Storm Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 Does anyone see how the Eagles D flocks to the ball carrier and one guy is always trying to strip the football? Yah, our defense doesn't do that. Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 Does anyone see how the Eagles D flocks to the ball carrier and one guy is always trying to strip the football? Yah, our defense doesn't do that. Ever. Really? Considering Philly only has one more fumble caused then us at this point I think our guys are stripping the ball fairly well. Not to mention I've seen plenty of times on gang tackles when one of our guys go for the ball, I think you just miss it Storm because it's usually a 20 yards gain on us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 20, 2009 Author Share Posted December 20, 2009 Really? Considering Philly only has one more fumble caused then us at this point I think our guys are stripping the ball fairly well. Not to mention I've seen plenty of times on gang tackles when one of our guys go for the ball, I think you just miss it Storm because it's usually a 20 yards gain on us. The difference is most of our forced fumbles are caused by sacks on the QBs. Their fumbles are caused by both sacks on the QB and guys actually swatting the ball out of receivers and running back's hands. We aren't aggressive at all in the open field. 11out of 18 by the front 7 for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 The difference is most of our forced fumbles are caused by sacks on the QBs. Their fumbles are caused by both sacks on the QB and guys actually swatting the ball out of receivers and running back's hands. We aren't aggressive at all in the open field. 11out of 18 by the front 7 for us. And out of the 14 Eagles fumbles two came from CBs and another two from special teams play, so out of their 14, ten were caused by their front 7. We actually have more fumbles then the Eagles and more caused by our "less physical" front 7. Not saying our D is all that great, but most of their fumbles are coming much like ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 And out of the 14 Eagles fumbles two came from CBs and another two from special teams play, so out of their 14, ten were caused by their front 7. We actually have more fumbles then the Eagles and more caused by our "less physical" front 7. Not saying our D is all that great, but most of their fumbles are coming much like ours. And the four they forced against us were all forced by guys actually going for the ball and trying to rip it out. We don't have that aggressiveness. I never see guys going for the strip while bringing the ball carrier down. The Eagles are trying to force fumbles every tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 And the four they forced against us were all forced by guys actually going for the ball and trying to rip it out. We don't have that aggressiveness. I never see guys going for the strip while bringing the ball carrier down. The Eagles are trying to force fumbles every tackle. You serious? I see it almost every play when theres more then one defender in the area for the Giants, thats just usually not the case when teams are throwing to a wide open WR in the back of our secondary. Not to mention these four fumbles you mention, I can only think of one of them that would be considered a "strip". The Jacobs fumble, only one guy was tackling him from behind and he popped the ball it no where near a "gang tackle physical strip" Eli's one fumble is when he went to the ground and the ball came loose. The other coming from a sack if I recall but wasnt it just Trent Cole who knocked it loose? The Hixon fumble was a good strip but thats about it. This point is all moot though no matter who many times we do strip the ball or end up getting a turnover, we always just end up giving it back to them in with broken coverages. Is anything I find our D to fucking aggressive and going for the big hit or a sack, then trying to wrap up for a sure tackle or play smart and not leave yourself out of position on a WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 You serious? I see it almost every play when theres more then one defender in the area for the Giants, thats just usually not the case when teams are throwing to a wide open WR in the back of our secondary. Not to mention these four fumbles you mention, I can only think of one of them that would be considered a "strip". The Jacobs fumble, only one guy was tackling him from behind and he popped the ball it no where near a "gang tackle physical strip" Eli's one fumble is when he went to the ground and the ball came loose. The other coming from a sack if I recall but wasnt it just Trent Cole who knocked it loose? The Hixon fumble was a good strip but thats about it. This point is all moot though no matter who many times we do strip the ball or end up getting a turnover, we always just end up giving it back to them in with broken coverages. Is anything I find our D to fucking aggressive and going for the big hit or a sack, then trying to wrap up for a sure tackle or play smart and not leave yourself out of position on a WR. I'm dead serious. And I'm done arguing with you because my point is, to be a good defense, you have to have the right kind of attitude. The Giants' don't. The Eagles' does. Perhaps that's another reason why we're 2 games out of the playoffs. The dude popped Jacobs' elbow. Hence, going for the strip. And you're misunderstanding. The first tackler is always trying to strip the ball because he has confidence that the rest of the team is going to flock to the ball carrier. I didn't mean that the whole team is gang stripping every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balloonknot Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 How dare you interject facts in what shaping up to be a good rant about our Defensive ineffectiveness. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you have done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boohyah Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Just get to the fucking player first, then worry about the strip. We're not getting to the ball enough period. can't walk before you crawl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 How dare you interject facts in what shaping up to be a good rant about our Defensive ineffectiveness. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you have done Is the Giants defense physical and aggressive? I say, no they are not. Is the Giants defense physical and aggressive? Blue says they are OVERLY aggressive. 24th in the league in INTs. Eagles- 4th 23rd in the league in sacks Eagles- 5th Point is, their defense sticks to receivers like glue, gets pressure, and flocks to the ball carrier. Aggressiveness. Stats. Want anything more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 Just get to the fucking player first, then worry about the strip. We're not getting to the ball enough period. can't walk before you crawl. And yet more proof we aren't nearly aggressive enough. That's because we give a 10 yard cushion every play. Bump them at the line and give up a 5 yard gain compared to a 50 yard gain and it's much more feasible to go for a strip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boohyah Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 After the first 5 games of the season, we had the top defense in the league. It was built on creampuff teams yes, but those stats carried forward for the next few weeks, techically "based on stats", we were still the best defense in the league when it was clear we were'nt even close. Stats are overated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 After the first 5 games of the season, we had the top defense in the league. It was built on creampuff teams yes, but those stats carried forward for the next few weeks, techically "based on stats", we were still the best defense in the league when it was clear we were'nt even close. Stats are overated. Well, I mean, that's why I wasn't really too concerned with them.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 The difference is most of our forced fumbles are caused by sacks on the QBs. Their fumbles are caused by both sacks on the QB and guys actually swatting the ball out of receivers and running back's hands. We aren't aggressive at all in the open field. 11out of 18 by the front 7 for us. does it really matter how you get 'em? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 How dare you interject facts in what shaping up to be a good rant about our Defensive ineffectiveness. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you have done Oh Canada!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 Oh Canada!!!! "After the first 5 games of the season, we had the top defense in the league. It was built on creampuff teams yes, but those stats carried forward for the next few weeks, techically "based on stats", we were still the best defense in the league when it was clear we were'nt even close. Stats are overated." It should be clear to you that, although we're ranked 9th in total defense (which boils down to yards per game and really doesn't take into consideration points given up per game which is 25), we're no where near the 9th best defense. But I forgot Nas, you're the biggest homer here. You think we're going to go undefeated the rest of the season and beat the Colts in the Super Bowl 63-0, essentially with only 1/3 of a football team. Offense. Again, it boils down to Storm: "The Giants aren't aggressive, don't play receivers physically or close to the line of scrimmage, don't flock to the ball carrier, and have no blitz timing or pass rush" Blue: "The Giants are overly aggressive, try to make big plays, and screw themselves over" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balloonknot Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Is the Giants defense physical and aggressive? I say, no they are not. Is the Giants defense physical and aggressive? Blue says they are OVERLY aggressive. 24th in the league in INTs. Eagles- 4th 23rd in the league in sacks Eagles- 5th Point is, their defense sticks to receivers like glue, gets pressure, and flocks to the ball carrier. Aggressiveness. Stats. Want anything more? Fuck dude, I was agreeing with you. Our fucking defense sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 "After the first 5 games of the season, we had the top defense in the league. It was built on creampuff teams yes, but those stats carried forward for the next few weeks, techically "based on stats", we were still the best defense in the league when it was clear we were'nt even close. Stats are overated." It should be clear to you that, although we're ranked 9th in total defense (which boils down to yards per game and really doesn't take into consideration points given up per game which is 25), we're no where near the 9th best defense. But I forgot Nas, you're the biggest homer here. You think we're going to go undefeated the rest of the season and beat the Colts in the Super Bowl 63-0, essentially with only 1/3 of a football team. Offense. Again, it boils down to Storm: "The Giants aren't aggressive, don't play receivers physically or close to the line of scrimmage, don't flock to the ball carrier, and have no blitz timing or pass rush" Blue: "The Giants are overly aggressive, try to make big plays, and screw themselves over" I'm sticking by my team dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 I'm sticking by my team dude. I'm sticking by the team, too. Doesn't change the fact they're terrible and not aggressive on defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 Fuck dude, I was agreeing with you. Our fucking defense sucks. Sorry...I thought you meant while he was arguing stats as proof I was ignoring those stats.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I'm sticking by the team, too. Doesn't change the fact they're terrible and not aggressive on defense. It's not over. I'm gonna hang on till the wheels fall off... hop off if you want... I'm not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Does anyone see how the Eagles D flocks to the ball carrier and one guy is always trying to strip the football? Yah, our defense doesn't do that. Ever. flocks? i would say swarms. and i saw one team today. i think it was denver (with that genius DC mike nolan) who were doing tht in lieu of tackling. philly does it right, 1st man tackles, 2nd man strips. some teams just try to strip first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 flocks? i would say swarms. and i saw one team today. i think it was denver (with that genius DC mike nolan) who were doing tht in lieu of tackling. philly does it right, 1st man tackles, 2nd man strips. some teams just try to strip first Thanks for being objective, Blu. Appreciate it, man. Just because they're our rivals I feel like any time you compare something good that another team is doing to what the Giants do, everyone gets up in arms. Our team does not swarm the ball carrier. And you're right, Philly does it right, and it's not only two guys....it's 4 or 5 guys normally. Reid and Co have those guys playing like they have something to prove, which they totally do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Thanks for being objective, Blu. Appreciate it, man. Just because they're our rivals I feel like any time you compare something good that another team is doing to what the Giants do, everyone gets up in arms. Our team does not swarm the ball carrier. And you're right, Philly does it right, and it's not only two guys....it's 4 or 5 guys normally. Reid and Co have those guys playing like they have something to prove, which they totally do. they're playing like a well coached and secure team. that said, they are not overly talented and have many holes on defense. i think dallas's D is much more talented ( but not as well coached). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 they're playing like a well coached and secure team. that said, they are not overly talented and have many holes on defense. i think dallas's D is much more talented ( but not as well coached). I agree.That Philly defensive backfield is always scary, year after year. I think their secondary coach could get even Bruce Johnson to play like Charles Woodson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now