The Big Cat Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 Hey, sack artist! You have the elite athletic ability to excel at the job you were asked to do but not professional enough to do it. Regards, anyone that actually gives a schit about his teammates. GO BILLS!!! This is an interesting take. One reason I think it may have merit, is that as 2014 progressed, our LBs were badly exposed for the poor pass defenders they were. They got eaten alive on shallow crossers and other quick developing plays that negated our pass rush. GO BILLS!!! Speculating that the 2014 defense would have its weaknesses exposed is precisely that. However, we can assuredly rely on health being a factor. The 2014 defense was freakishly healthy. Experts were on record last offseason that a decline was imminent since the lack of injuries was simply (based on historical data) unsustainable.
K-9 Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 Speculating that the 2014 defense would have its weaknesses exposed is precisely that. However, we can assuredly rely on health being a factor. The 2014 defense was freakishly healthy. Experts were on record last offseason that a decline was imminent since the lack of injuries was simply (based on historical data) unsustainable. I don't like to engage in speculation as a rule. But I thought teams were figuring out our LBs as the season wore on and teams definitely tried to get the ball out quicker against our pass rush. Staying healthy is always critical for all teams. Depth, especially solid veteran depth, is a luxury in today's age of free agent movement. GO BILLS!!!
eball Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 The only thing better than the complete lack of football knowledge displayed in the opening post in this thread is the specious reasoning and logical leaps that follow. This is like accidental crayonz. Crayonzidental. Have you read his diatribe on Sammy Watkins? It's like volumes one and two of the Encyclopedia Crayonzannica.
hondo in seattle Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 You can blame Rex for the drop in sacks and overall defensive ranking. A coach has to be accountable for his results. But dropping defensive linemen into coverage is not new, or unique, as many have observed. Maybe my memory is flawed, but I think I recall see Bruce Smith in coverage a couple times. And Rex dropped linemen into coverage the year he lead the NFL in defense with the Jets. Dropping linemen is not new nor unique nor necessarily a recipe for failure. I guess it might be interesting to measure how often Rex's defenses do it versus other defenses. Personally, I don't care very much about that. I just care about the results. Rex proved with Baltimore and in his early years with the Jets that his 'multiple' defensive approach can work in the NFL with the right players. Obviously, he has to continue to evolve his defense to keep up with offensive innovations. Does he have the right players this year? Has he kept up with the offensive changes implemented by our opponents? I don't know. I do know his 'hybrid' approach didn't work last year. Let's see what he can do this year with a pure Ryan D and a roster better suited to his philosophy.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 Disguising rushers is the same as disguising coverages. You're trying not to tip your hand to the QB. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But we didn't beat brady or any other solid quick throwing QBs with the wide 9 either. That comes down to coaching ur DBs on what to look for when covering guys. That game against brady last year we had their O-line all turned around. The first game against the jets - we created some havoc and had a few turnovers. Then the game against KC, we tried to play coverages and contain and we got destroyed in the 2nd half. Washington we couldn't stop anything they did. I'd prefer a little more consistency in Ryan. There was some good last year - and a lot of bad. Wide 9 concepts don't generally work well with a 3-4 hybrid. So that was probably dumb to begin with. Call what you're good at. Blitzes and combinations.
FLFan Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 http://www.cover1.net/2016/02/20161212015-bills-defensive-study-defensive-line/ The article linked above is an excellent read on this topic. The author breaks down the stats on DL in coverage last year and provides some useful insight on the scheme and performance.
26CornerBlitz Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 http://www.cover1.net/2016/02/20161212015-bills-defensive-study-defensive-line/ The article linked above is an excellent read on this topic. The author breaks down the stats on DL in coverage last year and provides some useful insight on the scheme and performance. One of my favorite articles of this offseason.
Big Turk Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 (edited) It's a zone blitz concept made popular by Dick LeBeau...every team does it to some extent...I didn't see anything last year to think the Bills did any more of this than a normal team in the league...for instance I think someone went back and counted Mario Williams dropping in coverage somewhere between 12-15 times the entire season, which equates to like once a game...yeah some games he did it more than others based on game plan, but they made it sound like every play they dropped in coverage and that was not the case at all. Ryan's defense needs complete buy in to be effective where people are willing to sacrifice individual accomplishments and stats at times for the good of the team, something Mario clearly wasn't willing to do. Surprisingly, Mario's teams have never won anything of note...probably because he is more worried about himself that the team... Edited June 3, 2016 by matter2003
Webster Guy Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 This has been discussed to death on this board. Here's a simple answer.... A lot of very effective defenses attempt to fool offensive linemen and quarterbacks by keeping them guessing. One common way to do this is zone blitzes, overloads to one side, dropping a D lineman to cover a passing lane etc. It's beyond debate that this method is proven when done properly. Guys like Dick LeBeau have stymied great quarterbacks with these techniques for decades. My personal belief is that when a D coordinator sees that one of his rushing lineman is getting handled consistently and failing to reach the qb (like Mario was last year in most cases by mediocre RT's) then he'll drop them a little more than usual, which is still only one play out of 5 or 6. An earlier poster pointed out Von Miller dropping in coverage and creating a game changing play. That's the best pass rusher in the game right there, with a top notch defensive coordinator calling the play. It works.
John from Riverside Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 This has been discussed to death on this board. Here's a simple answer.... A lot of very effective defenses attempt to fool offensive linemen and quarterbacks by keeping them guessing. One common way to do this is zone blitzes, overloads to one side, dropping a D lineman to cover a passing lane etc. It's beyond debate that this method is proven when done properly. Guys like Dick LeBeau have stymied great quarterbacks with these techniques for decades. My personal belief is that when a D coordinator sees that one of his rushing lineman is getting handled consistently and failing to reach the qb (like Mario was last year in most cases by mediocre RT's) then he'll drop them a little more than usual, which is still only one play out of 5 or 6. An earlier poster pointed out Von Miller dropping in coverage and creating a game changing play. That's the best pass rusher in the game right there, with a top notch defensive coordinator calling the play. It works. I just feel like we had major communication issues on defense (and penalties) this past year..... Fix those.....see a different D
boyst Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 Haha. This so funny. Debating why its good to drop pass rushers in to coverage.
John from Riverside Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 Haha. This so funny. Debating why its good to drop pass rushers in to coverage. As opposed to?
boyst Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 As opposed to?stating the reasoning its better than playing traditional defense and what advantages it has and why. A lot of technical stuff. A lot of interesting stuff. A lot to do with why Denver and Carolina both employed this defense. Basically neither used excessive blitzing as a cornerstone to their defense which was firmly set aroundgreat linebackers . The linebackers that covered deep and down the stretch almost as well as dbs. This let them use a DL to drop to the flat giving no room to throw. Ya gotta have very good lbs to do this well
John from Riverside Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 stating the reasoning its better than playing traditional defense and what advantages it has and why. A lot of technical stuff. A lot of interesting stuff. A lot to do with why Denver and Carolina both employed this defense. Basically neither used excessive blitzing as a cornerstone to their defense which was firmly set aroundgreat linebackers . The linebackers that covered deep and down the stretch almost as well as dbs. This let them use a DL to drop to the flat giving no room to throw. Ya gotta have very good lbs to do this well We will see what we have at LB when we get to camp..... I am reserving judgement on that group till I actually see them together.
Jauronimo Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 (edited) Have you read his diatribe on Sammy Watkins? It's like volumes one and two of the Encyclopedia Crayonzannica. I just finished with it. Well, at least he's consistent. No one has hotter takes. Edited June 3, 2016 by Jauronimo
Ronin Posted June 3, 2016 Author Posted June 3, 2016 (edited) http://www.cover1.net/2016/02/20161212015-bills-defensive-study-defensive-line/ The article linked above is an excellent read on this topic. The author breaks down the stats on DL in coverage last year and provides some useful insight on the scheme and performance. That is an excellent article, it provides greater detail than any I've seen, but it also supports my point. Again, can we see the defensive linemen dropping into coverage more this year given that they didn't do so much at all in 2014 under Schwartz. Some people have commented on the LBs but they were not included in the original thesis. LBs can be expected to be in coverage as much as in run D or thereabouts. Either way, when your sack totals, and therefore pressure on the QB given that sacks are merely a singular measure of that, although at least to a large extent a proportional one, diminish by over 60%, it's a very difficult argument to suggest that dropping linemen into coverage was effective. According to that linked article, it wasn't effective. We merely lost pass pressure and gave up more yards per play passing when the DL-men were in coverage than when they were not. Haha. This so funny. Debating why its good to drop pass rushers in to coverage. Like many others commenting with criticism, try reading the original post, it was limited to DL-men, not LBs who are also pass-rushers, into coverage. Only DL-men including DTs, not just DEs. Either way, the aforementioned link does a nice job of breaking down the ineffectiveness of doing so. And BTW, from that piece; The only significant difference was Jerry Hughes compared to last year. Hughes only dropped into coverage 12 times last year, compared to 58 times this year. Mario dropped 28 times this year versus 13 times last year. Kyle and Dareus dropped into coverage 9 times and 0 times respectively in 2014. So when the defense dropped lineman into coverage, how effective were offenses? And once again, overlooked by several of the critical intellectual giants otherwise contributing absolutely nothing to the conversation, again, is the notion that if this was a hybrid, then we can expect more, theorhetically anyway, of Kyle, Dareus, and whoever the DEs are dropping into coverage even more, again, theorhetically at somewhere in the ballpark of twice the rate. Doesn't seem to make much sense given the lack of production on D otherwise, clearly a result of the difference in Ryan's philosophy with that of Schwartz. I see further regression in the play of the D as a result, not an improvement as the Ryan Bros. are promising. As well, I see very little wisdom in dropping your best pass rushers into coverage on key passing plays. All you do is give the opposing QB more time, generally speaking. Edited June 3, 2016 by TaskersGhost
The Big Cat Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 That is an excellent article, it provides greater detail than any I've seen, but it also supports my point. Again, can we see the defensive linemen dropping into coverage more this year given that they didn't do so much at all in 2014 under Schwartz. Some people have commented on the LBs but they were not included in the original thesis. LBs can be expected to be in coverage as much as in run D or thereabouts. Either way, when your sack totals, and therefore pressure on the QB given that sacks are merely a singular measure of that, although at least to a large extent a proportional one, diminish by over 60%, it's a very difficult argument to suggest that dropping linemen into coverage was effective. According to that linked article, it wasn't effective. We merely lost pass pressure and gave up more yards per play passing when the DL-men were in coverage than when they were not. Like many others commenting with criticism, try reading the original post, it was limited to DL-men, not LBs who are also pass-rushers, into coverage. Only DL-men including DTs, not just DEs. Either way, the aforementioned link does a nice job of breaking down the ineffectiveness of doing so. And BTW, from that piece; And once again, overlooked by several of the critical intellectual giants otherwise contributing absolutely nothing to the conversation, again, is the notion that if this was a hybrid, then we can expect more, theorhetically anyway, of Kyle, Dareus, and whoever the DEs are dropping into coverage even more, again, theorhetically at somewhere in the ballpark of twice the rate. Doesn't seem to make much sense given the lack of production on D otherwise, clearly a result of the difference in Ryan's philosophy with that of Schwartz. I see further regression in the play of the D as a result, not an improvement as the Ryan Bros. are promising. If your point was that Rex dropped D-Lineman into coverage way too often and that's a problem, the cover1 link does nothing to support that. Unless you think 3% of Mario's snaps and and 0.6% of Marcel's are "too many."
Jauronimo Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 (edited) If your point was that Rex dropped D-Lineman into coverage way too often and that's a problem, the cover1 link does nothing to support that. Unless you think 3% of Mario's snaps and and 0.6% of Marcel's are "too many." Finish him!! Sweep the leg and then hit him with the heat maps while he's down. I know you've got them prepared and ready to go. You have my guarantee that I won't interfere with this effort. Hell, I'll even go so far as to distract FireChan in the shoutbox while you administer the coup de grace. God speed. Edited June 3, 2016 by Jauronimo
The Big Cat Posted June 3, 2016 Posted June 3, 2016 Finish him!! Sweep the leg and then hit him with the heat maps while he's down. I know you've got them prepared and ready to go. You have my guarantee that I won't interfere with this effort. Hell, I'll even go so far as to distract FireChan in the shoutbox while administer the coup de grace. God speed. Hmmm...I hadn't considered heat mapping this issue... [cracks knuckles]
Recommended Posts