Roster Building vs. Play Scheme...

to compliment scheme.

Bettcher vs Spags?

Coaghlin vs McAdoo vs Shurmur?

Well, the time of year kind of dictates the topic, no?...FA, Draft and 90man roster is now.

Because I know very little about X's and O's. Actually, I know very little about player evaluation.

...the vast majority of fans just like to complain about things regardless of the specific topic.

and filling a roster with players that fit it ... which is exactly what Gettleman is doing

I love X’s and O’s ... Bettcher’s D is going to surprise a lot of people with an overhauled Secondary and players that fit his scheme upfront

You make a decision to go with a certain scheme, likely because the players you currently have are better in it, and then you build your roster to that scheme. It doesn't really make any sense to bring in players who aren't going to be good in the defenses/offenses you are planning to run.

In comment 14444919 PatersonPlank said:

Quote:

You make a decision to go with a certain scheme, likely because the players you currently have are better in it, and then you build your roster to that scheme. It doesn't really make any sense to bring in players who aren't going to be good in the defenses/offenses you are planning to run.

They should be tied together ...

Now we have a GM who actually does it

they certainly couldnt play the Defensive coordinators scheme with the shit they had on the field last year.

When the season starts there'll prob be more talk of scheme. I don't think we really saw what Bettchers scheme is because we didnt have the players

until we see the scheme.

So we talk roster until camp.

In comment 14444957 cjac said:

Quote:

they certainly couldnt play the Defensive coordinators scheme with the shit they had on the field last year. When the season starts there'll prob be more talk of scheme. I don't think we really saw what Bettchers scheme is because we didnt have the players

I've posted several times on this, but his scheme can be boiled down to 4 main points:

1. Strong secondary play; pressman coverage
- man coverage = blitz heavy approach; pressman disrupt route timing
2. Diverse front 7 alignments
- confuse protections, create free rusher(s)
3. Disruptive DL
- occupy double teams, penetration, allow #2 to "get home"
4. Stout run defense
- force teams into 3rd down/passing situations; #1-3 unleashed

I've linked Bettcher's 2015 defensive roster/statistics. You'll notice his top "Edge" was a 35 year old Freeney, with no one posting double digit sacks and only 2 players exceeding 5 sacks.

The point: Strong secondary play + stout run defense + schematic pressure = great defense.

He is not reliant on a dominant edge player, nor is it a coincidence the secondary has been completely overhauled with quality press man coverage/diversity and guys like Hill/Carter/Lawrence added to the front 7.

Bettcher is getting "his guys", and this defense is going to improve dramatically.

Cardinals 2015 defense - ( New Window )

They are related, but I definitely prefer a
X's and O's and scheme and finding the right players which is absolutely critical in the nfl. With the correct scheme, you can find economical value in certain players, which is critical in a salary capped league. Underlying reason why Bellicheat switches between 4-3, 3-4 and hybrids.

DO not understand the X's and O's enough. Also schemes can be tweaked to fit personnel

we are free to discuss personalities.

Actually, if the Giants were a winning team, a discussion of how they were doing it [the x's and o's] would be appropriate. But, because the Giants are losing, we know it is not the scheme that is the issue. The lack of good players is the issue.

that did not detract from its quality.

Season vs Off-season and Draft?

That's how crazy we are

Scheme seems interesting on both sides r now.

We just did roster

So now it's implementation, coaching, communication, effort, ...do the young men get it.

W's and L's, than X's and O's.

In comment 14445394 Marty in Albany said:

Quote:

we are free to discuss personalities. Actually, if the Giants were a winning team, a discussion of how they were doing it [the x's and o's] would be appropriate. But, because the Giants are losing, we know it is not the scheme that is the issue. The lack of good players is the issue.

Good succinct post Marty. You should endeavor to delete half of each post more often?

in retrospect, I failed in presenting the question I wanted answered.

I simply was asking which type of discussion you ENJOY more.

The reasons behind it have to do with the media sources we consume and how they are presented to us, but that is irrelevant to the intent of the thread.

Thanks again.