Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48

Thread: Who's responsible for this defense?

  1. #11
    Pro Bowler

    User Info Menu

    No Mixon, No Chase, No problem

  2. #12
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Terrapin View Post
    I've never fully understood that excuse anyway. If your D is on the field for say 7 minutes, wouldn't logic dictate that the opposing offense is also on the field for the same 7 minutes? And the offense typically doesn't substitute anyone.

    I mean, I get that it's more exhausting to chase people, tackle, etc. But overall it shouldn't be that big of a deal
    agreed.

    as a whole. Offensive lineman are the worst conditioned athletes on the field.

  3. #13
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Why don't we get 5 new "Who's responsible" threads when we win?

  4. #14
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    I don't watch enough of other teams to know the answer, but do they take their D starters out a lot during games? Seems as if TJ, Cam and Highsmith will come out for entire series when the game is still in hand. Shouldn't these starters be playing every down unless injured?

  5. #15
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
    I don't watch enough of other teams to know the answer, but do they take their D starters out a lot during games? Seems as if TJ, Cam and Highsmith will come out for entire series when the game is still in hand. Shouldn't these starters be playing every down unless injured?
    Not sure what your definition is for a lot. It's not that unusual for defensive players, especially ones pass rushing, to take breathers throughout the game. Snap counts in the 80s% isn't unusual. Ramon Foster complained about not having subs and the fact that OL gets no breaks in a game.

  6. #16
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
    I don't watch enough of other teams to know the answer, but do they take their D starters out a lot during games? Seems as if TJ, Cam and Highsmith will come out for entire series when the game is still in hand. Shouldn't these starters be playing every down unless injured?
    The Eagles do, but they value depth along the DL, the Steelers do not.

  7. #17
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
    " Cardio"...lmao.
    In general, I think the issue with the 3-and-outs is more about giving them more opportunities than it is about guys getting tired.

    If you have successful drives and control the clock, they get fewer drives. Which should lead to fewer points.

    For example, the Saints last week had 10 drives.

    The Bengals this week had 13.

    Or even in the Bengals game.

    In the first half, our offense had one drive of 4 or fewer plays. The Bengals had five drives (scored 17 points).

    In the second half, our offense had 6 drives of 4 or fewer plays. The Bengals had 8 drives (scored 20 pts).

    The defense actually gave up fewer points per drive in the 2nd half (3.4 pp drive in the 1st half and 2.5 pp drive in the 2nd half). But the inept offense meant that the Bengals had 60% more chances to score in the 2nd half than the did in the first half.

    If it was a matter of the defense getting more tired than the offense, then wouldn't we expect that their offense would score more points per drive in the 2nd?

    It's not fitness. It's opportunity.

    And if the offense didn't suck, their offense would get fewer opportunities.

  8. #18
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Northern_Blitz View Post
    In general, I think the issue with the 3-and-outs is more about giving them more opportunities than it is about guys getting tired.

    If you have successful drives and control the clock, they get fewer drives. Which should lead to fewer points.

    For example, the Saints last week had 10 drives.

    The Bengals this week had 13.

    Or even in the Bengals game.

    In the first half, our offense had one drive of 4 or fewer plays. The Bengals had five drives (scored 17 points).

    In the second half, our offense had 6 drives of 4 or fewer plays. The Bengals had 8 drives (scored 20 pts).

    The defense actually gave up fewer points per drive in the 2nd half (3.4 pp drive in the 1st half and 2.5 pp drive in the 2nd half). But the inept offense meant that the Bengals had 60% more chances to score in the 2nd half than the did in the first half.

    If it was a matter of the defense getting more tired than the offense, then wouldn't we expect that their offense would score more points per drive in the 2nd?

    It's not fitness. It's opportunity.

    And if the offense didn't suck, their offense would get fewer opportunities.
    Since their last drive didn't really count, it's more like 7 drives in the 2nd half and a pp drive of 2.9.

    Maybe that's not any different than 3.4 pp drive. But it's clearly not worse than the pp drive in the 1st half.

    It would be better if the defense made more plays. But they did get 2 turnovers in the game as well.

  9. #19
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by WindyCitySteel View Post
    The Eagles do, but they value depth along the DL, the Steelers do not.
    The Eagles and Steelers are in very different phases of their competitive windows.

  10. #20
    Legend

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.wizard View Post
    Why don't we get 5 new "Who's responsible" threads when we win?
    because we only have 3 wins this year?

    seriously tho, even when we win its doom or “can we really win a SB with these guys?” or “but they were missing a player and we got lucky our players made a few plays”
    Tomlinís coming back so what can you do?


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •