Jump to content

Archived

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

Zod

Looking at the Luke Kuechly forced fumble

Recommended Posts

I believe the job of at least one of those guys in the run game is not to shed but to occupy and hold on to blockers. if you shed the blocker they go lay blocks into line backers and that is not good.

Depends on whether you are running a one gap or two gap scheme. In a one gap scheme the goal is to split the blockers and penetrate into the backfield not occupy two blockers.In a two gap it is to occupy two blockers. So in our hybrid scheme what the nose tackles often does on running plays is to occupy two blockers which is different than the 3 technique who is to penetrate and disrupt the play. On passing downs it is to penetrate and pressure the quarterback from all positions once it is determined that the play isn't a running play.

So no it isn't as simple as you want to make it or even I have depicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will run a blitzing aggressive scheme in the regular season. Last year we ran a vanilla cover 2 bend don't break defense. Nothing remotely similar.

Well, I think we need to see some signs of this aggressive scheme soon. Take the Texans for example, why did they blitz us? B/c that is what they do and they need practice at it. None of our LBs have been involved in heavy blitzing schemes. It isn't like we can just start blitzing teams week 1 and it work. Preseason game 3 at least we need to see glimpses of this aggressive scheme in action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Depends on whether you are running a one gap or two gap scheme. In a one gap scheme the goal is to split the blockers and penetrate into the backfield not occupy two blockers.In a two gap it is to occupy two blockers. So in our hybrid scheme what the nose tackles often does on running plays is to occupy two blockers which is different than the 3 technique who is to penetrate and disrupt the play. On passing downs it is to penetrate and pressure the quarterback from all positions once it is determined that the play isn't a running play.

So no it isn't as simple as you want to make it or even I have depicted.

That's what I said. When discussing run defense there is no reason to suggest that the DTs need to learn to shed blocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think we need to see some signs of this aggressive scheme soon. Take the Texans for example, why did they blitz us? B/c that is what they do and they need practice at it. None of our LBs have been involved in heavy blitzing schemes. It isn't like we can just start blitzing teams week 1 and it work. Preseason game 3 at least we need to see glimpses of this aggressive scheme in action.

Ask McDermott. I don't have a clue. I trust that he knows what he is doing though....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I said. When discussing run defense there is no reason to suggest that the DTs need to learn to shed blocks.

3 technique DTs do need to split or shed blocks to gain penetration on run plays. Nose tackles do not necessarily although you want them to work through the double team and grab the runner as he goes through the hole. So I am not sure we totally agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad how many people made fun of OP and others for discussing actual football for once instead of posting a 'funny' gif.

The whole "you shouldn't dissect the plays that's for the coaches to know" sounded like the king of religious thinking that gave us the middle ages. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad how many people made fun of OP and others for discussing actual football for once instead of posting a 'funny' gif.

The whole "you shouldn't dissect the plays that's for the coaches to know" sounded like the king of religious thinking that gave us the middle ages. lol

I also hate the you don't have coaches tape and aren't a GM/coach therefore any opinion you have should be kept to yourself and is wrong if it goes against the FO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




So because the DTs didn't do a great job on a single play and our backup middle linebackers wasn't great, the defense is going to be poor again....................................

Lets not talk about the goal line stand, or the fact that Foster only ran the ball that one play. Lets open up a new thread just to discuss one meaningless in the first preseason game of the year to illustrate nothing of importance.

Got it......................

If you don't want to discuss breaking down this play......Couldn't you chose to simply click on another link instead of b*tching about what other people are talking about? There are a lot of threads that I don't care to read so I just click on the ones that interest me and move on from the others. Maybe you should give it a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad how many people made fun of OP and others for discussing actual football for once instead of posting a 'funny' gif.

The whole "you shouldn't dissect the plays that's for the coaches to know" sounded like the king of religious thinking that gave us the middle ages. lol

I also hate the you don't have coaches tape and aren't a GM/coach therefore any opinion you have should be kept to yourself and is wrong if it goes against the FO.

The issue has nothing to do with analyzing a play. The issue is making too much of the analysis and extrapolating that to the team or suggesting it is symptomatic of a larger problem. That is like taking a single sample and saying that since it was the case in this small example, it is going to be the case across the board. That is a huge leap from one to the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't want to discuss breaking down this play......Couldn't you chose to simply click on another link instead of b*tching about what other people are talking about? There are a lot of threads that I don't care to read so I just click on the ones that interest me and move on from the others. Maybe you should give it a try.

So why should you get to say what you want in favor of this play yet I should say nothing if I don't agree that the analysis is indicative of a problem in general? You have the right to speak your mind and so do I. I am not telling people they can't do anything they want just suggesting that they are making way too much of a single incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue has nothing to do with analyzing a play. The issue is making too much of the analysis and extrapolating that to the team or suggesting it is symptomatic of a larger problem. That is like taking a single sample and saying that since it was the case in this small example, it is going to be the case across the board. That is a huge leap from one to the other.

Are you saying that Kuechly won't force a fumble every play??? B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying that Kuechly won't force a fumble every play??? B)

And I bet he won't have to run back 10 yards from the line of scrimmage to make the play as the D line get gashed for a big run on every play either.

See it is easy.....................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



×