So in the last couple years, it seems to me that the Giants defensive players had a hard time getting off blocks from offensive linemen while trying to tackle ball carriers or rush the quarterback. Was it part of Graham's scheme? Can Cox, Patterson, and the rest teach something other than bull rush?
The answer is simple but maybe not what we want to hear. Imo, it was a combination of lack of players, bad coaching, bad technique, and bad mentality. The last one is not the most important but that alone will change things around. We were a flatfooted defense always taking punches.
Watch Wink's defenses. They remind me of the Jim Johnson defenses on the Eagles. They look like they put less stress on gap control and more stress on penetration. There are positives and negatives to this. Lets use the Rams as an example. With Donald, he shoots his gap. When a player does that, he creates more gaps if his teammates aren't doing the same. There is no wall. People love Donald because of all the plays he makes in the backfield. The problem is that if he misses, it can lead to huge plays and puts a lot of stress on your teammates. With Wink, he doesn't rely on one dominate player. He does a great job of coaching up all of his guys so when he gets penetration, he gets it from his whole team. He loves disruption. And look at his run defenses. They are always at the top of the league. We will see that aggressive mentality from this defense. In return, we will see better results.
Personnel is always the number one thing regardless of coach. We have upgraded our personnel so that will be a plus too. Under Graham, our edges struggled the most of any unit overall. Then we had injuries to Martinez and tried having what's his name replace Tomlinson. It just didn't work out.
Graham, like other recent DCs we've had, tried running a lot of man and quickly switched to a predominantly zone based defense that led to a slow death. There is no other option with Wink. He'll coach them up with man being his base coverage.
Having coached for many years, it is hard to flip a switch during the season. It takes a special group of players to do so. This is why I hated what Judge did with our OL with constantly moving them. He would always say we are cross training all of our players. That may work with vets who know the game and how to prepare and have experience. This doesn't happen with rookies. It is too much with limited practice time. I always hated the positives on Pugh when we drafted him. His number one positive was flexible. Fuck that. If you are a first round OL, you shouldn't be moving around. You should cement a position and others will fill in the gaps behind you. Look at Diehl. He was a 5th round pick that basically played everytbing but C. If I am not mistaken, he went from LG to RT during the season and looked like shit. Then we were putting him at LT after releasing Pettigout. What happened? He was able to handle LT because he had a whole offseason to prepare for one position. Moving young OL around isn't a recipe for success.
Why did I bring up that point? Well, as a DB if you aren't practicing the shit out of man coverage then the odds are that players will struggle. CB is the easiest position on the field mentally and arguably the toughest physically. Players need the reps for many reasons. One main reason is that you can be going up against a DK Metcalf one play and a Tyler Lockett the next play. It becomes extremely difficult. Our DCs like Graham saw these guys getting beat and went with the safe approach of playing mostly zone.
So, what can we expect next year? I am already expecting that we will be giving up a lot of big plays. I expect some games to get out of hand. However, I wouldn't change it fir anything. There will be growing pains for this defense. With these growing pains, however, you will see a lot of great plays as well. But, most, importantly, you will see a defense that will always fight no matter what and with that mentality we will be better for it in the long run.
If the LBs can quickly read their triangle, they should be able to beat and shed in a much more productive way.
I agree about the big plays both positive and negative.
The team will be fun and frustrating early on... Hopefully as the season wears on...more fun
If the LBs can quickly read their triangle, they should be able to beat and shed in a much more productive way.
I agree about the big plays both positive and negative.
The team will be fun and frustrating early on... Hopefully as the season wears on...more fun
Also, I have no clue what Wink actually coaches in terms of his philosophy of stopping the run because he has had so much success at it but also being aggressive up front. I love always going back to the Jim Johnson and Monte Kiffin defenses of the 90s. They were so drastically different but so successful. Even Tampa who primarily played a zone defense had their front 4 being aggressive. Sapp would always say play the run on your way to the QB. They worried about the pass first and reacted to the run. You were able to run on them but they were still one of the best defenses in the league for years. Wink seems to install that mentality with his front 7 but the Ravens are tough to run against. It could be as simple as more men up front than the Bucs would have because of their Tampa 2.
Also, in a T2, the backer that's dropping into the hole can play the run 1st and still get there.
Harry Carson up there too. I'm hoping Blake Martinez is OK, he's very good too.
Here's hoping their rookie DT, DJ Davidson can force double-teams, makes it easier of LBs to shoot gaps and get into the backfield.
If the LBs can quickly read their triangle, they should be able to beat and shed in a much more productive way.
I agree about the big plays both positive and negative.
The team will be fun and frustrating early on... Hopefully as the season wears on...more fun
Based on the Giants.com interviews with the defensive front players, including the NTs, there isn't going to be any 2-gap in this defense.
Modzelewski, Robustelli, Katcavage & Greir would "eat-up" the offensive lines; then Huff would be free to play "heat seeking missile", on his way to whoever had the ball.
Quote:
... the nose is likely going to be a 2Gap player but I would prefer that the other lineman shoot gaps.
If the LBs can quickly read their triangle, they should be able to beat and shed in a much more productive way.
I agree about the big plays both positive and negative.
The team will be fun and frustrating early on... Hopefully as the season wears on...more fun
Also, I have no clue what Wink actually coaches in terms of his philosophy of stopping the run because he has had so much success at it but also being aggressive up front. I love always going back to the Jim Johnson and Monte Kiffin defenses of the 90s. They were so drastically different but so successful. Even Tampa who primarily played a zone defense had their front 4 being aggressive. Sapp would always say play the run on your way to the QB. They worried about the pass first and reacted to the run. You were able to run on them but they were still one of the best defenses in the league for years. Wink seems to install that mentality with his front 7 but the Ravens are tough to run against. It could be as simple as more men up front than the Bucs would have because of their Tampa 2.
My impression of Martindale and what I've read is that he prefers a 46-style defense by bringing as many people as possible to the line of scrimmage, but from a 3-4 base instead of a 4-3 as Ryan did with the Bears and Eagles.
Quote:
... the nose is likely going to be a 2Gap player but I would prefer that the other lineman shoot gaps.
If the LBs can quickly read their triangle, they should be able to beat and shed in a much more productive way.
I agree about the big plays both positive and negative.
The team will be fun and frustrating early on... Hopefully as the season wears on...more fun
Based on the Giants.com interviews with the defensive front players, including the NTs, there isn't going to be any 2-gap in this defense.
I'm looking forward to seeing this team take the field.
Diehl played lots of right and left guard that year. Went back to left guard after we signed McKensie in 2005. Didn't move to left tackle until 2007. He doesn't fit your argument at all as he was one of the guys who could handle multiple positions in his second year in the league.
Diehl played lots of right and left guard that year. Went back to left guard after we signed McKensie in 2005. Didn't move to left tackle until 2007. He doesn't fit your argument at all as he was one of the guys who could handle multiple positions in his second year in the league.
I'm sure my memory isn't perfect. He started 26 games at RT. Diehl himself has talked about moving sides during the season and hiw difficult it is.
Diehl played lots of right and left guard that year. Went back to left guard after we signed McKensie in 2005. Didn't move to left tackle until 2007. He doesn't fit your argument at all as he was one of the guys who could handle multiple positions in his second year in the league.
It was almost 20 years ago but I remember him struggling from the left side to the right side. Even O'Hara pointed it out in the video below. Diehl had experience all over the place and changing positions mid year isn't easy at all. That is my point.
Starts a little after 18:00 - ( New Window )
That is not the way you want to do things (IMO). If you are playing zone, the pass rush should be aggressive because the coverage is off, facing the QB and able to react if the QB escapes.
In man, it makes sense to have a controlled, pocket contain rush with the DBs back turned.
A zone D with a pocket contain rush is just too g0dd@amn easy to beat. It was obviously determined that strategy gave the Giants the best chance to win, and I understand Graham's logic for using it but I'm glad its gone.
That is not the way you want to do things (IMO). If you are playing zone, the pass rush should be aggressive because the coverage is off, facing the QB and able to react if the QB escapes.
In man, it makes sense to have a controlled, pocket contain rush with the DBs back turned.
A zone D with a pocket contain rush is just too g0dd@amn easy to beat. It was obviously determined that strategy gave the Giants the best chance to win, and I understand Graham's logic for using it but I'm glad its gone.
What was Graham's logic for it? It certainly didn't make things easier for us and even cost us a couple games.
That is not the way you want to do things (IMO). If you are playing zone, the pass rush should be aggressive because the coverage is off, facing the QB and able to react if the QB escapes.
In man, it makes sense to have a controlled, pocket contain rush with the DBs back turned.
A zone D with a pocket contain rush is just too g0dd@amn easy to beat. It was obviously determined that strategy gave the Giants the best chance to win, and I understand Graham's logic for using it but I'm glad its gone.
If that's the case, was the contain rush possibly a remnant of Graham's man coverage schemes, except he put in the wrong combo?