Quote:
Originally Posted by ChoppedWood
DE's, yep, Ballard has crapped the bed. However, we do have an all-world DT, and All-universe LB, and an at least All-North America 1st team all star in the slot. So we have talent.
I don't know. Listening to Venturi, there's a lot more here than just not having the right guys at DE to make this work. Listening to him, this scheme is straight out of high school and any decent QB will just devour it- which seems to prove true. Again, year over year, the completion percentages are absolutely absurd. We create "historical" days for QB's all the time. That has to transcend the DE position. Bending but not breaking due to personnel / injuries, yeah I can see some of that. Allowing 75%+ completion percentages... nah there's more to it.
|
I've wondered if the evolution of the passing game, rule changes, and the Air Raid football that kids are running as early as junior high now makes this style of defense antiquated.
I get the idea of preventing the big play by allowing short stuff and this creates more opportunities for the front four to get home or for the offense to make a mistake and kill a drive.
Well, these kids are growing up with 7-on-7 their whole lives and pitch-and-catch is easier for more QB's than it used to be. And the great QB's don't miss.
So that leaves disruption through pressure, which we just don't do consistently. Paye and Dayo are young, but Lewis, Banogu, and Turay haven't lived up. Plus we miss Autry. Hard for Buckner not to get double and triple teamed.
We know the teams that have succeeded with this broad philosophy. Dungy's Bucs, Lovie's Bears, even the post-season runs of the Giants, etc. They had players all over for sure, but specifically they had some motherfuckers on the D-line.
Do we need that level of personnel in order for the system to work? I don't know. Are there examples out there?