Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Week 2 Postmortum / Other Thoughts

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post
    Considering the quality of RB and OL, I would say there is plenty to back up that statement. But let us talk about mis-using statistics for our D.

    10th Worst Rush per Attempt -- 4.3 (Last year 9th Best at 3.9)
    13th Worst 1st Down % -- 23% (Last year 8th best at 20.5)

    (** So we are in the bottom third of the league when last year at the top third **)

    Same old -- same old. Mind I add that DMW is baiting me so that he can go run to his friends to ban my posts. LOL.

    I have not said a word to anyone. All I said was the run D was not a good thing so far. And without any stats, I can SEE that we are not playing it as well as last year. Mabye losing Fergie (HELLO!) has something to do with it?

    OT, DMW after those ghastly names you called me invoking God in that private email, I figured you would just leave Satan alone. Can you please leave me alone? Please? Pretty please?
    You are right, to a point, Robert, but the run defense did play much better this week than in week 1 (against a better running back too I might add). In week one, it wasn't a problem with the scheme, it was people missing tackles that really cost us. Sure those stats you posted do provide some evidence that the run defense isn't quite as solid as the one that DMW posted (we aren't in the bottom third of the league in first down percentage by the way; 32 divided by 3 is 10.66666, meaning that teams ranked 21 and above are in the bottom third; we are ranked 19th according to your statistic). That same statistic is also misleading--the defense clearly hasn't been up to snuff yet this year, and passing has as much to do with that as running; so passing affects the number of first downs the opposing team gets as well.

    Furthermore, we are missing 3 key defensive players, all who would help the run defense. Terrence Newman is one of the best corners in the league against the run, Greg Ellis is a far more capable run-stopper than Anthony Spencer, and Jason Ferguson does have more experience and bulk than Jay Ratliff. The loss of Newman affects the scheme even more: without him, the defense is more likely to drop an extra man into coverage, leaving fewer guys in the box to stop the run. This is not to say that we shouldn't be playing better without Ellis and Newman, but it is important to be aware of their absence and to hope and pray that they come back soon.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by JJJ888 View Post
      You are right, to a point, Robert, but the run defense did play much better this week than in week 1 (against a better running back too I might add). In week one, it wasn't a problem with the scheme, it was people missing tackles that really cost us. Sure those stats you posted do provide some evidence that the run defense isn't quite as solid as the one that DMW posted (we aren't in the bottom third of the league in first down percentage by the way; 32 divided by 3 is 10.66666, meaning that teams ranked 21 and above are in the bottom third; we are ranked 19th according to your statistic). That same statistic is also misleading--the defense clearly hasn't been up to snuff yet this year, and passing has as much to do with that as running; so passing affects the number of first downs the opposing team gets as well.

      Furthermore, we are missing 3 key defensive players, all who would help the run defense. Terrence Newman is one of the best corners in the league against the run, Greg Ellis is a far more capable run-stopper than Anthony Spencer, and Jason Ferguson does have more experience and bulk than Jay Ratliff. The loss of Newman affects the scheme even more: without him, the defense is more likely to drop an extra man into coverage, leaving fewer guys in the box to stop the run. This is not to say that we shouldn't be playing better without Ellis and Newman, but it is important to be aware of their absence and to hope and pray that they come back soon.
      No debate on the reasons. No debate on the fact we can get better.

      That is why I said that as of right now -- the Run D is not very good.

      I just find it interesting that DMW is picking on 1 point out of 20 to argue something which seems like a fact.

      Fact is the Run D is not as good so far as it was last year.

      I truly hope we get better but if I had to predict I would predict marginal improvement.

      If I where to predict a bigger improvement for our D through the season I would pick Pass Rush and Pass D for the reasons mentioned about personnel. (** Not rocket science as some make it out to be. Just stating the obvious **)

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by leroyisgod View Post
        Maybe because he caused us 25 yds in penalties.

        25 yards??
        In war, you win or lose, live or die - and the difference is just an eyelash.


        -Douglas MacArthur

        Comment


        • #19
          Sorry 20. I believe he had a holding penalty and two false starts.

          Comment


          • #20
            Very nice try pal, but let me quote you again:

            Originally posted by robert in big D
            3) Run D is not very good in this new system.
            My point was to emphasize how ridiculous this statement is. I am neither saying that our run D is great, or that it is horrible. I am saying, rather, that the assertion that the new defensive system we are running is "not very good" against the run is unfounded and false, to this point. If you take the Giant game, and subtract the one 44 yard run against us, which was not a problem with scheme, but execution, since there was a defender in place to make the play and that defender failed to do his job even though he was in perfect position to do so, then you have 21 carries for exactly 80 yards. That is sub 4 ypc, just like the Dolphins, which were also sub 4ypc.

            If anything, that suggests that this defense IS good against the run, as long as our players don't miss easy tackles.

            But that's not my point. My point is that THERE IS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE right now to indicate either way. It's early in the season. One run like that 44 yarder can skew the stats badly. We don't know if that play is going to be the norm or going to be the exception. In 4 or 5 games, we will. Right now we don't.

            Your attempt to say "what I meant is that it looks worse now than it did a year ago" is funny to me, because you, again, display your lack of a conscience in changing points mid stream. You didn't say "Our run D in this system is not as good as it was last year", you said "[our] run D is not very good in this new system" which you cannot prove, and which, in fact, the stats actually disagree with.

            Say what you want about competition, but the facts are the we have allowed one big run play, and the other 41 carries we have allowed ~3.5 yards per carry. That is at least enough to earn some reservation of judgment.
            Originally posted by 21ST
            He was protecting his self
            Originally posted by tjsunstein
            From what? His leg?
            Originally posted by Paranoidmoonduck
            That leg has had it out for him since day 1.
            "We're the quiet guys, the guys before the storm. And then we hit you."

            DeMarcus Ware

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by leroyisgod View Post
              Where is the QB pressure? For now I'm going to chalk it up to Phillips not opening up the playbook because he's trying to protect the secondary. But we need to figure out a way to let Ware and Spencer loose. The inside rush was nice, but you cannot do that all day long.
              It's not the playbook. It's the DL. We'll never have success rushing the passer without a capable DL. Our DEs suck. Our NT sucks.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by DMWSackMachine View Post
                Very nice try pal, but let me quote you again:

                My point was to emphasize how ridiculous this statement is. I am neither saying that our run D is great, or that it is horrible. I am saying, rather, that the assertion that the new defensive system we are running is "not very good" against the run is unfounded and false, to this point. If you take the Giant game, and subtract the one 44 yard run against us, which was not a problem with scheme, but execution, since there was a defender in place to make the play and that defender failed to do his job even though he was in perfect position to do so, then you have 21 carries for exactly 80 yards. That is sub 4 ypc, just like the Dolphins, which were also sub 4ypc.

                If anything, that suggests that this defense IS good against the run, as long as our players don't miss easy tackles.
                If is the key word. If does not make 4.3, 3.9 or make 8-8, 14-2. But that's not my point.

                Originally posted by DMWSackMachine View Post
                But that's not my point. My point is that THERE IS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE right now to indicate either way.
                2 games is not a season but it sure it the only evidence we have right now.

                Originally posted by DMWSackMachine View Post
                It's early in the season. One run like that 44 yarder can skew the stats badly. We don't know if that play is going to be the norm or going to be the exception. In 4 or 5 games, we will. Right now we don't.

                Your attempt to say "what I meant is that it looks worse now than it did a year ago"
                Did I write those words or are you trying to de me the "favor of paraphrasing" for me again?

                Originally posted by DMWSackMachine View Post
                is funny to me, because you, again, display your lack of a conscience in changing points mid stream. You didn't say "Our run D in this system is not as good as it was last year", you said "[our] run D is not very good in this new system" which you cannot prove, and which, in fact, the stats actually disagree with.

                Say what you want about competition, but the facts are the we have allowed one big run play, and the other 41 carries we have allowed ~3.5 yards per carry. That is at least enough to earn some reservation of judgment.
                Real long explanation for a simple fact about our run D not looking/being/seeming as effective so far in the new scheme.

                Execution, injuries, missed tackles, Roy Williams has a hernia, Wade is trying to trick people, WHATEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!

                What the future brings, who knows for sure, but if predicting, I would not expect much improvement in this phase of the game.

                Regardless, I thought God/Jesus/Whatever damned me and I was the reason the country was going to hell?

                Don't you have somewhere to be? Chapel, Church, etc. Or have some soul to slavage or something?
                Last edited by robert_in_bigd; 09-18-2007, 12:25 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
                  It's not the playbook. It's the DL. We'll never have success rushing the passer without a capable DL. Our DEs suck. Our NT sucks.
                  I don't buy that 100%. Last year we were able to put pressure on the QB with the same DL.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
                    It's not the playbook. It's the DL. We'll never have success rushing the passer without a capable DL. Our DEs suck. Our NT sucks.
                    Ratliff is actually playing like an above average NT. I don't get why you are so down on him.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by leroyisgod View Post
                      I don't buy that 100%. Last year we were able to put pressure on the QB with the same DL.
                      Correction. Last year, we had more pressure than this year, but it was still subpar. It appears Phillip's 3-4 is not very "attackish" in Dallas. Looks just as "vanilla" as the Parcells' bashers claimed.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by thule View Post
                        Ratliff is actually playing like an above average NT. I don't get why you are so down on him.
                        I'm actually more down on our DEs and their lack of ability. But NT does upset me so. I guess above average is not what I'm looking for.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by thule View Post
                          Ratliff is actually playing like an above average NT. I don't get why you are so down on him.
                          I like Ratliff too. I just think he is a DE in this system.

                          Best penetrator we have on the DL.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by robert_in_bigd View Post
                            I like Ratliff too. I just think he is a DE in this system.

                            Best penetrator we have on the DL.
                            I totally agree with that. wow.

                            That is where Parcells played him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
                              Correction. Last year, we had more pressure than this year, but it was still subpar. It appears Phillip's 3-4 is not very "attackish" in Dallas. Looks just as "vanilla" as the Parcells' bashers claimed.
                              I'd like to see some stats showing the percentage of the time that Phillips blitzed last year compared to this year. I still think he's holding back because of the secondary concerns.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information