to be.

Never said I was an expert. I only stated who isn't an expert. I'm not a novice though, because I've educated myself on the subject and played the game and coached the game. Just said if you haven't played or coached the game then you don't know much about football from just watching it as a fan.

from just watching games and watching ESPN. You have to educate yourself on the subject and be involved in order to have football knowledge. All true.

BBI doesn't discriminate between experts or novices,

we argue with everyone about everything...

In comment 11724950 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

BBI doesn't discriminate between experts or novices, we argue with everyone about everything...

I've noticed that. But surely the informed opinion should be held higher than the ignorant one.

your conscience permits...

At the 3:50 mark in that video, Billick gives an example of moving the TE in motion against the over defensive front. In that example, the "SAM" truly becomes the strong side linebacker after the TE sets.

However, against the under defensive front, if the TE goes in motion, the "WILL" does not change; he is still the "WILL" or the LB that plays the 3-technique.

That is what is confusing about Fewell's LB terminology. I think that is what Billick might be suggesting when he moves the TE in motion. Fewell's terminology makes sense in Billick's TE motion example against the over defensive front. But that's it.

I wish Billick had moved the TE in motion against the under defensive front. In that example, the SAM is no longer the "strong side" LB. I would have liked to have seen the defensive adjustment made in that scenario.