Jump to content

If we don't develop a pass rush and a playmaker at outside linebacker, it won't matter who plays in the defensive backfield.


kennycaine
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sporting News magazine recently had an article which stated among the things which a team needs to win a championship, a franchise quarterback, running back, which we have, and a pass rush, which to this point is markedly absent. It listed the top 5 teams which consistently has these traits: The New York Giants, The New England Patriots, The Pittsburgh Steelers, The Philadelphia Eagles and the Dallas Cowboys. Three of these teams cited have won the last 5 Super Bowls. This being said, if you examine the game tapes (albeit as an amateur armchair GM) You will see that the pass rush is anemic at best. It could get better however even the starters have failed to generate much of a rush, oftentimes against second string offenses. Brian VanGorder has even tried exotic corner blitzes overloaded to the weakside and it has had mixed results. Last season John Abraham had more than half of the teams sack total (16.5 of 32) and Jamaal Anderson is once again manning the strongside, he of the whopping 2 career sacks. This should raise a caution flag to anyone who feels that simply adding defensive backs is the sole solution.

If you examine the tapes and remove Chris Houstons tepid play, you will find that Brent Grimes is in the frame on virtually every pass thrown in his direction. Conversely, another aspect of the defense is glaring; that Mike Peterson, as an alleged upgrade over Keith Brooking, has made no significant play to this point to merit the tag of "upgrade". If Brooking was making plays downfield as many suggest, then Peterson is being flat-out pushed out of the play by fullbacks and guards blocking down on him. Again, these are preseason tapes but the tapes are not lying: Unless someone either steps up, gets traded for or signed to provide a pass rush opposite Abraham and a playmaker at linebacker (Derrick Brooks?) don't expect a dramatic turnaround by the defense simply by signing free agent cornerbacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sporting News magazine recently had an article which stated among the things which a team needs to win a championship, a franchise quarterback, running back, which we have, and a pass rush, which to this point is markedly absent. It listed the top 5 teams which consistently has these traits: The New York Giants, The New England Patriots, The Pittsburgh Steelers, The Philadelphia Eagles and the Dallas Cowboys. Three of these teams cited have won the last 5 Super Bowls. This being said, if you examine the game tapes (albeit as an amateur armchair GM) You will see that the pass rush is aneimic at best. It could get better however eevn the starters have failed to generate much of a rush, oftentimes against second string offenses. Brian VanGorder has even tried exotic corner blitzes overloaded to the weakside and it has had mixed results. Last season John Abraham had more than half of the teams sack total (16.5 of 32) and Jamaal Anderson is once again manning the strongside, he of the whopping 2 career sacks. This should raise a caution flag to anyone who feels that simply adding defensive backs is the sole solution.

If you examine the tapes and remove Chris Houstons tepid play, you will find that Brent Grimes is in the frame on virtually every pass thrown in his direction. Conversely, another aspect of the defense is glaring; that Mike Perterson, as an alleged upgrade over Keith Brooking, has made no significant play to this point to merit the tag of "upgrade". If Brooking was making plays downfield as many suggest, then Peterson is being flat-out pushed out of the play by fullbacks and guards blocking down on him. Again, these are preseason tapes but the tapes are not lying: Unless someone either steps up, gets traded for or signed to provide a pass rush opposite Abraham and a playmaker at linebacker (Derrick Brooks?) don't expect a dramatic turnaround to the defense simply by signing free agent cornerbacks.

x2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're doooooooomed!

Is that a joke or a serious statement? If you are joking then it won't be funny when we face the New England Patriots in Foxboro and Tom Brady has time to have breakfast while waiting for a reciever (Moss and Welker are there, need I remind you?) to break open. Without a pass rush, we could have Ed Reed at safety and Champ Bailey and Deon Sanders playing cornerback, Brady will still torch the secondary. You scoff and make jokes like others here but I won't be laughing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said the key word in your title; develop. Just how are we going to "develop" a playmaker if we don't allow them to play(the rookies)? Seems to me you have to play them in order to develop them and that means showing some patience with them thru their growing pains. But I'm afraid there's too many people on this board that can't grasp this concept. Watching them grow up will make a title even more sweeter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said the key word in your title; develop. Just how are we going to "develop" a playmaker if we don't allow them to play(the rookies)? Seems to me you have to play them in order to develop them and that means showing some patience with them thru their growing pains. But I'm afraid there's too many people on this board that can't grasp this concept. Watching them grow up will make a title even more sweeter.

Develop also means to cause to come to the forefront. Jamaal Anderson is no rookie and he has yet to develop into a pass rusher yet he is again starting. I'm not speaking of the Lawrence Sidburys who are long on potential but are not starting or the Peria Jerrys who are slated to start, rather the Andersons, Chauncey Davises, Steven Nicolases and the Mike Petersons on the team , veterans who we need to show something NOW not later on in the season when it could possibly affect us dramatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Develop also means to cause to come to the forefront. Jamaal Anderson is no rookie and he has yet to develop into a pass rusher yet he is again starting. I'm not speaking of the Lawrence Sidburys who are long on potential but are not starting or the Peria Jerrys who are slated to start, rather the Andersons, Chauncey Davises, Steven Nicolases and the Mike Petersons on the team , veterans who we need to show something NOW not later on in the season when it could possibly affect us dramatically.

True Anderson hasn't shown much, but I think his replacement is already on the roster in Kroy Bierman. If Anderson can't do much of anything in the first couple games or so, we are going to see more and more of the Bierman. Davis is already a good situational player and though Nicholas has two years under his belt, he gets his first true chance at starting this year.

Peterson hasn't really shown his true colors yet in the preseason. Though he is certainly no Merriman, he's better than most people want to give him credit for. And don't forget the two veteran acquisitions we just made this week. I already feel better about our secondary. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i guess people forget the word count mike smith had PROCESS in his conferences...there is no overnight solution to this, we're building for the long-term, not to make a quick Superbowl run, people need to catch on to that.

Understood, but in the "process" you observe your shortcomings and aggressively go after improving them. 32 sacks with more than half coming from one man suggested that the problem did not solve itself by re-signing Chauncey Davis to 14 million; the proof being the fact that even he failed to oust the lukewarm Anderson at defensive end. Now if Dimitroff had thrown the same fevor into drafting and signing pass rushers and linebackers as he has defensive backs, maybe this would be less of a problem. Lawrence Sidbury was the only pass rusher signed or drafted. 32 sacks in the process would signal pass rusher/plamaking linebacker in the Derrick Brooks mold, not Mike Peterson, who is not much more of a pass rusher than Keith Brooking was at weakside linebacker, THE pass rushing linebacker position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Understood, but in the "process" you observe your shortcomings and aggressively go after improving them. 32 sacks with more than half coming from one man suggested that the problem did not solve itself by re-signing Chauncey Davis to 14 million; the proof being the fact that even he failed to oust the lukewarm Anderson at defensive end. Now if Dimitroff had thrown the same fevor into drafting and signing pass rushers and linebackers as he has defensive backs, maybe this would be less of a problem. Lawrence Sidbury was the only pass rusher signed or drafted. 32 sacks in the process would signal pass rusher/plamaking linebacker in the Derrick Brooks mold, not Mike Peterson, who is not much more of a pass rusher than Keith Brooking was at weakside linebacker, THE pass rushing linebacker position.

You're gonna have to count Jerry as well as Sidbury as Dimitroff putting as much energy in trying to fix the defensive line. I'm with you on the fact our defensive line only produced 32 sacks with over half coming from one player. But if you continually try to go the FA route, you'll end up a lot of aging players and a busted cap.

We're going to have to rely on these young players in order to rebuild our defense. If TD had gone and signed every name free agent that was available we'd be the Washington Redskins. And they haven't done much of anything since Gibbs' first go-around in 1992.

And Peterson is an upgrade over Brooks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are judging this off the pre-season, where Abraham was barely present let alone trying?

With him taking up blockers and/or generating pressure off the right side you will see how good this pass rush can be.

The interior pressure from the massive pass-rush upgrade we have made at DT (Peria Jerry vs. Grady Jackson) will show itself by at least midseason.

The problems have come when QBs are connecting for 15 yard gains when only on 3 and 5 step drops - if a QB only needs 3 to 3.5 seconds to find an open guy then unless a blown blocking assignement occurs there is no opprotunity at the NFL level for pressure to be generated.

Pass rush and secondary are to an extent in a symbotic relationship and both are dependent upon the other - have you never heard the term "coverage sack"? An upgrade in one area will help the other look better.

Also:

32 sacks in the process would signal pass rusher/plamaking linebacker in the Derrick Brooks mold, not Mike Peterson

As you have quoted Brooks twice in two posts:

Derrick Brooks - career sacks 13.5

Mike Peterson - career sacks 19.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sporting News magazine recently had an article which stated among the things which a team needs to win a championship, a franchise quarterback, running back, which we have, and a pass rush, which to this point is markedly absent. It listed the top 5 teams which consistently has these traits: The New York Giants, The New England Patriots, The Pittsburgh Steelers, The Philadelphia Eagles and the Dallas Cowboys. Three of these teams cited have won the last 5 Super Bowls. This being said, if you examine the game tapes (albeit as an amateur armchair GM) You will see that the pass rush is anemic at best. It could get better however even the starters have failed to generate much of a rush, oftentimes against second string offenses. Brian VanGorder has even tried exotic corner blitzes overloaded to the weakside and it has had mixed results. Last season John Abraham had more than half of the teams sack total (16.5 of 32) and Jamaal Anderson is once again manning the strongside, he of the whopping 2 career sacks. This should raise a caution flag to anyone who feels that simply adding defensive backs is the sole solution.

If you examine the tapes and remove Chris Houstons tepid play, you will find that Brent Grimes is in the frame on virtually every pass thrown in his direction. Conversely, another aspect of the defense is glaring; that Mike Peterson, as an alleged upgrade over Keith Brooking, has made no significant play to this point to merit the tag of "upgrade". If Brooking was making plays downfield as many suggest, then Peterson is being flat-out pushed out of the play by fullbacks and guards blocking down on him. Again, these are preseason tapes but the tapes are not lying: Unless someone either steps up, gets traded for or signed to provide a pass rush opposite Abraham and a playmaker at linebacker (Derrick Brooks?) don't expect a dramatic turnaround by the defense simply by signing free agent cornerbacks.

My opinion is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

Yes a good, solid pass rush makes a secondary look much better. That is a true statement in my opinion. We also need to develop a better pass rush, and I think you will see an improvement this year across the board from our DL.

However, way too often, QB's are able to get rid of the ball in 3 seconds or less because the WRs have our DBs completely beat at the LoS. How can you expect us to mount a consistent pass rush if the CBs were beat as soon as the ball was snapped. We could have the NY Giants DL and not be able to put up a consistent pass rush.

JMO, the DL has been worked on the last 2 years and is improving. The DBs are where the biggest weakness is at this point, and we have to hope that Hill/Williams can make enough improvement there to give our pass rush a chance to make plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

Yes a good, solid pass rush makes a secondary look much better. That is a true statement in my opinion. We also need to develop a better pass rush, and I think you will see an improvement this year across the board from our DL.

However, way too often, QB's are able to get rid of the ball in 3 seconds or less because the WRs have our DBs completely beat at the LoS. How can you expect us to mount a consistent pass rush if the CBs were beat as soon as the ball was snapped. We could have the NY Giants DL and not be able to put up a consistent pass rush.

JMO, the DL has been worked on the last 2 years and is improving. The DBs are where the biggest weakness is at this point, and we have to hope that Hill/Williams can make enough improvement there to give our pass rush a chance to make plays.

put very nice, But OLB depth behind pete not 1st year rookie, maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I agree with you on the statement that Peterson has not looked like an upgrade over KB I completely disagree with what you think of our pass rush. IMO we are as set as we're going to be right now. The pass rush has looked pretty good to me this preseason. Sidbury and Bierman will get the pass rush going from the left side if JA doesn't get his ish together.

Back to LB... I too have voiced that I've not been impressed with Peterson in passing situations. I was actually hoping we would keep Winborn so either he or Lofton would be on the field for obvious passing downs. Peterson looks slow to me... just like KB did last year. Most people will keep saying Peterson is an upgrade over KB, I hope they are right, but I haven't seen it yet. Hopefully Adkins can help out.

We will draft an OLB in the 1st next year....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I agree with you on the statement that Peterson has not looked like an upgrade over KB I completely disagree with what you think of our pass rush. IMO we are as set as we're going to be right now. The pass rush has looked pretty good to me this preseason. Sidbury and Bierman will get the pass rush going from the left side if JA doesn't get his ish together.

Back to LB... I too have voiced that I've not been impressed with Peterson in passing situations. I was actually hoping we would keep Winborn so either he or Lofton would be on the field for obvious passing downs. Peterson looks slow to me... just like KB did last year. Most people will keep saying Peterson is an upgrade over KB, I hope they are right, but I haven't seen it yet. Hopefully Adkins can help out.

We will draft an OLB in the 1st next year....

Did you notice Pete chasing qb(two knee surg.) in Det. game, wasn't even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sporting News magazine recently had an article which stated among the things which a team needs to win a championship, a franchise quarterback, running back, which we have, and a pass rush, which to this point is markedly absent. It listed the top 5 teams which consistently has these traits: The New York Giants, The New England Patriots, The Pittsburgh Steelers, The Philadelphia Eagles and the Dallas Cowboys. Three of these teams cited have won the last 5 Super Bowls. This being said, if you examine the game tapes (albeit as an amateur armchair GM) You will see that the pass rush is anemic at best. It could get better however even the starters have failed to generate much of a rush, oftentimes against second string offenses. Brian VanGorder has even tried exotic corner blitzes overloaded to the weakside and it has had mixed results. Last season John Abraham had more than half of the teams sack total (16.5 of 32) and Jamaal Anderson is once again manning the strongside, he of the whopping 2 career sacks. This should raise a caution flag to anyone who feels that simply adding defensive backs is the sole solution.

If you examine the tapes and remove Chris Houstons tepid play, you will find that Brent Grimes is in the frame on virtually every pass thrown in his direction. Conversely, another aspect of the defense is glaring; that Mike Peterson, as an alleged upgrade over Keith Brooking, has made no significant play to this point to merit the tag of "upgrade". If Brooking was making plays downfield as many suggest, then Peterson is being flat-out pushed out of the play by fullbacks and guards blocking down on him. Again, these are preseason tapes but the tapes are not lying: Unless someone either steps up, gets traded for or signed to provide a pass rush opposite Abraham and a playmaker at linebacker (Derrick Brooks?) don't expect a dramatic turnaround by the defense simply by signing free agent cornerbacks.

Your magazine is wrong.

You don't need a franchise QB or RB.  Several teams have won without respectable players at either position.

The only thing you need is a defense.  Not having one will prevent you from winning a championship.  

That's exactly what happened to the 2007 Patriots; they couldn't stop anybody all year long and it finally caught up with them at the worst possible moment.  Their offense could no longer hide their defensive woes.  

Even this year there are legitimate doubts about whether they have the horses on defense to win the Super Bowl this year. And this is all despite their record setting offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your magazine is wrong.

You don't need a franchise QB or RB.  Several teams have won without respectable players at either position.

The only thing you need is a defense.  Not having one will prevent you from winning a championship.  

That's exactly what happened to the 2007 Patriots; they couldn't stop anybody all year long and it finally caught up with them at the worst possible moment.  Their offense could no longer hide their defensive woes.  

Even this year there are legitimate doubts about whether they have the horses on defense to win the Super Bowl this year. And this is all despite their record setting offense.

Why split hairs with The Sporting News (which I wish was MY magazine) and try to fact find; the bottom line is the premise, that unless you can rush the passer, you don't win the Super Bowl, which was their assertion. That is why their statement related to the opening comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Broken record spins round and round...

Hey, broken record, stop spinning. That is all.

Typical nonsense.

Not really, all your posts/threads are about what you think is wrong with this team and predictions of calamity. What's this thread?- what you think is wrong with this team and a prediction of calamity. Seems more like an astute observation to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...