Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why do we play so much zone?

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

  • Why do we play so much zone?

    Do we not have the players to play man to man defense?
    Do we only play man when we can get pressure on the Quarterback?

    Also, does anybody know specifically how much zone defense we played this year?
    Mood: WOOF!

  • #2
    They have always played a lot of zone. Spags called a ton of it

    As to why they play so much zone. Well that is what fewel has always called.

    And it's not a negative. Especially with how many running QBs there are now. You really can't play man against them.

    Comment


    • #3
      i think we played more of it this season bc the DL wasnt getting home. If the DL is generating consistent pressure, you can play more man. When the QB isnt getting pressured, you cant expect the corners to hold up coverage 4 seconds or more really, especially Webster this past season at least. I also think bc of who we could field at LB, our more athletic guys were hampered all season, PF might not have been comfortable depending on them tracking the athletic TE's and RB's we faced downfield...theres a ton of reasons...'


      btw, rudy, this is a good question. and notice how theres like 2 replies? dont u find it funny, ironic, hypocritical how theres certain posters who complain that eli gets all this attention and its on "homers" minds non stop, meanwhile theyre creating eli threads to pick at and instigate banter?? i dunno i just find it funny at least...

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by giantsfan420 View Post

        btw, rudy, this is a good question. and notice how theres like 2 replies? dont u find it funny, ironic, hypocritical how theres certain posters who complain that eli gets all this attention and its on "homers" minds non stop, meanwhile theyre creating eli threads to pick at and instigate banter?? i dunno i just find it funny at least...
        Well, I think some of the lack of response is because a lot of people just don't know the answer and/or aren't strong enough in the X's and O's to give an informed opinion on why we run so much zone.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by giantsfan420 View Post
          i think we played more of it this season bc the DL wasnt getting home. If the DL is generating consistent pressure, you can play more man. When the QB isnt getting pressured, you cant expect the corners to hold up coverage 4 seconds or more really, especially Webster this past season at least. I also think bc of who we could field at LB, our more athletic guys were hampered all season, PF might not have been comfortable depending on them tracking the athletic TE's and RB's we faced downfield...theres a ton of reasons...'


          btw, rudy, this is a good question. and notice how theres like 2 replies? dont u find it funny, ironic, hypocritical how theres certain posters who complain that eli gets all this attention and its on "homers" minds non stop, meanwhile theyre creating eli threads to pick at and instigate banter?? i dunno i just find it funny at least...
          Yes I do find it funny, it is what it is. They know who they are.

          Anyway, I find it interesting that under Spags we were this powerhouse defense. Maybe it's because he had better players under his belt.
          Mood: WOOF!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Drez View Post
            Well, I think some of the lack of response is because a lot of people just don't know the answer and/or aren't strong enough in the X's and O's to give an informed opinion on why we run so much zone.
            This is also true.
            Mood: WOOF!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Rudyy View Post
              Yes I do find it funny, it is what it is. They know who they are.

              Anyway, I find it interesting that under Spags we were this powerhouse defense. Maybe it's because he had better players under his belt.
              We had a great pass rush in '07 that petered out at the end of '08, though, we did play excellent defense for most of '08.

              I just think that Spags' defenses were kind of a perfect storm of personnel that fit great and players that truly got his scheme. I really would have been interested in seeing if he could have had continued success or if he was just a two year wonder.

              Comment


              • #8
                I think it is because PF emphasizes turnovers. Zone allows the secondary to look back at the QB more than man to man, and theoretically allows them to make a play for the ball.
                Do not feed the trolls.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Mercury View Post
                  I think it is because PF emphasizes turnovers. Zone allows the secondary to look back at the QB more than man to man, and theoretically allows them to make a play for the ball.
                  And importantly, he does like that quasi-read-and-react thing, lol (which is essentially what you just said).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I actually cannot remember the last time this team was a primarily press man team

                    Perry calls a whole lot of zone ......but that is not what bothers me .....its the particular type of zones they run that bother me sometimes

                    there is a difference between zone and press zone

                    these corners are almost always way off the LOS because the safeties in this scheme are often forced to be LB or nickel corners

                    I personally believe playing more press zone will help the pass rush ...but in order to play a successful press zone you would need that safety over the top of each half

                    and further more......for that to happen the Giants will need more affective LBs

                    for years and years the NY Giants defensive scheme has been built around the pass rush and also built to mask a weakness at LB

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Rudyy View Post
                      Do we not have the players to play man to man defense?
                      Do we only play man when we can get pressure on the Quarterback?

                      Also, does anybody know specifically how much zone defense we played this year?
                      Zone is used for a bunch of reasons:

                      1) Keep everything in front of you. If you are running man across the board and bringing extra rushers (or doubling some people) and a swing pass, or run play gets to the second level, you're looking at a big gash in yardage (possibly score).

                      2) Zone provides a base that's easy to get back to when things are going wrong. Carl Banks remarked one of Sheridan's problems was that when our defense was being abused over and over, we wouldn't get into a base zone as a "reset". We kept reacting to the last play instead of preparing for the current one.

                      3) Zone follows the philosophy of providing "traffic". Most of your picks are in a zone defense when a QB doesn't see someone playing center field.

                      4) Zone also follows the philosophy of assigning players "permanent" positions from which you can then add your wrinkles in. In other words, when asked to blitz, you know who/where your back up is.

                      Generally speaking, when you bring an extra man (or more) on a blitz, your zone becomes too open (not enough coverage) so you go to man coverage to make up the difference. Often you will see a combination of zone and man coverage on almost every defensive play in the NFL. The caveat here is the sell out blitz (when you bring two or more extra rushers) and the zone blitz (where you bring an extra rusher (Safety or LB) and drop a dlineman).

                      We ran pure zone about 40%(ish) of the time in 2012. When we've done this, its almost always been in a Cover 3 look. Normally we run a Cover 2 shell with single or double man underneath (although our Safeties tend to cheat a lot on that). Very occasionally we've run pure man coverage (we almost never blitz that many players).

                      We ran a type of zone about 90%+ of our defensive snaps this year.

                      Hope that helped
                      I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by YATittle1962 View Post
                        I actually cannot remember the last time this team was a primarily press man team

                        Perry calls a whole lot of zone ......but that is not what bothers me .....its the particular type of zones they run that bother me sometimes

                        there is a difference between zone and press zone

                        these corners are almost always way off the LOS because the safeties in this scheme are often forced to be LB or nickel corners

                        I personally believe playing more press zone will help the pass rush ...but in order to play a successful press zone you would need that safety over the top of each half

                        and further more......for that to happen the Giants will need more affective LBs

                        for years and years the NY Giants defensive scheme has been built around the pass rush and also built to mask a weakness at LB
                        Well, we usually have one S playing slot or hybrid LB... and then our deep safety is often somewhere in Morris County. That creates the additional problem of making that deep center area that the LB is supposed to cover too large and too deep, only exposing our LBs more.
                        Last edited by Drez; 01-22-2013, 03:21 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Kruunch View Post
                          Zone is used for a bunch of reasons:

                          1) Keep everything in front of you. If you are running man across the board and bringing extra rushers (or doubling some people) and a swing pass, or run play gets to the second level, you're looking at a big gash in yardage (possibly score).

                          2) Zone provides a base that's easy to get back to when things are going wrong. Carl Banks remarked one of Sheridan's problems was that when our defense was being abused over and over, we wouldn't get into a base zone as a "reset". We kept reacting to the last play instead of preparing for the current one.

                          3) Zone follows the philosophy of providing "traffic". Most of your picks are in a zone defense when a QB doesn't see someone playing center field.

                          4) Zone also follows the philosophy of assigning players "permanent" positions from which you can then add your wrinkles in. In other words, when asked to blitz, you know who/where your back up is.

                          Generally speaking, when you bring an extra man (or more) on a blitz, your zone becomes too open (not enough coverage) so you go to man coverage to make up the difference. Often you will see a combination of zone and man coverage on almost every defensive play in the NFL. The caveat here is the sell out blitz (when you bring two or more extra rushers) and the zone blitz (where you bring an extra rusher (Safety or LB) and drop a dlineman).

                          We ran pure zone about 40%(ish) of the time in 2012. When we've done this, its almost always been in a Cover 3 look. Normally we run a Cover 2 shell with single or double man underneath (although our Safeties tend to cheat a lot on that). Very occasionally we've run pure man coverage (we almost never blitz that many players).

                          We ran a type of zone about 90%+ of our defensive snaps this year.

                          Hope that helped
                          I'm not too well with X's and O' specifically with coverages and different looks and all that, but this helped. Thanks!
                          Mood: WOOF!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by YATittle1962 View Post
                            I actually cannot remember the last time this team was a primarily press man team

                            Perry calls a whole lot of zone ......but that is not what bothers me .....its the particular type of zones they run that bother me sometimes

                            there is a difference between zone and press zone

                            these corners are almost always way off the LOS because the safeties in this scheme are often forced to be LB or nickel corners

                            I personally believe playing more press zone will help the pass rush ...but in order to play a successful press zone you would need that safety over the top of each half

                            and further more......for that to happen the Giants will need more affective LBs

                            for years and years the NY Giants defensive scheme has been built around the pass rush and also built to mask a weakness at LB
                            Parcells put it best ... zone is meant to be played to the player, not the patch of grass. Fewell's defense plays it to the patch of grass (no matter what else is going on).
                            I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by YATittle1962 View Post
                              I actually cannot remember the last time this team was a primarily press man team

                              Perry calls a whole lot of zone ......but that is not what bothers me .....its the particular type of zones they run that bother me sometimes

                              there is a difference between zone and press zone

                              these corners are almost always way off the LOS because the safeties in this scheme are often forced to be LB or nickel corners

                              I personally believe playing more press zone will help the pass rush ...but in order to play a successful press zone you would need that safety over the top of each half

                              and further more......for that to happen the Giants will need more affective LBs

                              for years and years the NY Giants defensive scheme has been built around the pass rush and also built to mask a weakness at LB
                              So is the LBer position a bigger need than the DE position? In terms of helping out the secondary.

                              I've seen many posts on if we rush the QB then we wouldn't play so much zone.
                              Mood: WOOF!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X