Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Halfway to the answer

48 posts in this topic

Posted

it all goes back to the black glove award.

the guys were hitting hard trying to win it and when they took it away they got soft.

it needs to be brought back. screw the pansies worrying about people getting hurt.

I'm sayin, there are some brutal D's out there... Ravens and Steelers game was a beautiful game for any fan of Defense...

They play nasty. They don't show unsportsmanlike conduct on the field.. But they still play nasty.

We don't have that. We haven't had that for a long time.

We need that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Our linebackers were great this year, Davis included, any opinion to the contrary is flat out wrong.

Ability-wise I would agree.

But defenses also thrive on intimidation. This is where we're lacking all around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

it all goes back to the black glove award.

the guys were hitting hard trying to win it and when they took it away they got soft.

it needs to be brought back. screw the pansies worrying about people getting hurt.

It does make you wonder why that went away.

It's also worth discussing whether Davis propensity for hard hits dropped with his switch in positions.

They play nasty. They don't show unsportsmanlike conduct on the field.. But they still play nasty.

Glad you mentioned that. Some folks thought sportsmanship was the problem. I disagree with that. You can be intimidating and hit hard while remaining a good sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

They play nasty. They don't show unsportsmanlike conduct on the field.. But they still play nasty.

Steelers yes, Ravens no. Watch the Ravens on D. They take cheap shots after the whistle where the ref can't see. I have zero respect for their defense. They are thugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It does make you wonder why that went away.

It's also worth discussing whether Davis propensity for hard hits dropped with his switch in positions.

Glad you mentioned that. Some folks thought sportsmanship was the problem. I disagree with that. You can be intimidating and hit hard while remaining a good sport.

i can't remember who it was that reported it going away but whoever it was asked the players about it and it was because the league was cracking down big time on big hits (wussy league officials) and they thought that it might be seen as an unfavorable thing to be doing.

i thought it was a great motivator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Our linebackers were great this year, Davis included, any opinion to the contrary is flat out wrong.
they were great but the constant level of ferocity went down quite a bit. they weren't as intimidating as they had been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

He doesn't get the chances because he isn't as athletic, so ya I agree.

Reed is on my mancrush list as well.:biggrinjester:

Yup, not saying that he can't hit as hard, or harder, just not as consistently. That just comes from them being super athletic, and fast, while also having enough ass to half kill someone. Very few are as fast as Ed, and also can hit that hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think having that "nasty" defense is a way to be successful so in that I agree with you but I don't think you have to be that to be a successful defense.

Maybe its just me but when I think of the Tampa defense and even the New England defense I don't think about a team that plays with a nasty demenour. I think of defenses that are smart, oppurtuntistic and cunging.

A friend (a Steelers fan) and I were having a conversation about the New England defense just the other day. It really is amazing that they have a good defense at all. The players on that team throughout their run have never been what I would consider to be the ideal players. Most of the players on that team have benefited more from their mind and ability to run the scheme than from their natural physical talents. I'm not saying they don't have players with physical talents but they not rely simply on those physical talents to be successful.

Maybe what this team needs is that nasty demoure that Baltimore and Pittsburgh has. Maybe this team needs a scheme (for lack of a better word) that will allow them to be "quite techniquians". Now that Meeks has been hired and his style would be more of the Tampa and Indy defenses, let him do what he does best. I'd love to have a Pittburgh or Baltimore type defense but at the same time I'd take a New England or Tampa type defense as well if the result is a championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We have guys on the Defence to get everyone fired up. Beason and Harris are two that just demand respect and are just natural born leaders. We just need a guy on the line that has the fire to get everyone's motors going. As for coaches im sure im gonna get bashed for this but Fox is if anything good at getting his D fired up and not letting them quit. Thats what I like the most out of him he knows how to keep them playing hard even when the chips are down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The only feared tackler on the D for us is Harris, and he is nowhere near a Troy or Ed type hitter.

The rest are good tacklers, but not big hitters. I personally like those who wrap up, and maybe miss the big hit. At the end of the day, the Safety is a more important position than most give it credit for, and we have good S's but not great.

I'd rather get tackled by Harris than Davis. Davis is a BEAST.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think having that "nasty" defense is a way to be successful so in that I agree with you but I don't think you have to be that to be a successful defense.

Maybe its just me but when I think of the Tampa defense and even the New England defense I don't think about a team that plays with a nasty demenour. I think of defenses that are smart, oppurtuntistic and cunging.

A friend (a Steelers fan) and I were having a conversation about the New England defense just the other day. It really is amazing that they have a good defense at all. The players on that team throughout their run have never been what I would consider to be the ideal players. Most of the players on that team have benefited more from their mind and ability to run the scheme than from their natural physical talents. I'm not saying they don't have players with physical talents but they not rely simply on those physical talents to be successful.

Maybe what this team needs is that nasty demoure that Baltimore and Pittsburgh has. Maybe this team needs a scheme (for lack of a better word) that will allow them to be "quite techniquians". Now that Meeks has been hired and his style would be more of the Tampa and Indy defenses, let him do what he does best. I'd love to have a Pittburgh or Baltimore type defense but at the same time I'd take a New England or Tampa type defense as well if the result is a championship.

The Patriots always go for smart players on defense, which is a good strategy.

The fact that we had to simplify our scheme to be effective doesn't speak well, honestly :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

fantastic article. I agree whole-heartedly... if Meeks' strong point is providing the schemes, we need the positional coaches to inspire the anger, the heart. If we can pull that off we'll be in good shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites