Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Defensive Review: Giants

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-16-2009, 11:12 PM   #1
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Defensive Review: Giants

My shortest game note of either side of the ball was in response to watching Ahmad Bradshaw lose three yards on a first down run in the third quarter. Here's how I described what I saw in my spreadsheet:

"Haynesworth is a god damn monster"

That's really all that needed to be said about the Redskins $100 (actually 48) million dollar man, who took the Center and the fullback in either arm, and exploded into the running back. As for the rest of the unit, well, a lot more words would be necessary.

There were a lot of great individuals plays made by the Redskins defense in this game, but perhaps that's the problem. Haynesworth, Andre Carter, Brian Orakpo, London Fletcher, LaRon Landry, and Carlos Rogers are all great individual talents, but the team pass defense just isn't there.

What is there this year that was not last year is the pass pressure. The Redskins forced Eli Manning into two or three mistake throws, and they did it by getting pressure on the quarterback. The two best edge pass rushers on the Redskins are Lorenzo Alexander and Andre Carter, but Chris Wilson and Orakpo are also threats to the quarterback's health. Some insiders I have talked to are disappointed that the Redskins pass rush isn't more consistently effective, but I think that's just the nature of pass rush. We think of a pass rush such as the Giants in Super Bowl 42 just pounding the quarterback consistently, but there's a reason that there isn't a more recent example of "consistent" pass rush.

What a pass rush can do is create big plays, such as sacks and fumbles. The Giants might have won this game because of a fumble. And while the Redskins might have gotten away with a facemask, they hurried Eli Manning 6 times, sacked him twice, and hit him another time. 3 quarterback knockdowns is perhaps a bit underwhelming over the course of a game, but add to that six hurries and the flurry of Eli mistakes that came with it, and the pass rush was probably adequate to win the game.

What wasn't adequate was the Redskins coverage against secondary and tertiary Giant receivers, and the run defense of Ahmad Bradshaw. Phillip Daniels is one of my favorite Redskins, but the guy just looked old out there. He was a non-factor against the pass and a liability against the run, and looked like a 36 year old who hasn't played since he was 34. Brian Orakpo makes a lot of questionable reads against the run; he just doesn't look comfortable with flow coming at him, he'd much rather chase the play (all the plays he made in this game were in pursuit in the backfield). Rocky McIntosh, who didn't have a particularly bad game, overran two or three plays which a back like Bradshaw can make him pay for (and did).

Outside of Daniels, the Redskins defensive line played exceptionally well. Alexander, Carter, and Haynesworth were outstanding. Griffin looked like a young version of himself when he was destroying Chris Snee, a match-up Snee usually wins. Jeremy Jarmon played well when he got snaps. I did not see Anthony Montgomery on the field in this game, and he has historically dominated against the Giants. Golston was adequate, and excellent on the sack he got that turned into a holding call against Rich Seubert. I thought Chris Wilson played very well in the multiple looks we use him for.

The Giants' plan in the passing game was obvious by who they targeted*:

  • Carlos Rogers: 3 targets
  • DeAngelo Hall: 7 targets
  • Fred Smoot: 4 targets
The plan: if Smoot is in the game, throw at him. If Smoot is not in the game, throw at Hall or to Kevin Boss against Chris Horton. If you have to go at Carlos Rogers, try a double move.

Horton was his usual in-the-opponents-backfield self against the run, but he's still very questionable in coverage. In the second half, Reed Doughty played on every defensive play, with Horton only in during 3 safety formations. Doughty isn't as unbelievable in run support as Horton is, but he's better in coverage, and is as a good blitzer at the line.

Blitzin' Greg Blache

With Doughty back in the lineup, the Redskins are a much better team when the blitz. I charted 13 separate Redskin blitzes. 6 of these resulted in successful plays for the offense so it's hard to say the Redskins are better off blitzing than rushing four. I do think if Blache can generate additional pressure with the occasional blitz, it's worth doing, but the all-out blitzes have to stop.

Last season against Baltimore, the only touchdown drive of the second half for the Ravens happened because we inexplicably sent an 8-man all out blitz which somehow did not get to Joe Flacco. Blache scapegoated Carlos Rogers for the touchdown, ignoring that Rogers had been doing just fine against Derrick Mason all game before his double safety blitz failed to get any sort of pressure on Joe Flacco.

The only score of the day for the Giants on Sunday came on an equally inexcusable blitz. The Redskins were in the nickel, and blitzed both linebackers and both safeties at Eli Manning. Manning knew it was coming, so he got the ball out to Mario Manningham quickly. The blitz put Fred Smoot in an awful situation: having to come up and make an aggressive open field tackle with no pursuit to come before the first down would be reached. Smoot's tackle attempt only compounded the problem as he basically tried to faceplant at Manningham's feet in the hopes that he would trip somehow, but Smoot isn't going to make that play very often. Manningham went in for a touchdown after DeAngelo Hall came over and tried to think-push him out of bounds.

The play encapsulated the potential struggles of the post-Springs Redskin defense: Blache ran a crazy blitz because he was getting burned on third down too much, and because it's easier than playing a rookie DB. Fred Smoot is a walking mismatch on the field, and well, DeAngelo Hall is getting his $27 million whether Manningham scores on that play or not. Of course, if Springs had been banged up in the preseason, nothing would have been different. Maybe Byron Westbrook can play some defense. It's a longshot, but he can't be any worse than Smoot.

The Redskins also have a schematic issue with their seven and eight man blitzes: the fact that they don't have any bump and run corners outside of Rogers anymore means that the receivers get a clean release on more or less every play. It kind of defeats the purpose of sending a bunch of guys at the quarterback. On the third and goal play for the Redskins offense that preceded the fake FG touchdown, the Giants ran a seven man blitz in which they matched up in an aggressive man to man scheme and hit the four Redskins receivers and dared someone to get behind the coverage. The blitz got a free shot on Jason Campbell because there were 6 blockers and 7 rushers and the corners knew they only had to bump and run for about 5 or 6 yards, and then the ball would come out.

When the Redskins run these blitzes, they run no sort of aggressive coverage. Despite the pack of wolves coming at the quarterback, he's really not under any sort of specific duress: he can throw the ball whenever he wants to. The result is obvious: the Redskins never generate a hit on QB because professional receivers are smart enough to adjust their routes and take 10-12 yards against this defense, and they even have the time to run double moves if the QB is willing to stand in and take a hit.

The bottom line: the eight man blitz as the Redskins currently execute it is not a viable defense.

The Final Word

The Redskins defense is such a dominant unit up front that it's hard to imagine them giving a yard to any team that needs it this year, but I can see them having an issue with fast backs this year. The poor coverage is a result of questionable cornerback depth. For the Redskins to be a threat against the quarterbacks who will populate the playoff field in the NFC, they will need an unexpected development from at least one of their current 4-6 CBs on the current depth chart. I really do not see Fred Smoot making it through the season on the roster.

In the immediate, the Redskins can use three safeties to help limit rushing attacks and provide good zone coverage to limit damage as the defensive line creates havoc and forces mistakes and turnovers. This can work. It just can't work in the way the Redskins are currently executing.

Here are the macro-level defensive numbers for the game:

  • 5.44 yards per play
  • 39% success rate against
  • 4 defensive penalties
  • 2 turnovers forced
  • 9 successful runs against
The difference between the Redskins and Giants in this game is not that the Giants were any better. It's that the Giants ran more plays, and when both quarterbacks fumbled: the Redskins fell on the ball for no return and the Giants returned the fumble for a touchdown. That seems like more good fortune than great football.

The game really didn't even come down to third down conversions, where the Redskins offense went 5/12 (41.7%), and the Giants offense went 6/12 (50%). In fact, once you take away the two drives to end the halves, the Giants had 8 total drives to the Redskins' 10. The Giants got to run 15 more plays than the Redskins at about the same rate of efficiency because they averaged 8 plays per drive to 5 plays per drive for the Redskins. They did that by converting twice as many first downs, seeing fewer third downs, and they did that by playing well on all downs.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 09-17-2009, 01:05 AM   #2
Playmaker
 
Slingin Sammy 33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,341
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
What wasn't adequate was the Redskins coverage against secondary and tertiary Giant receivers.....
While D. Hall and Smoot look bad this is a scheme issue IMO.

Quote:
The plan: if Smoot is in the game, throw at him.
Problem with Smoot is, at this point he's a Cover-2/Tampa-2 Zone CB only, forget man coverage, he's awful. He's fairly decent in run support. The way Blache sets his D, it doesn't matter if Smoot subs in when they run C2 Zone. You can read it pre-snap from a mile away anyway.

Quote:
Blitzin' Greg Blache
With Doughty back in the lineup, the Redskins are a much better team when the blitz. I charted 13 separate Redskin blitzes. 6 of these resulted in successful plays for the offense so it's hard to say the Redskins are better off blitzing than rushing four. I do think if Blache can generate additional pressure with the occasional blitz, it's worth doing, but the all-out blitzes have to stop.
Again a scheme issue. In the first quarter the Skins came out in either Cover 1 or Cover-2 Zone. Very easy pre-read for Manning. If Landry is 20 yds deep middle it's C-1. At about 11 min left in the 2nd Qtr Blache switched to a Cover 3 base look. From that look it was harder to read the pass coverage and this forced Manning to question his pre-reads a little more. Still pre-reading C-3 Zone vs. C-1 Man against the Skins D is not as hard as getting a good pre-read on the Giants' D.

Quote:
The only score of the day for the Giants on Sunday came on an equally inexcusable blitz. The Redskins were in the nickel, and blitzed both linebackers and both safeties at Eli Manning. Manning knew it was coming, so he got the ball out to Mario Manningham quickly. The blitz put Fred Smoot in an awful situation: having to come up and make an aggressive open field tackle with no pursuit to come before the first down would be reached. Smoot's tackle attempt only compounded the problem as he basically tried to faceplant at Manningham's feet in the hopes that he would trip somehow, but Smoot isn't going to make that play very often. Manningham went in for a touchdown after DeAngelo Hall came over and tried to think-push him out of bounds.
No problem with a Cover 0 blitz. All good Ds take this risk sometimes....problem is Blache's D is very predictable/easy to read and it was a simple audible for Manning. However there is NO EXCUSE for a CB who can't come up on a WR quick screen and grab some jersey to hold onto until help arrives. Hall should be fined for his effort on that play. If he wants to play flag football there are plenty of leagues in VA he can play in.

Quote:
The Redskins also have a schematic issue with their seven and eight man blitzes: the fact that they don't have any bump and run corners outside of Rogers anymore means that the receivers get a clean release on more or less every play......
I thought Hall was supposed to be a bump-n-run shutdown corner? My mistake. What did we pay $ 27M + for? Landry can't play man coverage? Hell, give Barnes or Tryon a shot.

Quote:
The poor coverage is a result of questionable cornerback depth. For the Redskins to be a threat against the quarterbacks who will populate the playoff field in the NFC, they will need an unexpected development from at least one of their current 4-6 CBs on the current depth chart.
My belief is that the CB talent, while not spectacular is adequate. The problem is Blache playing a "bend don't break" style of D. I only saw 6 plays where a real blitz was called. I'm not including run blitzes because often in Man coverage the LB/DB reads his man blocking or reads run and flys into run support making it look like a run blitz.
Blache is not schemeing his D at all. He sits back in the Cover 1 Man or Cover 2 Zone and hopes his personnel are just better than the opponent. That doesn't work and he backs off into the Cover 3 scheme we saw on Sun. Again, the Cover 3 coverage was harder to read but still not tremendously difficult for pros who have full field film and hours to study. Just looking at the Eagles and Giants D you see defenders moving in and out of gaps and feinting blitz then dropping to coverage. What happened to a Zone Blitz here and there? The FO spent a great deal of money and we have some playmakers now, Blache needs to be much more creative in his schemes and efforts to confuse to opposing QB.
How hard is it to put Orakpo in position to get after the QB at not worry about coverage, how setting up overload blitzes and Zone Blites, I didn't see much of that on Sunday.

A few other thoughts:
- D. Hall: Outside of the INT (which Landry created, he was in Zone and happened to benefit) Hall played a crappy game. I counted three terrible efforts at tackles, the penalty on the Punt Return, getting abused by Smith, and being manhandled in the run game by Nicks & Co. He better step it up or we're looking at Lloyd/Arch part 2.
- Our CBs must jam the WRs, this 8-10 yard cushion and giving WRs a free release doesn't work.
-When Landry comes into the box, he blitzes, period. This isn't a hard read to pick up on.

Keep in mind without the 2 close stops the D made inside the 10 (yes they did a good job inside the 10 but we won't be so lucky if our opponents are consistently inside our 10) and the fake FG, the score could've very easily been 28-0 at half and 34-10 for the game.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.
Slingin Sammy 33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 02:00 AM   #3
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,399
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Good stuff GTripp and Sammy makes a lot of excellent points IMO. A "bend but don't break" defense is exactly what Blache runs which is one of the reasons the "D" can't seem to get off the field. Apparently Blache doesn't have enough faith in our corners to use the bump-n-run. If the DB's would at least play a little closer, more plays on the ball could be made. We don't disguise blitze's worth a crap and it's easy for the opposing QB to read and exploit. After the game Blache said that players would be in certain positions so as not to give away what they were doing, but Manning would go to a double snap count. During the first snap count, the players would move into position when they thought the ball would be snapped and Manning, seeing what they were going to do, would go into another snap count aware of what was coming. This seems to be a discipline problem with maybe not holding your position long enough but didn't we have the same problem last year? Blache seems to get a little exasperated with what seems to me to be legitimate questions. I'm starting to get a little exasperated by some of his schemes and excuses about why things didn't work.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"

Last edited by 53Fan; 09-17-2009 at 02:10 AM.
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 02:10 AM   #4
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Well a fantastic thread so far and there are only two posts. I can't add anything in terms of football acumen but I can ask questions

I'll start up front w/ the line and work backwards. The comments about Daniels looking slow don't surprise one bit cuz I thought the same thing. How worrisome is this? He's 36 and it's his first game in almost two years so can we reasonably hope he gets a bit more agile over the next few games OR is it time to make him a reserve and test the other guys? I really like what i'm seeing/hearing about Zo. The dude lost some weight and really seems to have increased his agility/quickness but still plays around 285 lbs. Sounds like a perfect fit at LDE and since this is one of the easiest positions to learn in Blache's scheme (and maybe overall in the game) I'd like to think he's a real prospect...Jarmon is prolly too inexperienced at this point.

Per the LB corp I see Rocky around the ball way more than I remember last year. I picked up on one of his misses on Bradshaw...three is a pattern so that's worrisome. Anyway the question is if we do go more w/ Cobra packages as suggested it means London and Rocky are the main "tacklers" on the field: working as a twosome are they up to that challenge?

And finally as to the secondary. Eff this is where things get complicated IMO. It sounds like on the one hand Blache expects single coverage of these guys much of the time but simultaneously asks them to play well off the LOS i.e. soft coverage. The two things seem utterly contradictory but that's what I take from it...am I missing something? To dig a little deeper it also sounds like the fact our CBs have differing talents they don't necessarily compliment one another. Namely, Los is a damn good cover corner...just strait up man coverage and that WR is taken out of the play. Meanwhile Hall is better suited in a zone scheme. How can Blache scheme to both their strengths? Or...is it plausible that if Hall stops playing like a pussy he'll actually fair pretty well in man-coverage (hopefully he can learn to jam a WR in the next 4 days LOL)?

My last question is sort of general... what more is there to know about the Cobra package? I ask because we've got some really nice talent among the safeties but it doesn't come wrapped in a bow (tied around one or two guys head). Horton strikes me as the best tackler among the group...and damn he looks stout for a safety. He looks like the WLB in the Tampa 2 defense. I want him on the field. Doughty is the smartest from what I see and therefor the best at reading the offense/play. Landry...Landry has all the GD talent in the friggin world but it doesn't translate into what I would call elite FS work on the field.
The Goat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 10:31 AM   #5
Special Teams
 
Kope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 253
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

I dont care what you say about the Manningham touchdown - it was 3 piss poor tackle attempts, not the blitz. The scheme worked, the players did not execute - a defensive coordinator should EXPECT his players to make a tackle. For superstars (Barry Sanders, Adrian Peterson) you can offer some excuse missed tackles; Manningham is not in the same galaxy. Coaches put players in position, players have to make the play.
Kope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 12:32 PM   #6
Playmaker
 
Slingin Sammy 33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,341
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
I'll start up front w/ the line and work backwards. The comments about Daniels looking slow don't surprise one bit cuz I thought the same thing. How worrisome is this? He's 36 and it's his first game in almost two years so can we reasonably hope he gets a bit more agile over the next few games OR is it time to make him a reserve and test the other guys?
IMO more situational rotation at LDE would be a good thing.

Quote:
Per the LB corp I see Rocky around the ball way more than I remember last year. I picked up on one of his misses on Bradshaw...three is a pattern so that's worrisome. Anyway the question is if we do go more w/ Cobra packages as suggested it means London and Rocky are the main "tacklers" on the field: working as a twosome are they up to that challenge?
Because Horton and Doughty are generally pretty good tacklers I think they're fine.

Quote:
It sounds like on the one hand Blache expects single coverage of these guys much of the time but simultaneously asks them to play well off the LOS i.e. soft coverage. The two things seem utterly contradictory but that's what I take from it...am I missing something?
Blache runs a lot of man. In his Cover 1 the DBs normally have a closer cushion. What we saw on Sunday from the 2nd qtr on was a Cover 3 base look with the DBs at a 7-10 yd cushion. I think what Blache was trying to do is give the same look yet run different coverages from it. But to your point, if you're asking the DBs to sit back at 7-10 yds and then at the snap fly up into man, you wind up with DBs getting beat on double moves (Rogers on the Sluggo) and short to med routes being pretty open if the DB sits back and reads the QB too long.

IMO Blache has to put more effort into making things more difficult to get a pre-read on. From the Cover 3 base I saw either a Cover 3 Zone with Fletch, Rocky, Doughty underneath in Zones, or the same underneath guys in man on the TEs, RBs in a 2WR set, or Man coverage across the board. 3 Choices that can be identified by certain offensive sets pretty easily, 3WR Split set saw man coverage, the Bunch sets saw Man normally. If I'm picking this stuff up looking at a DVR replay for an hour or two, what are pros looking at a full field view for multiple hours per day seeing. In the NFL today the defenses that are successful in making turnovers and getting off the field on 3rd down create indecision on the OL and most importantly with the QB by their scheme and defensive looks. IMO Blache currently isn't doing a very good job of that.


Quote:
To dig a little deeper it also sounds like the fact our CBs have differing talents they don't necessarily compliment one another. Namely, Los is a damn good cover corner...just strait up man coverage and that WR is taken out of the play. Meanwhile Hall is better suited in a zone scheme. How can Blache scheme to both their strengths? Or...is it plausible that if Hall stops playing like a pussy he'll actually fair pretty well in man-coverage (hopefully he can learn to jam a WR in the next 4 days LOL)?
Here is a pretty good article from the Examiner. Hall is a pretty decent coverage corner, not a press guy, but a good run-chase-close guy because of his speed/quickness. Smoot is a liability in man coverage, pretty easy to scheme around that....put him on the bench and put Tryon or Barnes in LOL. Seriously though, Smoot just needs to be protected and be matched up on a possesion receiver, not a speed guy. If the opponent is finding a formation to create a mismatch with him he's got to come out or go Zone coverage.

The man coverage with a 7yd cushion is OK if there's some heat up front, I don't like it with a 4 man rush.

Chalk talk: Why the Redskins play off-man coverage | Washington Examiner

Quote:
My last question is sort of general... what more is there to know about the Cobra package? I ask because we've got some really nice talent among the safeties but it doesn't come wrapped in a bow (tied around one or two guys head). Horton strikes me as the best tackler among the group...and damn he looks stout for a safety. He looks like the WLB in the Tampa 2 defense. I want him on the field. Doughty is the smartest from what I see and therefor the best at reading the offense/play. Landry...Landry has all the GD talent in the friggin world but it doesn't translate into what I would call elite FS work on the field.
I like the Cobra package, I would like to see Landry a bit more involved than just playing center field all the time or coming on a predictable blitz. Run some Cover 0 and put him on a WR. Rotate him into underneath coverage sometimes for a different look.

I believe we have very good personnel on D, outside of depth at LB, I believe our scheme needs to be more aggressive and much more creative. Not simply rely on our talent outclassing the opponents offense. The Giants WR/TEs are not better than our secondary in a match-up talent wise. But Blache was out-coached by Gilbride on Sunday.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.
Slingin Sammy 33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 12:42 PM   #7
The Starter
 
SC Skins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by 53Fan View Post
Good stuff GTripp and Sammy makes a lot of excellent points IMO. A "bend but don't break" defense is exactly what Blache runs which is one of the reasons the "D" can't seem to get off the field. Apparently Blache doesn't have enough faith in our corners to use the bump-n-run. If the DB's would at least play a little closer, more plays on the ball could be made. We don't disguise blitze's worth a crap and it's easy for the opposing QB to read and exploit. After the game Blache said that players would be in certain positions so as not to give away what they were doing, but Manning would go to a double snap count. During the first snap count, the players would move into position when they thought the ball would be snapped and Manning, seeing what they were going to do, would go into another snap count aware of what was coming. This seems to be a discipline problem with maybe not holding your position long enough but didn't we have the same problem last year? Blache seems to get a little exasperated with what seems to me to be legitimate questions. I'm starting to get a little exasperated by some of his schemes and excuses about why things didn't work.
Bingo. A sure sign of a charlatan if you ask me. If you want to watch a real defensive coordinator at work watch the Jets play (or put on some tape of the Redskins in 2004 or 2007). So glad that shotgun was so effective in convincing Blache to unretire. Now the dude won't go away and he's armed.
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do.
SC Skins Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2009, 12:56 PM   #8
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,399
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan View Post
Bingo. A sure sign of a charlatan if you ask me. If you want to watch a real defensive coordinator at work watch the Jets play (or put on some tape of the Redskins in 2004 or 2007). So glad that shotgun was so effective in convincing Blache to unretire. Now the dude won't go away and he's armed.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 10:03 AM   #9
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,892
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Candidly speaking, I felt like you were really reaching with your experimental line yards in your offensive review Tripp. But this is a solid review, really interesting point about the third down conversions.

Montgomery was inactive, and might be again this weekend
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 10:07 AM   #10
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,005
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kope View Post
I dont care what you say about the Manningham touchdown - it was 3 piss poor tackle attempts, not the blitz. The scheme worked, the players did not execute - a defensive coordinator should EXPECT his players to make a tackle. For superstars (Barry Sanders, Adrian Peterson) you can offer some excuse missed tackles; Manningham is not in the same galaxy. Coaches put players in position, players have to make the play.
Yeah I agree, it came down to poor tackling, simple as that. Smoot needed to make that tackle.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 10:37 AM   #11
Franchise Player
 
mredskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,762
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

I was think these are great stats but when dealing with stats espically in a anaylsis type format you need bench marks. Maybe numbers we think that are horrible really league wide are acceptable when comparing other teams. Probably way too much work in order to do that but just a thought.

Thanks GTripp for doing this it is a lot of work! DC Sports Report should pick this up and put in their news letter.
__________________
When life gives you paper jams, turn them into paper footballs!
mredskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 12:35 PM   #12
The Starter
 
30gut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,099
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Nice break down, i love these threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
What is there this year that was not last year is the pass pressure. The Redskins forced Eli Manning into two or three mistake throws, and they did it by getting pressure on the quarterback. The two best edge pass rushers on the Redskins are Lorenzo Alexander and Andre Carter, but Chris Wilson and Orakpo are also threats to the quarterback's health. Some insiders I have talked to are disappointed that the Redskins pass rush isn't more consistently effective, but I think that's just the nature of pass rush. We think of a pass rush such as the Giants in Super Bowl 42 just pounding the quarterback consistently, but there's a reason that there isn't a more recent example of "consistent" pass rush.
1st half observations:

The pass rush and the use of Orakpo dissappointed me.

I like a rube believed the talk of Orakpo 'blitzing' on 1st and 2nd downs.
Orakpo and Wilson spent alot of team reading and reacting taking on blocks and covering TEs then i was hoping for.

What i really didn't like was the times when Orakpo was matched up with Boss when Boss didn't go out in a pattern he stayed in to block and Orkapo didn't ass rush he just shadowed Boss at the line

There were a few times when we were in Cover 2 the secondary did its job and Eli wasn't able to throw in rhythm but pass rush didn't get to him and Eli was able to make a play.

Rogers pass break-up on 2&10 came against Cover 2

I would love to see us get pressure with a 4 man rush and sit back in Cover 2 sometimes.
When we're in Cover 2 i think Orakpo should be at DE no matter what the down.

It seemed like Carter was getting stood up alot.

Quote:
What wasn't adequate was the Redskins coverage against secondary and tertiary Giant receivers,
My thoughts on the secondary from the 1st half:

Didn't like/understand off coverage in the RZ near the goalline with Orakpo covering a hook zone.

Landry=0
I thought that Landry was making good reads and breaking downhill on some routes but was just a hair late and it was the difference between a pass break-up and interception and a catch. (1st qtr 3rd and 6 catch to Smith and 3rd and 6 catch to Manningham) A couple unforced missed tackles a nice clean up tackle for no gain or a loss on crucial down and a TD saving tackle on Bradshaw.
Horton=+
Horton had decent coverage on Boss but Boss made a nice catch.
Horton made a nice read and was all over Manningham on the same pass play where Landry is late on Steve Smith (1st qtr 3rd and 6)
I wonder if Horton instincts are always this good when he's in zone covergae?

Horton of course made his presence felt in the run game.

Rogers= +
Smoot=- I was surprised by Smoot he played well in the preseason especially against the Pats and i thought he was getting ready for a good season, i hope he bounces back
Hall=-- I know he can play better then he played
poor tackling, poor coverage

Quote:
Blitzin' Greg Blache
I detest Blaches blitz schemes.

Haynesworth is a beast 3rd and short 4th and short i wish the cameran men would zoom in and really focus on the trench wars sometimes.
Its no wonder the dude is needs a blow sometimes he fighting2 dudes almost every play!

Overall I felt like there were to many missed tackles and that our guys weren't shedding/avoiding their blocks well.
Pass rush was a little late in coming on and the secondary play was spotty.

I think its all fixable though.
...except for the blitz schemes
__________________
No longer were NFL coaches dealing inflexibly with spread [QBs] in ways that caused stunted development for players like [A. Smith and Vick] now, the idea is to bring what the quarterback can do, and what he should do, together as an organic whole
30gut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 02:38 PM   #13
Propane and propane accessories
 
JWsleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Age: 45
Posts: 4,615
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Great stuff again. Thanks Tripp!
__________________
Hail from Houston!
JWsleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 03:20 PM   #14
The Starter
 
KI Skins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: MD Eastern Shore
Posts: 2,435
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

Let's see if I got this straight. In the offensive review, our resident experts tell us that Zorn was outcoached by the Giants' DC and, in the defensive review, they tell us that Blache was outcoached by the Giants' OC. Meanwhile, we're picking apart every mistake the players make.

If it's true that we were outcoached on both sides of the ball, let's hope that doesn't become a trend because, if the coaches can't put the players in positions where they are likely to succeed, we won't have a snowball's chance of making the playoffs.
KI Skins Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2009, 04:11 PM   #15
Registered User
 
Njall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: N.Y.C.
Posts: 41
Re: Defensive Review: Giants

The 4-3 is best i believe against the run. Especially with a 330 DT like Hworth...
Njall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.48394 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25