PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Fact--all four losses against 4-3 teams



Oviedo
12-22-2008, 09:53 AM
If I'm not mistaking all four of our losses have been against teams that run a 4-3 defense. Anyone else notice that?

Anyone have any ideas why?

My thoughts is that our tackles are exposed, particularly Colon, by the speed rushing DEs you find in 4-3.

SidSmythe
12-22-2008, 09:59 AM
This stat is irrelevant ..... Against the COLTS & TITANS we lost b/c of turnovers alone. The Giants I don't really remember why we lost, i think we ran the ball on them. The Eagles beat us b/c we couldn't stop their blitz stunts.

Iron Shiek
12-22-2008, 10:26 AM
This stat is irrelevant ..... Against the COLTS & TITANS we lost b/c of turnovers alone. The Giants I don't really remember why we lost, i think we ran the ball on them. The Eagles beat us b/c we couldn't stop their blitz stunts.


James Harrison long snapping? We had that game in the bag if not for that minor issue...

Ghost
12-22-2008, 12:10 PM
This stat is irrelevant ..... Against the COLTS & TITANS we lost b/c of turnovers alone. The Giants I don't really remember why we lost, i think we ran the ball on them. The Eagles beat us b/c we couldn't stop their blitz stunts.


James Harrison long snapping? We had that game in the bag if not for that minor issue...

You're f"n kidding about having the game in the bag right? Of all the terrible things that happened in that game you think that one play caused the loss?

It wasn't the FOUR interceptions Ben threw that day?
It wasn't the fact that after Moore's 32 yard run in the first quarter the entire team only ran for 50 yards the rest of the game?
It wasn't the 1-10 (yes that is the stat) on 3rd down conversions that game? Or the 0-4 on 4th down conversions on top of that?

The Harrison thing was nothing compared to the absolute abysmal game the Offense had that day - the O flat out sucked! That's why we lost to the Giants.

Chadman
12-22-2008, 06:03 PM
This stat is irrelevant ..... Against the COLTS & TITANS we lost b/c of turnovers alone. The Giants I don't really remember why we lost, i think we ran the ball on them. The Eagles beat us b/c we couldn't stop their blitz stunts.

Kind of agree...but your post did make Chadman think of something that O might have been getting at...

COLTS, TITANS, GIANTS & EAGLES all have something in common- speedy DE's.

Yes, turnovers are the teams big killer- but why are there so many turnovers? Is it because in these games Ben is under increased pressure from the edges?

flippy
12-22-2008, 06:12 PM
This stat is irrelevant ..... Against the COLTS & TITANS we lost b/c of turnovers alone. The Giants I don't really remember why we lost, i think we ran the ball on them. The Eagles beat us b/c we couldn't stop their blitz stunts.

Kind of agree...but your post did make Chadman think of something that O might have been getting at...

COLTS, TITANS, GIANTS & EAGLES all have something in common- speedy DE's.

Yes, turnovers are the teams big killer- but why are there so many turnovers? Is it because in these games Ben is under increased pressure from the edges?

These teams can get pressure with 4 guys. And drop 7.

Speedy DEs beating our tackles quickly off the edge forcing the interior guys to help. Leaving room for the interior guys to get pressure. And 7 in coverage means no one is getting open quickly and Ben has to hold onto the ball a second too long.

Trouble no matter how you slice it.

Chadman
12-22-2008, 06:17 PM
This stat is irrelevant ..... Against the COLTS & TITANS we lost b/c of turnovers alone. The Giants I don't really remember why we lost, i think we ran the ball on them. The Eagles beat us b/c we couldn't stop their blitz stunts.

Kind of agree...but your post did make Chadman think of something that O might have been getting at...

COLTS, TITANS, GIANTS & EAGLES all have something in common- speedy DE's.

Yes, turnovers are the teams big killer- but why are there so many turnovers? Is it because in these games Ben is under increased pressure from the edges?

These teams can get pressure with 4 guys. And drop 7.

Speedy DEs beating our tackles quickly off the edge forcing the interior guys to help. Leaving room for the interior guys to get pressure. And 7 in coverage means no one is getting open quickly and Ben has to hold onto the ball a second too long.

Trouble no matter how you slice it.

Ahh- good point.

Leads to the next 2 questions then- is the O-Line incapable of blocking 4 defenders? And is Ben good enough to disect 7 pass defenders?

A good running game would drag at least one extra defender in, opening up play-action a little....

But is this the 'blueprint' to beating the Steelers in 08/09? Rush 4 & drop everyone else in coverage? If the O-Line can't hold up against 4 & if Ben can get his passes out through traffic & if they have no running game to fall back on...

SidSmythe
12-22-2008, 06:19 PM
Good points FLIPPY and CHADMAN ...
but yesterday Ben got beat up by a rookie DT and most of Philly's pressure came up the middle.

The COLTS game was due to Turnovers and the Giants also. I don't remember those turnovers being forced by pressure either.

SuperSize
12-23-2008, 05:19 PM
They may struggle against 4-man lines, but not because of speedy DE's. In the Tenn & Phil games, they could not protect the A-gap(s) from either twists, LB blitzes, or getting beat 1-on-1. Kemo himself gave up 3-1/2 of the 5 last Sunday, just getting beat 1-on-1. Against Philly, the 3 interior guys, of which I think Simmons was one of them, never could figure out the stunts/blitzes that got thrown at them, leaving guys with a free shot at the QB.


Pete

Jigawatts
12-23-2008, 05:24 PM
This stat is irrelevant ..... Against the COLTS & TITANS we lost b/c of turnovers alone. The Giants I don't really remember why we lost, i think we ran the ball on them. The Eagles beat us b/c we couldn't stop their blitz stunts.


James Harrison long snapping? We had that game in the bag if not for that minor issue...

You're f"n kidding about having the game in the bag right? Of all the terrible things that happened in that game you think that one play caused the loss?

The loss of Warren cost us points and field position. It was a huge factor in the loss.

flippy
12-23-2008, 05:41 PM
Good points FLIPPY and CHADMAN ...
but yesterday Ben got beat up by a rookie DT and most of Philly's pressure came up the middle.

The COLTS game was due to Turnovers and the Giants also. I don't remember those turnovers being forced by pressure either.

The problem is in the interior and figuring out who to block many times.

The rookie DT is a player and schooled our interior line in the TEN game. Not having film on him probably helped his cause. Kemo got played.

But we also see stints where the line is on the same page and effective.

I think BA was doing the right thing trying to stick to the running game even when it wasn't working to try and draw more defenders in the box to open up the passing game.

Ben truly didn't make the couple of plays he needed to make to win that last game.

And a couple of his audibles to draws were ill conceived.