Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Del Rio ran more Zone than Turgovac.


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,514 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 21 January 2009 - 08:39 AM

Buckner elborated on this yesterday in some discussion on a local radio show.

At first I was shocked, but as his rant continued it made more sense.


He said under DelRio the D-line knew they had to beat the man in from of them. Buck and Jinx had too or a guy named Shane Burton would come in and do it in their place. Pep and Ruck had too, or that cat named Al Wallace certainly would. He continued that after the first year or so under Turgo, that accountablitly started to reside, and a bit of complacency started to inch into the D-line because they knew he wouldn't replace the starters.

He said several times that Del-Rio ran a TON more soft zone schemes relying on the D-line making a play and Turgo does ALOT more blitzing and man2man. The difference being the D-line making plays for DelRio and not making plays for Turgovac.:eek:

Discuss...

#2 Squirrel

Squirrel

    Drink a beer and relax

  • ALL-PRO
  • 12,523 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 08:44 AM

Would you want to piss off Del Rio?

#3 Zaximus

Zaximus

    I'm Brett Jensen

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,931 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 21 January 2009 - 08:47 AM

Yeah I believe this. Fox doesn't replace people, at all. Our guys need to know that if they can't produce, someone will.

#4 Cyberjag

Cyberjag

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,642 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 08:54 AM

How much of that is also the talent level behind the starters on the defensive line?

#5 pantherj

pantherj

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,523 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:24 AM

Buckner elborated on this yesterday in some discussion on a local radio show.

At first I was shocked, but as his rant continued it made more sense.


He said under DelRio the D-line knew they had to beat the man in from of them. Buck and Jinx had too or a guy named Shane Burton would come in and do it in their place. Pep and Ruck had too, or that cat named Al Wallace certainly would. He continued that after the first year or so under Turgo, that accountablitly started to reside, and a bit of complacency started to inch into the D-line because they knew he wouldn't replace the starters.

He said several times that Del-Rio ran a TON more soft zone schemes relying on the D-line making a play and Turgo does ALOT more blitzing and man2man. The difference being the D-line making plays for DelRio and not making plays for Turgovac.:eek:

Discuss...



For whatever reason, the fans on this forum seem to think that Turdo likes soft zone defense. This is NOT true. Turdy was interviewed about his own personal defensive preferences, and he made it clear that he liked man-to-man coverage and blitzing a lot more than zone defense. Turdums just goes along with Fox's wishes.

Edited by pantherj, 21 January 2009 - 09:26 AM.


#6 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,514 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:27 AM

How much of that is also the talent level behind the starters on the defensive line?



And someone catches the truth behind the problem.

It's not so much Turgo as it is lack or high quality depth/starters on the defensive line. First it was the lack of depth, now it is the lack of talent from start to finish.

Want to know why our blitzes never seem to work ? Notice none of the D-linemen beat anyone on a consistant basis.

Get a influx of talent on the D-line. Some high motor depth and our D would head back to it's winning ways.

#7 Snake

Snake

    swagaholic

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,559 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:32 AM

I can see this. Its the attitude of the team. Really if your getting pressure from your front 4 you dont need to blitz.

#8 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,514 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:33 AM

I can see this. Its the attitude of the team. Really if your getting pressure from your front 4 you dont need to blitz.


If you are getting pressure from the front 4 you look like a genius when you blitz as well.:iagree:

#9 Zcustom

Zcustom

    The Irish Hammer

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,669 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:36 AM

And someone catches the truth behind the problem.

It's not so much Turgo as it is lack or high quality depth/starters on the defensive line. First it was the lack of depth, now it is the lack of talent from start to finish.

Want to know why our blitzes never seem to work ? Notice none of the D-linemen beat anyone on a consistant basis.

Get a influx of talent on the D-line. Some high motor depth and our D would head back to it's winning ways.


You mean hold the players accountable for their poor play and not make the coach a scapegoat?

That's not how we roll

#10 engine9

engine9

    shoota muhfukkaina minute

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,089 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:47 AM

I remember that under Del Rio. When it kept on under Fox I figured it was Fox's style not really the DC. I haven't watched enough Jaguars games to know, but the last one I did was when they beat Pittsburgh the season before last and Del Rio's D was aggressive start to finish.

If our talent on our D line is so bad, who has the responsibility of recognizing that and altering the game plan?

#11 PanthersFanNY

PanthersFanNY

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,655 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:51 AM

That is the whole problem. We don't have the d-line talent that we need to run our defense. We need to get constant pressure with our front four otherwise our defense will suffer.

We don't have the personnel to run that scheme, but the coaches refuse to make adjustments.

#12 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,514 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 21 January 2009 - 09:55 AM

That is the whole problem. We don't have the d-line talent that we need to run our defense. We need to get constant pressure with our front four otherwise our defense will suffer.

We don't have the personnel to run that scheme, but the coaches refuse to make adjustments.


I think they have made adjustments.

Running the softer Zone is an adjustment.

As the season went on our D-line got weaker.
To compensate we had to allow a softer zone to keep from being killed by the big play. In theory the softerzone allows the D-line longer to make a play. They never made plays.

#13 Urrymonster

Urrymonster

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 10:16 AM

YEah I think this rings a truth home about our defense that some will not have considered. The scehemes they were using were because we simply didn't not have either the experience or the ability in key areas of the D to be more aggressive. More aggressive would have been a VERY porous D. As it is the defensive scheme slowed the opposition offenses in terms of scoring. Yes they still put up points, but not nearly as quickly as they could have.

I think having a 2nd year guy calling the plays, a rookie free safety and a league low DL from the year before kind of forced their hand. They also struggled to improve in either position as the free agency and draft just did not fall that way.

I disliked the defensive scheme but frankly there is a big reason for te indentity of this D to suddenly vanish. The coaches may have thought the players couldn't handle it...YET. Goes back to the simplification fact and another reason why Pep feels it is time to move on. He is aware of what defensive plans the coaches have for next season and if they are planning on bringing the young guys slowly to ensure they are coached properly, then he is quite right in that he will not get the opposrtunities as he will in other schemes.

It does all make a lot of sense really...

#14 Pumpkin Eater

Pumpkin Eater

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 10:21 AM

I think they have made adjustments.

Running the softer Zone is an adjustment.

As the season went on our D-line got weaker.
To compensate we had to allow a softer zone to keep from being killed by the big play. In theory the softerzone allows the D-line longer to make a play. They never made plays.


wow someone with some common sense!

Are you sure you don't want to blame Fox for everything while advocating the hiring of Bill Cowher to take his place? Maybe we should fire the entire defensive line. Or better yet trade defenses with Philly.

#15 Pumpkin Eater

Pumpkin Eater

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted 21 January 2009 - 10:25 AM

YEah I think this rings a truth home about our defense that some will not have considered. The scehemes they were using were because we simply didn't not have either the experience or the ability in key areas of the D to be more aggressive. More aggressive would have been a VERY porous D. As it is the defensive scheme slowed the opposition offenses in terms of scoring. Yes they still put up points, but not nearly as quickly as they could have.

I think having a 2nd year guy calling the plays, a rookie free safety and a league low DL from the year before kind of forced their hand. They also struggled to improve in either position as the free agency and draft just did not fall that way.

I disliked the defensive scheme but frankly there is a big reason for te indentity of this D to suddenly vanish. The coaches may have thought the players couldn't handle it...YET. Goes back to the simplification fact and another reason why Pep feels it is time to move on. He is aware of what defensive plans the coaches have for next season and if they are planning on bringing the young guys slowly to ensure they are coached properly, then he is quite right in that he will not get the opposrtunities as he will in other schemes.

It does all make a lot of sense really...



holy poo. two intelligent, reasonable, well though-out posts in a row. Must be a record.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com