PDA

View Full Version : Lets talk about the defense


mwill07
01-15-2011, 08:02 AM
The 2010 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/YoJHJ) to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/7D1Au).

TheReverend
01-15-2011, 08:07 AM
I'm from the future and I can confirm that the 2111 defense was historically bad.

Dr. Broncenstein
01-15-2011, 08:11 AM
Part of the problem is that Bailey and Dawkins were approaching 140 years old, and by all accounts dead at the time.

Inkana7
01-15-2011, 08:20 AM
Part of the problem is that Bailey and Dawkins were approaching 140 years old, and by all accounts dead at the time.

Dawkins, God yes, Bailey, no. Dawkins is responsible for a lot of our big plays this year, but the complete and utter lack of passrush is what really did this defense in.

TheReverend
01-15-2011, 08:25 AM
Dawkins, God yes, Bailey, no. Dawkins is responsible for a lot of our big plays this year, but the complete and utter lack of passrush is what really did this defense in.

You should check out this album:

http://animalradio.com/EricStromerMarNL.jpg

Dr. Broncenstein
01-15-2011, 08:35 AM
You should check out this album:

http://animalradio.com/EricStromerMarNL.jpg

Either he's oblivious (my theory) or it's a very sophisticated troll technique.

Inkana7
01-15-2011, 08:35 AM
You should check out this album:

http://animalradio.com/EricStromerMarNL.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2217/2244766883_13ab7293bc.jpg

Mediator12
01-15-2011, 08:36 AM
The 2111 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/YoJHJ) to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/7D1Au).

Really easy answer. They have the worst front seven, they did not play better than their talent level in the front seven, and the one true pass rusher they have in the front seven was hurt in TC and never played a down this year.

The DL has to be addressed and it has to be upgraded. The LB's are all just guys and none of them make the players around them better or can audible to better defensive plays when they are not in a good one. The secondary is only adequate behind that. Injuries and youth hurt last year.

There is some talent there, and there is some youth. Now, they need a scheme, a Coordinator, a staff, FA, and a Draft to address all the problems. They need to find a scheme and stick to it for awhile and they will get better. Having one of the deepest defensive drafts in a decade will sure help.

mwill07
01-15-2011, 08:45 AM
Really easy answer. They have the worst front seven, they did not play better than their talent level in the front seven, and the one true pass rusher they have in the front seven was hurt in TC and never played a down this year.

The DL has to be addressed and it has to be upgraded. The LB's are all just guys and none of them make the players around them better or can audible to better defensive plays when they are not in a good one. The secondary is only adequate behind that. Injuries and youth hurt last year.

There is some talent there, and there is some youth. Now, they need a scheme, a Coordinator, a staff, FA, and a Draft to address all the problems. They need to find a scheme and stick to it for awhile and they will get better. Having one of the deepest defensive drafts in a decade will sure help.

so that's the answer - this front 7 is historically bad? I suppose I could see that - only Ayers and DJ were not discarded by their former team...Still though - I think there's more to it, and that's probably scheme, which falls on Martindale's lap. Simply, he wasn't good enough to mask deficiencies.

It will be very interesting to see how this team performs under Fox (Mora?)

Jesterhole
01-15-2011, 08:46 AM
Oh, the classics...

http://img.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/time-travel-want-advert.jpg

Mediator12
01-15-2011, 09:15 AM
so that's the answer - this front 7 is historically bad? I suppose I could see that - only Ayers and DJ were not discarded by their former team...Still though - I think there's more to it, and that's probably scheme, which falls on Martindale's lap. Simply, he wasn't good enough to mask deficiencies.

It will be very interesting to see how this team performs under Fox (Mora?)

It's actually three things:

1. The talent is below average in the front 7.
2. The talent was injured in the front seven.
3. The guys they were replaced with were not able to execute the scheme because there were so many holes OC's were able to exploit.

This was not a solid Defense to start the year, some players like Jamal williams were not able to conme back to form, some regressed, and some never were able to play at a solid replacement level.

When you have a situation like that, where there are so many holes, it is really impossible to assess the scheme. What you can assess is how well backups could play if starters went down and how well they were coached. Unfortuntely, it is almost impossible for fans to spend the time to break that down as the coaches have done with the game film already.

The new D coordinator is going to have to watch last years film in order to see what kind of scheme these guys can play. Then, the new staff has to assess how each of the previous players would fit into the new Coordinators scheme. Finally, the FO will have to fill the gaps with the players they can acquire in FA or the draft.

It is not very easy and its a long process. However, if it is done right this group can be at least average next year or better. It all depends on if they can learn, buy in, and play the next scheme. This year was just an exercise in futility.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 10:53 AM
so that's the answer - this front 7 is historically bad? I suppose I could see that - only Ayers and DJ were not discarded by their former team...Still though - I think there's more to it, and that's probably scheme, which falls on Martindale's lap. Simply, he wasn't good enough to mask deficiencies.

It will be very interesting to see how this team performs under Fox (Mora?)

Do you recall during the last Chargers game when the commentators were talking about how Turner had told them he believed there were areas that were unsound in Martindale's scheme that could be exploited? Do you know how bad it is when a coach actually comes out and says that? That means there were probably holes in his scheme that mack trucks could be driven through. At that point I no longer had any doubt that a large portion of our problems were the result of poor coaching rather than the players alone. The roster has a lot of issues, but a good coach could probably have had them at 20th in the league at least.

WolfpackGuy
01-15-2011, 11:47 AM
Don't forget the offense taking entire halves off the last two years.

The defense was already suspect enough without being left on the field for long stretches.

enjolras
01-15-2011, 12:14 PM
Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

I don't think it's the best comparison, tho. The 2047 defense was very much weaker in the back, but played much stronger up front. On paper it was a worse defense, but superior coaching really got the best out of them.

I really think the issue was just how poorly they adapted to the addition of the hover-back. You need a linebacker who can move vertically more effectively, and they just didn't have that.

thumpc
01-15-2011, 12:21 PM
Do you recall during the last Chargers game when the commentators were talking about how Turner had told them he believed there were areas that were unsound in Martindale's scheme that could be exploited? Do you know how bad it is when a coach actually comes out and says that? That means there were probably holes in his scheme that mack trucks could be driven through. At that point I no longer had any doubt that a large portion of our problems were the result of poor coaching rather than the players alone. The roster has a lot of issues, but a good coach could probably have had them at 20th in the league at least.
Was it John Lynch calling the game? He was downright exasperated calling one game, saying the LBs never came off zone to pick a player/route to cover when they all dropped back. They gave up an easy score, seemed oblivious, JL broke it down and blamed shoddy preparation, not utilizing obvious keys in the backfield that he discovered while preparing as a game commentator.

Agamemnon
01-15-2011, 12:30 PM
Was it John Lynch calling the game? He was downright exasperated calling one game, saying the LBs never came off zone to pick a player/route to cover when they all dropped back. They gave up an easy score, seemed oblivious, JL broke it down and blamed shoddy preparation, not utilizing obvious keys in the backfield that he discovered while preparing as a game commentator.

No it was someone else. John Lynch clearly wasn't a fan of what was going on with his second team though. I do remember that.

OABB
01-15-2011, 12:46 PM
I don't think it's the best comparison, tho. The 2047 defense was very much weaker in the back, but played much stronger up front. On paper it was a worse defense, but superior coaching really got the best out of them.

I really think the issue was just how poorly they adapted to the addition of the hover-back. You need a linebacker who can move vertically more effectively, and they just didn't have that.

****ing brilliant.

fontaine
01-15-2011, 04:43 PM
What did people expect with practice squad rejects, players that were cut from other teams and over the hill or injured DL?

But that's nothing unique for McDaniels. He tried to do the same thing on offense starting Baptiste and Daniels with a rookie Center.

I can't think of any other coach who completely disregarded the trenches as badly as McDaniels did in just two years here and the guy did it while having more top draft picks than any other team during that time. He was too busy spending luxury picks on a 2nd blocking TE, RB at 12th overall etc etc.

OrangeSe7en
01-15-2011, 04:44 PM
I'm from the future and I can confirm that the 2111 defense was historically bad.

He's from the future.

Rascal
01-15-2011, 05:03 PM
I beginning to think we should switch back to the 4-3.

HILife
01-15-2011, 05:10 PM
The 2111 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/YoJHJ) to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/7D1Au).

The problem is the Josh McDaniels IV does not now how be a GM. He traded away are HoF Long Snapper and Place Kicker. I say FIRE JOSH MCDANIELS!

bombay
01-15-2011, 05:13 PM
The Broncos need to spend their first two picks on a DT and another DL. Fairly and Heyward would work for me, or Fairly and Liugit, or Darious in combination with one of the others.

mwill07
01-15-2011, 05:16 PM
all right jerkos...I just caught the 2111typo...no idea how that happened - I'll chalk that up to fat-finger-syndrome. Now I get why people were making wise-cracks about 2043.

Let's talk more about the 2010 D. I do remember the comment about Norv saying the D was fundamentally unsound...any idea what he was talking about?

HILife
01-15-2011, 05:17 PM
The 2010 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/YoJHJ) to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/7D1Au).

Seriously, what's a 2111 Defense? You name the defense based on how many yards they give up per game?

mwill07
01-15-2011, 05:19 PM
What did people expect with practice squad rejects, players that were cut from other teams and over the hill or injured DL?

But that's nothing unique for McDaniels. He tried to do the same thing on offense starting Baptiste and Daniels with a rookie Center.

I can't think of any other coach who completely disregarded the trenches as badly as McDaniels did in just two years here and the guy did it while having more top draft picks than any other team during that time. He was too busy spending luxury picks on a 2nd blocking TE, RB at 12th overall etc etc.

When looking at the O last year, it was pretty clear that the plan, barring injury, was to start rookies @ C & G, with no clear veterans who could step in if they struggled. It didn't occur to me at the time how reckless that was. Letting Weigmann walk was one of many terrible moves, and I wonder how that went down.

HILife
01-15-2011, 05:21 PM
all right jerkos...I just caught the 2111typo...no idea how that happened - I'll chalk that up to fat-finger-syndrome. Now I get why people were making wise-cracks about 2043.

Let's talk more about the 2010 D. I do remember the comment about Norv saying the D was fundamentally unsound...any idea what he was talking about?

That's a hell of a fat finger. The zero is on the other side of the keyboard.

errand
01-15-2011, 06:28 PM
The 2010 defense was historically bad...statistically, one of the worst since the early 80's. Since they went to a 16 game schedule, there have been only 5 other teams (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/YoJHJ) to allow more points and yards.

Looking at the players though, I'm not sure why: We have two HoF players in the backfield in Dawkins and Bailey, a decent corner opposite Champ in Goodman, a decent nickel in Cox, DJ is not terrible, and obviously some question marks in the DL.

Comparing this defense to the 2008, I would have to think that they would be much better - no Niko, no Boss, better safeties, better DL....On paper, the 2010 D looks to me like it should have been a lot better than the 2008 debacle, but it wasn't.

So - why was the D so bad? I'm having trouble putting my finger on it...The only thing I can come up with is that the pass rush was completely non-existant up until the SD game in week 17, but there have been other defenses that have no rush that weren't quite as bad...16x this decade alone (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny/7D1Au).

[] Opposing QB's having forever to find the open man is why two hall of famers like Dawkins and Bailey and the above average guys playing opposite them couldn't cover anyone....who could?

[] The linebackers while Williams is ok, and the other guys are servicable, none keep DC's up at night .... there's no Ray Lewis or Clay Matthews or Urlacher to be found.

[] The defensive line sucks...plain and simple it nsucks. For about a decade we've been combing the waiver wire to put a band aid on what has been our Achilles heel.

[] Lack of consistent running game and turnover on the OL has caused us to throw more than we'd like, and while the passing game has been the biggest playmakers, it too was not dominant enough to build huge leads.....it generally stalled when opposing teams knew we couldn't run very well and you generally cannot win the clock game by throwing 70% of the time.

The good news is defense is Fox's specialty...the Panthers D has generally been good to pretty good during his time in Carolina. He's also been able to generate a pretty good running game with guys like Steven Davis, Williams and Stewart.

Now that we found our new fearless leader, we need to address what has ailed us the past decade...a suck-ass defensive line that has wasted the best years of guys like Bailey

Boomhauer
01-16-2011, 01:28 AM
...Let's talk more about the 2010 D. I do remember the comment about Norv saying the D was fundamentally unsound...any idea what he was talking about?

Running a 5-2 defense with sub-average DE's (Haggan, Ayers or Hunter) and only 1-of-2 ILBs that belong in the NFL. Looked better once Woodyard came in, but Haggan and Mays are bums.

Our DBs. Cox shouldn't have ever started and McBath is a bust. Squid and Jones should only see the field in emergencies. Dawkins played well in the box, but is too old to cover anymore.

As far as scheme, that was all McD and no suprise a total failure.