PDA

View Full Version : Players HATE playing zone defense.. Grant wants to play more man "D" .. WAKE UP FEWELL



NYG4lifeNYK
12-21-2011, 01:16 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513





Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </p>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</p>


"I think we just have to get back to
challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out
there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then
we'll be successful."</p>






I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better
&amp; suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man,
completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS &amp; disrupt their route with the QB.

Kase-1
12-21-2011, 01:17 PM
LOL I want Grant to play more sideline

Kase-1
12-21-2011, 01:19 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513

I realize we aren't shut down in man but we are MUCH better &amp; suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man, completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS &amp; disrupt their route with the QB.
I LOVE Webby in a man base D, thats where he REALLY excelled.

We cant get much worse with Aaron Ross, and that was supposed to be his style of play coming out of Texas way back when.

I believe Prince was a press cover guy in Nebraska as well, but someone like redeyedjedi would know much better

Vtgmenfan89
12-21-2011, 01:20 PM
Too bad our D coordinator insists zones that only confuse our players. Then he rushes 3 to give the qb/wrs plenty of time to read those zones and exploit them. AWFUL scheming.

daynemustgo
12-21-2011, 01:22 PM
lol. They used a good amount of man against NO and how did that work out?

Zone or Man, this defense is garbage.

YATittle1962
12-21-2011, 01:24 PM
if the players are begging for it and we dont see more of it this week I will personally be on line buying Perry Fewell his train ticket out of town

jomo
12-21-2011, 01:24 PM
Too bad our D coordinator insists zones that only confuse our players. Then he rushes 3 to give the qb/wrs plenty of time to read those zones and exploit them. AWFUL scheming.Terrible, miserable, dis-spiriting and pathetic too! lol

LT_Hits
12-21-2011, 01:25 PM
LOL I want Grant to play more sideline
Me too, and take Ross with him.

elifan10
12-21-2011, 01:26 PM
The players know more about defense than Fewell does!!!

daynemustgo
12-21-2011, 01:28 PM
Sanchez could have a career game on Saturday against this group.

YATittle1962
12-21-2011, 01:29 PM
Sanchez could have a career game on Saturday against this group.

scary but true

NYG4lifeNYK
12-21-2011, 01:32 PM
if the players are begging for it and we dont see more of it this week I will personally be on line buying Perry Fewell his train ticket out of town

+<font size="6">infinite</font>

HilliardFan16
12-21-2011, 01:32 PM
lol. They used a good amount of man against NO and how did that work out?

Zone or Man, this defense is garbage.

We played a lot of man vs the Pats and it worked wonders. Yeah, the Saints blew them up, but the Saints blow almost everyone up.

Plus, the zone has gotten us NOWHERE in every other game.

Vtgmenfan89
12-21-2011, 01:32 PM
lol. They used a good amount of man against NO and how did that work out?

Zone or Man, this defense is garbage.

Well then you looked at the Patriots game, where I think we pressed much more than we did in the Saints game and we were pretty dominant on D for most of the game (holding Brady to no points in the 1st half is no simple task.) Not saying we'd have won the Saints game in that case just think it'd have been a better scheme. I think it's the off man which is still basically read and react that we get burned by giving receivers clean releases. When we press the wr's and te's and disrupt them at the line, it not only fits our DB's strengths but it gives the d-line a much better chance at getting to the QB. It fits this defense and is how we won the super bowl. How TC doesn't see this and make Fewell do it more, I will NEVER understand. It falls on him just as much as Fewell. They do not utilize this defenses strength in it's d-line/ pass rush and instead leave guys like canty and joseph on the sideline while rushing tolly jpp and tuck with kiwi in coverage...I mean are you ****ing kidding me? That is the exact reason why we get burned on 3rd and longs

Gianthunter
12-21-2011, 01:35 PM
One ofthe most effective ways to defend Plax is to jam him. But I hate the thought of him being one on one out there for long.

yatitle
12-21-2011, 01:35 PM
LOL I want Grant to play more sideline


You took the words right out of my mouth. Grant should be playing flag football not in the NFL

daynemustgo
12-21-2011, 01:39 PM
lol. They used a good amount of man against NO and how did that work out?

Zone or Man, this defense is garbage.

Well then you looked at the Patriots game, where I think we pressed much more than we did in the Saints game and we were pretty dominant on D for most of the game (holding Brady to no points in the 1st half is no simple task.) Not saying we'd have won the Saints game in that case just think it'd have been a better scheme. I think it's the off man which is still basically read and react that we get burned by giving receivers clean releases. When we press the wr's and te's and disrupt them at the line, it not only fits our DB's strengths but it gives the d-line a much better chance at getting to the QB. It fits this defense and is how we won the super bowl. How TC doesn't see this and make Fewell do it more, I will NEVER understand. It falls on him just as much as Fewell. They do not utilize this defenses strength in it's d-line/ pass rush and instead leave guys like canty and joseph on the sideline while rushing tolly jpp and tuck with kiwi in coverage...I mean are you ****ing kidding me? That is the exact reason why we get burned on 3rd and longs

The pass rush today consists of JPP and nobody else. Tuck has been MIA all season. Osi has made a few plays but has been injured for much of the year. I agree with what you said above. Perhaps Perry doesn't think they can get pressure and would rather die a slower death in coverage than blitzing and not getting home.

All I know for sure is that the last time the defense was this bad the DC was shown the door after the season. I am hoping for nothing less this year.

Mr Excitement
12-21-2011, 01:43 PM
Sanchez could have a career game on Saturday against this group.

Without a doubt...most crap QB's do...

giantsfan420
12-21-2011, 01:49 PM
some one i think dayne said "well NO we pressed man to man and howd that work out"

well we didnt have boley that game, and if u remember, there wr's didnt really carve us up as much as there TE Graham did. I'd much rather try man again with Boley in there.

Also, with Plex, I dont know if we should play man on him or at least not press man. We all rembemre the GB game where he lit up Al Harris. Trying to jam Plex makes things much easier for him bc now he just needs to beat the press and use a quick step and hes open over the top. DO NOT PRESS HIM.

Watch Fewell be a f'in moron and not realize that we should be in press man, but with Plex the coverage needs to be off.

Vtgmenfan89
12-21-2011, 01:50 PM
lol. They used a good amount of man against NO and how did that work out?

Zone or Man, this defense is garbage.

Well then you looked at the Patriots game, where I think we pressed much more than we did in the Saints game and we were pretty dominant on D for most of the game (holding Brady to no points in the 1st half is no simple task.) Not saying we'd have won the Saints game in that case just think it'd have been a better scheme. I think it's the off man which is still basically read and react that we get burned by giving receivers clean releases. When we press the wr's and te's and disrupt them at the line, it not only fits our DB's strengths but it gives the d-line a much better chance at getting to the QB. It fits this defense and is how we won the super bowl. How TC doesn't see this and make Fewell do it more, I will NEVER understand. It falls on him just as much as Fewell. They do not utilize this defenses strength in it's d-line/ pass rush and instead leave guys like canty and joseph on the sideline while rushing tolly jpp and tuck with kiwi in coverage...I mean are you ****ing kidding me? That is the exact reason why we get burned on 3rd and longs

The pass rush today consists of JPP and nobody else. Tuck has been MIA all season. Osi has made a few plays but has been injured for much of the year. I agree with what you said above. Perhaps Perry doesn't think they can get pressure and would rather die a slower death in coverage than blitzing and not getting home.

All I know for sure is that the last time the defense was this bad the DC was shown the door after the season. I am hoping for nothing less this year.

I'm with you on that last part without a doubt. We need someone who uses the strength of the defense as the center of the defense. Sure, in blitzing there is always a risk of giving up a play. But it's way more excusable than giving up a play with 8 guys in coverage not doing their job or not even knowing what their job is

Kruunch
12-21-2011, 01:53 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513





Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </p>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</p>


"I think we just have to get back to
challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out
there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then
we'll be successful."</p>






I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better
& suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man,
completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS & disrupt their route with the QB.


A few issues to ponder:

1) We have one guy who can cover in man-press (Webster)

2) Man-press isn't a defensive philosophy ... you match it to your oppenent. The fact that Fewell tried man-press against the Saints (who have a fairly good running game) and then went zone against the Packers (who have absolutely no run game) is a testament to the fact that our DC doesn't know when to run the right scheme.

3) Man-press is something you do occasionally (like blitzing) not every play. It's too easy to beat when you know its coming.

4) Man-press is awful if you're not blitzing and/or getting pressure on the QB.

5) Deon Grant is kind of slow to be begging for man-press at this point in his career.

6) I agree that we should be more aggressive, but intelligently aggressive. Fewell doesn't seem to know when/how to blitz (much the same way Sheridan didn't).

7) Zone is a fine defense when taught correctly. Players should be aggressive to people coming near their zone ... they shouldn't be guarding a patch of grass (which is what they are doing now).

8) The Jets have a decent run game

TuckYou
12-21-2011, 01:58 PM
This sounds very 2009ish, with the defensive players calling out Sheridan's style of D.

netplus
12-21-2011, 02:01 PM
lol. They used a good amount of man against NO and how did that work out?

Zone or Man, this defense is garbage.

Well then you looked at the Patriots game, where I think we pressed much more than we did in the Saints game and we were pretty dominant on D for most of the game (holding Brady to no points in the 1st half is no simple task.)

Agains NE the Giants had 2 sacks and 9 QB pressures (Osi played and had 4 of the 9 pressures). Against NO the Giants had no sacks and only 4 QB pressures. OsI only played 20 snaps and got hurt in the NO game. No pressure and our DB's lack of talent is exposed.

NYG4lifeNYK
12-21-2011, 02:05 PM
This sounds very 2009ish, with the defensive players calling out Sheridan's style of D.

Yes, &amp; they've been quietly hinting at it all year.... week by week

GMENAGAIN
12-21-2011, 02:08 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513






Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </P>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</P>


"I think we just have to get back to challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then we'll be successful."</P>









I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better &amp; suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man, completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS &amp; disrupt their route with the QB.
A few issues to ponder: 1) We have one guy who can cover in man-press (Webster) 2) Man-press isn't a defensive philosophy ... you match it to your oppenent. The fact that Fewell tried man-press against the Saints (who have a fairly good running game) and then went zone against the Packers (who have absolutely no run game) is a testament to the fact that our DC doesn't know when to run the right scheme. 3) Man-press is something you do occasionally (like blitzing) not every play. It's too easy to beat when you know its coming. 4) Man-press is awful if you're not blitzing and/or getting pressure on the QB. 5) Deon Grant is kind of slow to be begging for man-press at this point in his career. 6) I agree that we should be more aggressive, but intelligently aggressive. Fewell doesn't seem to know when/how to blitz (much the same way Sheridan didn't). 7) Zone is a fine defense when taught correctly. Players should be aggressive to people coming near their zone ... they shouldn't be guarding a patch of grass (which is what they are doing now). 8) The Jets have a decent run game</P>


I totally agree.</P>


No team plays all zone or all man-to-man. That being said I think that we are way to zone-heavy in our D right now and would like to see more man-to-man.</P>


Also, if our front 4 isn't getting to the QB, Fewell has to dial up some blitzes to get to the QB . . . . we can't have our overrated DB's sitting back ina terrible zone scheme that they obviously don't undertsand for 30 seconds while the QB stands in the pocketcompletely untouched . . . . .</P>


</P>

BlueJayC
12-21-2011, 02:51 PM
<FONT color=#ff0000>Geee it only took 14 games for someone to speak up and say something......</FONT></P>


Bump and blitz all day....make Marky Mark and the boys beat you with perfect reads and passes....not gonna happen but neither will Fewell's adjustments so it's all moot.</P>

NYG4lifeNYK
12-21-2011, 03:16 PM
<font color="#ff0000">Geee it only took 14 games for someone to speak up and say something......</font></p>


Bump and blitz all day....make Marky Mark and the boys beat you with perfect reads and passes....not gonna happen but neither will Fewell's adjustments so it's all moot.</p>

LOL


Like I said players have been subtlety hinting &amp; talking about Fewell's scheme all year...

mstray92
12-21-2011, 03:26 PM
if the players are begging for it and we dont see more of it this week I will personally be on line buying Perry Fewell his train ticket out of town

This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

T-Murda84
12-21-2011, 03:28 PM
lol. They used a good amount of man against NO and how did that work out?

Zone or Man, this defense is garbage.

Well then you looked at the Patriots game, where I think we pressed much more than we did in the Saints game and we were pretty dominant on D for most of the game (holding Brady to no points in the 1st half is no simple task.) Not saying we'd have won the Saints game in that case just think it'd have been a better scheme. I think it's the off man which is still basically read and react that we get burned by giving receivers clean releases. When we press the wr's and te's and disrupt them at the line, it not only fits our DB's strengths but it gives the d-line a much better chance at getting to the QB. It fits this defense and is how we won the super bowl. How TC doesn't see this and make Fewell do it more, I will NEVER understand. It falls on him just as much as Fewell. They do not utilize this defenses strength in it's d-line/ pass rush and instead leave guys like canty and joseph on the sideline while rushing tolly jpp and tuck with kiwi in coverage...I mean are you ****ing kidding me? That is the exact reason why we get burned on 3rd and longs


In the Patriot game, Brady was a little off....He had guys wide open all game long and started to find his groove late in the game. Man Coverage does not work because Ross, Rolle, Grant, and the Linebackers can not cover 1 on 1.

Zones are not a bad idea if every1 could get on the same page. Its pretty sad that we can not run a Cover 2..and our secondary is dumbfounded when a team comes out in a bunch set. Do our secondary even watch film? All that time on Twitter and doing dumb interviews for the media, can all be spent on watching film.

Redeyejedi
12-21-2011, 03:29 PM
The Giants can play man against this group of receivers. Teams like the Packers and Saints u cant match up with. The Jets arent scary athletic like those teams. Dustin Keller is the one guy to watch out for

burier
12-21-2011, 03:35 PM
This entire story is completely asinine!

First if all Deon Grant should have a gag order imposed on him as he's completely worthless. Can't cover a spread and he's talking about Man???

Our guys suck! Fewell could help them out a little by not making them cover forever with his BS three man rush nonsense but Man/Zone doesn't matter because WE CANT COVER!

Websters game has fallen off a cliff. Ross is a bust. Rolle is bust and Grant should have never been signed back.

Its apparent that we have a bunch of first and second round draft choices who really shouldn have been taken in the 4th and 5th round.

This coupled with the idiocy that is Perry Fewell and what do you get? Bill Sheridan part Dux.

Total joke

NYG4lifeNYK
12-21-2011, 03:37 PM
This entire story is completely asinine!

First if all Deon Grant should have a gag order imposed on him as he's completely worthless. Can't cover a spread and he's talking about Man???

Our guys suck! Fewell could help them out a little by not making them cover forever with his BS three man rush nonsense but Man/Zone doesn't matter because WE CANT COVER!

Websters game has fallen off a cliff. Ross is a bust. Rolle is bust and Grant should have never been signed back.

Its apparent that we have a bunch of first and second round draft choices who really shouldn have been taken in the 4th and 5th round.

This coupled with the idiocy that is Perry Fewell and what do you get? Bill Sheridan part Dux.

Total joke

Websters game has fallen off a cliff? LOL.. u had me until that part...

Saying Webster has fallen off is asinine friend [:|]

netplus
12-21-2011, 03:45 PM
Websters game has fallen off a cliff? LOL.. u had me until that part...

Saying Webster has fallen off is asinine friend [:|]


Agree. Webster and Phillips have played well this year. The rest of the secondary is awful.

burier
12-21-2011, 03:48 PM
This entire story is completely asinine!

First if all Deon Grant should have a gag order imposed on him as he's completely worthless. Can't cover a spread and he's talking about Man???

Our guys suck! Fewell could help them out a little by not making them cover forever with his BS three man rush nonsense but Man/Zone doesn't matter because WE CANT COVER!

Websters game has fallen off a cliff. Ross is a bust. Rolle is bust and Grant should have never been signed back.

Its apparent that we have a bunch of first and second round draft choices who really shouldn have been taken in the 4th and 5th round.

This coupled with the idiocy that is Perry Fewell and what do you get? Bill Sheridan part Dux.

Total joke

Websters game has fallen off a cliff? LOL.. u had me until that part...

Saying Webster has fallen off is asinine friend [:|]


sorry man I know you like Webster. I do to but He's been retched this season. He's got good INT numbers but every single one was thrown directly too him. at least three of them he got despite being flat out beaten.

(Two against the Bills, One sunday.)

Another INT he got I think it was against...I wanna say Arizona where he undercut a horrific throw.

Beyond that lucky stuff he's completey stunk the joint up in coverage and against the run.

NYG4lifeNYK
12-21-2011, 03:52 PM
This entire story is completely asinine!

First if all Deon Grant should have a gag order imposed on him as he's completely worthless. Can't cover a spread and he's talking about Man???

Our guys suck! Fewell could help them out a little by not making them cover forever with his BS three man rush nonsense but Man/Zone doesn't matter because WE CANT COVER!

Websters game has fallen off a cliff. Ross is a bust. Rolle is bust and Grant should have never been signed back.

Its apparent that we have a bunch of first and second round draft choices who really shouldn have been taken in the 4th and 5th round.

This coupled with the idiocy that is Perry Fewell and what do you get? Bill Sheridan part Dux.

Total joke

Websters game has fallen off a cliff? LOL.. u had me until that part...

Saying Webster has fallen off is asinine friend [:|]


sorry man I know you like Webster. I do to but He's been retched this season. He's got good INT numbers but every single one was thrown directly too him. at least three of them he got despite being flat out beaten.

(Two against the Bills, One sunday.)

Another INT he got I think it was against...I wanna say Arizona where he undercut a horrific throw.

Beyond that lucky stuff he's completey stunk the joint up in coverage and against the run.

[:|][:|][:|][:^)][:^)]

He held Dez to ZERO catches for zero yards..lol

TroyArcher
12-21-2011, 03:57 PM
Sanchez could have a career game on Saturday against this group.</P>


</P>


Who knows, he might break60% completion. </P>

burier
12-21-2011, 03:59 PM
This entire story is completely asinine!

First if all Deon Grant should have a gag order imposed on him as he's completely worthless. Can't cover a spread and he's talking about Man???

Our guys suck! Fewell could help them out a little by not making them cover forever with his BS three man rush nonsense but Man/Zone doesn't matter because WE CANT COVER!

Websters game has fallen off a cliff. Ross is a bust. Rolle is bust and Grant should have never been signed back.

Its apparent that we have a bunch of first and second round draft choices who really shouldn have been taken in the 4th and 5th round.

This coupled with the idiocy that is Perry Fewell and what do you get? Bill Sheridan part Dux.

Total joke

Websters game has fallen off a cliff? LOL.. u had me until that part...

Saying Webster has fallen off is asinine friend [:|]


sorry man I know you like Webster. I do to but He's been retched this season. He's got good INT numbers but every single one was thrown directly too him. at least three of them he got despite being flat out beaten.

(Two against the Bills, One sunday.)

Another INT he got I think it was against...I wanna say Arizona where he undercut a horrific throw.

Beyond that lucky stuff he's completey stunk the joint up in coverage and against the run.

[:|][:|][:|][:^)][:^)]

He held Dez to ZERO catches for zero yards..lol


So? Dez Bryant doesn't show up every week.

the Dolphins were throwing on him all day.

netplus
12-21-2011, 04:03 PM
Webster isn't having the year he had in 2008, but Rolle, Ross, and Grant need to be replaced before even thinking about Webster.

JMFP2
12-21-2011, 04:13 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513





Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </p>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</p>


"I think we just have to get back to
challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out
there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then
we'll be successful."</p>






I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better
& suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man,
completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS & disrupt their route with the QB.


As far as I'm concerned, Fewell has taken away this unit's personality.

I understand that man coverage can lead to some big plays (see: Saints game).

But when you force the secondary to constantly backpedal and guess, it's evern worse....the proof is out there on the field.

I guarantee Sanchez will have a career game on Saturday unless this team is allowed to be more physical at the line of scrimmage.

JMFP2
12-21-2011, 04:13 PM
Webster isn't having the year he had in 2008, but Rolle, Ross, and Grant need to be replaced before even thinking about Webster.

Everyone is the secondary is suffering from Fewell's utter lack of balls.

sharick88
12-21-2011, 04:16 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513





Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </p>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</p>


"I think we just have to get back to
challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out
there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then
we'll be successful."</p>






I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better
& suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man,
completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS & disrupt their route with the QB.

He's not lying. Too bad he is about 5 weeks late with his take on it.

sharick88
12-21-2011, 04:18 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513





Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </p>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</p>


"I think we just have to get back to
challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out
there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then
we'll be successful."</p>






I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better
& suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man,
completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS & disrupt their route with the QB.


As far as I'm concerned, Fewell has taken away this unit's personality.

I understand that man coverage can lead to some big plays (see: Saints game).

But when you force the secondary to constantly backpedal and guess, it's evern worse....the proof is out there on the field.

I guarantee Sanchez will have a career game on Saturday unless this team is allowed to be more physical at the line of scrimmage.
Not using his resources properly. You're damn right about that. I was thinking that maybe Fewell is afraid of giving up big plays. Then I was thinking "damn, we give up an endless amount of big plays, especially on 3rd down". Fewell is a fool.

JMFP2
12-21-2011, 04:20 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513





Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </p>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</p>


"I think we just have to get back to
challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out
there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then
we'll be successful."</p>






I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better
& suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man,
completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS & disrupt their route with the QB.


As far as I'm concerned, Fewell has taken away this unit's personality.

I understand that man coverage can lead to some big plays (see: Saints game).

But when you force the secondary to constantly backpedal and guess, it's evern worse....the proof is out there on the field.

I guarantee Sanchez will have a career game on Saturday unless this team is allowed to be more physical at the line of scrimmage.
Not using his resources properly. You're damn right about that. I was thinking that maybe Fewell is afraid of giving up big plays. Then I was thinking "damn, we give up an endless amount of big plays, especially on 3rd down". Fewell is a fool.

3rd and 17 against the Redskins was my final straw. I saw that ****ing bull****, and thought to myself "the Giants will NEVER be a dominating defense with this guy as DC."

You know what, if you are going to rush 3, then tell Reese not to even bother drafting defensive linemen anymore.

GameTime
12-21-2011, 04:24 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513






Is it time for the Giants' secondary to man up? </P>


Safety Deon Grant (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Deon_Grant) thinks so. He said the Giants have been playing too much zone coverage and they need to start being more aggressive.</P>


"I think we just have to get back to challenging receivers," he said Monday. "When we go back into going out there, being physical, being aggressive, challenging the receiver, then we'll be successful."</P>









I realize we aren't completely shut down in man but we are MUCH better &amp; suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man, completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS &amp; disrupt their route with the QB.
</P>


you know what.....I fully understand that some players are geared towards certain skills and types of play. But you know what.....**** THAT!!!. Play the god damn game you are being paid for. Do you have to suck so bad at zone that you cant do it at all??? Of course the coach should play more man maybe but show one team that plays all man all the time.....none of the do.
These are veteran highly paid and supposedly skilled players. PLAY THE ****ING GAME HOW ITS SUPPOSED TO BE PLAYED</P>

gumby742
12-21-2011, 05:26 PM
If we're going to give up 40 points regardless, I'd rather go down in style. Punt rush defense.

Vtgmenfan89
12-21-2011, 08:28 PM
This entire story is completely asinine!

First if all Deon Grant should have a gag order imposed on him as he's completely worthless. Can't cover a spread and he's talking about Man???

Our guys suck! Fewell could help them out a little by not making them cover forever with his BS three man rush nonsense but Man/Zone doesn't matter because WE CANT COVER!

Websters game has fallen off a cliff. Ross is a bust. Rolle is bust and Grant should have never been signed back.

Its apparent that we have a bunch of first and second round draft choices who really shouldn have been taken in the 4th and 5th round.

This coupled with the idiocy that is Perry Fewell and what do you get? Bill Sheridan part Dux.

Total joke

Websters game has fallen off a cliff? LOL.. u had me until that part...

Saying Webster has fallen off is asinine friend [:|]


sorry man I know you like Webster. I do to but He's been retched this season. He's got good INT numbers but every single one was thrown directly too him. at least three of them he got despite being flat out beaten.

(Two against the Bills, One sunday.)

Another INT he got I think it was against...I wanna say Arizona where he undercut a horrific throw.

Beyond that lucky stuff he's completey stunk the joint up in coverage and against the run.

[:|][:|][:|][:^)][:^)]

He held Dez to ZERO catches for zero yards..lol


So? Dez Bryant doesn't show up every week.

the Dolphins were throwing on him all day.

dude. do you watch football? i remember that phins game well and he basically shut down brandon marshall. sure you're not mixing him up with ross? i also remember a red zone possession from one of our more recent games where he was literally thrown three plays in a row breaking up EVERY one which were all TD possible plays. he has been one of the few bright spots on this defense. watch some football. shutting down dez bryant and also keeping him from being thrown at is impressive considering romo has a lot of faith in him in one on one situations, as he should. show some respect or go bury your head in sand you troll.

btw to go back to the phins game, you're an idiot. i say again, he shut down marshall and also ICED that game with an INT. come on man

Weygand
12-21-2011, 08:30 PM
Fortunately we have "playas"

gmen0820
12-21-2011, 08:37 PM
I've been backing Fewell this whole season but the players need to be comfortable in the scheme and although we aren't suited to play man, it is evident that we aren't suited for zone, so Fewell needs to adjust to at least have happy players. I hope this was the first insistence.

shotcalla39
12-21-2011, 08:53 PM
One of*the most effective ways to defend Plax is to jam him. But I hate the thought of him being one on one out there for long.

U need 2 men on plax in the red zone... U try to jam him he'll push you away and get by you.. u need help up top

giantsforce
12-21-2011, 09:32 PM
if the players are begging for it and we dont see more of it this week I will personally be on line buying Perry Fewell his train ticket out of townTrain ticket? This hobo needs to get out of town in a tar and feathers suit walking all the way to where ever he came from.

giantsforce
12-21-2011, 09:33 PM
I've been backing Fewell this whole season but the players need to be comfortable in the scheme and although we aren't suited to play man, it is evident that we aren't suited for zone, so Fewell needs to adjust to at least have happy players. I hope this was the first insistence.Fewell cannot spell "adjust" let alone know the meaning of the word.

JMFP2
12-21-2011, 09:42 PM
Webster + Ross + Prince should be able to get the job done.</P>


This team won a SB with Sam Madison, RW McQuarters, and a completely raw Webster.</P>


The biggest issue is Tuck and Osi are broke,Fewell is not Spags, and we don't have a player nearly as smart as Antonio Pierce.</P>

joenew61
12-21-2011, 10:28 PM
Can one of you X and O gurus explain to me what the theoretical advantage of playing zone is? I don't get it.

It just seems like there will always be a hole somewhere even when it is executed well, and there is a lot of interpretation that has to be done on the fly depending on what the offensive play is...and then snap decisions have to be made on who to follow during the route, as well as on long scramble type plays.

Seems there is a lot more downside than upside?

BallinNY
12-21-2011, 10:41 PM
I read this in the paper this morning but he is there article in newsday

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/giants/giants-grant-urges-man-coverage-1.3402513

I realize we aren't shut down in man but we are MUCH better & suited to play man. For one? Corey Webster shuts down his man, completely.

Our strength is a man base when we can jam the receivers at the LOS & disrupt their route with the QB.
I LOVE Webby in a man base D, thats where he REALLY excelled.

We cant get much worse with Aaron Ross, and that was supposed to be his style of play coming out of Texas way back when.

I believe Prince was a press cover guy in Nebraska as well, but someone like redeyedjedi would know much better


agree, and yes Ross and Prince were both mainly man and man press corners at their colleges. Both are larger corners, although Ross doesn't play like it, and I think that Grant is 100% correct.

I am starting to like grant a whole lot more when he decides to voice his opinions.

Prince in press is a bit risky, but it is a coverage that is much simpler, much more familiar to him. Webster is phenominal in this coverage, and I fully expect him to shut down one receiver if we decide to use this. Both are very physical. Webster is more fluid, so I expect him to be on Holmes who is more of the refined routerunner and active receiver wherease prince vs. Burress will be a battle decided by the accuracy of Sanchez and sheer physical ability. Ross would play slot, which seems to be his best position.

Ross and Grant are both not spectacular, but they can do a variety of things at an above average level, I hope Fewell uses them in a more Joker coverage where they can freelance and read the quarterback. Rolle on the other hand, is one of the best Jokers in the league while in the nickel, have a lot of players that can move around, all thats missing is an inventive DC.

YATittle1962
12-21-2011, 11:29 PM
Can one of you X and O gurus explain to me what the theoretical advantage of playing zone is? I don't get it.

It just seems like there will always be a hole somewhere even when it is executed well, and there is a lot of interpretation that has to be done on the fly depending on what the offensive play is...and then snap decisions have to be made on who to follow during the route, as well as on long scramble type plays.

Seems there is a lot more downside than upside?

the theory behind zone is having a player responsible for a section of the field other than responsible for a man......his zone......cover 2...cover 3....cover 6.....Tampa 2.....Fire Zone....Banjo....etc etc .....they all consist of dividing the field into zones .....quarters....3rds...etc.... which the players are responsible for

there are so many different kinds of zone coverages which each have their own advantages and disadvantages...just as man zone hybrids and man coverage does

there are many upsides to zone coverages when they are disguised and then run well ......but it does require extreme team cohesion.......zone coverages should flow with the moving pieces all working as one .....

zone was created as an alternative to man coverage ......and a teams true advantage in todays NFL is when they can disguise their call....be it zone or man...whatever .....with a look that the offense is less familiar with

if you had a question about a specific zone Id be glad to help you out.........but unil then thats prety much what zone coverage is...to get into advantages and disadvantage specifics Id have to know which zone yr speaking of

giantsfan420
12-21-2011, 11:54 PM
Can one of you X and O gurus explain to me what the theoretical advantage of playing zone is? I don't get it.

It just seems like there will always be a hole somewhere even when it is executed well, and there is a lot of interpretation that has to be done on the fly depending on what the offensive play is...and then snap decisions have to be made on who to follow during the route, as well as on long scramble type plays.

Seems there is a lot more downside than upside?

the theory behind zone is having a player responsible for a section of the field other than responsible for a man......his zone......cover 2...cover 3....cover 6.....Tampa 2.....Fire Zone....Banjo....etc etc .....they all consist of dividing the field into zones .....quarters....3rds...etc.... which the players are responsible for

there are so many different kinds of zone coverages which each have their own advantages and disadvantages...just as man zone hybrids and man coverage does

there are many upsides to zone coverages when they are disguised and then run well ......but it does require extreme team cohesion.......zone coverages should flow with the moving pieces all working as one .....

zone was created as an alternative to man coverage ......and a teams true advantage in todays NFL is when they can disguise their call....be it zone or man...whatever .....with a look that the offense is less familiar with

if you had a question about a specific zone Id be glad to help you out.........but unil then thats prety much what zone coverage is

well done YA, and to add...

zones are also used, creatively, to try and bait a qb into making a throw that the defense can make a play on. you want to disguise the zone coverages, mix them up from different looks and packages.

the idea of the zone is to cover the entire field that is being challenged, and to bait the qb into trying to throw into tight windows, bc when the zones are run well, there arent really open areas on the field, only really open seams in between zones.

thats why we keep getting burned, the players are leaving gaping holes inbetween there responsibilities.

but creative defensive coordinators will mix up the zone coverages so the qb will think he recognizes the defense and has an idea of where he will throw, only for the actual defense to mask where the coverage will be and the pass ends up right in a defenders area.

like the coverages YA listed, most good QB's have an idea between the personnel and formation what the defensive scheme will be. there arent really any "new" zone defenses, they are all pretty much shared but DC add different twists to them. Like good DC imo will show the QB a cover 2 shell look, but then drop the defense into a cover 3 or 6.

The fire zone is a way to blitz a defender from a certain zone he would normally cover, so the QB thinks "well he's blitzing from that zone so that area should be open" and he'll throw it into the weakness (hot routes) but good DC will mix it up and have another defender move into the area where the defender just blitzed from.

Zone defenses are good if the entire defense is on the same page. In our case, we aren't, which is why time and time again there are wide open parts of the field. But when the defense is on the same page and playing well, and the DC has a good understanding of the zone coverages, it makes life tough for the QB bc the QB will have a hard time finding that hole in the zone.

But there are also disadvantages to zone defense, our problem is that Fewell seems to be calling exotic zone packages, and the result is players confusing coverages and responsibilities, and easy pitch and catch for the opposing offense.
Also, if the offense can recognize the zone coverage, he can also recognize where the seams of the coverage are and the windows he can throw into.

Which is why the elite QB's have no real problem with good zone defenses like Eli. He will either know where the hole in the zone will be, or where the WR route will threaten the zone and where the window will be for him to throw into.

Man coverage is pretty basic for the QB to identify, but if you have good db's, the WR's dont get much seperation and the QB has to force the throw into a tight space.

Zones are meant to try and confuse the QB, sadly, Fewells zones dont confuse the opposing QB, it confuses our own defenders.

edit- and to clarify what i mean by trying to confuse the QB, there are certain zones/areas of the fields certain positions contain. Like the DB's in a cover two will cover there side of the field from the LOS until the Safeties who cover there half of the field behind the DB's.
But, good DC will move the DB's into deep coverage and have the safeties move up and cover the intermediary areas of the field.

Like a zone 3. one of the DB's drops off into deep coverage, and the safeties roll there coverage away from the area the DB covers.

Or like a Quarters zone, where the DB's and Safeties drop off into areas of the field that are almost equally horizontal to each other.

There are also man/zone concepts where you could have for instance in a dime package, two outside DB's and the safeties play a zone and the two slot DB's play man.

Theres really a whole lot to it, and it is interesting and fun to see when the defense runs it well. Unfortunately I don't think any Giants fan will say its been fun watching our defense play zone.

YATittle1962
12-22-2011, 12:19 AM
Can one of you X and O gurus explain to me what the theoretical advantage of playing zone is? I don't get it.

It just seems like there will always be a hole somewhere even when it is executed well, and there is a lot of interpretation that has to be done on the fly depending on what the offensive play is...and then snap decisions have to be made on who to follow during the route, as well as on long scramble type plays.

Seems there is a lot more downside than upside?

the theory behind zone is having a player responsible for a section of the field other than responsible for a man......his zone......cover 2...cover 3....cover 6.....Tampa 2.....Fire Zone....Banjo....etc etc .....they all consist of dividing the field into zones .....quarters....3rds...etc.... which the players are responsible for

there are so many different kinds of zone coverages which each have their own advantages and disadvantages...just as man zone hybrids and man coverage does

there are many upsides to zone coverages when they are disguised and then run well ......but it does require extreme team cohesion.......zone coverages should flow with the moving pieces all working as one .....

zone was created as an alternative to man coverage ......and a teams true advantage in todays NFL is when they can disguise their call....be it zone or man...whatever .....with a look that the offense is less familiar with

if you had a question about a specific zone Id be glad to help you out.........but unil then thats prety much what zone coverage is

well done YA, and to add...

zones are also used, creatively, to try and bait a qb into making a throw that the defense can make a play on. you want to disguise the zone coverages, mix them up from different looks and packages.

the idea of the zone is to cover the entire field that is being challenged, and to bait the qb into trying to throw into tight windows, bc when the zones are run well, there arent really open areas on the field, only really open seams in between zones.

thats why we keep getting burned, the players are leaving gaping holes inbetween there responsibilities.

but creative defensive coordinators will mix up the zone coverages so the qb will think he recognizes the defense and has an idea of where he will throw, only for the actual defense to mask where the coverage will be and the pass ends up right in a defenders area.

like the coverages YA listed, most good QB's have an idea between the personnel and formation what the defensive scheme will be. there arent really any "new" zone defenses, they are all pretty much shared but DC add different twists to them. Like good DC imo will show the QB a cover 2 shell look, but then drop the defense into a cover 3 or 6.

The fire zone is a way to blitz a defender from a certain zone he would normally cover, so the QB thinks "well he's blitzing from that zone so that area should be open" and he'll throw it into the weakness (hot routes) but good DC will mix it up and have another defender move into the area where the defender just blitzed from.

Zone defenses are good if the entire defense is on the same page. In our case, we aren't, which is why time and time again there are wide open parts of the field. But when the defense is on the same page and playing well, and the DC has a good understanding of the zone coverages, it makes life tough for the QB bc the QB will have a hard time finding that hole in the zone.

But there are also disadvantages to zone defense, our problem is that Fewell seems to be calling exotic zone packages, and the result is players confusing coverages and responsibilities, and easy pitch and catch for the opposing offense.
Also, if the offense can recognize the zone coverage, he can also recognize where the seams of the coverage are and the windows he can throw into.

Which is why the elite QB's have no real problem with good zone defenses like Eli. He will either know where the hole in the zone will be, or where the WR route will threaten the zone and where the window will be for him to throw into.

Man coverage is pretty basic for the QB to identify, but if you have good db's, the WR's dont get much seperation and the QB has to force the throw into a tight space.

Zones are meant to try and confuse the QB, sadly, Fewells zones dont confuse the opposing QB, it confuses our own defenders.

edit- and to clarify what i mean by trying to confuse the QB, there are certain zones/areas of the fields certain positions contain. Like the DB's in a cover two will cover there side of the field from the LOS until the Safeties who cover there half of the field behind the DB's.
But, good DC will move the DB's into deep coverage and have the safeties move up and cover the intermediary areas of the field.

Like a zone 3. one of the DB's drops off into deep coverage, and the safeties roll there coverage away from the area the DB covers.

Or like a Quarters zone, where the DB's and Safeties drop off into areas of the field that are almost equally horizontal to each other.

There are also man/zone concepts where you could have for instance in a dime package, two outside DB's and the safeties play a zone and the two slot DB's play man.

Theres really a whole lot to it, and it is interesting and fun to see when the defense runs it well. Unfortunately I don't think any Giants fan will say its been fun watching our defense play zone.

very nicely done

JMFP2
12-22-2011, 12:32 AM
I've been backing Fewell this whole season but the players need to be comfortable in the scheme and although we aren't suited to play man, it is evident that we aren't suited for zone, so Fewell needs to adjust to at least have happy players. I hope this was the first insistence.</P>


+1</P>


The success of any scheme depends in part on the confidence of the players. It's clear to me that Prince is getting lost out there while Fewell dials through different coverages.</P>


I understand man coverage has it's own flaws (e.g., the Saints game). However, the zone coverages have been getting abused all season, whereas the Giants played their best defensive game against the Patriots, and used an aggressive man coverage for much of the game....which is what the Steelers also used.</P>


http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/giants/big_blue_looks_to_spring_steel_trap_yc8t5FXd1ZcpKK ogXNlatK</P>

burier
12-22-2011, 10:31 AM
This entire story is completely asinine!

First if all Deon Grant should have a gag order imposed on him as he's completely worthless. Can't cover a spread and he's talking about Man???

Our guys suck! Fewell could help them out a little by not making them cover forever with his BS three man rush nonsense but Man/Zone doesn't matter because WE CANT COVER!

Websters game has fallen off a cliff. Ross is a bust. Rolle is bust and Grant should have never been signed back.

Its apparent that we have a bunch of first and second round draft choices who really shouldn have been taken in the 4th and 5th round.

This coupled with the idiocy that is Perry Fewell and what do you get? Bill Sheridan part Dux.

Total joke

Websters game has fallen off a cliff? LOL.. u had me until that part...

Saying Webster has fallen off is asinine friend [:|]


sorry man I know you like Webster. I do to but He's been retched this season. He's got good INT numbers but every single one was thrown directly too him. at least three of them he got despite being flat out beaten.

(Two against the Bills, One sunday.)

Another INT he got I think it was against...I wanna say Arizona where he undercut a horrific throw.

Beyond that lucky stuff he's completey stunk the joint up in coverage and against the run.

[:|][:|][:|][:^)][:^)]

He held Dez to ZERO catches for zero yards..lol


So? Dez Bryant doesn't show up every week.

the Dolphins were throwing on him all day.

dude. do you watch football? i remember that phins game well and he basically shut down brandon marshall. sure you're not mixing him up with ross? i also remember a red zone possession from one of our more recent games where he was literally thrown three plays in a row breaking up EVERY one which were all TD possible plays. he has been one of the few bright spots on this defense. watch some football. shutting down dez bryant and also keeping him from being thrown at is impressive considering romo has a lot of faith in him in one on one situations, as he should. show some respect or go bury your head in sand you troll.

btw to go back to the phins game, you're an idiot. i say again, he shut down marshall and also ICED that game with an INT. come on man

LOL he shut down Bradon Marshal? He was getting picked on in that game. And he wasn't on Brandon Marshal at all times either so good job giving Webster far more credit than he deserves. And like l said you math wiz that INT that "iced" the game was poorly thrown ball that my mother would have picked off.

NoHuddle10
12-22-2011, 01:26 PM
Can one of you X and O gurus explain to me what the theoretical advantage of playing zone is? I don't get it.

It just seems like there will always be a hole somewhere even when it is executed well, and there is a lot of interpretation that has to be done on the fly depending on what the offensive play is...and then snap decisions have to be made on who to follow during the route, as well as on long scramble type plays.

Seems there is a lot more downside than upside?

the theory behind zone is having a player responsible for a section of the field other than responsible for a man......his zone......cover 2...cover 3....cover 6.....Tampa 2.....Fire Zone....Banjo....etc etc .....they all consist of dividing the field into zones .....quarters....3rds...etc.... which the players are responsible for

there are so many different kinds of zone coverages which each have their own advantages and disadvantages...just as man zone hybrids and man coverage does

there are many upsides to zone coverages when they are disguised and then run well ......but it does require extreme team cohesion.......zone coverages should flow with the moving pieces all working as one .....

zone was created as an alternative to man coverage ......and a teams true advantage in todays NFL is when they can disguise their call....be it zone or man...whatever .....with a look that the offense is less familiar with

if you had a question about a specific zone Id be glad to help you out.........but unil then thats prety much what zone coverage is

well done YA, and to add...

zones are also used, creatively, to try and bait a qb into making a throw that the defense can make a play on. you want to disguise the zone coverages, mix them up from different looks and packages.

the idea of the zone is to cover the entire field that is being challenged, and to bait the qb into trying to throw into tight windows, bc when the zones are run well, there arent really open areas on the field, only really open seams in between zones.

thats why we keep getting burned, the players are leaving gaping holes inbetween there responsibilities.

but creative defensive coordinators will mix up the zone coverages so the qb will think he recognizes the defense and has an idea of where he will throw, only for the actual defense to mask where the coverage will be and the pass ends up right in a defenders area.

like the coverages YA listed, most good QB's have an idea between the personnel and formation what the defensive scheme will be. there arent really any "new" zone defenses, they are all pretty much shared but DC add different twists to them. Like good DC imo will show the QB a cover 2 shell look, but then drop the defense into a cover 3 or 6.

The fire zone is a way to blitz a defender from a certain zone he would normally cover, so the QB thinks "well he's blitzing from that zone so that area should be open" and he'll throw it into the weakness (hot routes) but good DC will mix it up and have another defender move into the area where the defender just blitzed from.

Zone defenses are good if the entire defense is on the same page. In our case, we aren't, which is why time and time again there are wide open parts of the field. But when the defense is on the same page and playing well, and the DC has a good understanding of the zone coverages, it makes life tough for the QB bc the QB will have a hard time finding that hole in the zone.

But there are also disadvantages to zone defense, our problem is that Fewell seems to be calling exotic zone packages, and the result is players confusing coverages and responsibilities, and easy pitch and catch for the opposing offense.
Also, if the offense can recognize the zone coverage, he can also recognize where the seams of the coverage are and the windows he can throw into.

Which is why the elite QB's have no real problem with good zone defenses like Eli. He will either know where the hole in the zone will be, or where the WR route will threaten the zone and where the window will be for him to throw into.

Man coverage is pretty basic for the QB to identify, but if you have good db's, the WR's dont get much seperation and the QB has to force the throw into a tight space.

Zones are meant to try and confuse the QB, sadly, Fewells zones dont confuse the opposing QB, it confuses our own defenders.

edit- and to clarify what i mean by trying to confuse the QB, there are certain zones/areas of the fields certain positions contain. Like the DB's in a cover two will cover there side of the field from the LOS until the Safeties who cover there half of the field behind the DB's.
But, good DC will move the DB's into deep coverage and have the safeties move up and cover the intermediary areas of the field.

Like a zone 3. one of the DB's drops off into deep coverage, and the safeties roll there coverage away from the area the DB covers.

Or like a Quarters zone, where the DB's and Safeties drop off into areas of the field that are almost equally horizontal to each other.

There are also man/zone concepts where you could have for instance in a dime package, two outside DB's and the safeties play a zone and the two slot DB's play man.

Theres really a whole lot to it, and it is interesting and fun to see when the defense runs it well. Unfortunately I don't think any Giants fan will say its been fun watching our defense play zone.

Two of the best posts I have ever read on these boards. Well done YA and 420.



I dont have the patience to explain some simple football talk to guys who think they know it all.