Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spread the defense, empty shotgun why not?

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

  • Spread the defense, empty shotgun why not?

    NICKS, CRUZ, HIXON, BARDEN, JERNIGAN????

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

  • #2
    I never said I had a problem with it....NO ONE had a problem with it. Reading comprehension my friend.......I said I don't think they'd ever go that route considering they drafted a RUNNING BACK in the first round. They clearly want to get their running game going.

    Comment


    • #3
      WELL GUESS where it is going? you wanna know where its going?? NO WHERE !! unless this o-line gets a reality check it is going nowhere, it is time for some empty shot-guns and some hurry up offenses with one of the best qb's in football. thanks. i gurantee we would win more if we brought that formation to our routine, it is so key to spread the defense, throw the ball downfield, it will open the run game up. and then you run, you dont throw the ball once then run the ball 2 times, gilbride is so predictable, friggen christ.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm sure he'll figure it out. They definitely need to do something to get the running game going and if passing more opens up running lanes.....I don't see why he wouldn't try it. We will see.

        Comment


        • #5
          i havent seen them line up in an empty shot gun in about 3 years, we do the same type of shot-gun everytime and he either does that stupid *** draw or he throws it obviously but its just the same thing im hoping they just change it up but i doubt it. i just think they should be experimenting a tad bit more.

          Comment


          • #6
            Is this Ksmooth again?

            Comment


            • #7
              Loud noises

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by BigBlueCrew22 View Post
                NICKS, CRUZ, HIXON, BARDEN, JERNIGAN????

                HOW ABOUT AN EMPTY SHOTgun lets start confusing these defenses a little bit what is the problem i posted something earlier about it and you idiots find a problem with it cuz it looks like green bays offense?? lmao hello and they were 14-2 last year i believe or 13-3 OUR RECEIVERS ARE JU AS GOOD AS THEIRS, why the **** not S P R E A D the defense, confuse them, we come out in the same formations all the time its so obvious when we are going to run the ball, the play action was terrible on wednesday the cowboys didnt buy it one bit, it is time to spread spread spread the defense why the hell not? i see nothing wrong with it or instead of jernigan how about bennet run something short have cruz go deep, nicks an in pattern hixon go deep like why the hell not it is time to confuse these defenses they are always prepared for the same giants game plan cuz it is literally the same thing each game, how about a reverse here n their cruz has lightening speed we need to utilize more of our weapons, not do the same thing each game, cuz thats what it is, its time for some experimenting god dammit.
                THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ! All your comment's are 1000000000 % True ! I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS SINCE AUGUST ! A lot of G fans don't agree, They say, then we become one Dimensional ! They say we can't Abandon the Run...............were not Abandoning the Run ! We have to Pass more to set up the Run....Let Eli do more Pitch-Outs, Screen-passes, Short Passes to AB on the outside. Stop AB from running into a Brick-Wall..Until we fix the the O-line..............If we have to run, RUN on the outside.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The irony between your post and signature is quite hilarious.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Because the solution to a bad offensive line is not to forgo half the offense. Without the threat of the run, the pass is that much easier to defend.

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

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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by BillTheGreek View Post
                      THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ! All your comment's are 1000000000 % True ! I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS SINCE AUGUST ! A lot of G fans don't agree, They say, then we become one Dimensional ! They say we can't Abandon the Run...............were not Abandoning the Run ! We have to Pass more to set up the Run....Let Eli do more Pitch-Outs, Screen-passes, Short Passes to AB on the outside. Stop AB from running into a Brick-Wall..Until we fix the the O-line..............If we have to run, RUN on the outside.
                      Most of those posters are ignorant and think that all offenses needed to be the same. The term I use is too predictable and that means too much predictable with no type of fake plays like screens. One posters said that screens do not work against zone defenses. Then another poster agreed with him. Both of those guys wich I am not going to name do not know that football is in real time. All screens look like ordinary plays then some time later in the play, the screens comes about. They think that just because the guys in the zone are looking at the qb receivers etc, they are going to see the screen. Yet how can they see the screens when it didn't happen yet?

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

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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Diamondring View Post
                        Most of those posters are ignorant and think that all offenses needed to be the same. The term I use is too predictable and that means too much predictable with no type of fake plays like screens. One posters said that screens do not work against zone defenses. Then another poster agreed with him. Both of those guys wich I am not going to name do not know that football is in real time. All screens look like ordinary plays then some time later in the play, the screens comes about. They think that just because the guys in the zone are looking at the qb receivers etc, they are going to see the screen. Yet how can they see the screens when it didn't happen yet?

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

                        What the Giants need to do until they get the players to run the ball successfully or our O-linemen start to improve their run blocking, we should be a passing offense and throw in runs here and there. Hopefully when the play starts, there are a few defenders and not more than our O-line can handle.
                        WOW ! You should apply to the Giants for a job to advise the coaches ! You no what your talking about ! In fact ......... THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT !

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The "Chuck and Duck"... sounds like a great idea! I mean, yeah, teams would probably just start sending 6 men in to kill the QB with no fear of a run or a check down option out of the backfield, but that shouldn't matter with our amazing ability to blitz protect. That won't matter because the receiving routes the Giants use are very quick to develop and Eli always gets rid of the ball in less than 2 seconds. [/sarcasm]

                          Seriously, while using the empty backfield every once in a while might be a good strategy, it is not, and should not be, your entire offensive scheme. I am all for going with a more up-tempo offense, even spreading out the defense more, but removing the RB is ridiculous. That would remove the threat of run, remove the check down when plays break down, remove the screen that helps slow blitzes, and remove the extra blocker that the RB often becomes. This would make our offense one dimensional and would all but guarantee that Eli would not finish the season.
                          My goal had been to win a championship, work toward the Hall of Fame, have my jersey retired by the team and I`d go in as a lifelong New York Giant, but I`m now resigned to the fact that this won`t happen. -- Michael Strahan, just when you think you're down...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by brad View Post
                            The "Chuck and Duck"... sounds like a great idea! I mean, yeah, teams would probably just start sending 6 men in to kill the QB with no fear of a run or a check down option out of the backfield, but that shouldn't matter with our amazing ability to blitz protect. That won't matter because the receiving routes the Giants use are very quick to develop and Eli always gets rid of the ball in less than 2 seconds. [/sarcasm]

                            Seriously, while using the empty backfield every once in a while might be a good strategy, it is not, and should not be, your entire offensive scheme. I am all for going with a more up-tempo offense, even spreading out the defense more, but removing the RB is ridiculous. That would remove the threat of run, remove the check down when plays break down, remove the screen that helps slow blitzes, and remove the extra blocker that the RB often becomes. This would make our offense one dimensional and would all but guarantee that Eli would not finish the season.
                            Exactly. It brings you back to the run and shoot...of which Kevin Gilbride was a massive proponent of and which failed miserably in the 80's and 90's. And, as said before what countered the run and shoot were blitzes. If you get the quarterback moving or even get in his face, the play and most likely the quarterback are dead.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Rat_bastich View Post
                              Exactly. It brings you back to the run and shoot...of which Kevin Gilbride was a massive proponent of and which failed miserably in the 80's and 90's. And, as said before what countered the run and shoot were blitzes. If you get the quarterback moving or even get in his face, the play and most likely the quarterback are dead.
                              Yes, the "Chuck and Duck" is what Buddy Ryan called the Run and Shoot... I know he wasn't well liked by many, but he was funny. If we want to emulate an offense from that era, let's emulate San Fran who actually won superbowls, not Houston who put up some big numbers and had some amazing come from behind wins, but never won anything.
                              My goal had been to win a championship, work toward the Hall of Fame, have my jersey retired by the team and I`d go in as a lifelong New York Giant, but I`m now resigned to the fact that this won`t happen. -- Michael Strahan, just when you think you're down...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X