Storm Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 not sure why you're making a big deal about injuries. it was the healthy defense that failed down the stretch. that, turnovers- by our healthy starters, and special teams. Read the OP. I know it's long... But I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Let me preface this by saying there were games I thought we were terrible on defense. Most notably, the Colts game and the Green Bay game. In both games, it was apparent to me that Fewell outcoached himself. I say that because the game plan he employed in those games went away from what we do very well and gave a lot of credit to the opposing offenses. In the Colts game, it was almost as if he conceded the run and dropped a lot of players into coverage. All that did was allow Peyton to sit back and watch his RBs do the heavy lifting, and when he did pass he had plenty of time to wait for a man to come free. In the Green Bay game, even though we blitzed, our corners were giving the short routes to WRs all game. You have Webby and Thomas playing 8 or 9 yards off the line of scrimmage... it was like Fewell wanted them to bend not break. But it made Rodgers job very easy... Our corners are good enough to play press and then rely on safeties to back us up, or force Rodgers to make the tough long throw, not the easy slant that he's going to connect on at least 80% of the time. Anyhow, those two games our defense was not good, and I put that more on scheme than anything else. But other than that, there has not been another season that I remember where our defense was put in more tough spots. As I posted in another thread, I showed just how many points were scored off of turnovers and special teams mistakes... how many times we asked the defense to hold up when our offense and special teams gave the ball to our opponents at the mid-field area. It happened literally all the time in those 6 losses. Given the circumstances, our defense played heroically. And when you see that the Giants set the record for FF in a season, and the number of turnovers we created... it's a pretty remarkable job by those guys and Osi in particular, who got 10 by himself (another NFL record). Given the personnel we have on our team... our QB, our offensive line, and the skill position players, we can expect more out of the offense. But the injuries to WR really did hurt us... but as Storm noted, at the times where we were most thin at WR, we won those games. But I didn't think Nicks looked 100% when he came back. The explosion simply wasn't the same.... this is the guy who was setting the league on fire early in the season. Whether you blame the coaching or the players (I blame both), the turnovers were the most important factor in us not winning our division outright this season. That said, there is validity to us not being able to make stops in critical situations on 3rd and short and 3rd down in general, and I think a lot of that has to do with our linebackers. Goff played ok, but as a MLB who started all season, he should've had more than 72 tackles. He got blocked out of the play an awful lot. In short, he is NOT the long term solution at MLB. And Bulluck... he just is not a play maker anymore. While I expected more out of Boley this season, he wasn't the problem. And he is one of the better coverage linebackers we've had here. He needs to stay. What we are lacking is that big and fast linebacker that can lead a defense and make the big play in the run game as well as in pass coverage. We don't have that, not in any of our linebackers. If you think about all the great defenses around the league, they have impact linebackers. Ray Lewis (still) in Baltimore, James Harrison and Lawrence Timmons in Pittsburgh, David Harris and Bart Scott for the Jets, Urlacher and Briggs on the Bears, Matthews and AJ Hawk on the Packers. We need to find just one big time linebacker to start for us on this defense and it would make a WORLD of difference.... of course, two would be better, but at this point, I'm not greedy. Please correct this, JR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 By the way, GG, agreed with just about everything you said. Jim, I actually agreed with your last post as well. Why were we debating in the other thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 By the way, GG, agreed with just about everything you said. Jim, I actually agreed with your last post as well. Why were we debating in the other thread? I think Deon Grant saw more playing time because our linebackers were so bad. We just need ONE impact linebacker in the mold of Jessie Armstead or Carl Banks (not saying Carson or Taylor because that's not realistic) and we would be fine. We already have a really good defensive line (we also have to be realistic in the fact that Superbowl 42 we got pressure on nearly every single pass play..UNHEARD OF. We can't get pressure every play, as much as we would like too...it's just not feasible so we need guys in the linebacking core to make some plays.) Our linebackers were awful, atleast when we had Pierce...we were never THAT bad. But they can't make any game changing plays (aside from Boley's hit on Romo) we need talent in the linebacking core...we have an awesome front 4 with some backups that could start on 25 other NFL teams and a pretty solid secondary...but teams attacked our linebacking unit so badly...it was just a drain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 By the way, GG, agreed with just about everything you said. Jim, I actually agreed with your last post as well. Why were we debating in the other thread? Sounds like everyone is in agreement. Less turnovers, Better LB's, Better Special Teams play. and Brandon Marshall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Sounds like everyone is in agreement. Less turnovers, Better LB's, Better Special Teams play. and Brandon Marshall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Fish, I think even in the other thread we agreed on more than we disagreed. I was still pretty hot for a few days even after that last game, so I was probably just a little too emotive in my disappointment, especially in anger towards a certain offensive coordinator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I think Deon Grant saw more playing time because our linebackers were so bad. We just need ONE impact linebacker in the mold of Jessie Armstead or Carl Banks (not saying Carson or Taylor because that's not realistic) and we would be fine. We already have a really good defensive line (we also have to be realistic in the fact that Superbowl 42 we got pressure on nearly every single pass play..UNHEARD OF. We can't get pressure every play, as much as we would like too...it's just not feasible so we need guys in the linebacking core to make some plays.) Our linebackers were awful, atleast when we had Pierce...we were never THAT bad. But they can't make any game changing plays (aside from Boley's hit on Romo) we need talent in the linebacking core...we have an awesome front 4 with some backups that could start on 25 other NFL teams and a pretty solid secondary...but teams attacked our linebacking unit so badly...it was just a drain. The scary part: our linebackers are still better than the Short, Mallard, Emmons days. Or the Emmons, Greisen, Green days. WTF was Accorsi even thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 By the way, GG, agreed with just about everything you said. Jim, I actually agreed with your last post as well. Why were we debating in the other thread? I disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The scary part: our linebackers are still better than the Short, Mallard, Emmons days. Or the Emmons, Greisen, Green days. WTF was Accorsi even thinking? Dude, how do you remember these things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Emmons was a complete bust... Greisen was ok... although I don't think he ever entered the season as the 1st string MLB, but he would get pressed into duty. What I remember is that he always seemed to be around the ball when there was a turnover. I remember Barrett Green, he had I think one good season for us, but he was supposed to be a big time acquisition and playmaker, and he never made the impact that Accorsi hoped... the problem was and is that Accorsi and now Reese have not used a first or second round pick on a linebacker. We need to address this through the draft, although, I would not be opposed to a Chad Greenway signing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Emmons was a complete bust... Greisen was ok... although I don't think he ever entered the season as the 1st string MLB, but he would get pressed into duty. What I remember is that he always seemed to be around the ball when there was a turnover. I remember Barrett Green, he had I think one good season for us, but he was supposed to be a big time acquisition and playmaker, and he never made the impact that Accorsi hoped... the problem was and is that Accorsi and now Reese have not used a first or second round pick on a linebacker. We need to address this through the draft, although, I would not be opposed to a Chad Greenway signing! sintim was a 2nd round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Emmons was a complete bust... Greisen was ok... although I don't think he ever entered the season as the 1st string MLB, but he would get pressed into duty. What I remember is that he always seemed to be around the ball when there was a turnover. I remember Barrett Green, he had I think one good season for us, but he was supposed to be a big time acquisition and playmaker, and he never made the impact that Accorsi hoped... the problem was and is that Accorsi and now Reese have not used a first or second round pick on a linebacker. We need to address this through the draft, although, I would not be opposed to a Chad Greenway signing! I think Greisen was supposed to start the season in 2004, but was constantly injured in preseason that year. I thought of him and Blackburn the same way: great backup to have, but god help you if he was your starter. Green was actually pretty good--but he couldn't stay on the field to save his life. Nas--you always remember the scars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Nas--you always remember the scars. I guess this is where I seem to go the other way.. lol. I remember the good times.. but bad times.. what bad times? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 sintim was a 2nd round pick. And he showed flashes.. now I wonder how come he wasn't given more time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The scary part: our linebackers are still better than the Short, Mallard, Emmons days. Or the Emmons, Greisen, Green days. WTF was Accorsi even thinking? i'd say it's a toss up. shows you how long this has been going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treehugger Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Mallard the Dullard, lol. That guy sucked out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Mallard the Dullard, lol. That guy sucked out loud. always cracked me up that mallard went to oregon. yes, mallard was a duck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 sintim was a 2nd round pick. You are correct, of course. Whoops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 The scary part: our linebackers are still better than the Short, Mallard, Emmons days. Or the Emmons, Greisen, Green days. WTF was Accorsi even thinking? Your telling me. In the 2006 playoff game against the Eagles...Emmons was the only guy NOT to register a tackle. Not one tackle..not even an assist! Barrett Green was decent for about 6 games and then the injuries came in droves. Greisen was a solid player, Blackburn is a great example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandolphScott Posted November 12, 2011 Author Share Posted November 12, 2011 FUCKING SAGE THAT GOLFINGGUY IS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Fish, can we agree that Kevin Kolb pretty much is a total scrub now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Fish, can we agree that Kevin Kolb pretty much is a total scrub now? But...But...the Cards traded a pick and DRC for him. Why would they trade DRC is he was a scrub? Oh...yes, yes he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 But...But...the Cards traded a pick and DRC for him. Why would they trade DRC is he was a scrub? Oh...yes, yes he is. Man, DRC looked like a scrub and a half, also, the other night. I think it was Steve Smith (PHI) who I heard make a pretty awesome and IMO correct point.....that team picked the absolute WORST NFL season to bring in so many new starters and big personalities. Not much in the way of an offseason and you decide to sign nearly every big time player in free agency? In retrospect, it was silly, and I think a lot of us Giants fans were concerned for no reason.....and a lot of analysts didn't even consider the fact that team would not only struggle to gel at all before and even during the season...... but that the signings would actually hurt their football team. Great news for us, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 FUCKING SAGE THAT GOLFINGGUY IS. You lost your job because you had strep throat and a sore back? 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