Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fewell's Buffalo Defense

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fewell's Buffalo Defense

    Did he run a 3-4 or a 4-3- This year Fewell seems to have more 3 man rushes. With so many are the Giants experimenting to switch over? Or, is Fewll the choice for HC right now when TC retires therfore trying 3-men rushes?

  • #2
    Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

    i believe he ran a 4-3 there..and the reason for the 3 man rushes is because he has no faith in our secondary to play man to man across the boards..wheather that is due to injuries or what he thinks is lack of skill i dont know

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

      but a 3 man rush with a weak zone is never going to work let me add

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

        [quote user="Red Dog"]Did he run a 3-4 or a 4-3- This year Fewell seems to have more 3 man rushes. With so many are the Giants experimenting to switch over? Or, is Fewll the choice for HC right now when TC retires therfore trying 3-men rushes?[/quote]
        Lol a guy who was fired from Buffalo and is now leading the 29th ranked defense.....I'll pass thank you

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

          because you see 3 men rushing the QB , that does not make it a 3-4. Far from it.

          We run a 4-3.

          Fewell comes from a Tampa 2 system. He uses it, or pieces of it quite often. In fact, I would say we run as much Tampa 2 as anyone in the league except maybe the Colts and Bears.
          sigpic

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

            The main reason for the the 3man rushes is to help out our weak secondary and linebackers. Also we used a 3man rush because we been playing Quarterbackers with quick releases...Alex Smith, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc.

            If we rush 4 or even blitzed its leaving some1 in man to man coverage or a hole in the zone. I dont understand why people want to rush4 or more when we know our rush wont get to the QB. Dont u get tired of saying QBs complete quick passes and watching holes in the zone.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense



              [quote user="T-Murda84"]The main reason for the the 3man rushes is to help out our weak secondary and linebackers. Also we used a 3man rush because we been playing Quarterbackers with quick releases...Alex Smith, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc. If we rush 4 or even blitzed its leaving some1 in man to man coverage or a hole in the zone. I dont understand why people want to rush4 or more when we know our rush wont get to the QB. Dont u get tired of saying QBs complete quick passes and watching holes in the zone.[/quote]When the Packers went down the field in 50 seconds they were rushing 5 and playing manhow did that work.




              People have to understand there is no perfect way to defend these guys. I still think zone is the best way to go because there is a better chance u force turnovers

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

                [quote user="Redeyejedi"]

                [quote user="T-Murda84"]The main reason for the the 3man rushes is to help out our weak secondary and linebackers. Also we used a 3man rush because we been playing Quarterbackers with quick releases...Alex Smith, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc. If we rush 4 or even blitzed its leaving some1 in man to man coverage or a hole in the zone. I dont understand why people want to rush4 or more when we know our rush wont get to the QB. Dont u get tired of saying QBs complete quick passes and watching holes in the zone.[/quote]When the Packers went down the field in 50 seconds they were rushing 5 and playing manhow did that work.




                People have to understand there is no perfect way to defend these guys. I still think zone is the best way to go because there is a better chance u force turnovers

                [/quote]What Fewell forgot to do in that 50 second play was to assign 1. a competent CB not a guy they just signed off of the street 2. give him some safety help deep since he was their speediest receiver. You just do not have a slow guy cover and play tight coverage also on a fast receiver. Fewell is garbage and he should not be a coordinator let alone a HC. There was a reason that the Bills they did not give him the HC position but went with Chan Gailey. What does that tell you? However strangest things have happen within the Giants organization so I wouldn't be surprised if they bring another no-name coach like Coughlin who by the way was unemployed for 2 years before the Giants hired him and no other team had made him an offer. Oh well. Get ready for more mediocrity.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

                  [quote user="giantsforce"][quote user="Redeyejedi"]


                  [quote user="T-Murda84"]The main reason for the the 3man rushes is to help out our weak secondary and linebackers. Also we used a 3man rush because we been playing Quarterbackers with quick releases...Alex Smith, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc. If we rush 4 or even blitzed its leaving some1 in man to man coverage or a hole in the zone. I dont understand why people want to rush4 or more when we know our rush wont get to the QB. Dont u get tired of saying QBs complete quick passes and watching holes in the zone.[/quote]When the Packers went down the field in 50 seconds they were rushing 5 and playing manhow did that work.




                  People have to understand there is no perfect way to defend these guys. I still think zone is the best way to go because there is a better chance u force turnovers




                  [/quote]What Fewell forgot to do in that 50 second play was to assign 1. a competent CB not a guy they just signed off of the street 2. give him some safety help deep since he was their speediest receiver. You just do not have a slow guy cover and play tight coverage also on a fast receiver. Fewell is garbage and he should not be a coordinator let alone a HC. There was a reason that the Bills they did not give him the HC position but went with Chan Gailey. What does that tell you? However strangest things have happen within the Giants organization so I wouldn't be surprised if they bring another no-name coach like Coughlin who by the way was unemployed for 2 years before the Giants hired him and no other team had made him an offer. Oh well. Get ready for more mediocrity.
                  [/quote]







                  Part of me wants to respond that Green Bay has been doing that to teams all year....




                  .....but another part of me knows that every other teamhas been doing this to the Giants defense all year.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense



                    [quote user="Red Dog"]Did he run a 3-4 or a 4-3- This year Fewell seems to have more 3 man rushes. With so many are the Giants experimenting to switch over? Or, is Fewll the choice for HC right now when TC retires therfore trying 3-men rushes?[/quote]




                    I would have to call out my loyalty to this team if Fewell ever become the head coach of it...I will be sick to my stomach.




                    He has this team Buffalo'ed




                    His Buffalo defense is this...stand around in a big field and get killed by Cowboys....not a defense I prefer so I hope someone else has a better scheme.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Fewell's Buffalo Defense

                      [quote user="Redeyejedi"]

                      [quote user="T-Murda84"]The main reason for the the 3man rushes is to help out our weak secondary and linebackers. Also we used a 3man rush because we been playing Quarterbackers with quick releases...Alex Smith, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc. If we rush 4 or even blitzed its leaving some1 in man to man coverage or a hole in the zone. I dont understand why people want to rush4 or more when we know our rush wont get to the QB. Dont u get tired of saying QBs complete quick passes and watching holes in the zone.[/quote]When the Packers went down the field in 50 seconds they were rushing 5 and playing man*how did that work.




                      People have to understand there is no perfect way to defend these guys. I still think zone is the best way to go because there is a better chance u force turnovers

                      [/quote]

                      This team is too dumb to run zone defense. Have u seen our secondary confused in man coverage and lining up wrong? We had to burn a timeout because Tyler Sash was lined up wrong. What about Aaron Ross for leaving his receiver wide open....yea there was safety help over the top but Rolle expected at least some1 to cover Driver.

                      This is the worst Secondary I have seen in a long time. It was the same stuff that got Sheridan fired...confused looks on the face of our secondary, all 11 guys running their mouths instead of one leader at each level of the defense making sure every1 is lined up right.

                      In 07, we had Strahan, Pierce and James Butler as the leaders who made sure we was lined up right. We had Sam Madison as a coach on the field. Name a leader on each level of the defense now. Dont say Tuck, he spends most of the game on his knees on hands on his hips. Boley is a leader when hes healthy, but if hes hurt...he sits on the sidelines teary-eyed. Im not going to even try to pick out a leader on the secondary...they say the right things pregame, but postgame they always have some sort of excuse.

                      Sprags had the advantage of having on field leaders making sure every1 knew their assignments. Sheridan and Fewell never had that...we lost Strahan and Pierce and it has not been the same since.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X