it seems for short term gain he really screwed up his career by leaving the Giants. It appears he has become a pariah around the league in terms of a DC position. Is he still coaching for someone? Why wouldn't we consider bringing him back should PF get fired.?
They're 100% important, though. Look at the percentages of how much more favorable your chances are to win football games when you win the turnover battle. It is huge. To just dismiss it is being naive. Being able to consistently force turnovers in a league that so heavily favors offensive ball movement is a big plus. I would not just write it off as some "eh, whatever" stat.
Quote:
One more thing I will add.. Spags' defenses here did not force nearly as many turnovers as Fewell's. The 2007 and 2008 defenses were 20th and 23rd respectively in TO's forced. Fewell has had multiple top 3-5 units and once again, we are top 5 right now.
TO's aren't everything. Spags scoring defense was ranked 17th in 2007 despite giving up 80 points in the first two games while they figured the D out. They only gave up more than 21 points twice after that including the postseason. In year two they were 5th.
Fewell's scoring D have been ranked 17th, 25th, 12th, 18th and this year so far 17th.
This year the top two scoring defenses Detroit and San Diego are tied for 13th in turnovers. They both have winning records though.
Also, offenses can negatively or positively impact defensive points against numbers. The 2013 Giants were a perfect example. We were routinely put in positions where opposing offenses STARTED drives in FG range because of our penchant for turning the football over multiple times a game. We handed teams 3-4.. sometimes more.. extra drives in nearly every football game. Obviously a defense is going to allow more points when that is the case. TD's that happen against us (and there were many, in the form of pick 6's or PR/KR TD's) without the defense on the field still count as points allowed.. even if the defense didn't give up the points.
Conversely an offense that can continually move the football, (see: SD) will help a defense by being on the field a lot and preventing opposing teams from getting good field position often.
Actually arc, they are giving up the 1st downs earlier now, on 1st & 2nd down.
I agree. I used to think the same thing but he's done well with that over the past few years. The mixup with that I think is how long the D is on the field. In 2010, Fewell's first year, The Giants D was first in opposing TOP per drive. However in year 2, 11th
2012: 32nd
2013: 14th (though I think alot of that has to do with how you mentioned a lot of short field because of the TO's)
2014 so far: 4th though I bet Sunday knocked us down. We'll see how this year plays out.
Quote:
Another big knock has been the defense not getting off the field on 3rd downs (which I definitely agreed was an issue). We are the 3rd best team in football in that regard right now. So he should get a little credit for fixing that issue as well. At least for now.
Actually arc, they are giving up the 1st downs earlier now, on 1st & 2nd down.
The Giants are 15th in 1st downs allowed per game. Seattle is just beneath us at 16, FWIW.. I know everyone think they're the gold standard (they're really not this year)
Eyeball test, right now we look ok against shitty teams and terrible against decent/good teams. That's a problem, has been a problem and unless something changes, will continue to be a problem.
It could have been a different ball game if we could have actually moved the football and put a little pressure on them to have to score. They were never in danger of losing the game. We had 12 first downs TOTAL. We were 2-14 on 3rd downs.
Bad offense lends itself to bad defense.
Eyeball test, right now we look ok against shitty teams and terrible against decent/good teams. That's a problem, has been a problem and unless something changes, will continue to be a problem.
The eyeball test always comes out when the stats don't say what people want it to say. By the way, the Giants Defense held the NFC West leading Cardinals to 13 points over the first three quarters before the game was given away by the offense and special teams. So the only good against bad teams stuff isn't exactly true.
What happened to Spagnuolo is the norm, not the exception. It happened to Belichick and Carroll in their first tours as HC. It came within a few phone calls of happening to Parcells in 1984. The more interesting cases are the few who beat the odds and achieve immediate success, like the Harbaughs and Chip Kelly. If we're lucky, the wheel will turn for Kelly as well.
The eyeball test always comes out when the stats don't say what people want it to say. By the way, the Giants Defense held the NFC West leading Cardinals to 13 points over the first three quarters before the game was given away by the offense and special teams. So the only good against bad teams stuff isn't exactly true.
Football isn't basevball, stats aren't the end all be all. One stat that has been pretty bad for years is scoring against us. It hasn't been good.
Let's be honest, the Cardinals haven't been lighting it up. Our offense lost that game However,no one has had any trouble containing the Cardinals offense this year; they have been putrid.
Funny how ungood you become when you lack the talent you had in one location.
Sorry Joey to disagree, after the way you've revealed yourself personally here I've got nothing but great thoughts about you as a person. But your analysis above is baloney, and if you weren't paying attention to what Spags did overall with that D I don't know what to say.
I'm not going to rip apart each Giant player you mention for their flaws because there were plenty, and anyone who watched the Giants' or Bears' front 7s of the mid 80s would know that the team D Spags coached up to the SB win was not uber-talented. Stray was well on the downside of his illustrious career - to the point that he almost never drew double teams. After Corey Webster (who was great during Spags' time here) most of the DB corps was thin and thinner. And the pressure that vaunted front 7 delivered was a much or more a result of Spags' schemes and well executed blitzes as it was individuals dominating one on one battles.
I call bullshit that a merely average NFL DC could have got that group to dominate the Pats, or several other teams they stifled those playoffs.
And I said it at the time too when many BBIers thought our DL was something akin to the Rams' Fearsome Foursome or Minny's Purple People Eaters. They weren't.
If more people used the same standards for both guys then this argument wouldn't come up as often as it does as it would then be a discussion about relative strengths and flaws
Holding the Eagles to their second-highest point total last weekend was not good D.