![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If they had a decent option to log his snaps back in '15, no way he'd of seen the field for at least a month. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Yes, there are some annoying nuances to the scheme here and there. No, that doesn't solve for how we defend power offenses like Pitt or Dallas. But the base dime scheme isn't nearly as flawed as we make it out to be. If we executed the basics we'd be getting much better results right now. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk |
Quote:
Never go full Herm, Andy starts going full Herm it won’t be pretty. If this happens I’m calling Buehler for ideas. |
Just don't go full Pee Roy
|
Quote:
Losing Houston wasn't nearly as devastating because Hali was still a force. I know two things. You win on offense on the shoulders of the QB. You win on defense by getting after the QB. The dime package in the first 3 games wasn't nearly as effective as you make it sound. Our offense put points on the board, putting pressure on the opponent's offense to do the same. Last 4-5 weeks, not so much, and the dime package proved to be what it is. A recipe for giving up big plays and points. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
There's something to be said for how we've frustrated Rivers, and how we frustrated Brady & Wentz in the second half because we've taken away their safety valves. We've seen that this approach this year for some reason has been flawed. I'm ok with that. Because it forces us to try things to fix it. We've identified plenty of solutions in this thread that don't require an overhaul. Fixing 50/50 balls and running base 3-4 against power offenses is the most obvious. Those 2 are huge fixes. We can shadow the #1 WR more, press more, and fix our atrocious 3rd and long prevent. Those are ways we'd significantly improve our defense without adding immediate pressure. The way Cousins and Carr and Wentz chucked up jump balls to contested receivers, we should be #1 in the league in turnovers. I'd like to see more QB pressure too. Perhaps that means sending more. Perhaps it means using Houston more as a pass rusher. I really don't love 3-man rush most of the time. But I don't think immediate pass rush is nearly as important as it's blown out to be here. We've had successful defenses in the past and I think the signature mark is that even good QBs are really frustrated that they have their safety valves taken away. That's not a bad concept to build around. Maybe. Can this team turn into top 5 with a different scheme? Maybe. But I do feel like significant improvements in execution and some small tweaks will also significantly boost our D. |
Quote:
Pressure wins. Period. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
We are not doing anything "interesting" in pass coverage...unless you count playing 20 yards off of the ball on 3rd and 15. |
Quote:
What is the main reason it didn't work against Philly, Washington, and Oakland? Again, it was that jump ball that we defend so shitty. Not talking about wide open deep balls. I'm talking contested jump balls, sometimes where we have two DBs in the area tripping over their feet. So against majority of the teams we've played, has it been scheme or execution? I don't know. Lets fix the execution first and see where that takes us. As I've said before, we played good D against SD, Denver, and Houston. With all the contested 50/50s in those 3 games, average execution knocks a few of those down and probably picks 1 or 2 of those off. And that's off to suggest we run the same coverages every time. In prevent and pond yardage yes we moronically run the same dumb set and that needs to stop. But on other downs there's plenty of variety of coverages. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.