Interesting read on our secondary philosophy

At least I won't blame this on Hixon:)

At least I won't blame this on Hixon:)

Well we do practice against our own receivers. :)

The scheme works, but as the article points out they just need better execution of it.

But what makes Pittsburgh so much better at it then us? Going by the article I'm assuming we have the same schemes. I'm really not trying to be smartass in any way I'm just curious. If it's purely execution then I'm fine with the scheme because it works very well for Pitt. If they do something differently than us I'd like to know what it is. I may be wrong but I think our personell should put us on the same level as them. I definitely believe our execution is lacking at this point and expect it to get better, it's only been one game and maybe that is the answer.

But what makes Pittsburgh so much better at it then us? Going by the article I'm assuming we have the same schemes. I'm really not trying to be smartass in any way I'm just curious. If it's purely execution then I'm fine with the scheme because it works very well for Pitt. If they do something differently than us I'd like to know what it is. I may be wrong but I think our personell should put us on the same level as them. I definitely believe our execution is lacking at this point and expect it to get better, it's only been one game and maybe that is the answer.

I would go with that too.

Everyone (not pointing you out) seems to want all these answers after just one game, and really it's just not that cut and dry. We still have 15 games left, alot can and will happen over the course of the season. I think too many people are taking the results of one game, putting it under the microscope, and assuming that's how the rest of the year will go.

I would go with that too.

Everyone (not pointing you out) seems to want all these answers after just one game, and really it's just not that cut and dry. We still have 15 games left, alot can and will happen over the course of the season. I think too many people are taking the results of one game, putting it under the microscope, and assuming that's how the rest of the year will go.

Got to agree with you here.

Unless I'm missing something, the Giants, who won 12 games last year, scored 16 offensive points and our defense caused 1 interception and 1 fumble.

I'm not sure I'm ready to throw the defense under the bus yet.

....since you apparently know what you're talking about, great posts by the wayThanks. Too bad I can't get my wife and kid to believe this. :)

The article says Pittsburgh only uses play off-man coverage, why such a big difference in their results and ours? Is it because they disguise better and mix things up a lttle more?Yes. But they use some press at times also. The key is disguise and mixing thiings up. Here is some info from wiki on Dick LeBeau, Jim Johnson and Spags:



“It was a thought process kind of born out of necessity. It was basically an outcropping of the run-and-shoot [offense] that was becoming pretty prevalent in the league back then. We were in the same division as Houston, and they were tremendous at it with Moon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Moon) and Co. Then the West Coast offense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_offense) was spreading throughout the league. Those were all quick-rhythm, get-the-ball-out-of-your-hands-and-cut-up-the-defense types of passing games. We were just looking for ways to get pressure without exposing our defensive backs to have to cover the whole field all of the time.”—Dick LeBeau, on the origin of the ‘zone blitz’.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_LeBeau#cite_note-Domowitch-0)







As an assistant coach he is credited with inventing the "Fire Zone" or "zone blitz" defense, which employs unpredictable pass rushes and pass coverage from various players.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_LeBeau#cite_note-6) His defenses typically employ 3-4 sets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football_strategy#3-4), with any of the 4 linebackers and frequently a defensive back among the pass rushers, while defensive linemen may drop back into short pass coverage zones to compensate for the pass rush coming from other positions. The design is intended to confuse the opposition's quarterback and frustrate its blocking schemes, as the offense may be unsure on each play of which defenders will rush the passer and which will drop into coverage. While often described as a "blitzing" scheme (implying more than the typical number of four pass rushers used by most defenses), the call on any particular "zone blitz" play may involve only three or four pass rushers but from unpredictable positions and angles. Although widely considered a defensive innovator, his stint as the head coach of the Cincinnati Bengals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_Bengals) was unsuccessful[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_LeBeau#cite_note-7).

Jim Johnson.....Widely regarded as one of the best defensive coordinators in the National Football League (NFL) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League), he was especially known for being a master architect of blitzes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blitz_(American_football)), disguising them skillfully and keeping offenses constantly off-balance.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Johnson_(American_football)#cite_note-0)

Spagnuolo learned under Philadelphia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Eagles) coach Jim Johnson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Johnson_(football_coach)), and shares the same aggressive, blitz-heavy approach as his mentor. Spagnuolo uses a 4-3 base (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football_strategy#4-3) defense with a heavy emphasis on multiple blitz packages, including corner and safety blitzes. While defensive coordinator of the New York Giants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Giants), he often used a smaller defensive line, with three or even four defensive ends to further pressure the quarterback.
This philosophy proved successful, with the Giants leading the NFL in sacks in 2007. During Super Bowl XLII (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_XLII), Spagnuolo's defense sacked Tom Brady (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Brady) five times, the most times he had been sacked in any game that season.

The Steelers run a 3-4, the Giants, Eagles run a 4-3. The technical aspects of what coverage to run or what base D is better 3-4 or 4-3 isn't as important as the philosophy of confusion and keeping the O off-balance. All three teams do this very well and have been historically successful on defense due to that type of philosophy. It isn't just that they have better players than anyone else.

I'm not throwing the season out the window or throwing Blache completely under the bus for the season. But from the Giants game the defensive philosophy is the same as last season. In the Giants game we had similar problems; can't get off the field on 3rd down, opponent picking apart the defense. We did manage (2) turnovers, the fumble came from exactly the type of blitz I'm talking about, and the pick was a great play by Landry while Manning was hurried (can't recall if it was a blitz play or great effort by the DL on the hurry).

My point is we have imporved our talent level on the D, to receive the maximum benefit from the over $ 70M invested in the D this off-season, the coaching staff must make the philosophical adjustment to be more aggressive, create confusion, and keep the O off-balance. If Blache does this we will see the same kind of defensive success as the Steelers, Giants and Eagles. If not, we'll still fare statistically well in yds & points but 3rd down %, turnovers, and most importantly coming up with stops in key situations, we will still struggle.

I would go with that too.

Everyone (not pointing you out) seems to want all these answers after just one game, and really it's just not that cut and dry. We still have 15 games left, alot can and will happen over the course of the season. I think too many people are taking the results of one game, putting it under the microscope, and assuming that's how the rest of the year will go.


Have to agree with you, i'm as mad as the next Die Hard Skin Fan of the result against the giants but i tell myself it's one game relax we will right the ship.

HTTR.

I am in debt to you Sammy! This kind of info is greatly appreciated! :food-smil

Hopefully, "You can't teach an old dog new tricks" doesn't apply to Blache. Changing the way you think about things doesn't mean you were a failure, just that you're intelligent enough to do better.

Got to agree with you here.

Unless I'm missing something, the Giants, who won 12 games last year, scored 16 offensive points and our defense caused 1 interception and 1 fumble.

I'm not sure I'm ready to throw the defense under the bus yet.

And wasn't our Defense on the field for like 80% of the first half? I would say we did an impressive job against the Giants on Defense for being fucked on the field so long because our offense didn't substain drives.

I hope this gives more context and insight rather than saying "XXXX sucks!!" although it didn't give any as to why Rogers can't catch. Just sayin. :confused:

Great article!
But Hall got beatdown playing the coverage he is best at. No excuses for him.

They just need to get the job done.

Also, We need to get enough pressure so the QB can't take a 7 step drop.
We need to force them to dump it on the first cut so our CBs can jump routes and make some picks.