PDA

View Full Version : Holy Cow



Rudyy
01-09-2013, 12:12 PM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giantsí defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.

OX1
01-09-2013, 12:14 PM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giants’ defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.

Bend, don't break is broke,

primetime
01-09-2013, 12:14 PM
That's 3.4 miles of yards... Truly disturbing

Toadofsteel
01-09-2013, 12:15 PM
Bend dont break works wonders, doesn't it?

Cloud57
01-09-2013, 12:15 PM
http://media.nj.com/giants_impact/photo/perry-fewell-bills-d49a77f6eb9b2804_large.jpg

YATittle1962
01-09-2013, 12:20 PM
wow

that stat is staggering

Carter.525
01-09-2013, 12:22 PM
Sweet Moses !!

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 12:24 PM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giants’ defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.

Lovie Smith = Alternative Fewell ;)

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 12:25 PM
"... The unit was ranked 31st in the NFL. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, it is the first time the Giants’ defense was ranked second-to-last in the NFL since 1966."

BlueJayC
01-09-2013, 12:25 PM
If you can fire Sheridan for such an offense why not Fewell? Super Bowl victory or not.......

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 12:26 PM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giantsí defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.
With all the new rules everybody is giving up more yards. Its the new NFL.
May I remind you all that we won a SB last year with this defense?

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 12:28 PM
With all the new rules everybody is giving up more yards. Its the new NFL.May I remind you all that we won a SB last year with this defense?I don't care. It's not all on PF but that is unacceptable

njg85m
01-09-2013, 12:28 PM
383 yards per game on average.
Yikes.

repeatchamps
01-09-2013, 12:28 PM
With all the new rules everybody is giving up more yards. Its the new NFL.
May I remind you all that we won a SB last year with this defense?

Don't care if they won the Super Bowl with that defense. That doesn't mean it cannot be improved. The only thing saving Fewell's job right now is the fact that the points allowed per game went down this year when compared to last year.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 12:28 PM
If you can fire Sheridan for such an offense why not Fewell? Super Bowl victory or not.......

The Giants were tied 12th for points allowed this year.

The Giants were 30th for points allowed in 2009.

But you give up that many yards ... it's going to lead to scores sooner or later.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 12:30 PM
"... The unit was ranked 31st in the NFL. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, it is the first time the Giantsí defense was ranked second-to-last in the NFL since 1966."
That's only based on yards/game. And that is a lousy standard, when used by itself.
The point of playing defense is to keep the other team from scoring. We were 12 in point against.
Another purpose is to take the ball away. We were third in take away's.
Another purpose is to keep the other team out of the endzone when they are in the redzone. We were 6th in red zone defense.

Lets be careful and make sure we take an overall view of the defense. I'm not saying we were that good. But we weren't the 31st best defense. We were about in the middle of the pack.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 12:33 PM
That's only based on yards/game. And that is a lousy standard, when used by itself.The point of playing defense is to keep the other team from scoring. We were 12 in point against.Another purpose is to take the ball away. We were third in take away's.Another purpose is to keep the other team out of the endzone when they are in the redzone. We were 6th in red zone defense.Lets be careful and make sure we take an overall view of the defense. I'm not saying we were that good. But we weren't the 31st best defense. We were about in the middle of the pack.That still doesn't make it acceptable to give up nearly 400 yards a game. Turnovers are great, but getting stops on third and fourth down and getting the opposing offense off the field is more important to me. Sooner or later, they are going to score. Some are fans of the bend but don't break defense and some are not. I am not.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 12:37 PM
That still doesn't make it acceptable to give up nearly 400 yards a game. Turnovers are great, but getting stops on third and fourth down and getting the opposing offense off the field is more important to me. Sooner or later, they are going to score. Some are fans of the bend but don't break defense and some are not. I am not.
Our defensive strategy isn't "bend don't break". Its just they way it played out with the performance of many of our players this season.
The scheme that PF uses is perfectly appropriate in today's NFL. We had to get away from playing a lot of press coverage because of all the mobile QB's in the league.
And for all those who are romantic about Spags, his defense was dead last....by a lot.
The moral of this story.......Players gotta play better. Coaches can't tackle and cover.

njg85m
01-09-2013, 12:38 PM
Morehead is actually correct in his assessment. We have played like that all year for the most part, even in most of the games we won. We would give up huge yards on consecutive plays, and the entire game over all, constantly looking for the turnover. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didnt.

We didn't really fall apart as bad as everyone claims we did. We just stopped getting the turnovers towards that end of the year that had bailed us out in so many of the early games that people seem to have forgotten about.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 12:39 PM
With all the new rules everybody is giving up more yards. Its the new NFL.
May I remind you all that we won a SB last year with this defense?

We were also 25th in points allowed.

We won the SB because our defense woke up for a very brief period of 4 games.

Is that the players or Fewell? History says it was the players.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 12:39 PM
Our defensive strategy isn't "bend don't break". Its just they way it played out with the performance of many of our players this season.
The scheme that PF uses is perfectly appropriate in today's NFL. We had to get away from playing a lot of press coverage because of all the mobile QB's in the league.
And for all those who are romantic about Spags, his defense was dead last....by a lot.
The moral of this story.......Players gotta play better. Coaches can't tackle and cover.

That's incorrect ... our defense is the "Bend-Don't-Break" version of the Cover 2 under Fewell.

nhpgiantsfan
01-09-2013, 12:42 PM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giantsí defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.

Must be Osi's fault!

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 12:42 PM
Our defensive strategy isn't "bend don't break". Its just they way it played out with the performance of many of our players this season.The scheme that PF uses is perfectly appropriate in today's NFL. We had to get away from playing a lot of press coverage because of all the mobile QB's in the league.And for all those who are romantic about Spags, his defense was dead last....by a lot.The moral of this story.......Players gotta play better. Coaches can't tackle and cover. Not every defense is getting torched for 400 yards a game, so I'm not buying the it's perfect for todays NFL standards. Now I think the injuries sustained to this defense totally reflects this stat, so it's not all on PF, but he and his system have regressed over the course of two years. Do I think we'll be like this next year? I have hope we can figure something out like we did down the stretch in 2011 (getting guys healthy back helps as well). Otherwise, he's going to be on the hot seat.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 12:44 PM
We were also 25th in points allowed.

We won the SB because our defense woke up for a very brief period of 4 games.

Is that the players or Fewell? History says it was the players.
PF plays a basic cover 2 scheme. It works fine when the players play well. I mean how many time did Webby have perfect coverage and the ball get caught by the receiver?
As I have said before, whether its Spags or Fewell, our defense depends on our pass rush. Without it, we suck. With it, we're very tough.
Last year our pass rush got going week 16 and we went on a tear. This year it never got going.
The "Nascar" package was a creation of Spags to get our best pass rusher on the filed together in passing downs. It worked well when the players played well in it. But Tuck, Kiwi and Osi are older. They aren't the players they were.

TCHOF
01-09-2013, 12:44 PM
We were also 25th in points allowed.

We won the SB because our defense woke up for a very brief period of 4 games.

Is that the players or Fewell? History says it was the players.

Even if it was the players that "woke up", they were still playing Fewell's schemes, right? If his schemes were no good, then no amount of "waking up" by the players would have change the defensive performance, right?

To me, saying that the defense played better last year because the players "woke up" points to the players being to blame for the defensive perfomance more than the DC.

I guess I'm not really following your logic.

TCHOF
01-09-2013, 12:45 PM
PF plays a basic cover 2 scheme. It works fine when the players play well. I mean how many time did Webby have perfect coverage and the ball get caught by the receiver?
As I have said before, whether its Spags or Fewell, our defense depends on our pass rush. Without it, we suck. With it, we're very tough.
Last year our pass rush got going week 16 and we went on a tear. This year it never got going.
The "Nascar" package was a creation of Spags to get our best pass rusher on the filed together in passing downs. It worked well when the players played well in it. But Tuck, Kiwi and Osi are older. They aren't the players they were.

Well said.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 12:45 PM
Not every defense is getting torched for 400 yards a game, so I'm not buying the it's perfect for todays NFL standards. Now I think the injuries sustained to this defense totally reflects this stat, so it's not all on PF, but he and his system have regressed over the course of two years. Do I think we'll be like this next year? I have hope we can figure something out like we did down the stretch in 2011 (getting guys healthy back helps as well). Otherwise, he's going to be on the hot seat.
Well what do you think Fewell is doing that makes our pass rush less effective?
Its the same package we've had for years, under 3 DC's.
What's happening is that our guys are getting older and less effective. Is Fewell supposed to make these guys younger?

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 12:46 PM
Well what do you think Fewell is doing that makes our pass rush less effective?Its the same package we've had for years, under 3 DC's.What's happening is that our guys are getting older and less effective. Is Fewell supposed to make these guys younger?No but is there nothing he can do? Again, lack of pass rush is due to having players who are not playing up to par. I get that. Corey Webster getting beat is on Corey. Still, something that Fewell is implenting is not working. Maybe he absolutely needs a pass rush? Maybe he's reliant on getting turnovers. Whatever it is, it's not working.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 12:51 PM
Even if it was the players that "woke up", they were still playing Fewell's schemes, right? If his schemes were no good, then no amount of "waking up" by the players would have change the defensive performance, right?

To me, saying that the defense played better last year because the players "woke up" points to the players being to blame for the defensive perfomance more than the DC.

I guess I'm not really following your logic.

The logic is that if your defense is BAD for more games than it is GOOD, you have a BAD defense.

As has been the case under Fewell.

P.S. - You can blame all the players for the past three years, but as they showed you at the end of last year, they have the ability .... they don't have the coaching.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 12:51 PM
No but is there nothing he can do?
Get better players.
Do you think Tuck and Osi are the same players they were a few years ago? They're still out there.
Guys like Austin haven't performed the way we needed them to. You have to look at the GM as well. Our team is getting older on D, especially in the D line (which is supposed to be our strength) JR has swung and missed a lot in early rounds on the defense.
So PF is dealing with what he has.
We have a MLB who we picked back up off the street last season. We have a bunch of injury prone guys all over the back 7.

Moke
01-09-2013, 12:52 PM
I REALLY THINK WE SHOULDN'T EVALUATE PERRY'S PERFORMANCE AS A COACH. GOOD JOB PERRY. YOU'Z AMAZIN'!!!

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 12:53 PM
Well what do you think Fewell is doing that makes our pass rush less effective?
Its the same package we've had for years, under 3 DC's.
What's happening is that our guys are getting older and less effective. Is Fewell supposed to make these guys younger?

The same base shell? Yes.

The same defense? Not remotely. Spags blitzed a ton more and he blitzed creatively.

That's the difference between a "Bend-Don't-Break" and an aggressive defense. Base look has nothing to do with anything other than where someone stands by default.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 12:55 PM
Get better players.
Do you think Tuck and Osi are the same players they were a few years ago? They're still out there.
Guys like Austin haven't performed the way we needed them to. You have to look at the GM as well. Our team is getting older on D, especially in the D line (which is supposed to be our strength) JR has swung and missed a lot in early rounds on the defense.
So PF is dealing with what he has.
We have a MLB who we picked back up off the street last season. We have a bunch of injury prone guys all over the back 7.

Talent acquisition and maintenance definitely is a part it. Easier said than done (otherwise every team would have great players across the board).

But I disagree that Reese has swung and missed in the early rounds of the draft.

To my knowledge, Austin is the only disappointment there. JPP and Linval Joseph have been fine additions, or do you disagree?

Moke
01-09-2013, 12:56 PM
Stop blaming the coach! It's not the coach's fault that the players SUCK. I mean, this is a football game and only the Giants have no talent and no execution.

Bad players! Very bad!

Enough. Obviously Perry has a problem - adjustment. Time to cut the ****, time to get a real defensive coordinator and not some guy who hides behind Gilbride, the other bad coordinator.

TCHOF
01-09-2013, 01:02 PM
The logic is that if your defense is BAD for more games than it is GOOD, you have a BAD defense.

As has been the case under Fewell.

P.S. - You can blame all the players for the past three years, but as they showed you at the end of last year, they have the ability .... they don't have the coaching.

But according to you, the players only showed that they had the ability at the end of last year, and when they did that Fewell's schemes worked just fine. Still not sure how that could be viewed as an indictment of the coaching. If the coaching was no good, the performance would be no good regardless of how well the players played.

Jahh
01-09-2013, 01:06 PM
yet fewell remains

BlueJayC
01-09-2013, 01:06 PM
Check the game film from late last year Fewell was not running his typical D down the stretch he was bringing heat.......I'm tired of this guy already....get rid of him......don't need stats to convince me he's not doing his job well.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 01:06 PM
But according to you, the players only showed that they had the ability at the end of last year, and when they did that Fewell's schemes worked just fine. Still not sure how that could be viewed as an indictment of the coaching. If the coaching was no good, the performance would be no good regardless of how well the players played.

That's incorrect.

Scheme only goes so far and player ability only goes so far. As you said, if you had a solid scheme and no players, it doesn't work. Conversely, if you have the best players in the world and not in a position to make plays, it doesn't work.

It's the DC's job to marry the two together ... that's my contention. Fewell has done this poorly, far more times than he's done it well.

P.S. - Half of the plays CWeb was blamed for, was actually the Safety being out of position. When that happens consistently (as it has over the past three years) THAT'S scheme. And bad scheme is ALL on the coach.

P.P.S. - And I don't subscribe to the notion that every one of our players on defense just became bad in a one year time frame.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 01:09 PM
Stop blaming the coach! It's not the coach's fault that the players SUCK. I mean, this is a football game and only the Giants have no talent and no execution.

Bad players! Very bad!

Enough. Obviously Perry has a problem - adjustment. Time to cut the ****, time to get a real defensive coordinator and not some guy who hides behind Gilbride, the other bad coordinator.

As I said, our defense wasn't as bad as some here have suggested. But having said that, you have to admit that age, and the lack of production that goes with it are a major problem for us. It doesn't take much in this league, with all these great athletes to fall behind.
I mean look at KP. The guys just can't stay on the field. Our young corner's (who I like) have also had problems staying on the field.
Look waht happened to the SF defense when they lost Justin Smith. They gave up 76 points in 2 games. It doesn't take much.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 01:09 PM
Check the game film from late last year Fewell was not running his typical D down the stretch he was bringing heat.......I'm tired of this guy already....get rid of him......don't need stats to convince me he's not doing his job well.

He also changed the back end playing more man coverage and keeping the Safeties back. He said he "simplified" his defense ... which is a euphemism for "my old defense sucked and the players didn't understand it".

Jahh
01-09-2013, 01:10 PM
That's incorrect.

Scheme only goes so far and player ability only goes so far. As you said, if you had a solid scheme and no players, it doesn't work. Conversely, if you have the best players in the world and not in a position to make plays, it doesn't work.

It's the DC's job to marry the two together ... that's my contention. Fewell has done this poorly, far more times than he's done it well.

P.S. - Half of the plays CWeb was blamed for, was actually the Safety being out of position. When that happens consistently (as it has over the past three years) THAT'S scheme. And bad scheme is ALL on the coach.

P.P.S. - And I don't subscribe to the notion that every one of our players on defense just became bad in a one year time frame.

It is my hypthesis that the players don't like the scheme much and don't play the calls to the letter.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 01:11 PM
It is my hypthesis that the players don't like the scheme much and don't play the calls to the letter.Didnt KP come out and speak on that?

Jahh
01-09-2013, 01:14 PM
Didnt KP come out and speak on that?

Calling out players not playing the calls? Or stating he didn't like the scheme?

Moke
01-09-2013, 01:15 PM
Hey Jahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhh.

I think you're correct, Yahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Jahh
01-09-2013, 01:21 PM
Hey Jahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhh.

I think you're correct, Yahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

hahahhhhhhhhhhh

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 01:22 PM
Calling out players not playing the calls? Or stating he didn't like the scheme?That he didnt like the scheme.

ny06
01-09-2013, 01:22 PM
Let me start off saying I have defended Fewell and this defense for a few seasons now. I kept telling myself it's the new rules of the NFL, injuries, players, etc... But I'm at a breaking point now, this is the NY Giants not the Arizona Cardinals. This franchise was built on defense, now we are the bend but don't break defense. Let's call this defense for what they are (insert anything negative)

BlueReign
01-09-2013, 01:27 PM
Rob Ryan please.

Jahh
01-09-2013, 01:28 PM
Maybe this press release is a precursor to firing Fewell. You know, gaining the backing of the fan base before he gets the booooooot!

JB456
01-09-2013, 01:31 PM
As I said, our defense wasn't as bad as some here have suggested. But having said that, you have to admit that age, and the lack of production that goes with it are a major problem for us. It doesn't take much in this league, with all these great athletes to fall behind.
I mean look at KP. The guys just can't stay on the field. Our young corner's (who I like) have also had problems staying on the field.
Look waht happened to the SF defense when they lost Justin Smith. They gave up 76 points in 2 games. It doesn't take much.

LMAO, it sounds like you work for PF. If it wasn't for that playoff run last year, PF would be toast. You can blame the players all you want but it ultimately falls on the shoulders of the coach. It is up to the coach to adjust his schemes when they are ineffective and Fewel is obviously incapable of adjustments. Two consecuitive 6K seasons should make you want to throw a toddler holding a kitten and a puppy into a woodchipper but it just seems like the norm to you. Well, think about this, the defense for the Giants over the last two years has been historically Bad for this organization.

jakegibbs
01-09-2013, 01:34 PM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giantsí defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.

And look @ the Bronco's defense... I was posting all over this message board when Jack Del Rio lost his job at Jacksonville to bring him in as the DC. We didn't but Denver did. The rest is history.

Dwinsballgames
01-09-2013, 01:35 PM
Rob Ryan please.

Yeah, because that fat turd did wonders for Dallas

JayMas9
01-09-2013, 01:39 PM
And look @ the Bronco's defense... I was posting all over this message board when Jack Del Rio lost his job at Jacksonville to bring him in as the DC. We didn't but Denver did. The rest is history.You would have fired a super bowl winnning DC? Even if you don't like him, there's no logical argument to do that as an organization

Giantz4Life
01-09-2013, 01:40 PM
And look @ the Bronco's defense... I was posting all over this message board when Jack Del Rio lost his job at Jacksonville to bring him in as the DC. We didn't but Denver did. The rest is history.

Denver also has a plethora of playmakers on defense especially their linebackers/pass rushers: Von Miller (absolute beast), Elvis Dumervil, Champ Bailey, Wesley Woodyard....

Del Rio had a lot to work with when he took over. Not saying he is not a good DC because he is, but he had a lot of new toys to play with.

That being said, I've never been a huge fan of PF. IMO he doesn't blitz enough and just lets our front four rush which usually results in us giving up a big play. Against the Eagles we brought pressure from the secondary and linebackers and look how effective it was.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 01:41 PM
LMAO, it sounds like you work for PF. If it wasn't for that playoff run last year, PF would be toast. You can blame the players all you want but it ultimately falls on the shoulders of the coach. It is up to the coach to adjust his schemes when they are ineffective and Fewel is obviously incapable of adjustments. Two consecuitive 6K seasons should make you want to throw a toddler holding a kitten and a puppy into a woodchipper but it just seems like the norm to you. Well, think about this, the defense for the Giants over the last two years has been historically Bad for this organization.
My only point is that the players performance is the difference in our defense. Do I "love" PF's scheme? No I don't. As one other poster said, we don't blitz like we used to.
But I'm not blaming him for the majority of our problems on D.
1. Because as I said, our D wasn't as bad as some are saying (12 in scoring, 3rd in takeaways, 6th in redzone defense)
2. The problem is our pass rush and the players on our D line is underperforming.
3. Secondary is constantly banged up.

And one thing no one can argue with...... We can win a championship with this DC.

giantsforce
01-09-2013, 01:46 PM
If you can fire Sheridan for such an offense why not Fewell? Super Bowl victory or not.......Come on, man! You do not break up the 3 stooges, do you? It won't be the same comedy without them.

BlueJayC
01-09-2013, 01:48 PM
Ravens won a Superbowl with Trent Dilfer at quarterback.......the question is not whether you can win a SB with certain coaches or players......but rather it should be are they the best option available?

In my opinion neither coordinator is.....would get rid of both in a heartbeat......not saying they haven't had success in the past but I think when this team performs well it's in spite of them not because of them.

The head coach is another story......wouldn't trade him for all the Gruden's or Cowher's on the planet.

Giantz4Life
01-09-2013, 01:49 PM
You would have fired a super bowl winnning DC? Even if you don't like him, there's no logical argument to do that as an organization

Yeah we won a SB with him, but the scheme sucks. It's a simplistic Cover 2 that relies on the front four to create pressure and if that doesn't happen then we are screwed unless a DB/LB makes a great play. No creativeness at all, and the numbers don't lie. We have given up over 12,000 yards in 2 seasons! If we didn't have some of those turnovers that number would be even higher and more embarrassing. Yes, we won the SB with him as our DC, but I attribute it more to our players (mainly DLine) playing at an extremely high level (for 4-5 games tops) than his scheme.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 01:50 PM
Ravens won a Superbowl with Trent Dilfer at quarterback.......the question is not whether you can win a SB with certain coaches or players......but rather it should be are they the best option available?

In my opinion neither coordinator is.....would get rid of both in a heartbeat......not saying they haven't had success in the past but I think when this team performs well it's in spite of them not because of them.

The head coach is another story......wouldn't trade him for all the Gruden's or Cowher's on the planet.

Yes but our defense played very well during our playoff run. It was most certainly the difference from our 9-7 regular season.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 01:54 PM
And one thing no one can argue with...... We can win a championship with this DC.

You can say the same thing for our players .... except you didn't :p

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 01:55 PM
Ravens won a Superbowl with Trent Dilfer at quarterback.......the question is not whether you can win a SB with certain coaches or players......but rather it should be are they the best option available?

In my opinion neither coordinator is.....would get rid of both in a heartbeat......not saying they haven't had success in the past but I think when this team performs well it's in spite of them not because of them.

The head coach is another story......wouldn't trade him for all the Gruden's or Cowher's on the planet.

BINGO!

While I don't have the problem some do with KG, I'd instantly replace him and PF for Norv Turner / Lovie Smith.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 01:56 PM
My only point is that the players performance is the difference in our defense. Do I "love" PF's scheme? No I don't. As one other poster said, we don't blitz like we used to.
But I'm not blaming him for the majority of our problems on D.
1. Because as I said, our D wasn't as bad as some are saying (12 in scoring, 3rd in takeaways, 6th in redzone defense)
2. The problem is our pass rush and the players on our D line is underperforming.
3. Secondary is constantly banged up.

And one thing no one can argue with...... We can win a championship with this DC.

Question: If our defense does *exactly* what it did this year in 2013 and we miss the playoffs again, do you still want Fewell?

YATittle1962
01-09-2013, 01:58 PM
PF plays a basic cover 2 scheme.

I love ya More....but this is not true at all

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 01:58 PM
You can say the same thing for our players .... except you didn't :p
Its a good point. The problem is that players skills diminish as they get older. Coaches should, in theory, get better as they get older with more experience.
If we could have the same Tuck, the same Osi, the same Boley etc...in 2013 that we had in 2011, you would be right.
But it's a young man's game.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 01:59 PM
I love ya More....but this is not true at all
Well he does like to play with corners facing the QB. Am I wrong? I defer to your knowledge on these things.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 02:00 PM
Its a good point. The problem is that players skills diminish as they get older. Coaches should, in theory, get better as they get older with more experience.
If we could have the same Tuck, the same Osi, the same Boley etc...in 2013 that we had in 2011, you would be right.
But it's a young man's game.

Valid point.

So how long are you willing to wait for PF to field a consistent quality defense?

Riverboat76
01-09-2013, 02:02 PM
The pass rush was never there the entire season. That has to fall on the DC. If what you're doing isn't working then you have to get creative, change it up. That really never happened. I understand Tuck and Osi getting older, but using that logic JPP is entering his prime and thus should be getting better. Yet he regressed this year. That also has to fall on the DC.

But you can't put everything on his shoulders, the players are the ones making tackles (or not making tackles). And I would agree that Reese has to take some of the blame as well, because our LB production has been non-existent for a few years now and alot of the guys he has signed and/or drafted have been off-injured or just plain ineffective.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 02:04 PM
Well he does like to play with corners facing the QB. Am I wrong? I defer to your knowledge on these things.

CBs sneaking a peak back at the QB is just bad technique. You don't teach that.

Accordingly, the majority of the reason I dislike Fewell is the lack of fundamentals on our defense which really hurt us this year. Bad tackling, inability to shed blocks, CBs peaking into the backfield, break down of containment ... these are techniques that are taught, not God given natural ability and these are all areas we broke down in constantly this year.

And then Fewell's scheme drives me nuts ... if your pass rush isn't getting there, you blitz. That's what a blitz is for. On third and long, you send the house ... not rush three in a prevent look.

YATittle1962
01-09-2013, 02:04 PM
Well he does like to play with corners facing the QB. Am I wrong? I defer to your knowledge on these things.

he does prefer read and react

but that is because his defense is based on pressure , rushed throws and causing turnovers

when the passer is rushed this scheme is a charm........when the pass rushers don't get pressure this scheme can look very ugly

you scheme to your strengths ......and the NY Giants strength was supposed to be pass rush

TheBookOfEli
01-09-2013, 02:05 PM
We need better players lulz.

Riverboat76
01-09-2013, 02:07 PM
And lets not forget, the Giants caught lightning in a bottle last year. Certainly their playoff run was no joke, but they were fortunate to get in in the first place. It's certainly a game of inches...what if Romo hits a wide open Miles Austin in the first Dallas game last year. No playoffs. No Superbowl. And this thread wouldn't even exist because our coaching staff would already be replaced.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:12 PM
Valid point.

So how long are you willing to wait for PF to field a consistent quality defense?
Right now I'm waiting for JR to field some better players. Everyone likes Chase, but he's far from a quality starting NFL MLB. We need to find some miracle that will enable these corners and safeties to stay healthy. Or at least have some better depth at corner.
And the D line is definitely due for a revamp.
There are going to have to be some real personell changes in our defense. Much more than the O.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:14 PM
he does prefer read and react

but that is because his defense is based on pressure , rushed throws and causing turnovers

when the passer is rushed this scheme is a charm........when the pass rushers don't get pressure this scheme can look very ugly

you scheme to your strengths ......and the NY Giants strength was supposed to be pass rush

YA...that's what I've been saying for weeks. Both Spags and PF rely on the pass rush. What I like about PF's scheme is that he doesn't use near as much press coverage. Last year I saw Webby playing press on the other teams #1 WR at times, but essentially, he likes his corners facing the QB. Which is helpful with mobile QB's.
But our pass rush is not what it was. We've gotten old and beat up on the D line.

YATittle1962
01-09-2013, 02:15 PM
Right now I'm waiting for JR to field some better players. Everyone likes Chase, but he's far from a quality starting NFL MLB. We need to find some miracle that will enable these corners and safeties to stay healthy. Or at least have some better depth at corner.
And the D line is definitely due for a revamp.
There are going to have to be some real personell changes in our defense. Much more than the O.

I gotta agree here

I'm getting tired of praising players who we are surprised played well and killing players who we expected to play well and stunk up the joint

my goodness.....get some LBs on this squad for crying out loud !!!!!!!

dezzzR
01-09-2013, 02:16 PM
With all the new rules everybody is giving up more yards. Its the new NFL.
May I remind you all that we won a SB last year with this defense?So did green bay and the saints, does that mean their defense was good?

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:26 PM
So did green bay and the saints, does that mean their defense was good?
GB and the Saints won a SB last year?

dezzzR
01-09-2013, 02:34 PM
GB and the Saints won a SB last year?When they won.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:37 PM
GB and the Saints won a SB last year?
The one common denominator with the Saints in 09 and the Packers in 2010, was their ability to create turnovers.
What does that suggest to you Dez?

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 02:41 PM
Right now I'm waiting for JR to field some better players. Everyone likes Chase, but he's far from a quality starting NFL MLB. We need to find some miracle that will enable these corners and safeties to stay healthy. Or at least have some better depth at corner.
And the D line is definitely due for a revamp.
There are going to have to be some real personell changes in our defense. Much more than the O.

Still didn't answer the question ... or will PF never be held accountable in your eyes?

P.S. - I totally disagree with you about the state of our players.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 02:42 PM
The one common denominator with the Saints in 09 and the Packers in 2010, was their ability to create turnovers.
What does that suggest to you Dez?

It suggests that defenses that rely on turnovers don't repeat.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 02:43 PM
YA...that's what I've been saying for weeks. Both Spags and PF rely on the pass rush. What I like about PF's scheme is that he doesn't use near as much press coverage. Last year I saw Webby playing press on the other teams #1 WR at times, but essentially, he likes his corners facing the QB. Which is helpful with mobile QB's.
But our pass rush is not what it was. We've gotten old and beat up on the D line.

The difference being that Spags didn't soley and blindly rely on his front four.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:44 PM
It suggests that defenses that rely on turnovers don't repeat.
It also suggests that creating turnovers is an important component in winning football games.

dezzzR
01-09-2013, 02:44 PM
The one common denominator with the Saints in 09 and the Packers in 2010, was their ability to create turnovers.
What does that suggest to you Dez?The other common denominator is great play from the QBs

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:45 PM
The difference being that Spags didn't soley and blindly rely on his front four.
Because he played a lot of man coverage. Its hard to blitz a lot when you play a lot of zone.
But having said that, I would like to see offenses kept more honest with more blitzes.

TroyArcher
01-09-2013, 02:46 PM
It also suggests that creating turnovers is an important component in winning football games.

I would argue a secondary component. You first must be able to stop the run, pressure the QB and cover someone. Giants didn't do much of that in 2012.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:46 PM
The other common denominator is great play from the QBs
Not biting.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 02:46 PM
Honestly, while I loved winning the SB last year..I think it did cover some major holes on this team, especially the D.

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 02:47 PM
It also suggests that creating turnovers is an important component in winning football games.

It's not a stat you can rely on ... just as you can't rely on defensive scoring (one of the reasons the Saints defense fell so sharply).

Turnovers are situational ... they're gravy ... they're not a substitute for solid tackling and stopping the opposing team on third downs.

Teams that rely on turnovers, never consistently field top defenses (or good defenses) year after year.

P.S. - We were 3rd or 4th in turnovers this year ... how'd that work out for us?

dezzzR
01-09-2013, 02:47 PM
It also suggests that creating turnovers is an important component in winning football games.So is creating 3 and outs and putting the offense in decent field position. So is getting after the QB. So is not avg. over 120 yards on the ground per game. Id rather those 3 things over 4-5 more turnovers a year.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:48 PM
I would argue a secondary component. You first must be able to stop the run, pressure the QB and cover someone. Giants didn't do much of that in 2012.
You know the win/loss records of team who win the turnover battle...Right?

dezzzR
01-09-2013, 02:48 PM
Not biting.Im not fishing, its the truth.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 02:49 PM
It's not a stat you can rely on ... just as you can't rely on defensive scoring (one of the reasons the Saints defense fell so sharply).Turnovers are situational ... they're gravy ... they're not a substitute for solid tackling and stopping the opposing team on third downs.Teams that rely on turnovers, never consistently field top defenses (or good defenses) year after year.Like the 2011 and 2012 Giants :)

Kruunch
01-09-2013, 02:49 PM
Because he played a lot of man coverage. Its hard to blitz a lot when you play a lot of zone.
But having said that, I would like to see offenses kept more honest with more blitzes.

Exactly my point.

I don't need a blitz every down ... but I'd rather go down swinging than go down looking.

Morehead State
01-09-2013, 02:51 PM
Im not fishing, its the truth.
Its not necessary when your team plays the kind of defense we did in our playoff runs of 07 an '11.

Dwinsballgames
01-09-2013, 04:20 PM
Im not fishing, its the truth.

And what does QB play have to do with the defense?

radar-ray
01-09-2013, 04:33 PM
Exactly my point.

I don't need a blitz every down ... but I'd rather go down swinging than go down looking.This 100%!!!

repeatchamps
01-09-2013, 04:36 PM
Exactly my point.

I don't need a blitz every down ... but I'd rather go down swinging than go down looking.

As a Mets fan it pains me to do this but I thought it apprapo:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhrJ-XI3F2A

ny06
01-09-2013, 05:22 PM
As a Mets fan it pains me to do this but I thought it apprapo:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhrJ-XI3F2A
The Mets make me appreciate being a Yankees fan that much more.

JayMas9
01-09-2013, 07:08 PM
Our piss poor run defense was my biggest gripe this year. Not only did it help stifle an already under-performing pass rush, getting gashed on the ground always leads to big plays. All problems for the giants this year. First priority is to sure up the darn run D next year, and I think some other things will fall into place. Corey Webster remembering how to play football would be nice as well.

brad
01-09-2013, 07:25 PM
People continue to point to players to excuse the defensive coaching, yet last year they had a great pass rush and prior to this year, it was the worst in franchise history. We didn't hear complaints about Webster or most of the other defensive players... and yet this year that is the excuse. This year was only slightly worse than last year... and while you might put some of that on players, clearly the scheme is a major factor. It is a bad defense that gives up a ton of yards. Last year it was saved by a tremendous pass rush. This year it was saved, at times, by getting turnovers. Those are situations where the players were actually covering up just how bad the defense really is, in my opinion.

Diamondring
01-09-2013, 07:37 PM
Hey those things may not be good but the Giants played a lot of good teams though. This changes basic concepts.

Diamondring
01-09-2013, 07:38 PM
I bet you that if a weak team played the Giants schedule, they would have won no games or maybe just two of them.

myles2424
01-09-2013, 08:25 PM
I bet you that if a weak team played the Giants schedule, they would have won no games or maybe just two of them.

Dude total crap teams make these kind of excuses....We have talent & not playing up even half of that potential....Cant blame injuries or schedule for that...

Diamondring
01-09-2013, 08:33 PM
Dude total crap teams make these kind of excuses....We have talent & not playing up even half of that potential....Cant blame injuries or schedule for that...Yes you can cause it is all about the matchups. Some teams we faced had better talent. Also playing too many good teams, you are going to have a lot of close games. You know about the could of, should of and would of? Those things really happen in close games.

Giants don't have good lbs and their D-line couldn't even beat one on one battles so how the blitz and mixing up plays are going to work?

miked1958
01-09-2013, 08:37 PM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giantsí defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.the defense that gave up 6022 in 2011 also won a SB

giantsfan420
01-09-2013, 08:38 PM
listen, i hate what our D has become. But it wasnt JUST the sb run last yr. in 2010, PF's defense was like top 5 unit across the board iirc, at least a top 10.

its that the FO has seen PFs defense be one of the better units AND play lights out on a SB run vs some of the best offenses.

if it were me, id make a change. but im not as patient as TC and the FO, and their patience has granted us 2 SBs. dont forget, everyone save a few were running eli out of town, tc out of town...we as fans are often short sighted.

miked1958
01-09-2013, 08:38 PM
I realize this trend can't continue but that was a nice trade off last season

giantsfan420
01-09-2013, 08:40 PM
i dont think we can blame PF for the DE's failures and Webster being hot trash, BUT, he can be blamed for not making the necessary adjustments to alleviate those issues effects on the outcome of games...

giantsfan420
01-09-2013, 08:41 PM
the DE's not getting sacks or Webster playing like trash doesnt excuse the performances we saw from this defense...

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 08:48 PM
the defense that gave up 6022 in 2011 also won a SBCool. That same defense is getting worse.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 08:50 PM
Hey those things may not be good but the Giants played a lot of good teams though. This changes basic concepts.What teams? I bet our defense made them look like the '07 Pats.

Diamondring
01-09-2013, 08:57 PM
What teams? I bet our defense made them look like the '07 Pats.Antlanta was kind of tough and the Ravens are tough as well. Those are just two teams. Oh how about the Bengals?. Then you have to look at teams in our own division with winning records as well wich we played twice every year. Lets take a look at the Pat's. They have a weak division but Giants don't have a weak one so they have more pressure. You should know that you have to evialuate the other teams in the NFL not just the Giants How about the Vikings one team we did not play and the Bears. They had winning records as well. The Giants aren't a perfect team and you should know this. Our D-line are going to win and lose battles. They may lose or win more depending on the teams they play. You should know all of that.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 09:06 PM
Antlanta was kind of tough and the Ravens are tough as well. Those are just two teams. Oh how about the Bengals?. Then you have to look at teams in our own division with winning records as well wich we played twice every year. Lets take a look at the Pat's. They have a weak division but Giants don't have a weak one so they have more pressure. You should know that you have to evialuate the other teams in the NFL not just the Giants How about the Vikings one team we did not play and the Bears. They had winning records as well. The Giants aren't a perfect team and you should know this. Our D-line are going to win and lose battles. They may lose or win more depending on the teams they play. You should know all of that.It is unacceptable to give up 400 a GAME. It tells me they are not executing/know what they are doing. When you go from 27th in total defense to 2011 to 31st and giving up more yards, that is telling me you are REGRESSING. Now was our schedule hard? Yes it was, but so was the Broncos schedule. You don't see their defense last in the league in anythig. That's an excuse. In the first Philly game, I don't think Michael Vick was sacked ONCE. I dont blame the game on defense but you brought up division rivals. As a matter of fact, nobody in our division except maybe the skins were powerhouse teams. So again, those are excuses.

Diamondring
01-09-2013, 09:17 PM
It is unacceptable to give up 400 a GAME. It tells me they are not executing/know what they are doing. When you go from 27th in total defense to 2011 to 31st and giving up more yards, that is telling me you are REGRESSING. Now was our schedule hard? Yes it was, but so was the Broncos schedule. You don't see their defense last in the league in anythig. That's an excuse. In the first Philly game, I don't think Michael Vick was sacked ONCE. I dont blame the game on defense but you brought up division rivals. As a matter of fact, nobody in our division except maybe the skins were powerhouse teams. So again, those are excuses.Skins had a winning record and the Cowboys. Denver is a different team and they had a good defense before Peyton came to them. Not only that, they were in the playoffs with Tebow Tebow before Peyton so come with a better example. Then you talk about the Skins being a powerhouse but the Cowboys also won a good amount of games to so you have to look at that. The Cowboys do have a good team. It is not the best but they had a winning record. The Pats don't have a team above 500 in their division. This makes things easier.

As for that excuse thing, well there are going to be problems and you have to fix them whether it be during the season or after and beyond. Giants have too many that Fewell can't fix anything. Look things happen and the season was to hard.

appodictic
01-09-2013, 09:32 PM
The Giants were tied 12th for points allowed this year.

The Giants were 30th for points allowed in 2009.

But you give up that many yards ... it's going to lead to scores sooner or later.

It's also going to mean your offense can't score cause there not on the field.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 09:39 PM
Skins had a winning record and the Cowboys. Denver is a different team and they had a good defense before Peyton came to them. Not only that, they were in the playoffs with Tebow Tebow before Peyton so come with a better example. Then you talk about the Skins being a powerhouse but the Cowboys also won a good amount of games to so you have to look at that. The Cowboys do have a good team. It is not the best but they had a winning record. The Pats don't have a team above 500 in their division. This makes things easier.

As for that excuse thing, well there are going to be problems and you have to fix them whether it be during the season or after and beyond. Giants have too many that Fewell can't fix anything. Look things happen and the season was to hard.Why are you bringing up the Patriots all of a sudden just because I used them as an example as what we make other teams look like? lol. I only brought up Denver because you said "we have a tough schedule so it's about matchups" yeah well Denver had a tough schedule and their defense didn't give up 400 a game.

In the end when I look our defense, we had opportunities to make plays and we didn't. Whether it was execution, the players, or Fewells scheme. They were not on the same page for most of the year. It doesn't matter who you play. We should not tackle, cover, or get pressure. That's on the players. We were constantly confused on D and they looked like they hadn't had a clue as to what to do. That's on the coach.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 09:40 PM
It's also going to mean your offense can't score cause there not on the field.This is also another reason why you shouldn't always depend on your offense. Last year it worked, this year it did not and you saw what happened.

rebelfan1966
01-09-2013, 09:58 PM
I suggested in another thread that we need to look at potential OC's and DC's just to see what was available..... that the ones we have are average. I got the "We wond two SB's with the coaches we have" rebuttle thrown back in my face.

I still say we need to look at all options available, or we risk missing another playoff.

drewz
01-09-2013, 10:07 PM
but Fewell won a Super Bowl

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 10:08 PM
I suggested in another thread that we need to look at potential OC's and DC's just to see what was available..... that the ones we have are average. I got the "We wond two SB's with the coaches we have" rebuttle thrown back in my face.

I still say we need to look at all options available, or we risk missing another playoff.They have no choice but to make adjustments this year. If they fail to do so, expect to see changes.

brad
01-09-2013, 10:10 PM
but Fewell won a Super Bowl

Fewell was great in the playoffs... the only problem is you have to make the playoffs first.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 10:14 PM
Fewell was great in the playoffs... the only problem is you have to make the playoffs first.bingo.

Diamondring
01-09-2013, 11:22 PM
Why are you bringing up the Patriots all of a sudden just because I used them as an example as what we make other teams look like? lol. I only brought up Denver because you said "we have a tough schedule so it's about matchups" yeah well Denver had a tough schedule and their defense didn't give up 400 a game.

In the end when I look our defense, we had opportunities to make plays and we didn't. Whether it was execution, the players, or Fewells scheme. They were not on the same page for most of the year. It doesn't matter who you play. We should not tackle, cover, or get pressure. That's on the players. We were constantly confused on D and they looked like they hadn't had a clue as to what to do. That's on the coach.Denver schedule wasn't tough. Even if it was their defense was good in 011 and they had a bad offense with Tebow. I use the Pats cause their division is weak and ours is stronger. Giants was going to lose game against their rivals. The only team the Brncos had to worry about was the Chargers and they weren't that good. Denver played about 10 games against weak opponents including in their division.

Rudyy
01-09-2013, 11:36 PM
Denver schedule wasn't tough. Even if it was their defense was good in 011 and they had a bad offense with Tebow. I use the Pats cause their division is weak and ours is stronger. Giants was going to lose game against their rivals. The only team the Brncos had to worry about was the Chargers and they weren't that good. Denver played about 10 games against weak opponents including in their division.They still had the 2nd toughest schedule in the leagur I believe. Again, you are averaging 383 yards a GAME, so it's not just tough opponents.

cornerback30
01-09-2013, 11:38 PM
Bend, don't break is broke,funny,I needed that one right about now dude funny

BK07071
01-10-2013, 12:35 AM
@RVacchianoNYDN: The Giantsí defense gave up a franchise-worst 6,134 yards, up from 6,022 in 2011 -- the only two times the Giants have ever given up 6,000. Guys, I know players were injured and some weren't playing up to par, but wow. That's two years in a row.

Yeah.........no sh-t Sherlock!!! You can expect the same next year too because we're keeping the world's best defensive genius as DC.....non other than the great....stupendous....brilliant......PERRY FEWELL !!!!!!!!!!!!

Giants5699
01-10-2013, 01:16 AM
I think our team was banged up more than we know at the end of the year.

barran21
01-10-2013, 01:43 AM
"... The unit was ranked 31st in the NFL. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, it is the first time the Giantsí defense was ranked second-to-last in the NFL since 1966."

Yet they still keeping I don't know how to Adjust Fewell...

Diamondring
01-10-2013, 07:28 AM
But the NFL ranked Giants total defense second. I must be reading it wrong or something. Sometimes stats don't tell the whole story. How many yards the Giants gave up in garbage time? How about the tackling? The DC can't have the players do everything so that is why teams get position coaches. A tough schedule can be hard on players cause of the stiff competition. Giants are going to have close games and those type of games are like a box of chocolate.

SweetZombieJesus
01-10-2013, 07:39 AM
Bend, don't break is broke,

Our defense bends, breaks, spindles, and shatters.

Rudyy
01-10-2013, 07:52 AM
But the NFL ranked Giants total defense second. I must be reading it wrong or something. Sometimes stats don't tell the whole story. How many yards the Giants gave up in garbage time? How about the tackling? The DC can't have the players do everything so that is why teams get position coaches. A tough schedule can be hard on players cause of the stiff competition. Giants are going to have close games and those type of games are like a box of chocolate.When and where were we even ranked in the top 10 in total defense?

brad
01-10-2013, 08:06 AM
But the NFL ranked Giants total defense second. I must be reading it wrong or something. Sometimes stats don't tell the whole story. How many yards the Giants gave up in garbage time? How about the tackling? The DC can't have the players do everything so that is why teams get position coaches. A tough schedule can be hard on players cause of the stiff competition. Giants are going to have close games and those type of games are like a box of chocolate.

The Giants defense has not been ranked 2nd in a very very long time... certainly not this year. You may have been looking at interceptions?

giantscolombia
01-10-2013, 08:36 AM
http://media.nj.com/giants_impact/photo/perry-fewell-bills-d49a77f6eb9b2804_large.jpg

should have stayed in Buffalo...

terrible....

Rudyy
01-10-2013, 09:12 AM
The Giants defense has not been ranked 2nd in a very very long time... certainly not this year. You may have been looking at interceptions?It has to be takeaways...don't know what he's talking about lol.

Rusty192
01-10-2013, 09:25 AM
Cows are holy indeed. At least in India.




To stay on topic: Fire PF!!

Rudyy
01-10-2013, 09:27 AM
Cows are holy indeed. At least in India.To stay on topic: Fire PF!!Oh Rusty...

Rusty192
01-10-2013, 09:46 AM
Oh Rusty...I'll be here all week

Rudyy
01-10-2013, 09:48 AM
I'll be here all weekWell my week is officially ruined.

Rusty192
01-10-2013, 10:02 AM
Well my week is officially ruined.Too bad I guess

Rudyy
01-10-2013, 10:03 AM
Too bad I guessYou know what's really bad? This defense :(

Rusty192
01-10-2013, 10:06 AM
You know what's really bad? This defense :(I blame it on you honestly.

BlueJayC
01-10-2013, 10:15 AM
The most basic question that should be asked is "are there better DC's out there and available?"

And I think'd you'd be lying if you answered "no."

A team should never settle for a "serviceable" product on the field especially not this team or organization.......the teams that follow that mold end up in the cellar year in and year out. I truly believe both coordinators jobs were saved for one more year simply because they took the title last year.......that's it......not because they're the two best options out there......

I'll keep saying it until I'm BLUE in the face <pun intended>......THIS TEAM WINS IN SPITE OF THE TWO CLOWNS RUNNING THE O AND D NOT BECAUSE OF THEM......they haven't won a game (this year or last) because of a great gameplans or adjustments......they win because their players make great plays out of mediocre calls.

TCHOF
01-10-2013, 11:09 AM
The most basic question that should be asked is "are there better DC's out there and available?"

And I think'd you'd be lying if you answered "no."

A team should never settle for a "serviceable" product on the field especially not this team or organization.......the teams that follow that mold end up in the cellar year in and year out. I truly believe both coordinators jobs were saved for one more year simply because they took the title last year.......that's it......not because they're the two best options out there......

I'll keep saying it until I'm BLUE in the face <pun intended>......THIS TEAM WINS IN SPITE OF THE TWO CLOWNS RUNNING THE O AND D NOT BECAUSE OF THEM......they haven't won a game (this year or last) because of a great gameplans or adjustments......they win because their players make great plays out of mediocre calls.

Please list the available DC's out there who would be an upgrade from Fewell.

M00KIE
01-11-2013, 07:13 AM
"THIS TEAM WINS IN SPITE OF THE TWO CLOWNS RUNNING THE O AND D NOT BECAUSE OF THEM"

Alrighty then...

brad
01-11-2013, 08:14 AM
Please list the available DC's out there who would be an upgrade from Fewell.

Not that I entirely agree with the poster that you responded too... a few that come to mind are:

Kiffin
Horton
Rob Ryan (not sure I would want him)
Lovie Smith

I am sure there are others out there, those are the ones that came to mind right away. All have produced defenses that have ranked among the best in the NFL at one time or another. Considering PF has never ranked in the top 20, all would technically be an upgrade.

Kruunch
01-11-2013, 08:32 AM
Please list the available DC's out there who would be an upgrade from Fewell.

Be easier listing the available DCs that would be a downgrade. :p

TCHOF
01-11-2013, 08:44 AM
Not that I entirely agree with the poster that you responded too... a few that come to mind are:

Kiffin
Horton
Rob Ryan (not sure I would want him)
Lovie Smith

I am sure there are others out there, those are the ones that came to mind right away. All have produced defenses that have ranked among the best in the NFL at one time or another. Considering PF has never ranked in the top 20, all would technically be an upgrade.

Monte Kiffin is 72, but you're right, he's probably an upgrade from Fewell. I'll give you Lovie Smith as well.

Rob Ryan is the most overrated DC in the history of football. He's never been anything but average. Not an upgrade IMO.

Not sure that Horton is "available" Isn't he still employed by the Cards?

BlueJayC
01-11-2013, 10:09 AM
Please list the available DC's out there who would be an upgrade from Fewell.

A couple guys beat me to it.......but they're also just looking at former DC's not potential new hires from the college ranks or positional coaches from other teams without work or worth a look.......

Oh and these guys would be an upgrade too:
Juan Castillo
Bill Sheridan

Kruunch
01-11-2013, 10:15 AM
A couple guys beat me to it.......but they're also just looking at former DC's not potential new hires from the college ranks or positional coaches from other teams without work or worth a look.......

Oh and these guys would be an upgrade too:
Juan Castillo
Bill Sheridan

I'm literally flummoxed for a reply.

Rudyy
01-11-2013, 10:17 AM
A couple guys beat me to it.......but they're also just looking at former DC's not potential new hires from the college ranks or positional coaches from other teams without work or worth a look.......Oh and these guys would be an upgrade too: Juan CastilloBill Sheridanlol dude...

gumby74
01-11-2013, 10:29 AM
Monte Kiffin is 72, but you're right, he's probably an upgrade from Fewell. I'll give you Lovie Smith as well.

Rob Ryan is the most overrated DC in the history of football. He's never been anything but average. Not an upgrade IMO.

Not sure that Horton is "available" Isn't he still employed by the Cards?

Half his defense was out for the seasons. And yet, his defense was still much better than ours.

TCHOF
01-11-2013, 10:32 AM
Half his defense was out for the seasons. And yet, his defense was still much better than ours.

You're focusing on one year. Look at his history. He's garbage.

If you want to think that he is an upgrade, more power to you.

BlueJayC
01-11-2013, 11:00 AM
I'm literally flummoxed for a reply.

I haven't been the biggest Fewell fan over the years but like many I kind of succumbed to the "well the Giants won the SB last year so whatever" mentality after failing to make the playoffs this year and the D playing like crap.....but I think it's finally set in that this season was another missed opportunity and that this guy's D has been garbage over the past couple season's except for a run late last year......the two road games we went to this year in Cincinnati and Baltimore the D got torched.......they gave up 2 TD's on 3rd and Long's in the first quarter to the Bengals and two inexcusable 3rd and 19's to the Ravens......this team couldn't get off the field on 3rd down and was 2nd worst in the league in giving up 3rd Down Conversions......I watch other teams repeatedly bring pressure on 3rd and long to give up 5-6 yards but get the team off the field.....Fewell rarely blitzes if ever on 3rd down and the D gets picked apart......yeah the Giants created a lot of turnovers but turnovers on this team are typically a result of great individual plays not due to schemes or coverages.....and definitely not from blitzing because this team and Fewell refuse to do that (yet they did heavy down the stretch last year and look what happened). I wasn't a fan of his when he came over from the Bills yet I tolerated him because of last year's title......this team, organization and their fans deserve a better DC......historically defense used to be this team's hallmark.....now it's an embarrassment.

Kruunch
01-11-2013, 11:27 AM
I haven't been the biggest Fewell fan over the years but like many I kind of succumbed to the "well the Giants won the SB last year so whatever" mentality after failing to make the playoffs this year and the D playing like crap.....but I think it's finally set in that this season was another missed opportunity and that this guy's D has been garbage over the past couple season's except for a run late last year......the two road games we went to this year in Cincinnati and Baltimore the D got torched.......they gave up 2 TD's on 3rd and Long's in the first quarter to the Bengals and two inexcusable 3rd and 19's to the Ravens......this team couldn't get off the field on 3rd down and was 2nd worst in the league in giving up 3rd Down Conversions......I watch other teams repeatedly bring pressure on 3rd and long to give up 5-6 yards but get the team off the field.....Fewell rarely blitzes if ever on 3rd down and the D gets picked apart......yeah the Giants created a lot of turnovers but turnovers on this team are typically a result of great individual plays not due to schemes or coverages.....and definitely not from blitzing because this team and Fewell refuse to do that (yet they did heavy down the stretch last year and look what happened). I wasn't a fan of his when he came over from the Bills yet I tolerated him because of last year's title......this team, organization and their fans deserve a better DC......historically defense used to be this team's hallmark.....now it's an embarrassment.

Oh I agree and I've wholeheartedly jumped off the Fewell bandwagon.

I just can't believe you mentioned Bill Sheridan as an upgrade.