Giving our defense excuses

[CRA]

the MLB is about as close as it gets. that's why they get the headset.

when you have a more experienced team full of players who know all their responsibilities and have been in the system for a while (years) then i think that what you said about no one player will make or brake a team. until we have that, we need a guy like beason who knows what everyone is supposed to be doing and makes sure that people don't do any freelancing.

yeah, but it still isn't the same. The Colts have a decent offensive cast.....take out Manning and they are the league's worst. If we had a decent overall defensive cast then losing Beason wouldn't cause us to be the league's worst.

A QB can cause an entire team to LITERALLY implode. A MLB doesn't have that ability to that extreme. If the D implidoes it is generally b/c of glaring weakness throughout (DTs, #2 CB, etc.).

[TAZZ]

SUPER HIGH

EXPECTATIONS !

For an extremly young defense.

But true to form ,some fans always want someone fired ,traded, cut or benched.

It Is What It Is

[Davidson Deac II]

Nah, QB is a unique position.

There are realistically no Peyton Manning's on D. No one player will make or break a team if the overall cast is strong. Get healthy and commit to improving it.....and Ron Rivera will have a good D soon.

Losing Beason hurt a lot....but it was a much bigger blow b/c of how weak we were in so many areas.

Lawrence Taylor probably came as close as anyone. But I agree, there is no one player on defense who compares in importance to the quarterback on offense.

However, I think it was the combination of the loss of Beason and Edwards that hurt us. A defense that is weak up the middle is going to be a bad defense.

[rayzor]

yeah, but it still isn't the same. The Colts have a decent offensive cast.....take out Manning and they are the league's worst. If we had a decent overall defensive cast then losing Beason wouldn't cause us to be the league's worst.

A QB can cause an entire team to LITERALLY implode. A MLB doesn't have that ability to that extreme. If the D implidoes it is generally b/c of glaring weakness throughout (DTs, #2 CB, etc.).

agreed, but then i look at what the pats did without brady. i think that if you have a solid system in place that the players are solid and experienced in and know what they are supposed to be doing then you should even be able to overcome the loss of a QB. the problem with the colts is that peyton manning is their system.

now you can't just stick in any player in to replace a QB or MLB and expect success. it has to be someone who knows their role in that particular system and can do the job relatively mistake-free. they don't have to excel at it, they just have to avoid making mistakes while the rest of the players pick up the slack.

point is for a young team just learning a system and that team also having glaring holes, like you mentioned, they for sure need to have that guy in the middle that can be the field general in the way a QB is on offense. they have to have someone that is respected and knows what everyone is supposed to be doing and that will put them in their place when they are out of line.

[Peppermint9030]

yeah, but it still isn't the same. The Colts have a decent offensive cast.....take out Manning and they are the league's worst. If we had a decent overall defensive cast then losing Beason wouldn't cause us to be the league's worst.

A QB can cause an entire team to LITERALLY implode. A MLB doesn't have that ability to that extreme. If the D implidoes it is generally b/c of glaring weakness throughout (DTs, #2 CB, etc.).

Thank you finally common sense

[Peppermint9030]

agreed, but then i look at what the pats did without brady. i think that if you have a solid system in place that the players are solid and experienced in and know what they are supposed to be doing then you should even be able to overcome the loss of a QB. the problem with the colts is that peyton manning is their system.

now you can't just stick in any player in to replace a QB or MLB and expect success. it has to be someone who knows their role in that particular system and can do the job relatively mistake-free. they don't have to excel at it, they just have to avoid making mistakes while the rest of the players pick up the slack.

point is for a young team just learning a system and that team also having glaring holes, like you mentioned, they for sure need to have that guy in the middle that can be the field general in the way a QB is on offense. they have to have someone that is respected and knows what everyone is supposed to be doing and that will put them in their place when they are out of line.

I agree with that...The only thing is this defense even with Beason doesn't have the talent right NOW to be good...It took Willis around 4 years to finally have a solid defense and that took a lot of work...

Beason alone can't save this defense he can band aid it, and make certain holes not as glaring but he alone can't fix it...

[Peppermint9030]

agreed, but then i look at what the pats did without brady. i think that if you have a solid system in place that the players are solid and experienced in and know what they are supposed to be doing then you should even be able to overcome the loss of a QB. the problem with the colts is that peyton manning is their system.

now you can't just stick in any player in to replace a QB or MLB and expect success. it has to be someone who knows their role in that particular system and can do the job relatively mistake-free. they don't have to excel at it, they just have to avoid making mistakes while the rest of the players pick up the slack.

point is for a young team just learning a system and that team also having glaring holes, like you mentioned, they for sure need to have that guy in the middle that can be the field general in the way a QB is on offense. they have to have someone that is respected and knows what everyone is supposed to be doing and that will put them in their place when they are out of line.

Were over thinking what a MLB does for a defense...The DT's create the holes and reads for a MLB...

[panthers55]

Panthers55 before you attack me I want you to read my original post again...Our defense doesn't have any talent the Ravens were just an example...A severe example? Yes...But still just a reference I can use a lot of defenses in the league as an example to my point about 27 other teams...

You said our team was blown up two years ago, we lost Beason and our defense doesn't have much talent outside of that. That was ORIGINAL POINT to this whole thread! Yea Beason is a loss, but there simply wasn't and isn't enough talent on this defense to be a top fight defense...Or even a top 20 defense!

The coaching doesn't help...Our D cor was never anything to admire over in Philly either...A matter of fact plenty of Philly fans were happy he was gone. Like you stated we don't have the talent, and I don't think we have the coaching either...

I don't think these problems will resolve with Ron Edwards, and Jon Beason either (great player)...Who do we draft? This is a weak DT class and the top DE is not so hot...So do we draft Blackmon and go D from rounds 2-7? Well we can't do that according to people on this site because draft picks from 2-7 are all considered projects.

Unless we find the Cam Newton of defense in this years draft and fill voids a lot of voids through FA...This defense is going to suffer again...Rome was not built in a day, and building this defense will be like building Rome.

And in a 3-4 weather you run fire zones, cover 2, man up, cover 3 w/e...You need a massive Nose Tackle, strong de's that act as tackles, pass rushing OLB's, and powerful space taking MLB's...So no matter what scheme is ran that would be a pretty tough transition for a 4-3 style team...

I played college football and when we switched formations players were more out of position and had to switch positions, had to bulk to fit the spot, it was a bigger change. Our Dline was way to small to fit in a 3-4, weather they stunted different, bull rushed, or took up space they were too small to make room for the clean up line backers...

You covered a lot of ground and in many points I agree with you. MY post wasn't to be an attack simply a rebuttal to what I thought was an attack on a fellow poster when honestly I couldn't tell why the two of you were arguing. Many folks seem to confuse formation and schemes. coverage shells, etc but I think you and rayzor were not that different in what you were saying. You are right that going from a 3-4 to a 4-3 is tough or easy based on personnel and skill sets first and foremost. The best coaching and schemes don't matter if you don't have the personnel to run a particular defense. And if you played college you also know that teams may have a base formation but the usually run several formations and different schemes based on down and distance, game situation, etc.

If it sounded like an attack it was a tongue in cheek attempt to clarify the point of the discussion. Sorry if it appears too harsh.

As for Mcdermott I think he inherited a lack from talent from Jim Johnson particularly at the linebacker spot in Philly. He had the same issue with injuries there he did this year. He seems snakebitten when it comes to linebackers. He isn't running the aggressive scheme he wants to run given the personnel limitations he has. Look at the stats for Philly's defense in 2007 and 2008 which were the last 2 years under Johnson versus mcDermott's success in 2009 and 2010 and notice that Johnson struggled as well.

[Razeyfingers]

Which guys in our secondary were locked up long term this offseason? Everytime I google I get a video of some goofy kid lookin like hes constipated.

Ya I didnt watch it either, but I am curious to know If Captain, Godfrey, or Martin got hooked up for long term this offseason. Im curious to know how invested we made ourselves there. Man its rough developing young safeties, not sure its worth it for what a good healthy vet would cost if one were available.

[bleys]

You covered a lot of ground and in many points I agree with you. MY post wasn't to be an attack simply a rebuttal to what I thought was an attack on a fellow poster when honestly I couldn't tell why the two of you were arguing. Many folks seem to confuse formation and schemes. coverage shells, etc but I think you and rayzor were not that different in what you were saying. You are right that going from a 3-4 to a 4-3 is tough or easy based on personnel and skill sets first and foremost. The best coaching and schemes don't matter if you don't have the personnel to run a particular defense. And if you played college you also know that teams may have a base formation but the usually run several formations and different schemes based on down and distance, game situation, etc.

If it sounded like an attack it was a tongue in cheek attempt to clarify the point of the discussion. Sorry if it appears too harsh.

As for Mcdermott I think he inherited a lack from talent from Jim Johnson particularly at the linebacker spot in Philly. He had the same issue with injuries there he did this year. He seems snakebitten when it comes to linebackers. He isn't running the aggressive scheme he wants to run given the personnel limitations he has. Look at the stats for Philly's defense in 2007 and 2008 which were the last 2 years under Johnson versus mcDermott's success in 2009 and 2010 and notice that Johnson struggled as well.

I'm even confused now.. he was originally saying the Ravens never missed a beat when Rex Ryan left.. saying that a 4-3 formation is still a 4-3 formation.. totally ignoring that the formation has little to do with this discussion.. the scheme from Fox to Rivera/McDermott has changed and that using the Ravens as an example was foolish, at best.. The Ravens didn't drastically change their scheme and had plenty of top notch talent as veterans...

now I guess he's saying that McDermott should have turned this defense around because the Ravens took a top 5 defense and kept it a top 5 defense while we had a horrible defense and should have made it a top 10?

:confused:

[panthers55]

Nah, QB is a unique position.

There are realistically no Peyton Manning's on D. No one player will make or break a team if the overall cast is strong. Get healthy and commit to improving it.....and Ron Rivera will have a good D soon.

Losing Beason hurt a lot....but it was a much bigger blow b/c of how weak we were in so many areas.

On our D there are two playcallers on defense. Beason calls the formation and under coverage, the strong safety calls the cover shell. When receivers line up to overload a zone in a cover 2 for example, the SS fills and calls the new coverage which could be a cover 1 with man under. We started going downhill last year when we lost Chris Harris. When Beason went down this year we had to rely on Godfrey and Anderson/Connor. That is why we are always out of place and don't adjust to the offense well. We just lack the expereince and veteran leadership to run the defense.

[panthers55]

I'm even confused now.. he was originally saying the Ravens never missed a beat when Rex Ryan left.. saying that a 4-3 formation is still a 4-3 formation.. totally ignoring that the formation has little to do with this discussion.. the scheme from Fox to Rivera/McDermott has changed and that using the Ravens as an example was foolish, at best.. The Ravens didn't drastically change their scheme and had plenty of top notch talent as veterans...

now I guess he's saying that McDermott should have turned this defense around because the Ravens took a top 5 defense and kept it a top 5 defense while we had a horrible defense and should have made it a top 10?

:confused:

I think the issue is the discussion around scheme versus formation. He was arguing that since we stayed in the same 4-3 formation rather than changing for example to a 3-4 should have made the transition easier and there is no reason for us to struggle so much. You and rayzor are arguing that while we are still a 4-3, the scheme is different to the point that it is just as different as if we went to a different formation.

The point about the Ravens was a little superfluous and irrelevant because they have had the same formations, schemes and most importantly personnel for years.

For me the problem this year is learning a new scheme, lack of appropriate personnel, injuries forcing us to juggle the lineup every week so there is no chemistry, and inexperience and lack of depth at most positions. I think McDermott and Rivera will be much better next year with this defense. If nothing else all the injuries and playing of rookies have given the starters and backups tons of experience. The same thing happened in 2004 which set us up for a pretty terrific 2005.

[panthers55]

Which guys in our secondary were locked up long term this offseason? Everytime I google I get a video of some goofy kid lookin like hes constipated.

Ya I didnt watch it either, but I am curious to know If Captain, Godfrey, or Martin got hooked up for long term this offseason. Im curious to know how invested we made ourselves there. Man its rough developing young safeties, not sure its worth it for what a good healthy vet would cost if one were available.

Martin, Godfrey,and Munnerlyn are all on there original rookie contracts. So while they are veterans, they are still inexperienced at this point. Only Godfrey started all the games in a season and he still struggles much of the time.

Gamble is the only one locked up long term.

[bleys]

I just said the scheme changed, the formation talk came from his reference to the Ravens had a 4-3 and their defense was still awesome after Rex Ryan left..

I'm guessing his irrelevant reference is where all this confusion came from..