PDA

View Full Version : Perry Fewell's Incorrect Mindset



Osi_baby
12-25-2011, 06:13 PM
I think through most of the season thus far, Perry Fewell has been approaching games with the idea that our D-Linemen are sooo good, he can just rush four and drop everyone else back in zone coverage (which also hurts our run defense). but this is the NFL where offensive linemen are beasts themselves. so our front four does need help, and by providing that help, it will allow them to reek havoc.

we have physical corners that we need to put up on WR's. webster, ross, amukamara are all way better when pressed up being physical. bump and run coverage provides the following benefits:

1) WR's dont have a free release to run a crisp route
2) timing with the QB becomes slightly skewed
3) WR's (over the course of the game) become tired and slow from expelling so much energy getting off the line
4) WR's may become timid from secondary's aggressiveness
5) doesn't allow WR's to be 15yds down field without a defender within 5yds (stupid zone)
6) <u>QB can't beat the blitz with a quick hot route if the corner isn't 10yds off when they dial up pressure</u> (this is one of the most important factors)
7) allows for more INT opportunities if the QB isn't perfect with throws

My final and main point is, this entire season has showed us that our defensive players are NO GOOD AT PLAYING ZONE. Perry Fewell needs to coach on the players' strengths. NOT on some drawn up zone system that looks good on paper. with the right players, can a zone be effective? sure, but we don't have those type of players. so lets not play zone all freakin' game. be aggressive, be tough, and make the offense feel scared. we seemed more aggressive against the jets, and we finally kept a team under 15pts.

<u>Uneasy QB's getting hit/pressured all game play WAY WORSE than QB's picking apart a zone defense with all day to throw.</u> Stats don't lie...

Idkaname
12-25-2011, 06:50 PM
You should be a dc in the NFL....not watch the saints game we played alot of press man and that was one of if not the worst defense we played all year

Osi_baby
12-25-2011, 07:07 PM
oh ya? then tell me... what's your solution smart guy?

intelligent responses only please...

Idkaname
12-25-2011, 07:13 PM
oh ya?* then tell me... what's your solution smart guy?

intelligent responses only please...

I dont have a solution nor do I need one I'm not in the NFL and there may not be a solution may e the reason we play bad d is becuz are players are simply not good enough ever think of that?

Osi_baby
12-25-2011, 07:14 PM
oh ya? then tell me... what's your solution smart guy?

<u>intelligent responses only please...</u>

^^^^

jjj45
12-25-2011, 07:22 PM
oh ya? then tell me... what's your solution smart guy?

<u>intelligent responses only please...</u>

^^^^
Dont mind idk... After a while he'll grow on ya.

elifan10
12-25-2011, 07:25 PM
Perry Fewell is a terrible DC and its rediculous that he only calls a good gameplan once every 5 games. He should be fired and we should do everything in our power to get Spags to come back.

Osi_baby
12-25-2011, 07:32 PM
Perry Fewell is a terrible DC and its rediculous that he only calls a good gameplan once every 5 games. He should be fired and we should do everything in our power to get Spags to come back.

couldnt have said it better myself. there is a reason why jim johnson was one of the best DC's year in and year out. getting spags was like getting a mini jim johnson. we won with spags because he brought that attacking downhill defense to the giants. do you honestly think we end up beating the pats had we played zone all game and never threw brady out of rhythm in SB42?

YATittle1962
12-26-2011, 12:57 AM
I think through most of the season thus far, Perry Fewell has been approaching games with the idea that our D-Linemen are sooo good, he can just rush four and drop everyone else back in zone coverage (which also hurts our run defense).* but this is the NFL where offensive linemen are beasts themselves.* so our front four does need help, and by providing that help, it will allow them to reek havoc.*

we have physical corners that we need to put up on WR's.* webster, ross, amukamara are all way better when pressed up being physical.* bump and run coverage provides the following benefits:

1)* WR's dont have a free release to run a crisp route
2)* timing with the QB becomes slightly skewed
3)* WR's (over the course of the game) become tired and slow from expelling so much energy getting off the line
4)* WR's may become timid from secondary's aggressiveness
5)* doesn't allow WR's to be 15yds down field without a defender within 5yds* (stupid zone)
6)* <u>QB can't beat the blitz with a quick hot route if the corner isn't 10yds off when they dial up pressure</u>* (this is one of the most important factors)
7)* allows for more INT opportunities if the QB isn't perfect with throws

My final and main point is, this entire season has showed us that our defensive players are NO GOOD AT PLAYING ZONE.* Perry Fewell needs to coach on the players' strengths.* NOT on some drawn up zone system that looks good on paper.* with the right players, can a zone be effective?* sure, but we don't have those type of players.* so lets not play zone all freakin' game.* be aggressive, be tough, and make the offense feel scared.* we seemed more aggressive against the jets, and we finally kept a team under 15pts.*

<u>Uneasy QB's getting hit/pressured all game play WAY WORSE than QB's picking apart a zone defense with all day to throw.</u>* Stats don't lie...


this post is a mess....just had to say it

sorry

NYSPORTS
12-26-2011, 01:08 AM
oh ya?* then tell me... what's your solution smart guy?

intelligent responses only please...

I dont have a solution nor do I need one I'm not in the NFL and there may not be a solution may e the reason we play bad d is becuz are players are simply not good enough ever think of that?

In the Saints game, the Giants couldn't even break the D-huddle the signals were so slow coming in. Not to mention, the chaos in the DB backfield was the usual mayhem.

Redeyejedi
12-26-2011, 01:17 AM
I think through most of the season thus far, Perry Fewell has been approaching games with the idea that our D-Linemen are sooo good, he can just rush four and drop everyone else back in zone coverage (which also hurts our run defense).* but this is the NFL where offensive linemen are beasts themselves.* so our front four does need help, and by providing that help, it will allow them to reek havoc.*

we have physical corners that we need to put up on WR's.* webster, ross, amukamara are all way better when pressed up being physical.* bump and run coverage provides the following benefits:

1)* WR's dont have a free release to run a crisp route
2)* timing with the QB becomes slightly skewed
3)* WR's (over the course of the game) become tired and slow from expelling so much energy getting off the line
4)* WR's may become timid from secondary's aggressiveness
5)* doesn't allow WR's to be 15yds down field without a defender within 5yds* (stupid zone)
6)* <u>QB can't beat the blitz with a quick hot route if the corner isn't 10yds off when they dial up pressure</u>* (this is one of the most important factors)
7)* allows for more INT opportunities if the QB isn't perfect with throws

My final and main point is, this entire season has showed us that our defensive players are NO GOOD AT PLAYING ZONE.* Perry Fewell needs to coach on the players' strengths.* NOT on some drawn up zone system that looks good on paper.* with the right players, can a zone be effective?* sure, but we don't have those type of players.* so lets not play zone all freakin' game.* be aggressive, be tough, and make the offense feel scared.* we seemed more aggressive against the jets, and we finally kept a team under 15pts.*

<u>Uneasy QB's getting hit/pressured all game play WAY WORSE than QB's picking apart a zone defense with all day to throw.</u>* Stats don't lie...
What about the Saints game when they played press man and got slaughtered . It has more to do with player execution and the team they played more then anything else.The DE's played well and the Jets Oline is horrible so the Giants got more pressure.The Jets receivers are incredibly overrated and slow making them very easy to stick with in man coverage.Mark Sanchez has absolutely horrible pocket presence and is very inaccurate. Playing a lot of man was absolutely the right game plan for the Jets but just because it fits the Jets doesnt mean it will work against everyone.People seem to forget the Giants getting beat time and time again in man coverage in other games this season. Its all on the players

Redeyejedi
12-26-2011, 01:17 AM
I think through most of the season thus far, Perry Fewell has been approaching games with the idea that our D-Linemen are sooo good, he can just rush four and drop everyone else back in zone coverage (which also hurts our run defense).* but this is the NFL where offensive linemen are beasts themselves.* so our front four does need help, and by providing that help, it will allow them to reek havoc.*

we have physical corners that we need to put up on WR's.* webster, ross, amukamara are all way better when pressed up being physical.* bump and run coverage provides the following benefits:

1)* WR's dont have a free release to run a crisp route
2)* timing with the QB becomes slightly skewed
3)* WR's (over the course of the game) become tired and slow from expelling so much energy getting off the line
4)* WR's may become timid from secondary's aggressiveness
5)* doesn't allow WR's to be 15yds down field without a defender within 5yds* (stupid zone)
6)* <u>QB can't beat the blitz with a quick hot route if the corner isn't 10yds off when they dial up pressure</u>* (this is one of the most important factors)
7)* allows for more INT opportunities if the QB isn't perfect with throws

My final and main point is, this entire season has showed us that our defensive players are NO GOOD AT PLAYING ZONE.* Perry Fewell needs to coach on the players' strengths.* NOT on some drawn up zone system that looks good on paper.* with the right players, can a zone be effective?* sure, but we don't have those type of players.* so lets not play zone all freakin' game.* be aggressive, be tough, and make the offense feel scared.* we seemed more aggressive against the jets, and we finally kept a team under 15pts.*

<u>Uneasy QB's getting hit/pressured all game play WAY WORSE than QB's picking apart a zone defense with all day to throw.</u>* Stats don't lie...
What about the Saints game when they played press man and got slaughtered . It has more to do with player execution and the team they played more then anything else.The DE's played well and the Jets Oline is horrible so the Giants got more pressure.The Jets receivers are incredibly overrated and slow making them very easy to stick with in man coverage.Mark Sanchez has absolutely horrible pocket presence and is very inaccurate. Playing a lot of man was absolutely the right game plan for the Jets but just because it fits the Jets doesnt mean it will work against everyone.People seem to forget the Giants getting beat time and time again in man coverage in other games this season. Its all on the players

jhamburg
12-26-2011, 02:20 AM
I think through most of the season thus far, Perry Fewell has been approaching games with the idea that our D-Linemen are sooo good, he can just rush four and drop everyone else back in zone coverage (which also hurts our run defense).* but this is the NFL where offensive linemen are beasts themselves.* so our front four does need help, and by providing that help, it will allow them to reek havoc.*

we have physical corners that we need to put up on WR's.* webster, ross, amukamara are all way better when pressed up being physical.* bump and run coverage provides the following benefits:

1)* WR's dont have a free release to run a crisp route
2)* timing with the QB becomes slightly skewed
3)* WR's (over the course of the game) become tired and slow from expelling so much energy getting off the line
4)* WR's may become timid from secondary's aggressiveness
5)* doesn't allow WR's to be 15yds down field without a defender within 5yds* (stupid zone)
6)* <u>QB can't beat the blitz with a quick hot route if the corner isn't 10yds off when they dial up pressure</u>* (this is one of the most important factors)
7)* allows for more INT opportunities if the QB isn't perfect with throws

My final and main point is, this entire season has showed us that our defensive players are NO GOOD AT PLAYING ZONE.* Perry Fewell needs to coach on the players' strengths.* NOT on some drawn up zone system that looks good on paper.* with the right players, can a zone be effective?* sure, but we don't have those type of players.* so lets not play zone all freakin' game.* be aggressive, be tough, and make the offense feel scared.* we seemed more aggressive against the jets, and we finally kept a team under 15pts.*

<u>Uneasy QB's getting hit/pressured all game play WAY WORSE than QB's picking apart a zone defense with all day to throw.</u>* Stats don't lie...


I'm not a big fan of Fewell this year, in fact I'd like to see him replaced.

At the same time, it annoys me that some people actually believe you can get to be a defensive coordinator in the NFL without understanding the basic principles of the game.

ToomerFORtheBomb
12-26-2011, 04:29 AM
oh ya?* then tell me... what's your solution smart guy?

intelligent responses only please...

I dont have a solution nor do I need one I'm not in the NFL and there may not be a solution may e the reason we play bad d is becuz are players are simply not good enough ever think of that?

I really can't accept the idea that maybe the players just aren't good enough. We have plenty of talent on defense. Granted we need a MLB and have had some serious injuries since day one, we still have JPP, Webster, Ross, Rolle, Kiwanuka, and so on.

I'm not saying Fewell is bad or that I know as much as a pro defensive coordinator but doesn't it make sense, in looking at the body of work, that with the miscommunication and vulnerability to big plays, that this could be a case of schemes being too complicated?

Not to mention the fact that the Giants defense is currently based on getting pressure on the QB. So why only rush 4? How about some more corner blitz plays? Yea you may get burned here and there but for the most part you are gonna rattle some QBs and get them off their game and running scared.

I'm just saying Spags realized that and we won the SB that year. You would think Perry would want to follow suit.

Osi_baby
01-06-2012, 06:35 PM
I'm not a big fan of Fewell this year, in fact I'd like to see him replaced.

At the same time, it annoys me that some people actually believe you can get to be a defensive coordinator in the NFL without understanding the basic principles of the game.

hahaha its funny that you think this post was a resume for a DC position in the NFL. we need less slow folks on these forums

but back to the issue... i believe the next 2 weeks after this thread came out, the gmen played more aggressive and attacked. so please enlighten me, did we play really well and win with that formula? did we do way better than the previous 6 games where all we did was play zone?

TrueBlue07
01-06-2012, 06:39 PM
I'm not a big fan of Fewell this year, in fact I'd like to see him replaced.

At the same time, it annoys me that some people actually believe you can get to be a defensive coordinator in the NFL without understanding the basic principles of the game.

hahaha its funny that you think this post was a resume for a DC position in the NFL. we need less slow folks on these forums

but back to the issue... i believe the next 2 weeks after this thread came out, the gmen played more aggressive and attacked. so please enlighten me, did we play really well and win with that formula? did we do way better than the previous 6 games where all we did was play zone?


Pot, I have someone I'd like you to meet....where did that damn kettle go?!

Osi_baby
01-06-2012, 06:42 PM
join the slow club trueblue. or should i say falseblue, b/c your more interested in bickering on forums instead of talking giants football. go cry on twitter about something meaningless

TrueBlue07
01-06-2012, 06:47 PM
join the slow club trueblue. or should i say falseblue, b/c your more interested in bickering on forums instead of talking giants football. go cry on twitter about something meaningless


says the guy who is bickering with several different people in the thread, lol. If you're going to call a person slow, you should probably know when to use "your" and "you're".

but, even if your grasp of the English language wasn't comical, the fact that you think you know more than even the worst defensive coordinator in the NFL would be enough to put you over the top.

ELIistheFRANCHISE
01-06-2012, 06:51 PM
join the slow club trueblue.* or should i say falseblue, b/c your more interested in bickering on forums instead of talking giants football.* go cry on twitter about something meaningless


falseblue?

Bro you give new members a bad name. Not only do you sound comical, but the fact that you used falseblue as in insult immediately demotes you from new member to troll.

Sincerely,
ELIisNOTtheFRANCHISE...beat you to it.

Osi_baby
01-06-2012, 07:00 PM
lmao whats really comical is <u>you're</u> poor lives and the things that interest <u>you're</u> mundane minds. ive come onto this message board to talk giants football, and none of the "verterans" can manage to do the same. all <u>your</u> concerned about is the fact that i used your instead of you're... lol grow up

if being a veteran message boarder means being as lame as you guys, plz count me out.

jhamburg
01-06-2012, 07:38 PM
I'm not a big fan of Fewell this year, in fact I'd like to see him replaced.

At the same time, it annoys me that some people actually believe you can get to be a defensive coordinator in the NFL without understanding the basic principles of the game.

hahaha its funny that you think this post was a resume for a DC position in the NFL.* we need less slow folks on these forums

but back to the issue...* i believe the next 2 weeks after this thread came out, the gmen played more aggressive and attacked.* so please enlighten me, did we play really well and win with that formula?* did we do way better than the previous 6 games where all we did was play zone?


Ironic that you're calling me slow yet you completely misunderstood what I said. I'm saying that you think Fewell runs zone because he's completely missing out on the rather obvious concepts you pointed out. Fewell's scheme might not be good for this team, but believe me he's forgotten more about football than you'll ever know.

njsean
01-06-2012, 07:53 PM
lmao whats really comical is <u>you're</u> poor lives and the things that interest <u>you're</u> mundane minds.* ive come onto this message board to talk giants football, and none of the "verterans" can manage to do the same.* all <u>your</u> concerned about is the fact that i used your instead of you're...* lol grow up

if being a veteran message boarder means being as lame as you guys, plz count me out.


Yeah, I typically don't like to get in the middle of something, and maybe you did this on purpose, but you just completely butchered the use of "you're" and "your".....again.

Firenugget
01-06-2012, 08:12 PM
lmao whats really comical is <u>you're</u> poor lives and the things that interest <u>you're</u> mundane minds. ive come onto this message board to talk giants football, and none of the "verterans" can manage to do the same. all <u>your</u> concerned about is the fact that i used your instead of you're... lol grow up

if being a veteran message boarder means being as lame as you guys, plz count me out.


lol he still got it wrong...I think we know who the "slow person" is here.

Also, you say you came to talk Giants football....All you've done is insult anyone that posted any response. I think <u>you're</u> the one who needs to do some growing up and stop being a troll.

Lastly...

if being a veteran message boarder means being as lame as you guys, plz count me out.
Adios.

Osi_baby
01-06-2012, 08:58 PM
Yeah, I typically don't like to get in the middle of something, and maybe you did this on purpose, but you just completely butchered the use of "you're" and "your".....again.

lol u guys actually r becoming entertaining. so focused on the most minuscule and unimportant details. the IQ level around here doesnt seem to be high enuf to recognize sarcasm in my actions. which is sad considered u are my fellow giants fans. i only did it wrong on purpose b/c it is somewhat humorous to see how mad falseblue becomes. i could certainly spelled and write properly, but like any good rebel (oh my i used an oxymoron, but then again u guys will just have to google what an oxymoron is to know what i mean) i begin to do it more purposefully out of spite. in conclusion, stopping caring so much about how the message is written if you understand the concept of it. nobody is perfect and you guys are clearly a point-in-case. now, can we plz talk giants football?

bearbryant
01-06-2012, 09:13 PM
Heres some Giants football for everyone: The main reason why the defense performed the way it did the last two weeks has very little to do with the scheme, more blitzes or where the DB's lined up, LOL... Most of the success of our D was based in the effort, intensity and fire that the guys showed against both the Jets and the Boys. The pressures, sacks and hits came on 4 man rushes save 1 where he had Williams join the party once.

I'm not a fewell fan but to try and make the last two games beholden to fewell changing his defensive planning is just not what went down, my friend. Sorry

Osi_baby
01-06-2012, 09:30 PM
i am in full appreciation of the football talk and opinion sharing, so thank u. but i respectfully dont agree with the fact that fewell hasnt taken a different/more aggressive approach. maybe only slightly different, but different none the less. i watch pretty much every play of every game and ive noticed a change. the players are always hungry and willing to give the effort. it just looks as if they arent as hungry when they play a soft scheme, b/c thats how the scheme makes them play... soft.

njsean
01-06-2012, 09:35 PM
but like any good rebel (oh my i used an oxymoron, but then again u guys will just have to google what an oxymoron is to know what i mean)

Indeed, the paradoxical element of your trope was far too abstruse to comprehend. Perhaps you could elucidate the incongruous nature of your remark.

And sure, afterwards, we'll talk football if we can keep up.

Osi_baby
01-06-2012, 09:42 PM
i am in full appreciation of the football talk and opinion sharing, so thank u.

brad
01-06-2012, 10:18 PM
but like any good rebel (oh my i used an oxymoron, but then again u guys will just have to google what an oxymoron is to know what i mean)

Indeed, the paradoxical element of your trope was far too abstruse to comprehend. Perhaps you could elucidate the incongruous nature of your remark.

And sure, afterwards, we'll talk football if we can keep up.

LOL

bigal1giant
01-06-2012, 10:37 PM
oh ya?* then tell me... what's your solution smart guy?

intelligent responses only please...

I dont have a solution nor do I need one I'm not in the NFL and there may not be a solution may e the reason we play bad d is becuz are players are simply not good enough ever think of that?

I really can't accept the idea that maybe the players just aren't good enough. We have plenty of talent on defense. Granted we need a MLB and have had some serious injuries since day one, we still have JPP, Webster, Ross, Rolle, Kiwanuka, and so on.

I'm not saying Fewell is bad or that I know as much as a pro defensive coordinator but doesn't it make sense, in looking at the body of work, that with the miscommunication and vulnerability to big plays, that this could be a case of schemes being too complicated?

Not to mention the fact that the Giants defense is currently based on getting pressure on the QB. So why only rush 4? How about some more corner blitz plays? Yea you may get burned here and there but for the most part you are gonna rattle some QBs and get them off their game and running scared.

I'm just saying Spags realized that and we won the SB that year. You would think Perry would want to follow suit.I certainly agree that Fewell should follow the lead of what worked with many of our defensive guys in the past. But, there is that old nemesis, EGO!!! I suspect Fewell would rather cut off his jeeber than be accused of copying Spags coaching methodology. Ego and an inflated sense of self worth is a trait shared by many in the pro coaching ranks! Too bad, since "If it ain't broke then don't fix it"!!!

Osi_baby
01-06-2012, 10:53 PM
well said sir

JJC7301
01-06-2012, 11:28 PM
I think through most of the season thus far, Perry Fewell has been approaching games with the idea that our D-Linemen are sooo good, he can just rush four and drop everyone else back in zone coverage (which also hurts our run defense).* but this is the NFL where offensive linemen are beasts themselves.* so our front four does need help, and by providing that help, it will allow them to reek havoc.*

we have physical corners that we need to put up on WR's.* webster, ross, amukamara are all way better when pressed up being physical.* bump and run coverage provides the following benefits:

1)* WR's dont have a free release to run a crisp route
2)* timing with the QB becomes slightly skewed
3)* WR's (over the course of the game) become tired and slow from expelling so much energy getting off the line
4)* WR's may become timid from secondary's aggressiveness
5)* doesn't allow WR's to be 15yds down field without a defender within 5yds* (stupid zone)
6)* <u>QB can't beat the blitz with a quick hot route if the corner isn't 10yds off when they dial up pressure</u>* (this is one of the most important factors)
7)* allows for more INT opportunities if the QB isn't perfect with throws

My final and main point is, this entire season has showed us that our defensive players are NO GOOD AT PLAYING ZONE.* Perry Fewell needs to coach on the players' strengths.* NOT on some drawn up zone system that looks good on paper.* with the right players, can a zone be effective?* sure, but we don't have those type of players.* so lets not play zone all freakin' game.* be aggressive, be tough, and make the offense feel scared.* we seemed more aggressive against the jets, and we finally kept a team under 15pts.*

<u>Uneasy QB's getting hit/pressured all game play WAY WORSE than QB's picking apart a zone defense with all day to throw.</u>* Stats don't lie...

I agree with you -- I don't think Fewell coaches to this D's strengths. Whatever he's been doing the past few weeks, keep it up. Osi and Tuck have been healthier, so that obviously helps, but the LB corp seem to be more involved with Kiwi blowing up plays in the backfield and getting pressure, and Boley making some outstanding plays. Keep it up!

For most of the season it seemed like the D was playing with 9 or 10 on the field instead of 11. Over the past two weeks and our D players flying all over the place, it looks like we're playing with 12 or 13 players out there.