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?

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.

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by giantsfan420

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by giantsfan420

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudyy

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mercury

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).

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