PDA

View Full Version : Spread the defense, empty shotgun why not?



BigBlueCrew22
09-08-2012, 04:47 AM
NICKS, CRUZ, HIXON, BARDEN, JERNIGAN????

HOW ABOUT AN EMPTY SHOTgun lets start confusing these defenses a little bit what is the problem i posted something earlier about it and you idiots find a problem with it cuz it looks like green bays offense?? lmao hello and they were 14-2 last year i believe or 13-3 OUR RECEIVERS ARE JU AS GOOD AS THEIRS, why the **** not S P R E A D the defense, confuse them, we come out in the same formations all the time its so obvious when we are going to run the ball, the play action was terrible on wednesday the cowboys didnt buy it one bit, it is time to spread spread spread the defense why the hell not? i see nothing wrong with it or instead of jernigan how about bennet run something short have cruz go deep, nicks an in pattern hixon go deep like why the hell not it is time to confuse these defenses they are always prepared for the same giants game plan cuz it is literally the same thing each game, how about a reverse here n their cruz has lightening speed we need to utilize more of our weapons, not do the same thing each game, cuz thats what it is, its time for some experimenting god dammit.

lawrenceS59
09-08-2012, 04:52 AM
I never said I had a problem with it....NO ONE had a problem with it. Reading comprehension my friend.......I said I don't think they'd ever go that route considering they drafted a RUNNING BACK in the first round. They clearly want to get their running game going.

BigBlueCrew22
09-08-2012, 04:58 AM
WELL GUESS where it is going? you wanna know where its going?? NO WHERE !! unless this o-line gets a reality check it is going nowhere, it is time for some empty shot-guns and some hurry up offenses with one of the best qb's in football. thanks. i gurantee we would win more if we brought that formation to our routine, it is so key to spread the defense, throw the ball downfield, it will open the run game up. and then you run, you dont throw the ball once then run the ball 2 times, gilbride is so predictable, friggen christ.

lawrenceS59
09-08-2012, 05:04 AM
I'm sure he'll figure it out. They definitely need to do something to get the running game going and if passing more opens up running lanes.....I don't see why he wouldn't try it. We will see.

BigBlueCrew22
09-08-2012, 05:06 AM
i havent seen them line up in an empty shot gun in about 3 years, we do the same type of shot-gun everytime and he either does that stupid *** draw or he throws it obviously but its just the same thing im hoping they just change it up but i doubt it. i just think they should be experimenting a tad bit more.

Rat_bastich
09-08-2012, 05:29 AM
Is this Ksmooth again?

Flip Empty
09-08-2012, 06:04 AM
Loud noises

BillTheGreek
09-08-2012, 08:30 AM
NICKS, CRUZ, HIXON, BARDEN, JERNIGAN????

HOW ABOUT AN EMPTY SHOTgun lets start confusing these defenses a little bit what is the problem i posted something earlier about it and you idiots find a problem with it cuz it looks like green bays offense?? lmao hello and they were 14-2 last year i believe or 13-3 OUR RECEIVERS ARE JU AS GOOD AS THEIRS, why the **** not S P R E A D the defense, confuse them, we come out in the same formations all the time its so obvious when we are going to run the ball, the play action was terrible on wednesday the cowboys didnt buy it one bit, it is time to spread spread spread the defense why the hell not? i see nothing wrong with it or instead of jernigan how about bennet run something short have cruz go deep, nicks an in pattern hixon go deep like why the hell not it is time to confuse these defenses they are always prepared for the same giants game plan cuz it is literally the same thing each game, how about a reverse here n their cruz has lightening speed we need to utilize more of our weapons, not do the same thing each game, cuz thats what it is, its time for some experimenting god dammit.

THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ! All your comment's are 1000000000 % True ! I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS SINCE AUGUST ! A lot of G fans don't agree, They say, then we become one Dimensional ! They say we can't Abandon the Run...............were not Abandoning the Run ! We have to Pass more to set up the Run....Let Eli do more Pitch-Outs, Screen-passes, Short Passes to AB on the outside. Stop AB from running into a Brick-Wall..Until we fix the the O-line..............If we have to run, RUN on the outside.

drewz
09-08-2012, 09:05 AM
The irony between your post and signature is quite hilarious.

BlueSanta
09-08-2012, 09:06 AM
Because the solution to a bad offensive line is not to forgo half the offense. Without the threat of the run, the pass is that much easier to defend.

Review Steve Spurriers short tenure as a coach in the NFL. It will enlighten you.

The league may be a passing dominant league now, but running the ball is still important. We didnt run the ball well in the regular season last year and we were a marginal team. We ran the ball quite well in the playoffs and won a superbowl. It was the difference in our play between the playoffs and the regular season.

Diamondring
09-08-2012, 09:23 AM
THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ! All your comment's are 1000000000 % True ! I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS SINCE AUGUST ! A lot of G fans don't agree, They say, then we become one Dimensional ! They say we can't Abandon the Run...............were not Abandoning the Run ! We have to Pass more to set up the Run....Let Eli do more Pitch-Outs, Screen-passes, Short Passes to AB on the outside. Stop AB from running into a Brick-Wall..Until we fix the the O-line..............If we have to run, RUN on the outside.Most of those posters are ignorant and think that all offenses needed to be the same. The term I use is too predictable and that means too much predictable with no type of fake plays like screens. One posters said that screens do not work against zone defenses. Then another poster agreed with him. Both of those guys wich I am not going to name do not know that football is in real time. All screens look like ordinary plays then some time later in the play, the screens comes about. They think that just because the guys in the zone are looking at the qb receivers etc, they are going to see the screen. Yet how can they see the screens when it didn't happen yet?

When you spread the defense out and you have the talened wrs, defenses will have to use man more not zone. When the defense use 5 wr sets, then it is not good for the defense to perform zones. Many posters also act like all 4 wr sets are the same. They also think that in a 4 wr set, there are not going to be extra blockers to help the O-line. Well this is not true cause wrs can block well. When we talk about sets, we talk about the players but we hardly talk about the formations. In a 4 wr set, you can use the 3 wr set formation or the 4 wr set close I calls it. That type of formation has a wr close to the O-line acting as a te. Most of the time you use a big wr and we do have that. Some posters also don't look at the players as humans first. You always look at players as human beings first. When you do that, you can see that a te is just a big wr like Witten of Dallas. He is the te with the abilites of a wr. Actualy, the young Shockey was also in that same mold but the Giants used him as just a te. Yet if the Giants would have used Shockey as a possesive wr, he would have did very well and could have been a 1000 yard receiver in some years. Giants never used Shockey deep and that limits a receiver. At 6 ft 5, The Young Shockey should be able to outleap lbs and safeties.

What the Giants need to do until they get the players to run the ball successfully or our O-linemen start to improve their run blocking, we should be a passing offense and throw in runs here and there. Hopefully when the play starts, there are a few defenders and not more than our O-line can handle.

BillTheGreek
09-08-2012, 11:32 AM
Most of those posters are ignorant and think that all offenses needed to be the same. The term I use is too predictable and that means too much predictable with no type of fake plays like screens. One posters said that screens do not work against zone defenses. Then another poster agreed with him. Both of those guys wich I am not going to name do not know that football is in real time. All screens look like ordinary plays then some time later in the play, the screens comes about. They think that just because the guys in the zone are looking at the qb receivers etc, they are going to see the screen. Yet how can they see the screens when it didn't happen yet?

When you spread the defense out and you have the talened wrs, defenses will have to use man more not zone. When the defense use 5 wr sets, then it is not good for the defense to perform zones. Many posters also act like all 4 wr sets are the same. They also think that in a 4 wr set, there are not going to be extra blockers to help the O-line. Well this is not true cause wrs can block well. When we talk about sets, we talk about the players but we hardly talk about the formations. In a 4 wr set, you can use the 3 wr set formation or the 4 wr set close I calls it. That type of formation has a wr close to the O-line acting as a te. Most of the time you use a big wr and we do have that. Some posters also don't look at the players as humans first. You always look at players as human beings first. When you do that, you can see that a te is just a big wr like Witten of Dallas. He is the te with the abilites of a wr. Actualy, the young Shockey was also in that same mold but the Giants used him as just a te. Yet if the Giants would have used Shockey as a possesive wr, he would have did very well and could have been a 1000 yard receiver in some years. Giants never used Shockey deep and that limits a receiver. At 6 ft 5, The Young Shockey should be able to outleap lbs and safeties.

What the Giants need to do until they get the players to run the ball successfully or our O-linemen start to improve their run blocking, we should be a passing offense and throw in runs here and there. Hopefully when the play starts, there are a few defenders and not more than our O-line can handle.

WOW ! You should apply to the Giants for a job to advise the coaches ! You no what your talking about ! In fact ......... THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT !

brad
09-08-2012, 11:43 AM
The "Chuck and Duck"... sounds like a great idea! I mean, yeah, teams would probably just start sending 6 men in to kill the QB with no fear of a run or a check down option out of the backfield, but that shouldn't matter with our amazing ability to blitz protect. That won't matter because the receiving routes the Giants use are very quick to develop and Eli always gets rid of the ball in less than 2 seconds. [/sarcasm]

Seriously, while using the empty backfield every once in a while might be a good strategy, it is not, and should not be, your entire offensive scheme. I am all for going with a more up-tempo offense, even spreading out the defense more, but removing the RB is ridiculous. That would remove the threat of run, remove the check down when plays break down, remove the screen that helps slow blitzes, and remove the extra blocker that the RB often becomes. This would make our offense one dimensional and would all but guarantee that Eli would not finish the season.

Rat_bastich
09-08-2012, 11:48 AM
The "Chuck and Duck"... sounds like a great idea! I mean, yeah, teams would probably just start sending 6 men in to kill the QB with no fear of a run or a check down option out of the backfield, but that shouldn't matter with our amazing ability to blitz protect. That won't matter because the receiving routes the Giants use are very quick to develop and Eli always gets rid of the ball in less than 2 seconds. [/sarcasm]

Seriously, while using the empty backfield every once in a while might be a good strategy, it is not, and should not be, your entire offensive scheme. I am all for going with a more up-tempo offense, even spreading out the defense more, but removing the RB is ridiculous. That would remove the threat of run, remove the check down when plays break down, remove the screen that helps slow blitzes, and remove the extra blocker that the RB often becomes. This would make our offense one dimensional and would all but guarantee that Eli would not finish the season.

Exactly. It brings you back to the run and shoot...of which Kevin Gilbride was a massive proponent of and which failed miserably in the 80's and 90's. And, as said before what countered the run and shoot were blitzes. If you get the quarterback moving or even get in his face, the play and most likely the quarterback are dead.

brad
09-08-2012, 12:05 PM
Exactly. It brings you back to the run and shoot...of which Kevin Gilbride was a massive proponent of and which failed miserably in the 80's and 90's. And, as said before what countered the run and shoot were blitzes. If you get the quarterback moving or even get in his face, the play and most likely the quarterback are dead.

Yes, the "Chuck and Duck" is what Buddy Ryan called the Run and Shoot... I know he wasn't well liked by many, but he was funny. If we want to emulate an offense from that era, let's emulate San Fran who actually won superbowls, not Houston who put up some big numbers and had some amazing come from behind wins, but never won anything.

BillTheGreek
09-08-2012, 12:08 PM
Exactly. It brings you back to the run and shoot...of which Kevin Gilbride was a massive proponent of and which failed miserably in the 80's and 90's. And, as said before what countered the run and shoot were blitzes. If you get the quarterback moving or even get in his face, the play and most likely the quarterback are dead.

Were not Abandoning the Run ! We have to Pass more to set up the Run....Let Eli do more Pitch-Outs, Screen-passes, Short Passes to AB on the outside. Stop AB from running into a Brick-Wall..Last year we were Last in the league in Rushing 89.2............this year OK it was the first game 82 We have to do something until we fix OL..........

brad
09-08-2012, 12:15 PM
Were not Abandoning the Run ! We have to Pass more to set up the Run....Let Eli do more Pitch-Outs, Screen-passes, Short Passes to AB on the outside. Stop AB from running into a Brick-Wall..Last year we were Last in the league in Rushing 89.2............this year OK it was the first game 82 We have to do something until we fix OL..........

Title of this thread was "spread the defense, empty shotgun why not?" - which by definition means "no running back". That sounds like abandoning the run to me.

BurnerNYG
09-08-2012, 12:20 PM
Title of this thread was "spread the defense, empty shotgun why not?" - which by definition means "no running back". That sounds like abandoning the run to me.C'Mon you know what the guy meant. Of course we're gonna run the ball but we need to spread it out more. We got the personnel to do it.

GameTime
09-08-2012, 12:25 PM
delete duplicate

GameTime
09-08-2012, 12:26 PM
ever see the Giants do screens, pitchouts, and stuff like that. They are not too good at that either. They dont pull off the screen very well the mojority of the time. I agree they need to do something instead running for no gains but there still has to be a balance. Eli sholdl throw more but that doesnt mean they cant improve the run game significantly. They weer last last year. If they could get up to the middle of the pack that would be phenomonal for this line and offense...

BillTheGreek
09-08-2012, 12:27 PM
C'Mon you know what the guy meant. Of course we're gonna run the ball but we need to spread it out more. We got the personnel to do it.

Makes sense to me......................Better yet , get the other teams confused.........they know we are not that great at the run......So we start Passing a lot, then we sneak in a run ,when they least expect it...In the End ,Remember we are ALL GIANT FANS.!

GO GIANTS

Flip Empty
09-08-2012, 12:30 PM
C'Mon you know what the guy meant. Of course we're gonna run the ball but we need to spread it out more. We got the personnel to do it.
Yeah I'd love to see something like what the Pats ran in 07. I'm sure they could make it work.

Diamondring
09-08-2012, 12:32 PM
WOW ! You should apply to the Giants for a job to advise the coaches ! You no what your talking about ! In fact ......... THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT !I wish they would contact me.

brad
09-08-2012, 12:41 PM
C'Mon you know what the guy meant. Of course we're gonna run the ball but we need to spread it out more. We got the personnel to do it.

The reason they don't spread it out more with an empty backfield is because the O-line can't protect Eli long enough to do so. Defenses, rather than just trying to defend all those receivers, are going to send 6 guys in, overwhelming the 5 O-linemen and cutting off the head of the snake. Stop the QB, stop the passing game, it's that simple.

That being said, I agree with the premise of being a pass first offense, using the pass to set up the run. It isn't exactly my preferred approach to the game, but it is the one that would work best given the talent the Giants have on the roster. This is why I said "emulate San Fran, not Houston". San Fran was a pass first team, but more often than not had two men in the backfield, they just happened to be used as either blockers or receivers out of the backfield more than running the ball. That would also require simplifying the receiving routes, using more slants and timing patterns instead of option routes that can take longer to develop and require the WR and QB to be thinking the same thing at the same time.

The thought behind this is that we don't just have a problem with the running game, we have a problem with the O-line. Eli doesn't have 4-5 seconds to hang onto the ball, he needs to get rid of it quicker, letting the receivers make plays after the catch. Essentially, the short passing game is used almost like the running game, getting the runner past the D-line and hopefully to a more open field.

I think you and I agree more than we disagree, we are just saying it differently.

ELI_Iz_God
09-08-2012, 12:52 PM
I would like to see a no huddle drive once in a while...not just in situations where time is a factor. Just to mix things up.

Diamondring
09-08-2012, 12:55 PM
ever see the Giants do screens, pitchouts, and stuff like that. They are not too good at that either. They dont pull off the screen very well the mojority of the time. I agree they need to do something instead running for no gains but there still has to be a balance. Eli sholdl throw more but that doesnt mean they cant improve the run game significantly. They weer last last year. If they could get up to the middle of the pack that would be phenomonal for this line and offense...Tell you the truth, I like the two back and 3 wr set but we have to go to our strengths and that suppose to be wrs. Our O-line does not have to block for long periods of time all of the time and when the qb pass the ball, the wr can become the defender and bat the ball away if the defender does get the upperhand. The wr coach has a lot of work to do.

I also like the balance attack during play calling when we get the ball. Yet screens, draws and playaction are part of the balance attack. I wish posters know this. The 2000 Rams were balanced. They mixed up the play calling. You can see them use double moves and quick fakes just like the Saints. Marshal Faulk of the Rams was a receiver out of the backfiend and he caught a lot of balls thanks to his wr team mates. Rodger Craig and John Rathman of the 49ers in the 80s and some of the 90s were good receiving backs. A lot of times the backs were open in the passing game so if Eli has trouble, he can give it to one of his backs. I think that the Giants called some screens to the back in Wednesday Night's Game.

I like my receivers to get one on one battles and I feel that our receivers can beat many of them. The 4 and 5 wr sets gives you a good amount of one on one. Who could beat Cruz one on one? It is time to use Reuban or Barden to be the 4th receiver and that 4th one could be very valuable. I rememeber when the Packers were playing the Steelers in Superbowl 45 and one of the Packers' coaches said they wanted to use 4 wide cause they feel that their 4th wr can beat the Steelers 4th cb. I have been saying that football is all about the matchups so a 4th wr may play against the 4th cb so why not take a chance. If we can get that 3rd and 4th guy going, then our backs can just be open receivers. If our wrs can block well oh boy. All players don't gell right away like Nicks and Cruz. The spread gives receivers more one on one battles etc etc.

CowboysSuck
09-08-2012, 12:56 PM
How about just a plain hurry up offense now and then?!?

Idk what the tats are but Eli and the Giants HAVE to be top 5 in the league in the hurry up. I say they mix it up and run a couple drives throughout the game like that. I only see benefits, what is the negative side of that?

GameTime
09-08-2012, 01:41 PM
Tell you the truth, I like the two back and 3 wr set but we have to go to our strengths and that suppose to be wrs. Our O-line does not have to block for long periods of time all of the time and when the qb pass the ball, the wr can become the defender and bat the ball away if the defender does get the upperhand. The wr coach has a lot of work to do.

I also like the balance attack during play calling when we get the ball. Yet screens, draws and playaction are part of the balance attack. I wish posters know this. The 2000 Rams were balanced. They mixed up the play calling. You can see them use double moves and quick fakes just like the Saints. Marshal Faulk of the Rams was a receiver out of the backfiend and he caught a lot of balls thanks to his wr team mates. Rodger Craig and John Rathman of the 49ers in the 80s and some of the 90s were good receiving backs. A lot of times the backs were open in the passing game so if Eli has trouble, he can give it to one of his backs. I think that the Giants called some screens to the back in Wednesday Night's Game.

I like my receivers to get one on one battles and I feel that our receivers can beat many of them. The 4 and 5 wr sets gives you a good amount of one on one. Who could beat Cruz one on one? It is time to use Reuban or Barden to be the 4th receiver and that 4th one could be very valuable. I rememeber when the Packers were playing the Steelers in Superbowl 45 and one of the Packers' coaches said they wanted to use 4 wide cause they feel that their 4th wr can beat the Steelers 4th cb. I have been saying that football is all about the matchups so a 4th wr may play against the 4th cb so why not take a chance. If we can get that 3rd and 4th guy going, then our backs can just be open receivers. If our wrs can block well oh boy. All players don't gell right away like Nicks and Cruz. The spread gives receivers more one on one battles etc etc.
the more recievers, the more reads, and the more time Eli needs to go through progressions. Unless two of the routes are decoys.....

GameTime
09-08-2012, 01:42 PM
How about just a plain hurry up offense now and then?!?



^^^^^plain and simple......yes

YATittle1962
09-08-2012, 01:55 PM
WELL GUESS where it is going? you wanna know where its going?? NO WHERE !! unless this o-line gets a reality check it is going nowhere, it is time for some empty shot-guns and some hurry up offenses with one of the best qb's in football. thanks. i gurantee we would win more if we brought that formation to our routine, it is so key to spread the defense, throw the ball downfield, it will open the run game up. and then you run, you dont throw the ball once then run the ball 2 times, gilbride is so predictable, friggen christ.

I am going to explain to you how silly you sound

you are saying the O line is terrible.....which is completely true at this point

then in the same breath you say you want to go 5 wide

now who is protecting the QB?

if the coaching staff wants to shorten Elis career they will do a whole lot of 4 and 5 wide sets

.....and football is not about being unpredictable it is about executing the play called

Toadofsteel
09-08-2012, 02:16 PM
5 Wide is not good for the lack of O-line that we have. What we need is a more West Coast offense. That's what the Patriots have been doing as their former fortress of an o-line started wearing thin...

BillTheGreek
09-08-2012, 02:26 PM
I am going to explain to you how silly you sound

you are saying the O line is terrible.....which is completely true at this point

then in the same breath you say you want to go 5 wide

now who is protecting the QB?

if the coaching staff wants to shorten Elis career they will do a whole lot of 4 and 5 wide sets

.....and football is not about being unpredictable it is about executing the play called

OK we agree that the OL is need of repair..................First who is not doing their Job ?.on the ( OL ).........The Coaching staff knows ! The reason I ask this, if coaches know who it is, Why don't they work with him or them, why do the same play ,over and over . They run in the center of the line ! A Brick wall , Then we are 3 and out. We had 82 Rushing last week .. If they want to run fine, why not run on the outside, We should have beaten Dallas last week....The Coaching staff should have made necessary Adjustements.

rainierjef
09-08-2012, 03:32 PM
I am going to explain to you how silly you sound

you are saying the O line is terrible.....which is completely true at this point

then in the same breath you say you want to go 5 wide

now who is protecting the QB?

if the coaching staff wants to shorten Elis career they will do a whole lot of 4 and 5 wide sets

.....and football is not about being unpredictable it is about executing the play called

and to couple that with something else this O-line will break down too fast in a screen look, you need guys that are fast enough to get a chip block then pull to the side where the screen is going only person i see that can do that is snee.
spread offenses are nice but you still need a line even with the space out of the shotgun you still need that line to give you some time in the pocket for the shot to intermediate routes to develop. while eli might be smart enough to get the ball out fast enough in a spread offense with this line defenders are going to get their hits on him dangerously close to either a sack or just under the roughing the passer, we cannot allow eli to take hits, i know hes tough but there is only so much guys come on!

Captain Chaos
09-08-2012, 03:38 PM
You need to have an O line that can block to do any of these things, they did not do a very good job Wednesday evening.

Eliscruzzz
09-08-2012, 03:53 PM
The o-line would've been bad no matter what and if running the ball isn't working why not throw the ball more....you don't have to be in a spread offense to do that but we should be playing to our strengths which is the wrs and the qb. We also run so much in the beginning of game where the other defense is fresh and running around beating the crap outta of our o-line, then by the time we decide to throw more we are down 2 scores. It makes no sense. Throw the ball 1st in whatever offense 1st...try to build a lead like that and when you do get the lead wear teams down with the run in the second half. You got Eli Manning 3 points in the 1st half is inexcusable.