Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Looking at the Luke Kuechly forced fumble

carolina panthers luke kuechly

  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#31 nosuchthingasapanther

nosuchthingasapanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,313 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:31 AM

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......................


they wouldn't have had to make back to back goal lines stands if they would have taken care of business between the 20s.

you can bend and not break only so many times before...*snap*.

#32 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,143 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:32 AM

Here is the problem. Most olineman Gs now days weigh about the same as most DTs do. So it takes more then just weight to eat up space in the running lane. Those DTs got to learn to shred blocks and get to there position quick as possible. Weight is not so much the factor, but who wins out in the trenches as they say. Fatboy vs fatboy. So Mcclain and Fue got to learn to shred those blocks better and get there sooner. If not then they are going to get pushed around more and more every game until they learn.



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.

#33 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,651 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:37 AM

they wouldn't have had to make back to back goal lines stands if they would have taken care of business between the 20s.

you can bend and not break only so many times before...*snap*.


Since we don't play that style in the regular season you have nothing to worry about. It is the first preseason game. Why won't people understand that basic logic......

Chicken Little mania is running rampant around here.

#34 nosuchthingasapanther

nosuchthingasapanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,313 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:44 AM

Since we don't play that style in the regular season you have nothing to worry about. It is the first preseason game. Why won't people understand that basic logic......

Chicken Little mania is running rampant around here.


don't play that style in the regular season?

i'm fairly certain this thread was created because this is the same type of sloppy play that went on last season.

#35 nosuchthingasapanther

nosuchthingasapanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,313 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:46 AM

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.


blockers being the key word.

unfortunately, no one on the interior of the line consistently commands multiple blockers.

#36 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,651 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:53 AM

don't play that style in the regular season?

i'm fairly certain this thread was created because this is the same type of sloppy play that went on last season.


Last year we had a new system, no preseason, injuries and shuffling at key positions all season long, rookies at both DT positions and the list goes on. Tell me how one or two series in the first preseason game of the year is representative of last year in any way???

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.

Are people trying to get out front with the doom and gloom predictions so they can be first to say they predicted another poor defense?? I have never seen such overreactions to a preseason game. Obviously the problems last year have spooked lots of posters into chicken little logic...........

#37 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,651 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 August 2012 - 09:59 AM

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.

#38 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,736 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 10:07 AM

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.

#39 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,143 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 10:16 AM

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.

#40 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,651 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 August 2012 - 10:30 AM

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....

#41 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,651 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 August 2012 - 10:33 AM

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.

#42 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,728 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 11:14 AM

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

#43 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,736 posts

Posted 13 August 2012 - 11:17 AM

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.

#44 cgarsmoker

cgarsmoker

    Panther Aficionado

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 556 posts
  • LocationViera, Florida

Posted 13 August 2012 - 12:04 PM

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.

#45 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,651 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 13 August 2012 - 02:24 PM

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.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: carolina panthers, luke kuechly

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com