for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

MNF: WAS @ DAL

DC Gmen Fan : 10/27/2014 6:31 pm
Ugh I hate having to need a 'skins win but I guess it's necessary tonight.
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 15 16 17 <<Prev | Show All |
RE: RE: you could tell  
B in ALB : 10/28/2014 12:45 am : link
In comment 11944252 BigBlueinChicago said:
Quote:
In comment 11944243 B in ALB said:


Quote:


the Skins did their film and recognized Romo's signature move of spinning oppo play side to avoid the sack.

Meanwhile, the Giants blitz and run like Frank the Tank's Nude Run in Old School without bothering to breakdown their feet, settle their pads and play the tendency. He spins out and makes a play against Fewell's clownshow.

It's child's play really.



That is on the players.

On the Giants 1st and 10 show on MSG, Banks in the "Strategy" segment pointed this out with the film on the Romo spin move when the blitzer is coming and how to allow the pressure to work for you rather than him spinning away and buying time to complete the pass.

Instead, on 2 or 3 occasions, the Giants defender takes the bad angle, Romo spins away and either scrambles or make a play for a first down.

Banks on the broadcast couldn't believe the Giants were screwing this up in Dallas that day.


Uhh. Yeah I know. That's what I said.
Again..  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 12:47 am : link
There is nothing "exotic" about Cover 0.. you show blitz and you either send em or you bluff. Dallas knew they were coming and they simply didn't have enough blockers to compensate.

Which CB's would you even blitz with right now? DRC will probably get leveled. Do you want to take Prince out of coverage? I'm definitely not blitzing Zack Bowman.

Fewell tried to use Demps. Demps whiffed.

I think Rolle is a good blitzer but again.. it's risky. When you have 1 good safety, I don't know how eager you're going to be to send him into the backfield on a pass play.

Spags also had the luxury of a legitimate MIKE. Antonio Pierce was an extremely cerebral player. He was his own DC.

Fewell had one for about 8 games in 4+ years. Goff, Greg Jones... Blackburn.. Herzlich... those were the guys Fewell had to use in the middle most of the time he's been here.
I'm no Jim Haslett fan,  
Exit 172 : 10/28/2014 12:48 am : link
but it's sad that he can scheme so much better than our guy with -- at best -- the same talent (and probably worse).

Can we move on from Fewell, please?
I get that.  
AnishPatel : 10/28/2014 12:49 am : link


It comes down to two different theories on defense. If you're secondary sucks, then you may go with let's bring heat and add things we haven't shown in hopes we can cut down on the time in the pocket and see if we can get turnovers that way. Also, let's limit the time the secondary has to cover by bringing pressure.

Another way of thinking and I think this is Fewell's defensive philosophy, is our secondary is what it is. He doesn't want to give up the home run ball. So we focus on keeping the plays in front of us. We rely on the front 4 to get home, and have good coverage throughout the various passing zones. So the theory is, the QB can't find anyone open and by that time the front 4 gets home. If the QB rushes, our Cbs are playing zone or off man coverage so they can make a play on the ball.

I get that philosophy too. My personal preference is to bring pressure. Both ways can have weaknesses. However, if my defense is simply not talented I'd try to mix it up, and add tendency breakers, but if I am going to lose, I'd bring pressure and burned that way, then sitting back and watching an offense pick apart a zone.

So it depends on what people like. I just dislike the philosophy of this scheme just like I disliked the passing scheme of our previous offensive system. I am damn happy we finally changed schemes.
.  
kepler20 : 10/28/2014 12:52 am : link
couldnt watch the game tonight, but obviously dallas losing is a enormous boon for us wrt keeping the division somewhat open.
Anish  
Four Aces : 10/28/2014 1:02 am : link
Absolutely agree... Fewell's defense doesn't dictate anything. I agree with Reese's comments where he says we need to be more aggressive on both sides of the ball.

Spags defense was fun to watch and very aggressive and able to provide pressure in a number of ways, stunts, corner/safety blitzes, LB A gap blitzes, etc. It was creative and if well-timed very effective.
You have to bring the pressure against a team like the Cowboys  
prdave73 : 10/28/2014 1:02 am : link
who have an extremely talented Oline, you have no other options in imo.. Even if your lacking the talent at LB position, if the front four cannot get to the QB you have to scheme to create more pressure from other options, like from LB's, Safeties, or DB's. You cannot afford to give Romo time to pick you apart at all cost. Even if you play safe like Fewell does you will get burned. Your only option is to design a scheme to create enough pressure to get to Romo, and we all know how bad Romo is when being pressured. The Washington Redskins knew that, they knew they didn't have the secondary so they game planned for it. Hats off.
RE: Again..  
AnishPatel : 10/28/2014 1:13 am : link
In comment 11944267 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
There is nothing "exotic" about Cover 0.. you show blitz and you either send em or you bluff. Dallas knew they were coming and they simply didn't have enough blockers to compensate.

Which CB's would you even blitz with right now? DRC will probably get leveled. Do you want to take Prince out of coverage? I'm definitely not blitzing Zack Bowman.

Fewell tried to use Demps. Demps whiffed.



I think Rolle is a good blitzer but again.. it's risky. When you have 1 good safety, I don't know how eager you're going to be to send him into the backfield on a pass play.

Spags also had the luxury of a legitimate MIKE. Antonio Pierce was an extremely cerebral player. He was his own DC.

Fewell had one for about 8 games in 4+ years. Goff, Greg Jones... Blackburn.. Herzlich... those were the guys Fewell had to use in the middle most of the time he's been here.



Did they knew they were coming? When you come through untouched you usually beat the protection. Spags used to talk about that if I remember correctly. Did the skins do anything different or show something that wasn't seen in previous weeks? I don't know I been busy this season so stick to Giants games and some games here and there.

Depends on the formation. Who do we have out there? Demps whiffed but how about Rolle? If we got home with Michael Johnson, we should be able to coach up someone like Demps. Do we send Rolle often? If not, there you go that's something unexpected offenses can't prepare for because we hardly ever do.

It's risky but if we are going to go down swinging I'd rather mix it up be aggressive side of the spectrum. But that's my preference. On offense, I like this conservative nature of it, and high percentage passing concepts. It all depends. I have ZERO faith in our defense. So my expectations is that if they have a good game, it's a pleasant surprise.

True, we had AP, but the point is he and a game plan when it came to blitzing. What's ours in this system? Just because you are not good at blitzing you stop blitzing.. in a fucking passing league, where the CBs can't do shit without getting flagged? Yeah, good luck with that in this scheme and then factor personnel not being good across the board.

Then you say what? You hope the offense scores on Mon. night. They are a work in progress as well. That's why I have zero expectations this Monday night. If Eli has another good game, I am happy.

He also had guys like Rivers, and JW who have some speed. Send them. You get beat fine. Better than watching the zone get curved up or watching home run balls anyways.

Talent is low on both sides of the ball. At least our scheme on offense is trying to compensate for it. It's the best they can do with the talent they have on offense. You have to figure out something and so right now it's quick passes, high percentage stuff and boner for balance. So even if it's 3rd and 298192381 we will run a draw. Or even if the running game sucks, we are still going to run it.
We are making due with the talent right now.
RE: Anish  
AnishPatel : 10/28/2014 1:19 am : link
In comment 11944282 Four Aces said:
Quote:
Absolutely agree... Fewell's defense doesn't dictate anything. I agree with Reese's comments where he says we need to be more aggressive on both sides of the ball.

Spags defense was fun to watch and very aggressive and able to provide pressure in a number of ways, stunts, corner/safety blitzes, LB A gap blitzes, etc. It was creative and if well-timed very effective.


Yeah, it was fun to watch. Now Arc and Eric are correct when they bring up personnel. They are correct, but you play with the cards dealt. In this care it comes down to what the philosophy of the system is.

Is it conversative, keep everything in front of you, don't give up the deep ball? If so, then you will see more guys in coverage, off man and zone coverage, with just 4 or sometimes 3 guys rushing. I get that theory, hoping your guys cover so well, the pass rush gets home OR causes the QB to make a bad throw resulting in a turnover, which PF's defense is known for. That's fine if people like that kind of defense.

Just like the Gilbride offense, this defense philosophy is not something I like. The only DC I was happy without seeing the guy just based on defensive philosophy was Spags. I liked Jim Johnson as a DC. So that philosophy appealed to me. I disliked Tim Lewis, and Sheridan. Not a fan of Fewell either.

RE: +1, Anish  
blakjedi : 10/28/2014 6:31 am : link
In comment 11944261 SHO'NUFF said:
Quote:
but you're dreaming...we have the same defensive gameplan no matter who we play...scrambling QB or big arm QB. Rush 4, have a few LBs standing around defending nobody and have our DBs 10 yards off.


it feels that way doesnt it? hmmm.

Its a pleasure to read Anish's insight on this board daily.
Romo said that  
blakjedi : 10/28/2014 6:34 am : link
the redksins played a lot of cover 0. it got to the point where he didnt know where the pressure was gonna come from and that usually you make teams pay for that.

unfortunately he usually got hit before he could make em pay.

the whole line just got overloaded from defending against at least 6 defenders on EVERY play.
RE: I'm no Jim Haslett fan,  
Patrick77 : 10/28/2014 7:53 am : link
In comment 11944270 Exit 172 said:
Quote:
but it's sad that he can scheme so much better than our guy with -- at best -- the same talent (and probably worse).

Can we move on from Fewell, please?


It is sad. I can't believe Romo and that offense couldn't counter being shown Cover 0 constantly. You would think witten Escobar, Murray, and Bryant might cut off their routes or be able to outmuscle a DB as romo fires off a pass immediately. Maybe romo would realize he has less blockers than rushers, or they would have played some max protect.

Jim haslett's defense has given up huge point totals playing this type of defense. Teams in the past have had a very easy time exploiting his scheme. The Redskins played their defense last night and it worked. In recent years and games this defense has been blown apart.

I don't know if it was just inspired play and the redskins playing fast or romo and the offense not being able to adjust or gameplan for been attacked all game. The Cowboys offense looked a lot like how the Giants offense did against the Eagles. Only difference is they can actually run the ball.
I am in stitches  
dep026 : 10/28/2014 8:30 am : link
here in people saying the Redskins defense is "fast" and we need more players like Brandon Merriweather and Perry Riley. Holy good god, the Redskins defense is absolutely fuckign atrocious. Kerrigan/Hatcher may be their only two worthwhile players that they have. Their defense sucks.

Why did they have success last night? Haslett designed blitzes that Perry could only dream of coming up with. And this is what pisses me off about the defense of Fewell....

Washington was rushing 7-8 guys and daring Romo to make a mistake. When we blitzed, we would send one random blitzer (sending a total of 5 defenders) into an offense that has 6-7 guys blocking. People could still double team when we blitz where last night there were free rushers, guys gettign 1 on 1 matchups. Dont give me this that the Redskins were "fast" or that their corners played "excellent". People are saying that what they were doing was so bovious and easy to pick up... Um, no they werent easy pickup because Romo looked CLUELESS against their blitzs. He had no clue where guys were coming from. Our blitzes are so obvious that the waterboy can spot them before the snap.

Last night was an instance where Fewell's lack of blitz designed came to fruition. Haslett is no HOF DC, but last night he designed a game plan for his suck ass defense that was successful. And he did it with absolute shit players.

Fewell is out of excuses. The last two weeks, his defense was absolutely destroyed by division rivals.
the funny thing is that this is what Haslett does all the time  
Greg from LI : 10/28/2014 8:31 am : link
And it usually torches him. For some reason, it worked this time, but thinking that this was some ace gameplanning from him is a joke. It's pretty much his base defense.
dep...  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 8:37 am : link
Riley is a good player. If you don't notice that, you're not paying attention.

Also, as mentioned before, Dallas made NO adjustment to this whatsoever which is why it kept working. Callahan did a miserable job last night. You've got to move to max protect when your QB is walking like he just got hit by a freight train and has a bad back but he continued to send 3 and 4 guys on routes to leave the line overmatched.

It's a numbers game. Haslett did nothing "exotic" and he didn't "design" anything fancy. It's Cover 0. You're bringing the house. This is not something the guy drew up in a lab and people can't figure out.

All I said about the Redskins personnel was that they showed the speed to get there. They have guys who can run. Doesn't mean they're all elite players but I think the Giants defense is certainly lacking in speed (mostly at the LB position)
RE: I am in stitches  
Patrick77 : 10/28/2014 8:37 am : link
In comment 11944434 dep026 said:
Quote:


Why did they have success last night? Haslett designed blitzes that Perry could only dream of coming up with. And this is what pisses me off about the defense of Fewell....

Washington was rushing 7-8 guys and daring Romo to make a mistake. When we blitzed, we would send one random blitzer (sending a total of 5 defenders) into an offense that has 6-7 guys blocking. People could still double team when we blitz where last night there were free rushers, guys gettign 1 on 1 matchups. Dont give me this that the Redskins were "fast" or that their corners played "excellent". People are saying that what they were doing was so bovious and easy to pick up... Um, no they werent easy pickup because Romo looked CLUELESS against their blitzs. He had no clue where guys were coming from. Our blitzes are so obvious that the waterboy can spot them before the snap.


The Redskins weren't disgusing the blitzes they showed blitz constantly and blitzed most times. The Cowboys didn't adjust at all that I could see. They almost constantly had a free man running at romo unimpeded. I don't agree that haslett came up with some super cowboy stopping disguised blitz gameplan. I think game tape of his defenses would show this type of scheme and plays in the past. It would also show offenses scoring all over it.
you're overrating Riley  
Greg from LI : 10/28/2014 8:38 am : link
He pops up with an impressive play now and then, but he makes a lot of bad plays too. Tends to overrun things quite a bit.
Garrett handled the blitzing poorly  
Greg from LI : 10/28/2014 8:39 am : link
I have no idea why he didn't go into max protect and rely on his receivers to win battles against the lousy Skins secondary.
RE: dep...  
dep026 : 10/28/2014 8:41 am : link
In comment 11944449 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Riley is a good player. If you don't notice that, you're not paying attention.

Also, as mentioned before, Dallas made NO adjustment to this whatsoever which is why it kept working. Callahan did a miserable job last night. You've got to move to max protect when your QB is walking like he just got hit by a freight train and has a bad back but he continued to send 3 and 4 guys on routes to leave the line overmatched.

It's a numbers game. Haslett did nothing "exotic" and he didn't "design" anything fancy. It's Cover 0. You're bringing the house. This is not something the guy drew up in a lab and people can't figure out.

All I said about the Redskins personnel was that they showed the speed to get there. They have guys who can run. Doesn't mean they're all elite players but I think the Giants defense is certainly lacking in speed (mostly at the LB position)


I have seen Riley play a lot. He's fair. And the only reason why they looked fast was because they were successful in what they did. If Romo throws the ball earlier or even recognized a blitz.... we would be saying, "well their blitzes didnt work because they were too slow and couldnt get to the QB."

Believe it or not..... I am not going to give all the credit to Haslett and their defense. They were gashed on the ground, gave up some big plays to backs/tight ends. Actually, I think Romo was GOD AWFUL even before his injury. He realistically could have had 3-4 INTs, almost lost a fumble. He couldnt read the blitz to save his life (credit Haslett for designing some creative blitzes even if they were jailbreak ones.) I thought Romo cost his team last night and thought it was pure idiocy putting him back in the game.
RE: RE: I am in stitches  
dep026 : 10/28/2014 8:43 am : link
In comment 11944450 Patrick77 said:
Quote:
In comment 11944434 dep026 said:


Quote:




Why did they have success last night? Haslett designed blitzes that Perry could only dream of coming up with. And this is what pisses me off about the defense of Fewell....

Washington was rushing 7-8 guys and daring Romo to make a mistake. When we blitzed, we would send one random blitzer (sending a total of 5 defenders) into an offense that has 6-7 guys blocking. People could still double team when we blitz where last night there were free rushers, guys gettign 1 on 1 matchups. Dont give me this that the Redskins were "fast" or that their corners played "excellent". People are saying that what they were doing was so bovious and easy to pick up... Um, no they werent easy pickup because Romo looked CLUELESS against their blitzs. He had no clue where guys were coming from. Our blitzes are so obvious that the waterboy can spot them before the snap.




The Redskins weren't disgusing the blitzes they showed blitz constantly and blitzed most times. The Cowboys didn't adjust at all that I could see. They almost constantly had a free man running at romo unimpeded. I don't agree that haslett came up with some super cowboy stopping disguised blitz gameplan. I think game tape of his defenses would show this type of scheme and plays in the past. It would also show offenses scoring all over it.


BS. He didnt bring the house every play. He came with some 5-6 blitzes (a couple with Merriweather where he was the only blitzer). And did anyone recognize the 3rd and 3 play in OT. He showed an all out blitz, Romo audibled, and they all back up - ruining the play. Haslett was pretty good last night (and as I said, it helped that Romo was god awful). But to say he didnt design any blitzes is just some lazy analysis.
Maybe...  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 8:44 am : link
But I saw Riley make more plays from the LB position last night than I've seen most of ours make all year. He has good sideline to sideline speed and last night wasn't the first time I've seen him play well.

Again.. not calling the guy an elite JLB but he led that team in tackles last year and is better than you're giving him credit for. He took a pretty big step forward and has become pretty solid in pass coverage. They use him in a bunch of different ways.
RE: Garrett handled the blitzing poorly  
AnishPatel : 10/28/2014 8:45 am : link
In comment 11944456 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
I have no idea why he didn't go into max protect and rely on his receivers to win battles against the lousy Skins secondary.


Ego perhaps. That the offense has been successful to this date, all we need is a little time to make a play and we can win this. So stick with what we are doing. Eventually we can get one on this defense.

Credit the DC for coming up with excellent blitzes.
Speaking of lazy analysis....  
Patrick77 : 10/28/2014 8:46 am : link
You are seeing what you want to see. If you think he designed blitzes just for this game that he had never used before and the Cowboys could not have ever seen I don't know what to tell you.
It's not "lazy analysis"...  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 8:47 am : link
Everyone and their mother saw all the Cover 0 they played last night. They either sent them or bluffed them. As the game wore on, they mostly sent them.

What Haslett did was really not rocket science.

Send more than they can block and someone's going to get a free run at the QB. He knew his secondary wouldn't be able to hold coverages long so he just kept dialing up pressure and Dallas never adjusted.
RE: Speaking of lazy analysis....  
dep026 : 10/28/2014 8:48 am : link
In comment 11944477 Patrick77 said:
Quote:
You are seeing what you want to see. If you think he designed blitzes just for this game that he had never used before and the Cowboys could not have ever seen I don't know what to tell you.


Where did I say that? I saw all out blitzes, I saw 5-6 man pass rush, I saw them fake blitz and confuse the hell out of Romo. Romo himself said he didnt even know where the blitzes were coming from.

Seems to me that is saying that he desgined some pretty good blitzes to me.
But that's what Haslett does all the time  
Greg from LI : 10/28/2014 8:49 am : link
If anything, it makes Garrett's performance that much worse - it's not like Haslett calling a bunch of all-out cover 0 blitzes is a surprise.
RE: It's not  
dep026 : 10/28/2014 8:52 am : link
In comment 11944481 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Everyone and their mother saw all the Cover 0 they played last night. They either sent them or bluffed them. As the game wore on, they mostly sent them.

What Haslett did was really not rocket science.

Send more than they can block and someone's going to get a free run at the QB. He knew his secondary wouldn't be able to hold coverages long so he just kept dialing up pressure and Dallas never adjusted.


He did not bring the house every play last night. Not even close. He had a lot of successful blitzes just sending 5-6 rushers that were desgined really well.

Here is a 5 man rush where blitzed a LB and safety. Worked to perfection. Offense obviously did not pick up on it whatsoever. This is an example of a very good bltiz design, and not just bringing the house.
5 man rush - ( New Window )
I believe Eli  
AnishPatel : 10/28/2014 8:54 am : link
said that when we played against the Eagles on the WFAN. That their defense showed things they have't shown. That's what game planning is. That's the fun part of coaching I enjoyed.

Spags talked about this or there were articles on this when we beat the pats in the SB. That we beat their pass protection. We go over 3,5, and 7 step pass protections and design blitzes that beat it. With our DL and ability to blitz efficiently we fucked Brady up.

These blitzes were damn good. When guys come in untouched it means you came up with a blitz that wasn't accounted for. You beat the protection. We had 1 fucking blitz against Dallas that did that. Demps came in and did that.

In fact we have blitzed on occasion where we beat the protection, however our guys get juked easily by opposing QBs.

Haslett came up with a good game plan and it worked well. Tip your hat to him. Now opposing teams can review this and say. wow, we have much better personnel, so let's use some of these concepts and tailor it to our personnel.
I said he blitzed everyone on every play last night?  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 8:54 am : link
.
That blitz is just an overload to one side.  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 8:57 am : link
Again, it's not rocket science, you're just sending one more than they can account for on that side.

I am sure every DC in this league is familiar with these concepts.

I'd love to see us do that more if I had any faith that our players would actually get to the QB before he identified the rush and hit his hot read
RE: I said he blitzed everyone on every play last night?  
dep026 : 10/28/2014 8:57 am : link
In comment 11944498 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
.


You said they played cover 0 (which the ydid for a lot of the night, but not every play or even close to it.)

You said what Haslett did last night wasnt rocket science.... but you are undercrediting what he did. The video I showed obviously would have been a game changing play if Kerrigan recovers the fumble and it was a great desgined blitz. Rewatch the 3rd and 3 play in OT. He fooled the hell out of Romo who thought it was an all out blitz only for them to back out into something else.

Haslett is no great DC, I agree. But to say he did basically one thing and wasnt rocket science last night is just wrong.
This is the same Redskin defense that we annihilated.  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 8:59 am : link
Where were all of these exotic looks and great schemes against us? Eli made these guys look like a pop warner team.

Seems McAdoo knew exactly how to pick them apart and Callahan couldn't figure it out all night.
Well if it isnt  
dep026 : 10/28/2014 9:00 am : link
rocket science - why did Romo admit he was confused as hell last night? Its ok to give Haslett a little credit for a game plan.

And to say we dont have the talent to do what the Redskins last night is absurd.
RE: That blitz is just an overload to one side.  
AnishPatel : 10/28/2014 9:08 am : link
In comment 11944504 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Again, it's not rocket science, you're just sending one more than they can account for on that side.

I am sure every DC in this league is familiar with these concepts.

I'd love to see us do that more if I had any faith that our players would actually get to the QB before he identified the rush and hit his hot read


Yeah but some have preferences while others don't. Sure you but how? What formation? Do they show that formation during the game? How about if the defense already utilized that blitz in prior games and thus the offense prepares for it?

I am not sure the dynamic among defensive coaches in the game or booth since i was busy doing my stuff. However, also in game adjustments. You ask the defense, are they showing you what we went over in tape? Yes or No?

If no, then let's draw it up on the board. Let's adjust on the fly based on what you guys are saying and the coaches upstairs are saying.

It looks great when it works..  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 9:12 am : link
When it doesn't, not so much.

They got there last night and did a good job, so Haslett looks good. Most other games, when they get burned on these and give up like 35 points.. he doesn't.

He's mostly doing this out of necessity. His DB's aren't very good in coverage for the most part.

Our defensive talent is in different spots than theirs and we run different alignments so it's not as easy as just saying "well, we can do that too" 3-4 blitzes are going to look different than 4-3 blitzes.
RE: Well if it isnt  
Patrick77 : 10/28/2014 9:16 am : link
In comment 11944515 dep026 said:
Quote:
rocket science - why did Romo admit he was confused as hell last night? Its ok to give Haslett a little credit for a game plan.

And to say we dont have the talent to do what the Redskins last night is absurd.


Watching the game last night I personally have no idea what Romo or the offensive linemen thought they were seeing. Romo was constantly audibling and changing things at the line and the Redskins were continuing to get to him before he could find any receivers.

From the TV and the announcers booth everyone could see the Redskins showing pressure on many many plays. They didn't always bring it, but they showed pressure a lot.

Romo was definitely confused and his OC didn't do anything to help him (like keep blockers in or have his backs and TEs chip/check and release every single play). At some point a competent OC would start going to quick-hitting short passes, a lot of runs, screens, and max protect. I can't understand why they played the way they did. IMO Bryant, Witten and Murray could easily beat whoever the Redskins assigned to cover them on a majority of plays if Romo was given some time.

If the Cowboys were bound and determined to play that way, Romo should have just chucked 50/50 passes to Dez every time he was under pressure. The Cowobys game plan sucked.

The Redskins game plan on defense was a Jim Haslett defense and should not have been surprising. That's not to say the blitzes weren't well designed or well executed, just that the Cowboys should not have been surprised by what they saw. This is what Haslett and the Redskins do and usually it doesn't work.
Eagle fans are  
St. Jimmy : 10/28/2014 9:17 am : link
annoyingly giddy about this result this morning.
That was a bad loss.....  
BillKo : 10/28/2014 9:28 am : link
losing at home, to a third string QB when you could have went up 1.5 games in the division.

For the life of me, I can't figure out what Romo was seeing last night.

You get caught on a few early blitzs, ok.

But after that, why weren't they just running go routes with Bryant or their other WRs everytime WASH was selling out with the blitz?? Really weird.......they simply could not adjust which is bizarre considering the talent, and experience, Dallas has.
.  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 9:45 am : link
Marinelli made little to no adjustments against us once we started moving the ball, either. Had we put the ball in Eli's hands a little earlier, that game may have gone differently. I wonder how well coached that team really is.
Bottom line is Haslett had that defense running on all cylinders..  
prdave73 : 10/28/2014 1:17 pm : link
He got that defense to play better then expected and that is the key. That's what a DC does, and right now that is something the Giants are missing with Fewell..
.  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 1:29 pm : link
So Haslett gets a good game out of his defense and all else is forgiven? Where was this "running on all cylinders" when we carved them a new asshole? Or when the Eagles dropped 37 on them?

Good to know. As long as we get one good game out of our defense soon, we can just call it even and give Fewell all the credit.
Arc,  
prdave73 : 10/28/2014 1:43 pm : link
It's not just about one game or Haslett, it's overall. Fewell is not getting it done and hasn't been. You can continue to defend him, but that's just my opinion..
.  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 1:53 pm : link
I'm curious as to what people believe the actual talent level of this defense is right now and where they should be relative to that.

I personally think this collection of talent with injuries factored in are just about average. I don't see many DC's turning this into a top 5 or even top 10 unit. I just don't see how. I think any way you slice it, this defense right now is going to be about average at best.
I'm with arc, but I frame it a little differently  
jcn56 : 10/28/2014 1:58 pm : link
I do think another DC could make this unit better. Do I think there are 10 of them in the NFL already? Nope. Do I think we'd be guaranteed an upgrade with whomever we hire next? Nope.

Fewell is average. So's Haslett, for that matter, and Marinelli. His unit might boast better numbers, but he's about to see better offenses and he just had 20 hung on him by the Redskins led by McCoy. If not for the fact that his offense does a spectacular job of keeping his defense off the field, we'd see their already pedestrian stats turn downhill fast.
RE: .  
Mike in Long Beach : 10/28/2014 1:59 pm : link
In comment 11945028 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
I'm curious as to what people believe the actual talent level of this defense is right now and where they should be relative to that.

I personally think this collection of talent with injuries factored in are just about average. I don't see many DC's turning this into a top 5 or even top 10 unit. I just don't see how. I think any way you slice it, this defense right now is going to be about average at best.


I think we are above average but not by munch. I also think our personnel is being utilized incorrectly. If we don't get a pass rush we are decidedly below average (like any other team) so, most importantly, Ayers and Moore need to take over LDE for Kiwi. I think a lot of good things can start from there and trickle to the back 7.
Arc,  
prdave73 : 10/28/2014 2:02 pm : link
I get what your saying and you have a point, and once again this is just my opinion, but I really feel you even if the Giants went and got all the talent in the world, this defense would still be average at best under Fewell..
RE: .  
BigBlueinChicago : 10/28/2014 2:04 pm : link
In comment 11944987 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
So Haslett gets a good game out of his defense and all else is forgiven? Where was this "running on all cylinders" when we carved them a new asshole? Or when the Eagles dropped 37 on them?

Good to know. As long as we get one good game out of our defense soon, we can just call it even and give Fewell all the credit.


I remember when Haslett was a genius allowing Cruz to complete a sideline 30 yard catch when only :07 were left and the Giants only option was to go to the sideline and get out of bounds before the half.

#imaginative
Also arc, to be fair,  
Mike in Long Beach : 10/28/2014 2:05 pm : link
and I say this without judgment because I've been there...

But I think you're a little dug in on Fewell at this point. I don't see how you can actually think that over the last couple of years he hasn't made a tremendous amount of errors. I never thought he was the right man for the job and I still don't.
RE: Arc,  
arcarsenal : 10/28/2014 2:17 pm : link
In comment 11945054 prdave73 said:
Quote:
I get what your saying and you have a point, and once again this is just my opinion, but I really feel you even if the Giants went and got all the talent in the world, this defense would still be average at best under Fewell..


I don't at all. His defense got healthy in 2011-12 and at that point we actually DID have the talent to be good and we shut down some of the best offenses in the league and won a Super Bowl. I also thought we had pretty solid personnel in 2010 and the results were good.

If Fewell were a defensive mastermind, he'd probably have a head coaching gig. But the man isn't incompetent. He's gotten good results when he's had good personnel. It wasn't a coincidence that the defense looked improved the second Beason and Hill took the places of inferior players. Yes, backup QB's.. I get it. But the defense played well regardless considering how ghastly the offense was and how many awful situations they put them in.
I've never seen arca "dug in" on Fewell..  
Big Blue '56 : 10/28/2014 2:26 pm : link
What I've seen is a reasoned and rather patient poster, willing to take the time in NON-KNEEJERK fashion to simply explain that Fewell is a decent DC who has moments of very good work and moments of not so good work. Since we don't know the calls, whys and the wherefores, we have no idea where the fault lies on any given play..

It's about health and talent, something that some are too stupid to comprehend..Amazing how how LeBeau has become somewhat pedestrian when not surrounded by yearly playmakers he has enjoyed for many,mmany years..Sort of the luxury Spags enjoyed in 2007, once they got in sync..

Arca, those who are reasonably aware of what it takes to run a unit know where you have ALWAYS been coming from
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 15 16 17 <<Prev | Show All |
Back to the Corner