ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs

Danno · 04-04-2005, 03:07 PM

I\'m no expert, but from what I saw, the weakest area on the entire team was right up the gut of our defense.

I seem to recall it was mostly to the outside, with the cut-back run. Both Allen and Grant flew upfield and the RB cut inside of them for huge gains. I don\'t remember nearly as many runs straight up the middle.
As the season wore on Allen and Grant did much better.

GumboBC · 04-04-2005, 03:12 PM

I\'m no expert, but from what I saw, the weakest area on the entire team was right up the gut of our defense.

I seem to recall it was mostly to the outside, with the cut-back run. Both Allen and Grant flew upfield and the RB cut inside of them for huge gains. I don\'t remember nearly as many runs straight up the middle.
As the season wore on Allen and Grant did much better.

I certainly agree that the \"cut-back\" run killed us. But, I still contend that teams were able to run right up the gut of our defense.

Over the first 12-games our defense was so bad, it was hard to say one area was that much worse than the others. I think the defense stunk in all areas. Period.

I still believe you stop the run up the middle first and FORCE the runningback to the outside. I\'m not convinced we can do that and I\'m hopeful that\'s where we will upgrade.

baronm · 04-04-2005, 03:16 PM

why force them outside and stop the clock or let them run out of bounds?

I thought the OLB was supposed to trap them into the middle so the MLB could pound them?

again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better?

GumboBC · 04-04-2005, 03:21 PM

why force them outside and stop the clock or let them run out of bounds?

I thought the OLB was supposed to trap them into the middle so the MLB could pound them?

again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better?

You force the RB to run parallel to the line of scrimmage and it allows the defensive players to pursue the ball-carrier better and more effectively.

And the sideline is the friend of the defense. It\'s like the 12th man.

And killing the clock is to our advantage. It stops the clock and the offense doesn\'t keep the ball as long.

Danno · 04-04-2005, 03:26 PM

again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better?

Yes it did. And here\'s why I think it did.
1. James Allen-All the physicallness you want in a LB, but not the most mental. He finally started getting it, was out of position a lot less and started making plays. Everyone said the SLB was his natural position. I just wish it hadn\'t taken him 12 games to learn it. If he has.

2. Watson-Our best LB. The ROOKIE started playing smarter and ended the season pretty solid. I\'m comfy with him at MLB or at WLB.

3. Bockwoldt-What can you say? The kid looks like a gamer. So what if half of us here can bench 225 more times than he can, he made the plays when he had too. Does anyone remember him running with Vick last year? Imagine what this pup could do if he hits the weights hard this off-season.

baronm · 04-04-2005, 03:27 PM

good point-I guess I\'m thinkinga bout basketball..

but my point still remains unanswered: with the insertion of watson, allen and colby the defense played much better-if, and hopefully this doesn\'t happen-but if..those were our starters next year..would our defense be upgraded still? and doesn\'t thier insertion show they were atleast better than what we had?

GumboBC · 04-04-2005, 03:37 PM

good point-I guess I\'m thinkinga bout basketball..

but my point still remains unanswered: with the insertion of watson, allen and colby the defense played much better-if, and hopefully this doesn\'t happen-but if..those were our starters next year..would our defense be upgraded still? and doesn\'t thier insertion show they were atleast better than what we had?

baronm --

I don\'t think it was any fluke our run defense looked MUCH better over the last 4-games.

Much of that improvement was the change in \"scheme\", IMO. It allowed our front 7 a chance to be much more effective. And they simply made more plays.

Not many here want to give the defense their just due for the improvement over the last 4-games. But it was for real. And they deserve some credit.

GumboBC · 04-04-2005, 03:53 PM

PS --

It wasn\'t only the improvent of the young linebackers over the last 4 games. The defensive tackles also played much much better.

It seemed to me that the DTs and DEs played much more disciplined and maintained their gap responsibilities over the last 4 games.

In the first 12-games it seemed to me the DTS were trying to shoot the gaps and often got over powered or simply weren\'t in position to make the play.

There was very little room for RBs over the last 4 games.

I was surprised as hell at what I was watching. I\'m still dumbfounded.

baronm · 04-04-2005, 03:56 PM

again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better?

Yes it did. And here\'s why I think it did.
1. James Allen-All the physicallness you want in a LB, but not the most mental. He finally started getting it, was out of position a lot less and started making plays. Everyone said the SLB was his natural position. I just wish it hadn\'t taken him 12 games to learn it. If he has.

2. Watson-Our best LB. The ROOKIE started playing smarter and ended the season pretty solid. I\'m comfy with him at MLB or at WLB.

3. Bockwoldt-What can you say? The kid looks like a gamer. So what if half of us here can bench 225 more times than he can, he made the plays when he had too. Does anyone remember him running with Vick last year? Imagine what this pup could do if he hits the weights hard this off-season.

thanx..

see I think that colby is better at the WLB than thomas davis would be...speculation for sure, but the kid seems like a good football player-and he can gain strength..

the SLB is the position I would improve. either with sharper or with burnett...or with watson.

WhoDat · 04-04-2005, 03:58 PM

I thought the OLB was supposed to trap them into the middle so the MLB could pound them?

Both are right in their own way. You really want DTs that can stuff the middle on their own, and/or get push and disrupt a play. Either way, if the middle is clogged a RB has to either put his head down and run right into the pile, dance (which, unless your last name is Sanders, is a bad thing), or bounce outside.

Once the play is moving outside, you want to keep the runner going east and west, not cutting it upfield. You\'re right that an OLB should never let a RB get outside of him. The thinking isn\'t to keep the clock running, it\'s b/c you want to funnel the RB back in towards the pursuit so that he can be pounded.

04-04-2005, 03:07 PM	#11
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,718	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs I\'m no expert, but from what I saw, the weakest area on the entire team was right up the gut of our defense. I seem to recall it was mostly to the outside, with the cut-back run. Both Allen and Grant flew upfield and the RB cut inside of them for huge gains. I don\'t remember nearly as many runs straight up the middle. As the season wore on Allen and Grant did much better.

04-04-2005, 03:12 PM	#12
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs I\'m no expert, but from what I saw, the weakest area on the entire team was right up the gut of our defense. I seem to recall it was mostly to the outside, with the cut-back run. Both Allen and Grant flew upfield and the RB cut inside of them for huge gains. I don\'t remember nearly as many runs straight up the middle. As the season wore on Allen and Grant did much better. I certainly agree that the \"cut-back\" run killed us. But, I still contend that teams were able to run right up the gut of our defense. Over the first 12-games our defense was so bad, it was hard to say one area was that much worse than the others. I think the defense stunk in all areas. Period. I still believe you stop the run up the middle first and FORCE the runningback to the outside. I\'m not convinced we can do that and I\'m hopeful that\'s where we will upgrade.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-04-2005, 03:16 PM	#13
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs why force them outside and stop the clock or let them run out of bounds? I thought the OLB was supposed to trap them into the middle so the MLB could pound them? again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better?
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954

04-04-2005, 03:21 PM	#14
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs why force them outside and stop the clock or let them run out of bounds? I thought the OLB was supposed to trap them into the middle so the MLB could pound them? again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better? You force the RB to run parallel to the line of scrimmage and it allows the defensive players to pursue the ball-carrier better and more effectively. And the sideline is the friend of the defense. It\'s like the 12th man. And killing the clock is to our advantage. It stops the clock and the offense doesn\'t keep the ball as long.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-04-2005, 03:26 PM	#15
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,718	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better? Yes it did. And here\'s why I think it did. 1. James Allen-All the physicallness you want in a LB, but not the most mental. He finally started getting it, was out of position a lot less and started making plays. Everyone said the SLB was his natural position. I just wish it hadn\'t taken him 12 games to learn it. If he has. 2. Watson-Our best LB. The ROOKIE started playing smarter and ended the season pretty solid. I\'m comfy with him at MLB or at WLB. 3. Bockwoldt-What can you say? The kid looks like a gamer. So what if half of us here can bench 225 more times than he can, he made the plays when he had too. Does anyone remember him running with Vick last year? Imagine what this pup could do if he hits the weights hard this off-season.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

04-04-2005, 03:27 PM	#16
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs good point-I guess I\'m thinkinga bout basketball.. but my point still remains unanswered: with the insertion of watson, allen and colby the defense played much better-if, and hopefully this doesn\'t happen-but if..those were our starters next year..would our defense be upgraded still? and doesn\'t thier insertion show they were atleast better than what we had?
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954

04-04-2005, 03:37 PM	#17
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs good point-I guess I\'m thinkinga bout basketball.. but my point still remains unanswered: with the insertion of watson, allen and colby the defense played much better-if, and hopefully this doesn\'t happen-but if..those were our starters next year..would our defense be upgraded still? and doesn\'t thier insertion show they were atleast better than what we had? baronm -- I don\'t think it was any fluke our run defense looked MUCH better over the last 4-games. Much of that improvement was the change in \"scheme\", IMO. It allowed our front 7 a chance to be much more effective. And they simply made more plays. Not many here want to give the defense their just due for the improvement over the last 4-games. But it was for real. And they deserve some credit.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-04-2005, 03:53 PM	#18
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs PS -- It wasn\'t only the improvent of the young linebackers over the last 4 games. The defensive tackles also played much much better. It seemed to me that the DTs and DEs played much more disciplined and maintained their gap responsibilities over the last 4 games. In the first 12-games it seemed to me the DTS were trying to shoot the gaps and often got over powered or simply weren\'t in position to make the play. There was very little room for RBs over the last 4 games. I was surprised as hell at what I was watching. I\'m still dumbfounded.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-04-2005, 03:56 PM	#19
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs again I ask the question: the last four games of the season the defense (the linebackers esp. ) played better..that was when allen, watson and colby took over for the vets. so-did that make our corps better? Yes it did. And here\'s why I think it did. 1. James Allen-All the physicallness you want in a LB, but not the most mental. He finally started getting it, was out of position a lot less and started making plays. Everyone said the SLB was his natural position. I just wish it hadn\'t taken him 12 games to learn it. If he has. 2. Watson-Our best LB. The ROOKIE started playing smarter and ended the season pretty solid. I\'m comfy with him at MLB or at WLB. 3. Bockwoldt-What can you say? The kid looks like a gamer. So what if half of us here can bench 225 more times than he can, he made the plays when he had too. Does anyone remember him running with Vick last year? Imagine what this pup could do if he hits the weights hard this off-season. thanx.. see I think that colby is better at the WLB than thomas davis would be...speculation for sure, but the kid seems like a good football player-and he can gain strength.. the SLB is the position I would improve. either with sharper or with burnett...or with watson.
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954

04-04-2005, 03:58 PM	#20
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	ESPN Insider Scouts Inc team needs I thought the OLB was supposed to trap them into the middle so the MLB could pound them? Both are right in their own way. You really want DTs that can stuff the middle on their own, and/or get push and disrupt a play. Either way, if the middle is clogged a RB has to either put his head down and run right into the pile, dance (which, unless your last name is Sanders, is a bad thing), or bounce outside. Once the play is moving outside, you want to keep the runner going east and west, not cutting it upfield. You\'re right that an OLB should never let a RB get outside of him. The thinking isn\'t to keep the clock running, it\'s b/c you want to funnel the RB back in towards the pursuit so that he can be pounded.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"