Tweet
Originally posted by Partial
The Giants "blitz-oriented"? That's kinda a stretch.
I still don't like overdoing the blitzing.
-
I say you misspelled Pittsburgh.
The Giants "blitz-oriented"? That's kinda a stretch.
I still don't like overdoing the blitzing.What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football? -
Agreed, but beyond that, it is very evident to me that the teams that show different fronts/alignments as well as implement creative blitzing schemes are having a good amount of success.Originally posted by ZoolComment
-
I'm not one that buys into one system over the other. You can be successful with a 3-4 (if you have a stout DL and multi-talented LBs), 4-3 with a lot of blitzing (if you have good corners), and a 4-3 without blitzing (if you have a good DL). You can be bad with those systems if you don't have the right mix of players.
Of course, 3-4 teams are going to be on the high end of "blitzing" teams. They only have 3 down linemen, and they are going to blitz one or two LBs on most plays.
BTW, the Redskins blitzed the most out of any team in the NFL in 2006. They went 5-11, and their defense was awful. Remember Bob Slowitz and all of his blitzing? I can imagine you'll find "blitzing" teams at the top of the stats and bottom. Same with "non-blitzing" teams. Cleveland, Jets, and San Fran all played a 3-4 and they were all middle of the pack or worse in defensive stats (and didn't make the playoffs).
I want a DC that can adjust, but I do prefer more and better disguised blitzing than we saw under Sanders. I wouldn't be adverse to the 3-4 defense, but I think their success will be more watered down as more teams switch to a 3-4. It will get harder to find the personnel to make it work with more teams looking for the same qualities in their players.
BTW, Tennessee blitzed the least this year."There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted ThompsonComment
-
"Blitzing" is absolutely not a panacea. I think, ultimately, what we should be hoping for in a new defensive system is the flexibility to blitz (effectively) when appropriate, to show different looks, and to adjust defensive strategy when things aren't working.
Though it was successful last year, there's a sort of inflexibility and small margin for error in the Bates/Sanders system, as we saw this year.</delurk>Comment
-
Kind of a stretch that the Giants are a bltzing team? Spanulo is known for his Jim Johnson style blitzing!!! Calling them anything less than a heavy blitzing team is just crazy talk imo.Originally posted by texaspackerbackerComment
-
Originally posted by packrulz
I had a mild stroke. I meant Jim "Master" Bates, of course, not Fritz.
Bates got fired, well, "retired", after one down year.Comment
-
Lots of folks not understanding football too much here... it's not a blitzing vs. not blitzing...
it's called CREATIVE DEFENSIVE FRONTS
nothing to do with blitzing in and of itself ...
we need to be able to OUT THINK our opponent for once... they are doing something that is working ???? we need a DC that can counter that and shut it down at half time
i am 100% behind mcdermott but i dont think we will get him ... and if we do, he wont be around for long.Comment
-
-
Good article. At this point I am really hoping for McDermott. I think he could use the players we have in to a pretty good defense.Originally posted by PartialGo PACKComment
-
I don't necessarily buy this.At linebacker, only Brandon Chillar and Nick Barnett fit the mold of 3-4 linebackers -- and that's at the two inside 'backer spots. Chillar could also play some weakside. A.J. Hawk wouldn't fit well. Neither would Brady Poppinga."There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted ThompsonComment
-
I don't either. If anything, they don't fit. Inside backers in the 4-3 need to be big, long, and have good width. Out of the 4 main linebackers we use, those are the two smallest (looking, at least) imo.Originally posted by HarveyWallbangersComment
-
"According to one source, Sanders and Nunn stood united in support of the scheme whereas the other coaches to various degrees advocated change.
"Sanders and Nunn wanted to do it the Bates way, that it was tried and true," the source said. "But there was another camp within the staff headed by Moss that didn't like the scheme Sanders was using. There was a lot of bitching and griping. "
interesting read to say the least.Comment
-
ya nteresting read...Originally posted by Partial"According to one source, Sanders and Nunn stood united in support of the scheme whereas the other coaches to various degrees advocated change.
"Sanders and Nunn wanted to do it the Bates way, that it was tried and true," the source said. "But there was another camp within the staff headed by Moss that didn't like the scheme Sanders was using. There was a lot of bitching and griping. "
interesting read to say the least.
i like this one lol
"Kurt Schottenheimer, 59, secondary coach for three years. He and McCarthy served on his brother's staff in Kansas City for six years. Also fired by Sherman (in January 2005), he might be the first assistant ever let go twice by the Packers.Comment
-
If MM was interested in McDermott would he even be able to interview him right now? I know guys like Spagnuolo were getting interviewed last week cause they had the bye. I don't believe McDermott has Assistant Head Coach or anything as one of his titles, so it would be a move up the ladder and the Eagles couldn't block it. Is there a rule, either unwritten or written, about interviewing assistants on teams still in the playoffs? I don't believe it is allowed. Maybe that's why we are not hearing much yet in the way of interviews????Go PACKComment
-
Can't interview assistants of playoff teams until after playoffs are OR if they had a bye week. It's my understanding that Spagnulo could not interview after Saturday, but I could be wrong.
Keith Butler sounds intriguing to me. The linebackers for Pitt always perform very well. Harrison was a back-up just two years ago!Comment
Comment