Hortons defense was better than this...
-
So why did we still get gouged when our LB'ers were pressing? I can fully understand if our LB'ers were playing well off the line, but even up they were still constantly in the wrong gaps....both of them. And neither of them were anywhere to be found all season on the drawn out sweeps. Only Robertson started to flash through at the end. Did we do something different with him? When I played in a 4-3 as a DE or DT, we always were taught to extend down the line and not let the OL off of us...to only make a play on the ballcarrier if he comes to either side of us. Trying to shed the OL and get upfield immediately created a cutback lane the RB could read. It was the LB'ers job to weave through us and make the play. Hard to imagine much being different in the line play even in a 3-4 as the OLB'ers have to do the same job in that instance as DE's in a 4-3.
As for our scheme, the one I saw almost the whole season is two DL with Kruger and Sheard standing...every now and then Kruger would put his hand down basically becoming the 3rd down lineman. I see your point if we're running 3 DL and still having both Kruger and Sheard out there....that's basically putting two hybrids out there who aren't gonna be that great at coverage so that pulls one of the ILB'ers away. Seems like a terrible scheme then with what we have.
-
So why did we still get gouged when our LB'ers were pressing? I can fully understand if our LB'ers were playing well off the line, but even up they were still constantly in the wrong gaps....both of them. And neither of them were anywhere to be found all season on the drawn out sweeps. Only Robertson started to flash through at the end. Did we do something different with him? When I played in a 4-3 as a DE or DT, we always were taught to extend down the line and not let the OL off of us...to only make a play on the ballcarrier if he comes to either side of us. Trying to shed the OL and get upfield immediately created a cutback lane the RB could read. It was the LB'ers job to weave through us and make the play. Hard to imagine much being different in the line play even in a 3-4 as the OLB'ers have to do the same job in that instance as DE's in a 4-3.
As for our scheme, the one I saw almost the whole season is two DL with Kruger and Sheard standing...every now and then Kruger would put his hand down basically becoming the 3rd down lineman. I see your point if we're running 3 DL and still having both Kruger and Sheard out there....that's basically putting two hybrids out there who aren't gonna be that great at coverage so that pulls one of the ILB'ers away. Seems like a terrible scheme then with what we have.
So why did we still get gouged when our LB'ers were pressing? I can fully understand if our LB'ers were playing well off the line, but even up they were still constantly in the wrong gaps....both of them. And neither of them were anywhere to be found all season on the drawn out sweeps. Only Robertson started to flash through at the end. Did we do something different with him? When I played in a 4-3 as a DE or DT, we always were taught to extend down the line and not let the OL off of us...to only make a play on the ballcarrier if he comes to either side of us. Trying to shed the OL and get upfield immediately created a cutback lane the RB could read. It was the LB'ers job to weave through us and make the play. Hard to imagine much being different in the line play even in a 3-4 as the OLB'ers have to do the same job in that instance as DE's in a 4-3.
As for our scheme, the one I saw almost the whole season is two DL with Kruger and Sheard standing...every now and then Kruger would put his hand down basically becoming the 3rd down lineman. I see your point if we're running 3 DL and still having both Kruger and Sheard out there....that's basically putting two hybrids out there who aren't gonna be that great at coverage so that pulls one of the ILB'ers away. Seems like a terrible scheme then with what we have.
Yeah...I do think, when the line actually worked and the run got turned outside, Kruger and Sheard got burned more often than not. They both are pass rushers before run stoppers....
And I would say the Robertson is average at best. Yeah, he got better through the season, but to my eye, his best is still average.
And Kirksey looks like he'll be better, but he is still a converted(hybrid) outside backer playing in the middle. Not a thick run stopper, but more of a tweener who can cover too(which is what Pettine keeps saying he likes)....
So, in terms of stopping the run......I dont see a prototype backer on this team who will do that.....and I dont see a system that looks for that.
Ultimately....I think the team is committed to this system, so we shouldn't expect changes there. Hopefully, we will get additional line and LB talent to upgrade though.....
-
you got everyone else's opinions and they all disagreed with you. if you can't grasp that the dline injuries hurt us then you can't grasp the basics.
Of course the d line injuries hurt us, but as I've provided we were equally as bad against the run healthy as unhealthy this year. And last year was this d line not "EXACTLY" the same? So SOMETHING changed and it isn't just due to injuries. If you can't grasp that than the basics of football escape you. For the umpteenth time I'm open as to what was done differently this year. What I'm not open to is that it's ALL on the D line as it isn't ALL on the LB'ers. But what I've said from the beginning of the season and what anybody who's played organized football on the defensive side of the ball knows, final accountability for run defense falls on the LB'ers. Last year we were better against the run with the exact same D line but different linebackers. WHY? What, if anything, did we do drastically different with the d line and/or lb'ers. That's the discussion I wanted to have.
Of course the d line injuries hurt us, but as I've provided we were equally as bad against the run healthy as unhealthy this year. And last year was this d line not "EXACTLY" the same? So SOMETHING changed ...
Not "exactly" the same line. It seems small, but it was huge when Pettine switched Taylor and Rubin. Rubin was put at NT, and had a terrible season. Taylor is a perfect fit at 2-gap DE, so the move was justified, but Rubin did not play at the level we needed. I saw 2 major issues on run
First problem was that almost every play Rubin (or anybody else playing NT) was pushed 2-4 yards back and the Gs and C of the opposing team were blocking our linebackers. The reason everybody is putting the lack of run D on the line is because run stuffing STARTS on the line. The NT needs to clog the inside lanes, which Rubin/Kitchen were unable to do. In Pettine's system, the NT is the #1 most important position for run-stopping, and ours were terrible this year.
Second, the "Sam LB" position was a train wreck. Mingo was hurt, and was not making tackles. Not only that, but he was learning his 2nd new position in as many years so he was out of place at times. He did not play aggressive and never seemed to shoot gaps to make plays. It didn't get much better when Sheard was in. He is too bulky and slow to play this spot so many times Kruger would play the "Sam" while Sheard was the "Jack" which was stupid because Sheard has never been great against the run or setting the edge. He has gotten beat to the outside his whole career.
I think our ILBs played well, and Kruger did well, on most occasions. I think we are building a good D, but right now on the roster I think these are the only "good fits" on this front 7 that match the scheme:
Taylor and Hughes as 2-gap DEs
D.Bryant and Winn as 1-gap DTs (And A.Bryant in passing situations)
Dansby as the "Will LB"
Robertson and Kirksey as the "Mike LB"
Kruger as the "Jack LB"
Mingo as the "Sam LB"
That does not give us much depth, and it does not help that we have no NT...
-
Dude the last 26 thru 28 seconds is what kills you...
WSS
PS was there a noticeable difference in the games we lost in the 4th quarter?
-
Dude the last 26 thru 28 seconds is what kills you...
WSS
PS was there a noticeable difference in the games we lost in the 4th quarter?
Dude the last 26 thru 28 seconds is what kills you...
PS was there a noticeable difference in the games we lost in the 4th quarter?
Well....those last seconds weren't so good against the Colts, Ravens and Steelers.....all games we lost with less than 10 seconds left
And our TOP against the Bengals and Panthers was 21 minutes because the O went 3 and out over and over again.......with 40 minutes on the field, the D didn't stand a chance in either of these games......
-
Dude the last 26 thru 28 seconds is what kills you...
PS was there a noticeable difference in the games we lost in the 4th quarter?
Well....those last seconds weren't so good against the Colts, Ravens and Steelers.....all games we lost with less than 10 seconds left
And our TOP against the Bengals and Panthers was 21 minutes because the O went 3 and out over and over again.......with 40 minutes on the field, the D didn't stand a chance in either of these games......
Well....those last seconds weren't so good against the Colts, Ravens and Steelers.....all games we lost with less than 10 seconds left
And our TOP against the Bengals and Panthers was 21 minutes because the O went 3 and out over and over again.......with 40 minutes on the field, the D didn't stand a chance in either of these games......
I agree. That's why you have to run the ball.
WSS
-
Of course the d line injuries hurt us, but as I've provided we were equally as bad against the run healthy as unhealthy this year. And last year was this d line not "EXACTLY" the same? So SOMETHING changed ...
Not "exactly" the same line. It seems small, but it was huge when Pettine switched Taylor and Rubin. Rubin was put at NT, and had a terrible season. Taylor is a perfect fit at 2-gap DE, so the move was justified, but Rubin did not play at the level we needed. I saw 2 major issues on run
First problem was that almost every play Rubin (or anybody else playing NT) was pushed 2-4 yards back and the Gs and C of the opposing team were blocking our linebackers. The reason everybody is putting the lack of run D on the line is because run stuffing STARTS on the line. The NT needs to clog the inside lanes, which Rubin/Kitchen were unable to do. In Pettine's system, the NT is the #1 most important position for run-stopping, and ours were terrible this year.
Second, the "Sam LB" position was a train wreck. Mingo was hurt, and was not making tackles. Not only that, but he was learning his 2nd new position in as many years so he was out of place at times. He did not play aggressive and never seemed to shoot gaps to make plays. It didn't get much better when Sheard was in. He is too bulky and slow to play this spot so many times Kruger would play the "Sam" while Sheard was the "Jack" which was stupid because Sheard has never been great against the run or setting the edge. He has gotten beat to the outside his whole career.
I think our ILBs played well, and Kruger did well, on most occasions. I think we are building a good D, but right now on the roster I think these are the only "good fits" on this front 7 that match the scheme:
Taylor and Hughes as 2-gap DEs
D.Bryant and Winn as 1-gap DTs (And A.Bryant in passing situations)
Dansby as the "Will LB"
Robertson and Kirksey as the "Mike LB"
Kruger as the "Jack LB"
Mingo as the "Sam LB"
That does not give us much depth, and it does not help that we have no NT...
Not "exactly" the same line. It seems small, but it was huge when Pettine switched Taylor and Rubin. Rubin was put at NT, and had a terrible season. Taylor is a perfect fit at 2-gap DE, so the move was justified, but Rubin did not play at the level we needed. I saw 2 major issues on run
First problem was that almost every play Rubin (or anybody else playing NT) was pushed 2-4 yards back and the Gs and C of the opposing team were blocking our linebackers. The reason everybody is putting the lack of run D on the line is because run stuffing STARTS on the line. The NT needs to clog the inside lanes, which Rubin/Kitchen were unable to do. In Pettine's system, the NT is the #1 most important position for run-stopping, and ours were terrible this year.
Second, the "Sam LB" position was a train wreck. Mingo was hurt, and was not making tackles. Not only that, but he was learning his 2nd new position in as many years so he was out of place at times. He did not play aggressive and never seemed to shoot gaps to make plays. It didn't get much better when Sheard was in. He is too bulky and slow to play this spot so many times Kruger would play the "Sam" while Sheard was the "Jack" which was stupid because Sheard has never been great against the run or setting the edge. He has gotten beat to the outside his whole career.
I think our ILBs played well, and Kruger did well, on most occasions. I think we are building a good D, but right now on the roster I think these are the only "good fits" on this front 7 that match the scheme:
Taylor and Hughes as 2-gap DEs
D.Bryant and Winn as 1-gap DTs (And A.Bryant in passing situations)
Dansby as the "Will LB"
Robertson and Kirksey as the "Mike LB"
Kruger as the "Jack LB"
Mingo as the "Sam LB"
That does not give us much depth, and it does not help that we have no NT...
I'll admit that at the beginning of the season I wasn't eyeballing the DL on every play, but it didnt' seem to me like they were getting blown off the line. I would have noticed OL getting downfield untouched on our LB's. It seemed to me in the new scheme that they were not trying to get upfield like they were in Hortons gap scheme...as evidenced by our sack count being lower this year. So it did seem like they were trying to chew up the blockers. I dunno, I'd have to go back and look. But the one thing that I wholeheartedly disagree with you on is the edge setting from both Kruger and Sheard, cause that I did watch and it was something that was in my mind to keep an eye on this year even before the season started. At the beginning of the season nothing, and I do mean nothing, broke to the outside. Both Kruger and Sheard consistently got their man upfield and sat in the bounce lanes. And that was just fine with the other teams cause they just ran off center and guard all game long and it couldn't be stopped. The only times something broke to the outside was when Mingo was in, unfortunately. You're right he's not built for what they asked of him. I actually think he'd make an awesome 4-3 OLB. As the season progressed though you could tell that they were asking the OLB'ers to pinch in and help in the run, which of course resulted in RB's managing to escape interior containment.
This is what upset me so much about our early season run defense. You could blame the DL for letting the RB's get to the 2nd level consistently, I get that...but after that, those long runs are just all on the LB'ers. The whole issue that people had with DQ the previous season is that he was making tackles too far behind the line of scrimmage, well at least he was making those tackles. Our guys just got run right by. These werent' grinding big backs we were facing, those yards that were getting made on us were on a lot of big runs. You could make an argument that if teams were handing the ball off 30-40 times against us and getting those yards that they just ground us down. But how many times at the beginning of the year did teams have near or even over 100 yds by half time? On less than 15 carries. People say it's a passing league and we're set up for that. Fine. I'm even ok with averaging 100 yds or a little more on run defense. But not 150. If this year was cause of our scheme..that scheme has to go I don't care passing league or what. Look at our schedule next year. If Lynch is still in Seattle we're gonna deal with that nightmare plus SF who you know is gonna give Gore/Hyde 20 carries by halftime. It's gonna get ugly next year if we still have the same aw shux attitude toward stopping the run.
So you sound like you really know what you're talking about. What does NE do with their ILB'ers that's different? Those guys are monsters and seem to go out in coverage just fine.
-
No... Your own words say it. You wanted to discuss how many reasons why your conclusion was right. As best I can tell that conclusion was DQ's departure accounted for it a decline, or all except some small slice of Khalil Mack is better than Kirksey.
It never occurred to you someone might disagree with your conclusion let alone your premise... despite the above, awesome display of football prowess.
I saw only one dumbass here...
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
Grasp this... *points to crotch*
I've been beating the LB drum for years... almost since I joined the board. However, anyone who knows the game knows that in run D the primary job of the D-line is to keep the O-line off of the LBs, so they can make plays... especially true of the ILBs. Hard enough for 1st stringers to do let alone guys promoted from the PS due to injury.
As for your thread performance... I stand by my original analysis.
-
Different defenses, different offenses, different players,
foolish to just look at some stats to say Horton's defense was "better"...
renders a lot of stats from before meaningless.
The Browns have a lot better secondary now, so teams try to run more.....
injuries.....stop living in the past.
We'll see the improvements that take place next year.
Fix a few problem areas - and it should be a wild ride next season.
-
Not "exactly" the same line. It seems small, but it was huge when Pettine switched Taylor and Rubin. Rubin was put at NT, and had a terrible season. Taylor is a perfect fit at 2-gap DE, so the move was justified, but Rubin did not play at the level we needed. I saw 2 major issues on run
First problem was that almost every play Rubin (or anybody else playing NT) was pushed 2-4 yards back and the Gs and C of the opposing team were blocking our linebackers. The reason everybody is putting the lack of run D on the line is because run stuffing STARTS on the line. The NT needs to clog the inside lanes, which Rubin/Kitchen were unable to do. In Pettine's system, the NT is the #1 most important position for run-stopping, and ours were terrible this year.
Second, the "Sam LB" position was a train wreck. Mingo was hurt, and was not making tackles. Not only that, but he was learning his 2nd new position in as many years so he was out of place at times. He did not play aggressive and never seemed to shoot gaps to make plays. It didn't get much better when Sheard was in. He is too bulky and slow to play this spot so many times Kruger would play the "Sam" while Sheard was the "Jack" which was stupid because Sheard has never been great against the run or setting the edge. He has gotten beat to the outside his whole career.
I think our ILBs played well, and Kruger did well, on most occasions. I think we are building a good D, but right now on the roster I think these are the only "good fits" on this front 7 that match the scheme:
Taylor and Hughes as 2-gap DEs
D.Bryant and Winn as 1-gap DTs (And A.Bryant in passing situations)
Dansby as the "Will LB"
Robertson and Kirksey as the "Mike LB"
Kruger as the "Jack LB"
Mingo as the "Sam LB"
That does not give us much depth, and it does not help that we have no NT...
I'll admit that at the beginning of the season I wasn't eyeballing the DL on every play, but it didnt' seem to me like they were getting blown off the line. I would have noticed OL getting downfield untouched on our LB's. It seemed to me in the new scheme that they were not trying to get upfield like they were in Hortons gap scheme...as evidenced by our sack count being lower this year. So it did seem like they were trying to chew up the blockers. I dunno, I'd have to go back and look. But the one thing that I wholeheartedly disagree with you on is the edge setting from both Kruger and Sheard, cause that I did watch and it was something that was in my mind to keep an eye on this year even before the season started. At the beginning of the season nothing, and I do mean nothing, broke to the outside. Both Kruger and Sheard consistently got their man upfield and sat in the bounce lanes. And that was just fine with the other teams cause they just ran off center and guard all game long and it couldn't be stopped. The only times something broke to the outside was when Mingo was in, unfortunately. You're right he's not built for what they asked of him. I actually think he'd make an awesome 4-3 OLB. As the season progressed though you could tell that they were asking the OLB'ers to pinch in and help in the run, which of course resulted in RB's managing to escape interior containment.
This is what upset me so much about our early season run defense. You could blame the DL for letting the RB's get to the 2nd level consistently, I get that...but after that, those long runs are just all on the LB'ers. The whole issue that people had with DQ the previous season is that he was making tackles too far behind the line of scrimmage, well at least he was making those tackles. Our guys just got run right by. These werent' grinding big backs we were facing, those yards that were getting made on us were on a lot of big runs. You could make an argument that if teams were handing the ball off 30-40 times against us and getting those yards that they just ground us down. But how many times at the beginning of the year did teams have near or even over 100 yds by half time? On less than 15 carries. People say it's a passing league and we're set up for that. Fine. I'm even ok with averaging 100 yds or a little more on run defense. But not 150. If this year was cause of our scheme..that scheme has to go I don't care passing league or what. Look at our schedule next year. If Lynch is still in Seattle we're gonna deal with that nightmare plus SF who you know is gonna give Gore/Hyde 20 carries by halftime. It's gonna get ugly next year if we still have the same aw shux attitude toward stopping the run.
So you sound like you really know what you're talking about. What does NE do with their ILB'ers that's different? Those guys are monsters and seem to go out in coverage just fine.
I'll admit that at the beginning of the season I wasn't eyeballing the DL on every play, but it didnt' seem to me like they were getting blown off the line....
But the one thing that I wholeheartedly disagree with you on is the edge setting from both Kruger and Sheard, cause that I did watch and it was something that was in my mind to keep an eye on this year even before the season started. At the beginning of the season nothing, and I do mean nothing, broke to the outside. Both Kruger and Sheard consistently got their man upfield and sat in the bounce lanes. And that was just fine with the other teams cause they just ran off center and guard all game long and it couldn't be stopped. The only times something broke to the outside was when Mingo was in
This is what upset me so much about our early season run defense. You could blame the DL for letting the RB's get to the 2nd level consistently, I get that...but after that, those long runs are just all on the LB'ers. The whole issue that people had with DQ the previous season is that he was making tackles too far behind the line of scrimmage, well at least he was making those tackles. Our guys just got run right by. These werent' grinding big backs we were facing, those yards that were getting made on us were on a lot of big runs.
You could make an argument that if teams were handing the ball off 30-40 times against us and getting those yards that they just ground us down. But how many times at the beginning of the year did teams have near or even over 100 yds by half time? On less than 15 carries. People say it's a passing league and we're set up for that. Fine. I'm even ok with averaging 100 yds or a little more on run defense. But not 150. If this year was cause of our scheme..that scheme has to go I don't care passing league or what. Look at our schedule next year. If Lynch is still in Seattle we're gonna deal with that nightmare plus SF who you know is gonna give Gore/Hyde 20 carries by halftime. It's gonna get ugly next year if we still have the same aw shux attitude toward stopping the run.
So you sound like you really know what you're talking about. What does NE do with their ILB'ers that's different? Those guys are monsters and seem to go out in coverage just fine.
If you look at the run stats.....right, left, center.....you will see that most of the yardage was gained to the outside....(Kruger/Sheard/Mingo)....
We only allowed 5 runs of 10+ yards over the middle......BUT we allowed 37 runs of 10+ yards to the outside.....(real numbers, btw)
So, thats more than 7 times as many to the outside as the inside.....so, perception is everythjng except reality....
And I agree with the argument that teams piled on, after they identified our weakness....making it even worse.....yes, we gave up more rushing yards this year...but we also were the "2nd most rushed on" team in the league with 500 attempts against us....which only magnifies the issue
So....based upon the real numbers.....it would appear that the hybrid outside backers failed at a greater rate than the inside backers....
..
-
Not "exactly" the same line. It seems small, but it was huge when Pettine switched Taylor and Rubin. Rubin was put at NT, and had a terrible season. Taylor is a perfect fit at 2-gap DE, so the move was justified, but Rubin did not play at the level we needed. I saw 2 major issues on run
First problem was that almost every play Rubin (or anybody else playing NT) was pushed 2-4 yards back and the Gs and C of the opposing team were blocking our linebackers. The reason everybody is putting the lack of run D on the line is because run stuffing STARTS on the line. The NT needs to clog the inside lanes, which Rubin/Kitchen were unable to do. In Pettine's system, the NT is the #1 most important position for run-stopping, and ours were terrible this year.
Second, the "Sam LB" position was a train wreck. Mingo was hurt, and was not making tackles. Not only that, but he was learning his 2nd new position in as many years so he was out of place at times. He did not play aggressive and never seemed to shoot gaps to make plays. It didn't get much better when Sheard was in. He is too bulky and slow to play this spot so many times Kruger would play the "Sam" while Sheard was the "Jack" which was stupid because Sheard has never been great against the run or setting the edge. He has gotten beat to the outside his whole career.
I think our ILBs played well, and Kruger did well, on most occasions. I think we are building a good D, but right now on the roster I think these are the only "good fits" on this front 7 that match the scheme:
Taylor and Hughes as 2-gap DEs
D.Bryant and Winn as 1-gap DTs (And A.Bryant in passing situations)
Dansby as the "Will LB"
Robertson and Kirksey as the "Mike LB"
Kruger as the "Jack LB"
Mingo as the "Sam LB"
That does not give us much depth, and it does not help that we have no NT...
I'll admit that at the beginning of the season I wasn't eyeballing the DL on every play, but it didnt' seem to me like they were getting blown off the line. I would have noticed OL getting downfield untouched on our LB's. It seemed to me in the new scheme that they were not trying to get upfield like they were in Hortons gap scheme...as evidenced by our sack count being lower this year. So it did seem like they were trying to chew up the blockers. I dunno, I'd have to go back and look. But the one thing that I wholeheartedly disagree with you on is the edge setting from both Kruger and Sheard, cause that I did watch and it was something that was in my mind to keep an eye on this year even before the season started. At the beginning of the season nothing, and I do mean nothing, broke to the outside. Both Kruger and Sheard consistently got their man upfield and sat in the bounce lanes. And that was just fine with the other teams cause they just ran off center and guard all game long and it couldn't be stopped. The only times something broke to the outside was when Mingo was in, unfortunately. You're right he's not built for what they asked of him. I actually think he'd make an awesome 4-3 OLB. As the season progressed though you could tell that they were asking the OLB'ers to pinch in and help in the run, which of course resulted in RB's managing to escape interior containment.
This is what upset me so much about our early season run defense. You could blame the DL for letting the RB's get to the 2nd level consistently, I get that...but after that, those long runs are just all on the LB'ers. The whole issue that people had with DQ the previous season is that he was making tackles too far behind the line of scrimmage, well at least he was making those tackles. Our guys just got run right by. These werent' grinding big backs we were facing, those yards that were getting made on us were on a lot of big runs. You could make an argument that if teams were handing the ball off 30-40 times against us and getting those yards that they just ground us down. But how many times at the beginning of the year did teams have near or even over 100 yds by half time? On less than 15 carries. People say it's a passing league and we're set up for that. Fine. I'm even ok with averaging 100 yds or a little more on run defense. But not 150. If this year was cause of our scheme..that scheme has to go I don't care passing league or what. Look at our schedule next year. If Lynch is still in Seattle we're gonna deal with that nightmare plus SF who you know is gonna give Gore/Hyde 20 carries by halftime. It's gonna get ugly next year if we still have the same aw shux attitude toward stopping the run.
So you sound like you really know what you're talking about. What does NE do with their ILB'ers that's different? Those guys are monsters and seem to go out in coverage just fine.
So you sound like you really know what you're talking about. What does NE do with their ILB'ers that's different? Those guys are monsters and seem to go out in coverage just fine.
New England's DC Matt Patricia runs a 4-3 Under defense, which is slightly different than our 3-4 Over. The main difference is 4 hands-down D-linemen and 3 stand-up linebackers vs the opposite. Just like the 3-4, run-stopping starts with the 2-gap NT - and their defense is 100 times better when Wilfork is healthy and playing that position. The overall size of their front 7 helps as they line up 2- 300+ linemen and 3 260+ DE/OLB-type players. Having 2 DE's to contain the outside, and an extra 270+ OLB (Hightower) allows them to out-man the opposing front 5 basically setting up their ILBs to do some damage. Their Sam and Mike LBs have essentially the same responsibilities as ours. They have to have good size, but the most important quality is playing well in coverage.
We could run our 3-4 over with: Taylor / a new NT / D.Bryant and A.Bryant as the Jack/DE with Kruger in the Sam and that will open things up for Kirksey/Dansby to clean up the middle. That would give us the size up front that NE utilizes.
The problem is, Pettine and O'neil seem to LOVE speed on defense. They would rather push A.Bryant as a lineman and utilize Mingo's athleticism against opposing TEs and RBs instead of putting those responsibilities on Kruger and A.Bryant. It makes us smaller on D, which ultimately creates openings for opposing offenses.
-
Wilfork is, of course, one of the elite space-eaters in the league.
I've always seen Big Phil in that mold and as Mud has cited, our best run D game came during his all too brief, Week 10 return from injury after the D had gotten in sync.
Agree on the speed observation... speed makes sense if the line occupies the opposition's "beef" on run plays. Then hole-filling speed vs. the run is as useful as it is in drop-back coverages.
-
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
Grasp this... *points to crotch*
I've been beating the LB drum for years... almost since I joined the board. However, anyone who knows the game knows that in run D the primary job of the D-line is to keep the O-line off of the LBs, so they can make plays... especially true of the ILBs. Hard enough for 1st stringers to do let alone guys promoted from the PS due to injury.
As for your thread performance... I stand by my original analysis.
anyone who knows the game knows that in run D the primary job of the D-line is to keep the O-line off of the LBs, so they can make plays...
And our d line pretty much did that well enough. I watched our LB'ers go untouched into the wrong gaps time after time after time. And in any case, good lb'ers can shed OL. Our guys would get taken out of the plays by WR's and TE's consistently. Our DL did not press upfield like it did last year under Horton, as evidenced by the sack regression. So they were staying back and holding up blocks. Our LB'ers were just not often in the right place. Why is when Robertson came in at the end of the season, with the same "shitty" DL, he was getting through to the top level and making a lot of plays behind the line of scrimmage?
-
I'll admit that at the beginning of the season I wasn't eyeballing the DL on every play, but it didnt' seem to me like they were getting blown off the line....
But the one thing that I wholeheartedly disagree with you on is the edge setting from both Kruger and Sheard, cause that I did watch and it was something that was in my mind to keep an eye on this year even before the season started. At the beginning of the season nothing, and I do mean nothing, broke to the outside. Both Kruger and Sheard consistently got their man upfield and sat in the bounce lanes. And that was just fine with the other teams cause they just ran off center and guard all game long and it couldn't be stopped. The only times something broke to the outside was when Mingo was in
This is what upset me so much about our early season run defense. You could blame the DL for letting the RB's get to the 2nd level consistently, I get that...but after that, those long runs are just all on the LB'ers. The whole issue that people had with DQ the previous season is that he was making tackles too far behind the line of scrimmage, well at least he was making those tackles. Our guys just got run right by. These werent' grinding big backs we were facing, those yards that were getting made on us were on a lot of big runs.
You could make an argument that if teams were handing the ball off 30-40 times against us and getting those yards that they just ground us down. But how many times at the beginning of the year did teams have near or even over 100 yds by half time? On less than 15 carries. People say it's a passing league and we're set up for that. Fine. I'm even ok with averaging 100 yds or a little more on run defense. But not 150. If this year was cause of our scheme..that scheme has to go I don't care passing league or what. Look at our schedule next year. If Lynch is still in Seattle we're gonna deal with that nightmare plus SF who you know is gonna give Gore/Hyde 20 carries by halftime. It's gonna get ugly next year if we still have the same aw shux attitude toward stopping the run.
So you sound like you really know what you're talking about. What does NE do with their ILB'ers that's different? Those guys are monsters and seem to go out in coverage just fine.
If you look at the run stats.....right, left, center.....you will see that most of the yardage was gained to the outside....(Kruger/Sheard/Mingo)....
We only allowed 5 runs of 10+ yards over the middle......BUT we allowed 37 runs of 10+ yards to the outside.....(real numbers, btw)
So, thats more than 7 times as many to the outside as the inside.....so, perception is everythjng except reality....
And I agree with the argument that teams piled on, after they identified our weakness....making it even worse.....yes, we gave up more rushing yards this year...but we also were the "2nd most rushed on" team in the league with 500 attempts against us....which only magnifies the issue
So....based upon the real numbers.....it would appear that the hybrid outside backers failed at a greater rate than the inside backers....
..
If you look at the run stats.....right, left, center.....you will see that most of the yardage was gained to the outside....(Kruger/Sheard/Mingo)....
We only allowed 5 runs of 10+ yards over the middle......BUT we allowed 37 runs of 10+ yards to the outside.....(real numbers, btw)
So, thats more than 7 times as many to the outside as the inside.....so, perception is everythjng except reality....
And I agree with the argument that teams piled on, after they identified our weakness....making it even worse.....yes, we gave up more rushing yards this year...but we also were the "2nd most rushed on" team in the league with 500 attempts against us....which only magnifies the issue
So....based upon the real numbers.....it would appear that the hybrid outside backers failed at a greater rate than the inside backers....
..
I need to see where you got those numbers and what they mean by "outside". If they're calling off guard runs "outside" than ok. But Kruger and Sheard let nothing break to the outside shoulder of their tackle. Lot's of runs went off guard just to the inside of our OLB'ers and you hope that a good OLB'er can at least get his hands on a runner as he's going by, but technically if that runner did not break containment and was forced inside the edges have done their job. I know for a fact they did cause I rewound almost all of the big runs to see who's fault it was. If our edges were letting everything get outside why did Oneil have them pinching in midway through the season to help clog the middle? See it's this kind of stuff that people who played can pick up on. As soon as I saw Kruger and Sheard trying to start spinning inside off their tackles I knew Oneil was desperate. Those stats you are giving are perhaps soiled by late season performance when our edges were asked to do this.....and yes I then also saw a lot of things breaking outside. But beginning of the season, all of the runs that broke outside were on Mingo which made me facepalm a lot. But if he had a broke AC the whole season I understand...I tried playing through that bullshit too and it's nearly impossible to be an effective tackler nor shed an OL.
-
So you sound like you really know what you're talking about. What does NE do with their ILB'ers that's different? Those guys are monsters and seem to go out in coverage just fine.
New England's DC Matt Patricia runs a 4-3 Under defense, which is slightly different than our 3-4 Over. The main difference is 4 hands-down D-linemen and 3 stand-up linebackers vs the opposite. Just like the 3-4, run-stopping starts with the 2-gap NT - and their defense is 100 times better when Wilfork is healthy and playing that position. The overall size of their front 7 helps as they line up 2- 300+ linemen and 3 260+ DE/OLB-type players. Having 2 DE's to contain the outside, and an extra 270+ OLB (Hightower) allows them to out-man the opposing front 5 basically setting up their ILBs to do some damage. Their Sam and Mike LBs have essentially the same responsibilities as ours. They have to have good size, but the most important quality is playing well in coverage.
We could run our 3-4 over with: Taylor / a new NT / D.Bryant and A.Bryant as the Jack/DE with Kruger in the Sam and that will open things up for Kirksey/Dansby to clean up the middle. That would give us the size up front that NE utilizes.
The problem is, Pettine and O'neil seem to LOVE speed on defense. They would rather push A.Bryant as a lineman and utilize Mingo's athleticism against opposing TEs and RBs instead of putting those responsibilities on Kruger and A.Bryant. It makes us smaller on D, which ultimately creates openings for opposing offenses.
New England's DC Matt Patricia runs a 4-3 Under defense, which is slightly different than our 3-4 Over. The main difference is 4 hands-down D-linemen and 3 stand-up linebackers vs the opposite. Just like the 3-4, run-stopping starts with the 2-gap NT - and their defense is 100 times better when Wilfork is healthy and playing that position. The overall size of their front 7 helps as they line up 2- 300+ linemen and 3 260+ DE/OLB-type players. Having 2 DE's to contain the outside, and an extra 270+ OLB (Hightower) allows them to out-man the opposing front 5 basically setting up their ILBs to do some damage. Their Sam and Mike LBs have essentially the same responsibilities as ours. They have to have good size, but the most important quality is playing well in coverage.
We could run our 3-4 over with: Taylor / a new NT / D.Bryant and A.Bryant as the Jack/DE with Kruger in the Sam and that will open things up for Kirksey/Dansby to clean up the middle. That would give us the size up front that NE utilizes.
The problem is, Pettine and O'neil seem to LOVE speed on defense. They would rather push A.Bryant as a lineman and utilize Mingo's athleticism against opposing TEs and RBs instead of putting those responsibilities on Kruger and A.Bryant. It makes us smaller on D, which ultimately creates openings for opposing offenses.
Oh, I thought NE still ran a 3-4. I think the game I watched that's what they were showing mostly with 3 DL and Ninkovich as the Jack. But playing Kruger as the Sam?
-
anyone who knows the game knows that in run D the primary job of the D-line is to keep the O-line off of the LBs, so they can make plays...
And our d line pretty much did that well enough. I watched our LB'ers go untouched into the wrong gaps time after time after time. And in any case, good lb'ers can shed OL. Our guys would get taken out of the plays by WR's and TE's consistently. Our DL did not press upfield like it did last year under Horton, as evidenced by the sack regression. So they were staying back and holding up blocks. Our LB'ers were just not often in the right place. Why is when Robertson came in at the end of the season, with the same "shitty" DL, he was getting through to the top level and making a lot of plays behind the line of scrimmage?
And our d line pretty much did that well enough.
Sounds "pretty much" like bullshit...
-
And our d line pretty much did that well enough.
Sounds "pretty much" like bullshit...
Sounds "pretty much" like bullshit...
If they're not shooting the gaps upfield that means they're infront of their blockers. The sheer size of some of these guys means the LB'ers come free most of the time even if the lineman is shit. Which our guys weren't. They did what Oneil asked them to do this year and stayed back. Should have been a good year for our LB'ers. Again, account for what Robertson did at the end of the season with an even shittier and depleted D line infront of him....???? Why was he able to get off his own shot?
-
Just read Tom Reed's trilogy on our Defense. Even setting aside his reviews, he references ProFootballFocus ratings for every member of our front seven.
Here's the rating summary...
D-line: Rubin -14.3; Taylor -6.5; D. Bryant -6.5; Winn -7.7; A. Bryant -3.4; Hughes +5.2; Kitchen -2.7; Fua -11.4
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/01/why_season_was_a_mixed_bag_for.html
LBs: Dansby +13.9; Kirksey -3.7; Kruger +9.7; Robertson +2.2; Sheard +8.2
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/01/a_challenging_season_for_the_d.html
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Just read Tom Reed's trilogy on our Defense. Even setting aside his reviews, he references ProFootballFocus ratings for every member of our front seven.
Here's the rating summary...
D-line: Rubin -14.3; Taylor -6.5; D. Bryant -6.5; Winn -7.7; A. Bryant -3.4; Hughes +5.2; Kitchen -2.7; Fua -11.4
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/01/why_season_was_a_mixed_bag_for.html
LBs: Dansby +13.9; Kirksey -3.7; Kruger +9.7; Robertson +2.2; Sheard +8.2
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/01/a_challenging_season_for_the_d.html
Just read Tom Reed's trilogy on our Defense. Even setting aside his reviews, he references ProFootballFocus ratings for every member of our front seven.
Here's the rating summary...
D-line: Rubin -14.3; Taylor -6.5; D. Bryant -6.5; Winn -7.7; A. Bryant -3.4; Hughes +5.2; Kitchen -2.7; Fua -11.4
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/01/why_season_was_a_mixed_bag_for.html
LBs: Dansby +13.9; Kirksey -3.7; Kruger +9.7; Robertson +2.2; Sheard +8.2
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/01/a_challenging_season_for_the_d.html
Well...in the famous words of Mr. Gomer Pyle.....su-prise, su-prise, su-prise.....
-
calling Dansby one of the best ILB's in the league? Did they watch any of our games? He looked lost in the tall weeds most of the 1st half of the season.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login