Big Blue View: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: MLB Trade Deadline: Who is available around MLB?

To 3-4 or not to 3-4?

As the search for a defensive coordinator continues, we must broach a subject that is bound to stir up controversy. In fact when I told Ed I was writing this post he turned into the Incredible Hulk, punched me in the groin, lit my face on fire and told me he would now refer to me as "Peaches."

Still, we must discuss this lightning rod issue. There is a chance the Giants will once again become a 3-4 defense. Many of you have been clamoring for a 3-4 and today I ask a former Jets scout and college friend to discuss the defense and whether or not it makes sense for Big Blue. Here is our back-and-forth e-mail conversation:

Star-divide

Me -- OK Faz explain to me, as if I was an 8-year-old, what the 3-4 defense even is. Truthfully, I know your limited vocabulary doesn't allow you to speak any other way  but I thought I would lower our readers expectations, and BEGIN!

Faz -- I went to college with you and there is no way talking to you like an 8-year-old would cut it. Let me lay it out for you as if you were 5 and we may have a shot. The 3-4 defense simply stated is three down lineman and four linebackers. In order to run the 3-4 system you need these elements to be successful:

Two defensive ends, who are physically more like tackles in a 4-3. Unlike a 4-3 the ends are responsible for two gaps as opposed to one and they must be able to take on two offensive linemen at once. 

You MUST have a nose tackle who is an absolute beast. As you commonly write Mr Jacks, you need a lineman who looks like he ate his other fellow lineman to become the top dog. Your nose tackle has to be able to control the line of scrimmage, engage a center and a guard and keep the linebackers clean. 

You need two inside linebackers who are very athletic, with the ability to chase down a back, play coverage and take on the occasional offensive tackle. 

You need two outside linebackers who are bigger then the inside guys, can dominate a running back, can beat an an offensive lineman, and have limited coverage ability. 

The aim of the 3-4 is to have your defensive linemen control the line of scrimmage (a daunting task for three men against five, hence the need for size) while the four linebackers make all the plays. That's pretty rudimentary "Baby Dave (his college nickname for me)," you think you got it?

Me -- Rudimentary seems like far to big a word for you, Faz. In fact you've always had a knack for words. What were those words you used in your scouting report of Vernon Gholston. I believe you called him a "monster" with "jaw-dropping talent." I could have sworn I told you he was a "workout warrior"  with "limited talent." Now that I've completely torn down any legitimacy the readers may have thought you had, answer me this; with the current Giant roster do you think they make a seamless switch to a 3-4 defense?

Faz -- Seamless? What's that? Don't use your $20-dollar words on me. Uggh, I knew the Gholston scouting report would come up, rightly so. What you left out is that I graded Jerod Mayo and Chris Johnson well ahead of him, and also noted in my report that "Johnson will be the best player to come out of the 08' draft." So suck on that!

I'll have your readers know you are the same guy who wrote 1000 words about how Aaron Ross would be better then Darrelle Revis. How's that working out? I'm not exactly ingratiating myself to Giant fans, huh? OK, let's get back to the question at hand. Would the Giants roster lend itself to a 3-4 base defense? Well, let's take a look.

Defensive end -- As I said you need two guys who can be responsible for two gaps (great ability to play the run) and can take on tackles in passing situations and completely control the line of scrimmage. So, who do you have? The two guys who stick out are Justin Tuck and Chris Canty. Canty played end for Dallas in the 3-4, so he knows the technique. Tuck is just a physical freak who could handle the switch, but you certainly wouldn't get the sack numbers you're used to. In fact I think the switch may help to nullify your best player, which to me is Tuck. Then again Tuck is so good you may be able to put him in other spots in passing situations. My other concern is that Tuck and Canty are not as bulky as you'd like. Generally your ends, in a 3-4, are heavier players so they can take on two lineman. Then again both players very strong.

Ideal 3-4 ends -- Aaron Smith and Richard Seymour, you have Chris Canty and Justin Tuck - I'd say your roster is average for this spot. 

Nose Tackle -- To me this is the key to the line. Just look at how much the Jets improved with the addition of Kris Jenkins. You must have a beast who can take on a guard and center and still get a push, a Vincent Wilfork type. Scouring your roster there seems to be only one option and that's Barry Cofield. At 6-5, 305 pounds I still don't think Cofield is big enough for the spot. Don't get me wrong, weight isn't everything, but at the nose tackle spot you need the size to take on two linemen and still get a push. Alford is a 4-3 tackle. Bernard ate the other lineman but his skills have eroded. Robbins is old and oft-injured and Canty is a 3-4 end.

Ideal 3-4 nose tackle is Shaun Rogers/ Jamal Williams, you have Barry Cofield.  I'd say your roster is below average for this spot, but Cofield has proven people wrong most of his career.

Inside linebacker -- Let's face it, as you wrote in that cute little "bust of the decade" post, your linebackers haven't been this thin in some time. The only player i can see handling this spot is Michael Boley who, when healthy, can play the pass and run quite nicely. Antonio Pierce is probably your second-best option, but his coverage skills are almost gone, and that would kill you. Jonathan Goff may actually be more suited for the 3-4 then most people think, but that's yet to be determined. There really isn't any other option here, please don't even bother embarrassing yourself by mentioning Chase or Wilkinson

Ideal 3-4 inside linebackers are Patrick Willis/Ray Lewis. You have Pierce/ Boley and Goff. I'd say you are below average here. 

Outside linebacker -- Since a 4-3 defense requires dominant ends who can pressure the quarterback the Giants have done an amazing job of collecting talented at this spot. The question is can those guys, who are used to playing with their hands in the dirt, stand up and play in a two point stance? I think the majority of them can. Mathias Kiwanuka has some experience playing linebacker under Steve Spagnuolo. He is strong enough to dominate a running back, handle an offensive tackle and has some coverage ability. Clint Sintim played in the 3-4 at Virginia, so he would make the transition seamlessly (see I'm learning). The biggest question would be Osi Umenyiora. I think he could make the switch, but just like Kiwi the question would be his coverage skills. I think it could work for all three of these players and I actually think Tuck could play the spot from time to time as well. Although unlike the 4-3 you don't usually move players around like that, but Tuck and Osi may be exceptions.

Ideal 3-4 defensive ends are DeMarcus Ware and James Harrison, with Osi/ Tuck/ Kiwi/ Sintim I think you are above average at this position.  

I have the Giants roster listed as above average at outside linebacker, average at defensive end and below average at both nose tackle and inside linebacker. There are question marks, and almost all of your players will be put into spots they have never played before but there's an outside chance with the current roster. Mainly because I believe your ends could transition well to the outside linebacker spot. If that transition doesn't work then I am totally wrong (it happens once a decade, for example Vernon Gholston). I also said the key in the 3-4 defense is the NT spot and I don't see an answer on your current roster. 

Me -- You could easily have won our readers back when you mentioned the ideal outside linebacker who everyone knows is the great LT. But you went with Dallas's DeMarcus Ware, good work Faz. I'm going to ask you about the ideal  3-4 coordinator right now, but before I do let me relay this email conversation to our readers.

This conversation took place right before the 09 season. 

Me -- I fear that losing Spags will leave the Giants out of the playoffs in 2009.

Faz -- Nah, Spags was great but that D could run itself, hell if you had Ray Handley running it you'd be fine.

Me - If you mention Handley again I'll eat your first born. Spags was better then you think. Uggh, I like the Rex Ryan choice for the Jets. I think he will move them in the right direction, that's unfortunate.

Faz -- Ryan is gonna be great, Sheridan will be fine you watch.

You're an NFL scout? Unbelievable, it's as if you know nothing about the sport.

OK you can answer now, Faz:

Faz -- Let me be the first to say, you're an ass. And now let me tell your readers the original e-mail subject was "what coaches get too much credit for great talent." Mr. Jacks went with Joe Torre's Yankees, who he swears he could have taken to at least one title, despite never coaching a baseball team at any level EVER. I'm a Yankee fan so I struck back with his beloved Spagnuolo. I still say if Sheridan were even mildly competent (shame on you Miami), this defense should have been fine. There is far too much talent for them to be as bad as they were. Now, on to your question. 

3-4 coordinators -- I personally think Crennel would have been a nice choice when it comes to the 3-4 simply because he learned under the master Bill Belicheck, who learnt under the God Bill Parcells (see Jacks, I can ingratiate). With Romeo gone what about Pepper Johnson? The Patriots defensive line coach, is also a Belicheck disciple and more of a rah rah guy. Then again corpses are more rah rah compared to Sheridan. Capers is another 3-4 guru, but I don't think he will be going anywhere soon. Green Bay made the switch from 4-3 to 3-4 under Capers and went from 20th in overall defense to 9th. Bob Sutton has learned from Rex Ryan and right now no one is running it as well as the big man, so he certainly has to be an option. Jim Haslett is another 3-4 guy and he is certainly a good motivator, but a bit of a re-tread. Has anyone even mentioned Jim Mora Jr? His players love him and he certainly can motivate. Still, my vote would be to take from the best and go with Sutton.

Me -- You really don't understand ingratiating yourself do you? Are you actually saying because the Jets won A SINGLE playoff game means they run the best 3-4 defense in the league? You can't be serious? How in God's name did the Jets pay you to  scout. There isn't a day that goes by that I thank the Lord the Jets hired you and not the Giants. If anything Belicheck (a former Giant)  would have to be considered the best, and therefore Pepper Johnson (another former Giant) would be an even better choice, and ingratiating lessons over.

Lastly, if you were in charge of the hiring process what would you do, taking scheme into account?

Faz -- I'm not sure you could call what the Jets gave me pay (zing, a potshot to my former employee, how's that for ingratiating?) For the record after this e-mail I will never use the word ingratiate for the rest of my life. Here's a question for you. Is it better to transition to the hot defense (8 out of 12 teams in the playoffs were 3-4) or fix your holes (linebacker and safety), get healthy and continue on with a scheme that held one of the best offenses in the modern era to 14 points in 2007.

Me -- Well played, Faz. Let's do this again shortly and maybe next time you won't embarrass yourself. Also,  remember this is a Giants blog, and no one cares about  the weird little insecure brother who loiters in OUR stadium. 

Faz  -- Until then. Oh, and next time try and be funny. Isn't that your job here on Big Blue View? 

0 recs  |  Comment 135 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

The best way to utilize the 3-4 (for now)

would be as a package rather than a base defense, that way you don’t need truly scheme dependent guys.

President of the Ramses Barden Fan Club

Fact on Villanova Sports

by Hoyadestroya85 on Jan 13, 2010 11:09 AM EST reply actions  

I wouldn't mind seeing a hybrid next year

especially if we can’t find a true NT in the draft or free agency this year. I think that’s probably our best strategy if we hire a 3-4 DC. The transition could happen over multiple seasons before the Giants become a true 3-4 team.

2009 Did Not Happen

by cjmulrain on Jan 13, 2010 11:12 AM EST up reply actions  

3-4

My only issue with the 3-4 — considering the Giants current personnel — is that it basically buries their best player. Justin Tuck is that guy, and 3-4 is not the best way to utilize him. But, after this season I am all for whatever works. So, we shall see.
By the way, it appears our man ‘DJacks’ has some strange friends. LOL!

by Ed Valentine on Jan 13, 2010 11:19 AM EST reply actions  

Agreed

I agree with Ed on his point. And to elaborate on this, we simply do not have the five technique DEs, the OLBs, and the Nose Tackle to make 3-4 our base defense. Like what Ed said, using Tuck as a five technique DE is a waste of his talent. Chris Canty can play the five technique but Oci and Kiwi are not massive/strong enough to hold up against the double team, yet we definitely don’t want them covering in space as rush linebackers either (see the Kiwi experiment two seasons ago). Clint Sintim is prob. the best fit for the position, but it’d be hard to convince me at this point that the Giants will play Sintim in favor of Kiwi or Oci. Lastly (and most importantly,) we don’t have a run-stuffing nose tackle to eat up space up the middle, and we had enough trouble against the run as is.

Switching to a 3-4 defense is a slow process and it’d be risky to start trading proven players for draft picks just to get the 3-4 personnel. Though I must admit there is a trend toward the 3-4 defense because the good college DEs are either undersized but very fast, or massive/strong but slow.

Looking ahead to the draft, I’d spend a second/third round pick on a guy like Eric Norwood from South Carolina if the Giants are indeed transitioning to a 3-4 defense.

by bonwei on Jan 13, 2010 12:22 PM EST up reply actions  

yeah agreed

too much shuffling around, too much of learning new positions. we already had many instances of ppl not knowing there assignments this year. let’s not throw MORE on there plate.

My advice: stick with the 4-3. and throw in a little 5-1-5 every now and then(i’m not letting go of the dream!)

by wilddre22 on Jan 13, 2010 8:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Agreed ED

the D should be based around Tuck’s ability, he’s the best player hands down no need for him to be tying up blockers instwad of rushing the QB

by Landeta on Jan 13, 2010 12:58 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

In fact I think the switch may help to nullify your best player, which to me is Tuck

Ive been saying this for weeks!

by ryanwk628 on Jan 13, 2010 3:30 PM EST up reply actions  

There is no doubt that it would be a difficult transition, Ed

especially for Tuck. But I am confident that a hybrid version of the 3-4 could be created to use his special talent. To me the biggest obstacle is finding the right guy for Nose Tackle. He is the one guy who has to be a rock. And he should be about 340 and reasonably athletic. Faz above commented that the defensive ends will have to cover two gaps each but the right guy at nose tackle could nearly occupy the center plus two guards himself leaving the ends with only tackles to deal with. Add blitzing outside linebackers to the scene and you have the opportunity to wreck the offense’s passing game before it gets going.

To me another great advantage of the 3-4 is that we don’t have to put a hat on a hat. That makes it harder for the QB to change calls at the line of scrimmage, and keeps backs in the backfield, and negates the value of a smaller receiver type tight end who must suddenly spend a lot more time blocking. The 3-4 also keeps QB’s from drifting left or right in the pocket to get a better lane.

by giant fan since 57 on Jan 13, 2010 7:32 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm interested in the actual debate about the 3-4

but all that back-and-forth in the post was really tedious. Sorry for being all like that – just giving you some honest feedback.

"We were very much aware of that. There was a lot of phone call-type things going on in the room." -- Tom Coughlin

by Mr. Met on Jan 13, 2010 11:21 AM EST reply actions  

eh

I liked the format. It felt like I was overhearing too friends argue in a sports bar. Which I think is a great vibe to get from a fan-based blog.

by Woogie526 on Jan 13, 2010 12:52 PM EST up reply actions  

except

the references to things in the past we know nothing about, and the petty barbs, seems more contrived and schticky than illustrative

You play to win the game!

by Simms-McConkey on Jan 13, 2010 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

mr met

I hear you. Me and faz had a back and forth debate and tried to set it up like the caldwell – simmons debates. With all the cutting and pasting, and removing of personal jokes it got a little choppy. That said he makes some interesting points.

by David Jacks on Jan 13, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions  

He did make great points.

I learned a lot on the substance, which is what I was interested in.

Thanks for hearing me, and welcome to the front page here. I read your stuff at your previous site too, so I understand what you’re trying to do.

"We were very much aware of that. There was a lot of phone call-type things going on in the room." -- Tom Coughlin

by Mr. Met on Jan 13, 2010 3:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Simms

I wish this were true, but Faz and I have been debating about sports for far too long. I will say I do like the idea of making up friends and putting them in posts . Consider it done. For the record my buddy Gshep does not like the idea of the 3-4.

by David Jacks on Jan 13, 2010 2:10 PM EST up reply actions  

hey i liked it

gotta agree with woogie.. felt like i was listening to 2 friend BS about sports.. got a few laughs from it too

Give me work release or give me death - #17

by Plaxico Burress on Jan 13, 2010 2:17 PM EST up reply actions  

totally kidding about the schizophrenia

just trying to get a few laughs myself, and was thinking about the scene in the high-rise at the end of Fight Club.

You play to win the game!

by Simms-McConkey on Jan 13, 2010 3:56 PM EST up reply actions  

When i first read it

I wasn’t sure if he was talking to himself or another person.

Than I reread it and it was said he was talking to a former Jets scout.

None of my alter egos are scouts for Nfl teams (yet…)

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 4:58 PM EST up reply actions  

I think this says it all right here

" Is it better to transition to the hot defense (8 out of 12 teams in the playoffs were 3-4) or fix your holes (linebacker and safety), get healthy and continue on with a scheme that held one of the best offenses in the modern era to 14 points in 2007."

if its not broken, dont fix it. One bad year does not mean the system is broken. It means it needs a little repair job. Fill the hole and the Giants 4-3 can dominate again.

Give me work release or give me death - #17

by Plaxico Burress on Jan 13, 2010 11:43 AM EST reply actions  

Agreed...

Both the 4-3 and the 3-4 work, as long as the right personell are in place, along with coaches who can teach the scheme. Right now, on the roster, we have 4-3 guys. Bringing in the 3-4 will set these “4-3” guys back at least a year. I don’t believe that we can bring in a whole new scheme and get to the SB next year. Tuck, Kiwi, Osi, Cofield have never played the 3-4 and they are the core of our D-line. If we need DT, LB, and S, get them for the 4-3, that way are players know what they are doing come September. Get a DC in here that knows a good 4-3 scheme and has an attitude to get these guys going. No more DEs in pass coverage. If you are going to blitz a corner, do it out of a nickel and have the linebacker move over. I have always liked the idea of a 4-2-1-4 on passing downs, with that extra one being a safety. Offenses never know what the defense is planning from there. Can blitz anyone from that scheme. Get creative. That is what really lacked this year was the creativity. That and Sheridan was just plain awful.

by CCE718 on Jan 13, 2010 12:27 PM EST up reply actions  

4-2-5

is what I think you mean

The 1st part is for down lineman, 2nd for linebackers, and the 3rd for all defensive backs.

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 3:17 PM EST up reply actions  

where was the vaunted 5-1-5?

with our stock of DLs and lack of LBs it coulda been a contendah

You play to win the game!

by Simms-McConkey on Jan 13, 2010 3:57 PM EST up reply actions  

I was thinking that too

We should have tried it anyways

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 4:59 PM EST up reply actions  

the thing is...

couldn’t it be reasonable, that a switch could make these guys better?

Kiwi and Osi seem to fall in love with flying up field. Well…that’s what a 3-4 OLB is designed to do. Yea, they gotta drop back in coverage every now and then, but that’s why they invented backups. Also, D-Ware is not all that great in coverage. He does it, but most of the time they take him out.

Tuck may be the problem…but like I said below, Tuck is probably better as an inside pass rusher. Guys like Bruce Smith thrived as an inside guy cuz of their strength and speed, and not necessarily their size.

They have Canty, who is a good run stopper and also a guy who knows how to hold up at the point of attack, basically letting those around him do what they wanna do.

The key to it all is finding what really made Bruce Smith thrive, a NT like Ted Washington.

Find a big fat NT, that actually stays on the field for more then one down (re: NOT TERRENCE CODY). Maybe 2 or 3.

It can be done. It may even be what would make guys like Osi, Kiwi and even Tuck, thrive.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 12:37 PM EST up reply actions  

I agree

it definetly COULD make these guys better. Obviously the question is will it? Makes sense in theory but will these guys be able to adjust.. i think they could. all depends on the coach i think and finding that NT. if the Giants can sign Vince Wilfork (chances r slim to none) then id say go 3-4.. without getting a monster to play NT, i say youd have to fill the holes and play 4-3.

Give me work release or give me death - #17

by Plaxico Burress on Jan 13, 2010 2:06 PM EST up reply actions  

I think the key words are "in theory"?

There seems to be alot of different theories floating around that don’t point toward an absolute solution. This isn’t rocket science, but did it not take Einstein years to prove his theory? This is all something new that will probably fail to a degree with all the theoriatric variables? Though, others have converted to this theory (3-4), some of their variables were in place for a test, and to a degree also failed!

I’m not saying we will fail miserably in an all out effort to change to a 3-4, but i will expect some failures along the way. Interesting enough, should we literally explore the theory of a 3-4 in an uncapped year? Potential 3-4 FA additions will be less numerous too. Yes, there will be available NT’s in Hampton, Franklin or Wilfork, but that doesn’t mean they’ll be either franchised or signed to another team because of money. It’s something worth thinking about. It’s not guranteed of their services!

So regardless of our next DC, i would prefer him to be closer to a genious rather than a mad scientist. We have some of the resources here, but it’s the other resources that may be hard to come by. I just wish for a happy mixture!

by Hootman on Jan 13, 2010 3:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Prolm is Free

It could make them better in 2 years. It may take time to get up to a high level so I’m not sure its wortj the risk

by Landeta on Jan 13, 2010 3:43 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

The 3 best D's of all time

were 4-3’s

Balt 2000 Steelers 76 Bears 85

We’ve won with 4-3 im 07

Our problems this year were not cause we were’nt running a 3-4 but rather age, lack of efforts, diminshing talent, and injuries.

by Landeta on Jan 13, 2010 1:09 PM EST via mobile up reply actions   1 recs

I'm not saying run the 3-4 just to be like everyone else...

I’m saying it may make sense…cuz guys like Osi and Kiwi..maybe even Tuck (since he’s a better inside rusher), and to a lesser extent Sintim and Canty, maybe even Boley.

the key is the NT.

And the age, lack of effort and diminished talent make a case for the 3-4.

Guys like Willie McGinist, Greg Ellis..and many more, have increased the length of their careers cuz they were stand up OLB’s.

Osi and Kiwi like to fly up the field.

…so, how about the style of defense that encourages it?

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 4:23 PM EST up reply actions  

My thoughts exactly

"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch

by xMattex on Jan 14, 2010 6:43 AM EST up reply actions  

3-4

I think a 3-4 could work. Tuck is strong and frequently moves to DT on obvious passing situations now. I think the ends would be Tuck, Canty, and Cofield. The Giants would need a true NT, an ILB, and safeties. But in reality even if we stick with the 4-3 the Giants need another DT, a MLB, and safeties. Kiwi and Osi are both liabilities against the run as DE’s. We could trade Osi for an additional draft pick. Maybe to St Louis for their 2nd round pick

by Giants56 on Jan 13, 2010 11:44 AM EST reply actions  

Kiwi

plays the run pretty well. He led all Giants defensive linemen in tackles and he was among the team leaders in tackles for loss, even though he was not the starter for much of the year. Although he is a little small for a defensive end, I don’t think the Giants problems against the run were his fault. Osi, on the other hand was terrible against the run, and the stats bear it out. The Giants need to get him to buy into being a third down or other obvious passing down rusher and try to minimize the times he is called on to be in on running plays.

by Tucker Fredrickson on Jan 13, 2010 12:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Geezus..here we go again..I am so sick of this debate..

When I work-out I skip over 3 and 4 in my reps..I repeat 2 twice and 5 twice..This argument has my whole routine screwed up: 1-2-2-5-5-6-7-8-9-10…

by Bobbiblue on Jan 13, 2010 12:04 PM EST reply actions  

We need DT/NT help either way

I’m a proponent of the switch to the 3-4, but the truth is that either way we need a beast in the middle of the line that we don’t have right now.

by P. Gibbons on Jan 13, 2010 12:16 PM EST reply actions  

i agree

I agree we need help at DT/NT either way. We would also need help at safety and ILB/MLB either way. I’ve always been a proponent of the 3-4 but i think the best idea is to hire the best available DC and go from there.

by Giants56 on Jan 13, 2010 12:24 PM EST reply actions  

Am I the only one who got the sense

That there is no “Faz,” that DJacks has schizophrenia and was talking to one of his personalities?
;)

You play to win the game!

by Simms-McConkey on Jan 13, 2010 12:28 PM EST reply actions  

ive told girls at bars that im the back-up 3rd baseman for the KC Royals

works every time.. they have no idea haha.. so i would say your rght there is no Faz.. everyone wants to say they have a friend who works for an NFL team.

Give me work release or give me death - #17

by Plaxico Burress on Jan 13, 2010 2:20 PM EST up reply actions  

this comment was meant to be posted here oops

I wish this were true, but Faz and I have been debating about sports for far too long. I will say I do like the idea of making up friends and putting them in posts . Consider it done. For the record my buddy Gshep does not like the idea of the 3-4

by David Jacks on Jan 13, 2010 2:43 PM EST up reply actions  

And plaxico

I write for other shows here in LA, but i also do voice overs for cartoons and commercials (mainly in english accents) but in the past I’ve told girls I’m the geico gekko voice. It’s just obscure enough to believe, and i’m just good enough at the voice where it works.

by David Jacks on Jan 13, 2010 2:44 PM EST up reply actions  

haha thats exactly it

needs to be obsure enough to where theres no way they can prove you wrong and juuuust beleiveable enough. Im a decent size guy in decent shape so backup professional baseball player works very well for me.. haha very well.

Give me work release or give me death - #17

by Plaxico Burress on Jan 13, 2010 3:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Justin Tuck vs. Bruce Smith.

Tuck is no Bruce…but Bruce was A-OK lined up as a 3-4 DE and it didn’t hurt his production. Tuck IS good as a inside pass rusher.

Key is a NT. If the NT is truly good enough..and say, Kiwi and/OR Osi are flying up along side Tuck…why not?

Dan Williams, DT 6"3 FAT lbs, should be there at #15. Sign another pile of fat…maybe all they need to make it work. Someone like Abrayo Franklin.

It could work. Even for Tuck and Osi.

And to be honest, no matter what way they go, they could probably use a line clogger like Williams. Just to free up Tuck, Osi and Kiwi.

I think regardless they need to give more looks, including 3-4 looks.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 12:29 PM EST reply actions  

NT

We’re not getting a NT anywhere in the draft at our position and everyone in UFA is too old to build on.

Can we just fix the Safety spot and focus on upgrading LB’s. I feel that a move to 3-4 is a little drastic.

by The Curse on Jan 13, 2010 3:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Dan Williams..is probably there at #15.

He’s the best NT in the draft.

I’m thinking they should draft him anyway…to play a more Jim Schwartz style 4-3 at the very least.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 3:47 PM EST up reply actions  

Dan Williams

That would be a nice grab but I believe too many people in fornt of us or behind will come up to grab him thinking he’s the next Haynesworth. I could easily see the Pats making a move to go younger here. I think he could start right off the bat as well. That Tennessee defense got better through the year but I do like getting as many SEC players as possible.

by The Curse on Jan 13, 2010 4:43 PM EST up reply actions  

I doubt he'll get grabbed...

I mean, if he gets grabbed, it would mean someone unexpected would fall.

Kind of a win-win.

Between him and Brian Price, if the Giants are gonna go DT (which of course is possible) it should be interesting.

I mean…BOTH would be nice, cuz Williams is a big run stuffer, that on the pass may free up others to roam around.

But Price is a quick, fast and deceptively strong, very good pass rusher. That would free up others too.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 5:05 PM EST up reply actions  

osi

Can’t stop the run as a 4-3 end, he’d be awful as a 5-tech. I like Alford I think as the other 5-tech

by queler on Jan 13, 2010 6:41 PM EST up reply actions  

that's why I didn't suggest that...

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 6:43 PM EST up reply actions  

DC

Who is going to be the new DC anyway? It seems like Perry Fewell might take the Bears job. TC hasnt reached out to Sutton or Capers. Who is next on the list? Pepper Johnson?

by Giants56 on Jan 13, 2010 12:45 PM EST reply actions  

We'll see

This does not have to be decided tomorrow. If it’s Sutton, Giants have to wait for Jets to be eliminated before they can talk to him, anyway. So, we’ll see.

by Ed Valentine on Jan 13, 2010 1:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Judging by what Jets fans have been saying

Sutton would be a bad move. I really hope it doesnt come down to him

Give me work release or give me death - #17

by Plaxico Burress on Jan 13, 2010 2:37 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah

The idea does not appeal to me, either.

by Ed Valentine on Jan 13, 2010 3:06 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah.

Me neither. He was demoted from defensive coordinator and went through 4 head coaches. NOT a good look.

"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch

by xMattex on Jan 14, 2010 6:45 AM EST up reply actions  

Capers

Is he really going to be fired from GB?

by The Curse on Jan 13, 2010 3:35 PM EST up reply actions  

just say'n

this is why this is the best damn G-men site on the internet great stuff fellas…no wondering here why your site growth was crazy in 2009…4-3 all the way…having said that drafting athletic LB’s in this years draft and a killer DT, pieces we need anyway, doesn’t exactly close the door on the 3-4 either.

by nyGTrenches on Jan 13, 2010 12:57 PM EST reply actions  

shouldn't the question be ....

shouldn’t the question be is the 3-4 better then the 4-3 against the 3 teams O that we play the most…Dal..Phil..Reds….thoses are the Offenses we need to stop the most

by freakynjbifemandhubby on Jan 13, 2010 1:03 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

Improve the the 4-3 and continue with it

All of this talk about the 3-4 is an overreaction by a fan base that was in shock at season’s end and is now in panic mode. The inability to beat Philly with a 4-3 defense, coupled with Dallas’ ability to dominate Philly with a 3-4 defense, certainly helps the groundswell of pro-3-4 sentiment. I ain’t buyin’ it. The Giants run the 4-3 and do a darn good job at it when the pieces are there. Let’s take a look-see.

Defensive Line:
The team had five DTs who didn’t produce this season. Canty had injuries, Alford was on IR, Bernard was out of shape and unmotivated, and Robbins and Cofield didn’t fully recover from off-season surgery. The team had one starting DE hampered by a torn laburum – Tuck – in his shoulder and the other starting DE not fully recover from a severe leg injury – Osi. With the DTs unable to be disruptive and keep offensive linemen honest, opposing offenses were able to double Tuck and Osi. In their limited health these guys couldn’t fight through it, rendering them virtually useless. We all know that this team’s defense requires great play from the D-line.

Linebackers:
Starting MLB Pierce was visibly out of shape last but this year he simply became old. His eroding physical talent could not match his excellent leadership, a quality the team sorely missed once he went on IR. He couldn’t run down RBs and he couldn’t keep up with TEs. Third on the MLB depth chart, Goff was thrust into the starting MLB role. With no prior experience, his success was very limited. It was akin to replacing Plaxico Burress with Domenik Hixon last season. Starting WILL LB Boley was supposed to be the guy to handle those fast RBs and TEs but he had in-season surgery on his knee then became the signal caller after Pierce was gone, a task with which he was never comfortable and that limited his aggressiveness. Starting SAM LB Clark never had an impactful presence on the field. His contributions were minimal, at best. Sintim and Kehl came from 3-4 schemes in college and they’ll need time to adjust. Their injuries this season did not help.

Secondary:
The stalwart of an already thin safety unit, FS Kenny Phillips, suffers from a debilitating arthritic condition that ended a very promising 2nd season for him in Week 3. As most fans bemoaned in the off-season, the Giants did a very poor job in creating depth at the position. Michael Johnson is woefully inadequate and has no business being a starting SS. Players like CC Brown and Aaron Rouse were too bad to merit further space in this post. CB Aaron Ross suffered from a hamstring injury that delayed his entrance into a game until Week 11. By then, he was being asked to clean up the mess left by the two previous unmentionables. CB Webster had some bouts with inconsistency this season. Perhaps an effect of injuries or his inability to work well with inadequate safeties alongside him, he simply didn’t step up when his team needed him the most.

The Sheridan Effect
As the coup de grâce DC Bill Sheridan implemented schemes that were at times misguided and at times laughable. Though praising him publicly, the players did not play for him. His inanimate personality certainly didn’t help to inspire them.

So let’s recap the list of players who did not have the season we expected:
DE Tuck
DE Osi
DT Canty
DT Alford
DT Robbins
DT Cofield
DT Bernard
LB Pierce
LB Boley
LB Sintim
LB Kehl
FS Phillips
SS Johnson
CB Ross
CB Webster

I don’t see how all these problems equate to the 3-4 being better than the 4-3. Many things went wrong for the defense. Changing to the 3-4 will not right those wrongs. Upgrades need to be made at key positions, players need to stay healthy, players need to play better, and a good defensive coordinator needs to be hired.

by GhostDini on Jan 13, 2010 1:35 PM EST reply actions  

Good Points

I also believe a 3-4 with the current lineup would cause even more injury issues
as inept as they looked at times this year with the 4-3
learning a whole new defense for a lot of guys who have never played anything else could be disasterous
trying to overcompensate for missreads or just being out of position could cause many more hamstring and knee injuries, something we do not need
 
After AP went down for the season there was mass confusion on the D
This D was built with the 4-3 in mind I cant see a few free agent aquisitions making this adjustment seamless

You can see a lot just by observing-Yogi Berra

by greg a on Jan 13, 2010 2:56 PM EST up reply actions  

beautifully written

pretty much proves right there that we are all overreacting when it comes to this 3-4 jazz. when you break it down like that almost makes you feel bad for Sheridan… almost

Give me work release or give me death - #17

by Plaxico Burress on Jan 13, 2010 3:38 PM EST up reply actions  

3-4 steps to success

1- draft terrence cody for NT, keep cofield, alford backup
2- move tuck to weakside end but play him in 7and 5 technique
3- move canty to strongside end in 5 technique
4- move kiwi and osi to strongside rush linebacker
5-move sintim to weakside linebacker
6-boley is 1 inside linebacker, draft or pickup another one in FA , goff and blackburn as backup
THAT WOULD BE MY FRONT SEVEN IF WE SWITCHED TO A 3-4
sadly, pierce. clark. robbins, bernard, will probably be gone. (kehl and wilkinson are great on ST)

by MIKES92 on Jan 13, 2010 1:38 PM EST reply actions  

A couple of things to consider

The Eagles had a hard time against 3-4 defenses, look at what the Cowboys did to them.

A 3-4 defense is going to cost more because Linebackers generally cost more than defensive linemen.

The life expectancy of 3-4 linemen is short compared to 4-3 linemen because of the toll that’s exacted from having 3 down linemen taking on 5 o-linemen on a regular basis.

by John W on Jan 13, 2010 1:58 PM EST reply actions  

I don't know if

you can credit the Cowboys success against the Eagles on their 3-4. I think the fact that the Cowboys had 3 guys (Ware, Spencer and Ratliff) who got tremendous pressure against a depleted Philadelphia offensive line was what mattered. The Eagles’ center wasn’t consistently able to snap the ball properly and wasn’t good at picking up the inside rush — and Spencer and Ware are tough for anybody.

by Tucker Fredrickson on Jan 13, 2010 2:58 PM EST up reply actions  

But our 4-3 beat the cowboys

would a 3-4 be better vs the boys?

3-4 vs 4-3, it wouldn’t matter which one because neither of them would halp covering jackson going deep.

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 3:21 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd hardly say...

the Giants D was the reason they beat the Cowboys…really any of the past 2-3 years.

The Giants offense destroyed the Cowboys D for the most part…but that’s OK.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 3:33 PM EST up reply actions  

Sort of

I was pointing out the difference in the two team’s offenses (sort of).

3-4 or 4-3 won’t matter when we play the eagles if Jackson is going to be wide open down the field

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 3:42 PM EST up reply actions  

its all about the pass rush.

Osi and Kiwi really have been incapable of being pass rushers as a 4-3 DE’s..at least lately for Osi and Kiwi’s always been merely OK.

DJAX isn’t sitting that wide open if McNabb’s on his back and doesn’t have 5-6 seconds to throw the ball.

Maybe the 3-4 is the best way to get Osi, Kiwi and Tuck on the field more consistently?

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 3:50 PM EST up reply actions  

True...

but has any blitzer ever gotten off a block? That’s what it comes down to in a 3-4.

Linebackers beating multiple people. I didn’t see that happening vs runningbacks and te’s, how are they going to beat linesmen?

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 5:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Clark,

Boley, Backburn…no.

Buy maybe a Kiwi or Osi at full speed will?

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 5:06 PM EST up reply actions  

Blitzes from a 4-3 are usually easier to contain than from the 3-4.

Since you get a “hat on a hat” with the 4-3 your blitzers have to beat the guy right in front of him. 3-4 linebackers often get a head start three yards back and can pick a better path than simply bull rushing the offensive lineman in front of him. I think the 3-4 blitzing packages result in more blocking assingment failures too.

by giant fan since 57 on Jan 13, 2010 7:42 PM EST up reply actions  

I agree

A big advantage of the 3-4 is the confusion it can create. Where will the 4th guy becoming from? Will they bring more? If there showing blitz, is it really where the blitz is from?

Still, I haven’t seen anything where the LB we have could beat Tackles when they could barely beat RBs and TEs. Not that I don’t want to be proved wrong, but it’d take 3-4 good years to convert all the personnel to a 3-4, which would be at the expense of the secondary and getting a rid of a lot of old players

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 8:24 PM EST up reply actions  

the thing is...

the LB’s…3 of them will probably be Osi, Kiwi and Sintim.

No one knows what they’ll do as far as beating his man standing up.

With Tuck as a 3-4 DE..where yea…he could excel, that means on most of the plays they have Tuck, Osi, Kiwi and Sintim…all on the field. Who knows where they come from either?

If they get a NT that’s any good…it could look more like a 2-5-4!

Canty and NT do their thing, and the other 5 do theirs, with Tuck being the Joker.

I dunno if its a given that it has to take a few years to make it work

They’re gonna learn a new system anyway. Its not gonna be the JJ/Spags type thing (unless they find another Eagles assistent..)

Its gonna take time for anything to work.

I don’t think its out of the question for a base where Kiwi and Osi are standing up and moving around, and Tuck is rushing as a 5-tech, that it could work.

…it all keys on the NT. And I think they need to draft a big, stout DT anyway.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 8:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Pretty much we've switched places

A week ago I was all about a big DT, now I’m thinking we should get a Safety (although BDPA will make me happy)

Now you want a DT.

See what the off season does to people?

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 13, 2010 8:56 PM EST up reply actions  

lol..yea, I guess it has changed..

tho…really just draft position. I read a scouting report on Big Dan Williams..I think he’d be a perfect fit no matter the scheme.

I want a safety on the team too of course..but its possibly for one to fall into round 2.

Its def. all about BPA.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 9:00 PM EST up reply actions  

I agree about the big DT.

As for the others, Kiwi was able to convert fairly quickly and Sintim is already a linebacker, trained to make quick decisions standing up. Osi? Well, who knows about him? He might not even be here next year.

  Remember, the linebacker position gives the player time to react. As down linemen they immediatly bang heads with the guy in front of them. LInebackers can see the gaps develop and can more easily adjust their rush or drop back after the snap. Because of the lack of a hat on a hat, the offensive blockers are less certain of their assignments and you get more clean shots at the QB or the guy getting the handoff. Those kinds of plays are game changers and can shift momentum.

by giant fan since 57 on Jan 14, 2010 5:58 AM EST up reply actions  

Yeah I know that

but if osi’s the Linebacker, do you really think he’ll actually drop back and cover?

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 14, 2010 8:08 AM EST up reply actions  

doesn't have to...

if he does..he’s already in space, so he doesn’t have to lose a few ticks to get out of his stance and survey the field.

Ware does it with the Pokes, he’s not the greatest in coverage. Not bad, but OK.

Osi can be OK in coverage.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 14, 2010 8:18 AM EST up reply actions  

He did have that one play in coverage I remember

someone said this:

“osi is probably one of our worst db’s but he did alright there”

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 14, 2010 5:18 PM EST up reply actions  

As much as I'm concerned about switching to a 3-4 if it happens

I think Kiwi will be better suited at the OLB position.

Remeber his rookie year in 06 when Tim Lewis was DC he played a lot due to injuries to Osi, Strahan, Tuck so he started and Tim Lews used some 3-4 fronts with Kiwi playing OLB and he seemed to be effective playing in space a bit .

So to you’re point I think Kiwi would be effective in the 3-4, it’s just a matter of getting the other guys.

by Landeta on Jan 14, 2010 8:39 AM EST up reply actions  

And they have a DPOY Cornerback

Each team is different, and they had a high draft position, perfect for a scheme switch. Despite how bad we thought we were, we’re still the 15th draft pick.

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 14, 2010 8:06 AM EST up reply actions  

They got BJ Raji with the #9 pick.

I don’t think its out of the question for Dan Williams to fall to them with the #15.

And this draft is chock full of Clay Matthews caliber LB prospects.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 14, 2010 8:20 AM EST up reply actions  

My bad I thought they were higher

They’re also the youngest team in football, it’s not like they had tons of talent before hand that they converted (besides a few said people)

Never assume skill at bouncing a ball makes you smarter than the guy who built the court.

When there's a WILL there's a WAY

by Willgfass on Jan 14, 2010 5:19 PM EST up reply actions  

The Justin Tuck argument is balderdash

If Justin Tuck is playing the run, rushing the passer in passing situations and opening up opportunities for others to make plays, then he is just as valuable as he is now.
People are also forgetting- There is such thing as a one gap 3-4 defense. That would play into the strengths of Justin Tuck and others on the line.
The NFL’s all time leader in sacks, Bruce Smith played a lot of his career in the 3-4, so a great player will not be hidden by the scheme.

President of the Ramses Barden Fan Club

Fact on Villanova Sports

by Hoyadestroya85 on Jan 13, 2010 2:19 PM EST reply actions  

+1

we on das same page.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 3:34 PM EST up reply actions  

+1

"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch

by xMattex on Jan 14, 2010 6:51 AM EST up reply actions  

Keith Hamilton

I’ve read several post about the 3-4 defense taking away the Giants best pass rusher, bust wasn’t Hamilton a 3-4 end in 1991 and finished with 11.5 sacks?

by RickJS on Jan 13, 2010 2:57 PM EST reply actions  

Hamilton

was a tackle, if I remember correctly.

by Ed Valentine on Jan 13, 2010 3:07 PM EST up reply actions  

Hamilton was an End in the 3-4 his first few years

he converted to DT when the switched to a 4-3

He was effective at both positions. Though I’m not sure what his sack total was in 1991, was he even on the team then or was he drafted in 92?

by Landeta on Jan 14, 2010 8:41 AM EST up reply actions  

Then I'm wrong

I thought he was and end in 91 and move to tackle when the Giants went 4-3

by RickJS on Jan 13, 2010 3:10 PM EST reply actions  

I found the answer to my question about Hamilton

Michael Eisen from Giants.com mentions in an article that Hamilton was an End from 92-94 and then moved to DT and 95. He recorded 11.5 sacks in 93 as an End.

http://www.giants.com/news/headlines/story.asp?story_id=384

by RickJS on Jan 13, 2010 3:27 PM EST reply actions  

Nice

I had forgotten that. I always think of him playing inside.

by Ed Valentine on Jan 13, 2010 3:40 PM EST up reply actions  

Just play solid D.

I’m going to get out my Beam, have a drink(s), and watch the ’07 DVD when I get outta here. I think I recall Spags sending 5 DLs many times during that amazing season. I remember Tuck and Kiwi rushing up the middle from a stand. Sheridan sucked at the coordinator spot. Spags was great at managing our D and making it happen. Sticking with the 4-3 and hopefully our new Defensive Mastermind will have the smarts and imagination to keep Romo, McNabb, Farve and others running for their lives. We will be back next year.

by Last year in Sec 127 on Jan 13, 2010 4:19 PM EST reply actions  

Just read Hastlett is going to Skins. Why doesn't anyone want our DC position?

Hastlett picks skins (not that he was my choice.) Fewell looks like he’s favoring Bears.
Crennel goes to Chiefs. The question is: why turn up your nose at the coaching in the biggest market? I’m telling you, Sheridan was a fall guy for declining talent. The other coaches see it. Otherwise they’d jump at a chance to coach a team only two years removed form a SB, one year from 12-4, five months from 5-0. It’s our effen players. Sheridan wasn’t good enough to overcome deficient talent. Or his own shortcomings. Looks like lots of other people, in the know, see that, know that, and are going elsewhere.

by ZILLAG on Jan 13, 2010 4:26 PM EST reply actions  

Are you being serious?

Crennel obviously didn’t go to the Chiefs because they have so much more talent to work with than the Giants. Do you even know if any of these guys got offers from the Giants or what the size of those offers was? Do you think every coach’s number one priority is to coach in the biggest market possible? Maybe guys don’t want to work with Coughlin. I think the decision about where to coach is a lot more complicated than you are suggesting.

by Tucker Fredrickson on Jan 13, 2010 5:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Coughlin

is reportedly very demanding on assistants. I can see guys who have been head coaches like Crennel or Haslett not wanting to deal with the demands of a TC, especially when they can get big money elsewhere. Fewell might be different. He is, obviously, conflicted. We’ll see.

by Ed Valentine on Jan 13, 2010 5:17 PM EST up reply actions  

Good points

Some people might want to avoid the job feeling that Sheridan didn’t get a fair chance with injuries or want to deal with the media.

by The Curse on Jan 13, 2010 5:25 PM EST up reply actions  

not at all....

I highly doubt that.

Haslett and Crennel were just names.

Fewell is basically the only legit candidate so far. If he passes up the Giants, its more cuz Lovie’s hot-seat is hotter then Coughlin’s, and Fewell would likely be a coach in waiting there.

Declining talent is what you call aging players. That’s what you call the NE Patriot defense in 2008.

There is not declining talent in NY. Guys like Pierce and Danny Clark..OK yea, that’s declining talent.

But guys who are injured all year is not declining talent. Its bad luck.

Haslett probably got a ton of money to go coach in WAS anyway. He’s not good enough for what his contract likely will be.

Crennel wanted to go work for his old boss. CRENNEL CONTACTED THE GIANTS FIRST. He found out he was a candidate in KC. Gets to BBQ with Weis now too.

These guys aren’t serious candidates.

Fewell is a semi-serious one. I don’t get the vibes the Giants have him as their #1.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 5:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Keep in mind

coahing in Chicago and Washington are not crap jobs in fact those are two organizations that can compete very well with the Giants in terms of Market and history.

Crennel has ties to KC. . . Peoli, and he’s in his 60’s and does not want to work the long hours TC demands of his assistants.

by Landeta on Jan 14, 2010 8:45 AM EST up reply actions  

To add a little more info to the debate

people might want to check out football outsiders stats on qb hits

www.footballoutsiders.com/extrapoints/2010/stat-day-qb-hits

Kiwanuka led the league with 19 and Osi had 13, also putting him among the leaders. It’s not as if these guys weren’t getting any rush at all. They were often close, they just couldn’t seal the deal. I have to think that with even a little more push up the middle, a fair number of those hits would have turned into sacks.

by Tucker Fredrickson on Jan 13, 2010 4:28 PM EST reply actions  

That is a fair point

With no push from the DTs quarterbacks could just step up and let the ends go around.

by Ed Valentine on Jan 13, 2010 4:31 PM EST up reply actions  

of course.

you can tell cuz the QB was always getting up after a pass.

The key is that inside rush. That key..like in 2008, was Justin Tuck.

Tuck’s hurt, no pass rush.

I think Canty’s capable of doing that..but he was hurt too. Alford is capable of that too..but he didn’t play a down.

While I wouldn’t be against drafting a DT..maybe even in round 1….its not unfathomable that simply these guys coming back to health could solve the entire pass rush situation.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 5:09 PM EST up reply actions  

I agree

but, can you really count on it? Some fresh blood at the tackle position wouldn’t hurt either.

by Tucker Fredrickson on Jan 13, 2010 5:16 PM EST up reply actions  

no doubt.

that’s why I’m not against a 1st round DT.

Someone in the 2nd-5th range…could work too.

Someone like the next Alford. Just an extra body with some speed in there.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 5:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Agree about Tuck

disagree about Canty

He can’t generate a pass rush, he’s never been that type of player. Hopefully he’ll play the run better in 2010 but thats it.

by Landeta on Jan 14, 2010 8:47 AM EST up reply actions  

I meant Canty can be a good pass rusher in the 4-3 DT scheme.

3-4 DE..no.

He ties up blockers well tho and makes those around him better.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 14, 2010 8:56 AM EST up reply actions  

My only concern with the 3-4 is

that our offense is ready to contend now… If we take 2 years transitioning to a 3-4 then we stand the chance that our offense will be ready for some rebuilding (especially on the Oline and RB). Get the 4-3 defense back to flying to the ball and upgrade the secondary and get on with another Superbowl..

by NYGIANTSGW on Jan 13, 2010 5:27 PM EST reply actions  

Interesting stat

I don’t know if you guys saw this yet but look at these stats about CB’s against the run.

Look at whose at the top of the list.

by rozzz5 on Jan 13, 2010 6:22 PM EST reply actions  

cost is the biggest problem

Assuming we’re still playing with a cap. There are maybe 5 Ticonderoga-Class NT’s capable anchoring a 3-4 D. Once they have success, they are going to be expensive. The other key is because LB’s are more expensive then lineman you have to have 1) Balls of steel to cut veterans, and 2) great drafts where you reload those guys with cheaper rookies. This is what the steelers do, but it requires a lot of discipline, and analysis of LB’s, which is not the Giants strong suit it seems say.

by queler on Jan 13, 2010 6:46 PM EST reply actions  

The reason linebackers cost more is because they are more versatile than linemen.

They can drop back in coverage, run down a tight end, chase a quarterback down from behind, and still mix it up fairly well with offensive linemen.

I think we got a good look at what happens when a lineman tries to drop back when Canty was wallowing around downfield this year.

by giant fan since 57 on Jan 13, 2010 7:48 PM EST reply actions  

Why

are we looking to blow up the ship after one bad season. We still have the same core of D players that comprised a good D the last 2 seasons. What changed? We had a lousy D Coord. That along with a boat load of injuries on D.

by FrankB0318 on Jan 13, 2010 8:15 PM EST reply actions  

exactly

a 4-3 has plenty of advantages compared to the 3-4.

by mclaren_is_the_best on Jan 13, 2010 8:35 PM EST up reply actions  

who's blowing up the ship?

Tuck playing inside is nothing new.

Osi and Kiwi flying upfield with their heads chopped off is nothing new.

The Giants needing a big fat stout DT is nothing new.

….what are we blowing up?

Just cuz these guys played in one system, doesn’t mean they haven’t been figured out in that system.

Just cuz they haven’t played in it…doesn’t mean that it doesn’t make sense…cuz like I mentioned a few lines above, it might just be what suits them best.

They can find a fat in the draft.

They can find a ILB.

Hell…in the 3-4, it might even make Antonio Pierce useful again…ILB’s don’t have to be extremely fast in the 3-4.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 8:40 PM EST up reply actions  

AP is going to be even worse in a 3-4

they are going to run directly at him every play and theres nothing he can do against those big guards.

by mclaren_is_the_best on Jan 13, 2010 8:45 PM EST up reply actions  

?

the point of the 3-4 is the large people in front tie up the blockers.

Also the deception of who is going where.

Not every 3-4 team is like the 1986 Giants.

Teddy Bruschi played for how long? I doubt he was faster or stronger or quicker then AP.

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 8:48 PM EST up reply actions  

That maybe the point

but in reality against a 3-4 Defense guards and tackles often find themselfs blocking linebackers in the 2nd level.

Don’t forget that Olineman are actually bigger than Dlineman often so you don’t really see these fantasies where you have 3 people plugging up the holes of all 5 Olineman.

But Bruschi was definitely bigger than AP he was a DEnd in college.

by mclaren_is_the_best on Jan 13, 2010 9:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Fantasies?

nope….again, that’s the point. The 3 DT’s..sometimes 2, force the 5 OL’s to block them.

If the NT is any good, he’s gonna require 2. Canty always required 2 blockers too with Dallas.

That leaves Tuck one on one with a OT. He’d dream for that. Osi, Kiwi or Sintim one on one with a TE/RB/FB. Kiwi and Osi would dream for that.

And don’t give me Bruschi was bigger. He was 6’1 245. Pierce is that big.

And Elvis Dumervil was a DE in college. He’s 5"11 240lbs

How come China can't vote David Lee for All-Star?

by FreeBradshaw on Jan 13, 2010 9:56 PM EST up reply actions  

Umm?

Yeah that is a fantasy…. This ain’t the 80s. Have you seen any team ever even try blocking Dware or James Harrison with a TE / RB? I will answer that for you – No. Its still the OT’s that are blocking the OLB and the interior lineman blocking the DE’s. Most 3-4 ends are not good pass rushers anyway so in pass protection they only put a G or C on them. In run blocking that is why some teams use zone blocking schemes against 3-4 defenses to make it easier to move the Dlineman and get the other Olineman to block the linebackers on the 2nd level.

by mclaren_is_the_best on Jan 14, 2010 12:19 AM EST up reply actions  

Also Dumervil is a OLB now and he stinks against the run exactly because he is so small

He doesn’t have anything to do with Bruschi or AP

by mclaren_is_the_best on Jan 14, 2010 12:51 AM EST up reply actions  

But he's made to be a pass rusher and coverage guy.

Look at his stats this year. Speak for themselves.

"The Dallas Cowboys might be America's Team, but the New York Giants are America's DREAM team." -- Robert Tisch

by xMattex on Jan 14, 2010 6:56 AM EST up reply actions  

LB's have to better at shedding blockers in the 3-4

as compared to 4-3

A lot of good LB’s struggle with this. John Vilma could not do it at all with the Jets thats why he’s in NO

I doubt AP who’s undersized as it is will be good at it in a 3-4.

by Landeta on Jan 14, 2010 8:50 AM EST up reply actions  

I agree..Our defense needs coaching..it is not broke..this 3-4 talk is nuts..

Tuck and Osi wouldn’t last three games inside..and we have no NT which is the key to a 3-4…Any talk of changing to a 3-4 is just talk..

by Bobbiblue on Jan 14, 2010 3:58 AM EST up reply actions  

That was great.

Thanks to Dave and Faz for a really entertaining and informative piece. I think I am now convinced that the road to a successful 3-4 would be long and hard, and not suited to the players we have currently. The guys played well as a 4-3 unit in the past, they have pedigree, so let’s get them some help and a decent DC and off we go … SB next season.

He was like a god walking amongst mere mortals. He had a voice that could make a wolverine purr and suits so fine they made Sinatra look like a hobo.

by Johannus on Jan 14, 2010 2:57 AM EST reply actions  

WTF

Just read some of the other posts. What .. is Faz not a real person? Like BS not being a real DC. This is the second time that I have been suckered by stories on BBV, I will have to be much more skeptical in future. Next you will be telling me that FreeBradshaw in not excitable, and G-Man in England is a Frenchie.

He was like a god walking amongst mere mortals. He had a voice that could make a wolverine purr and suits so fine they made Sinatra look like a hobo.

by Johannus on Jan 14, 2010 3:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Johannus

He is very real and may be appearing in a new post soon. A tampa 2 debate in honor of Fewell.

by David Jacks on Jan 14, 2010 8:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Don't be concerned Johannus..

Free is for real he counts draft picks to fall asleep, and G-Man is not arrogant enough to be a Frenchie, plus he can spell.

by Bobbiblue on Jan 14, 2010 11:28 PM EST up reply actions  

I have an idea...

Lets have our DL’s occupy the blockers the our super-athletic LB’s can fly around and make plays!!!!

NOT

by dubsrub on Jan 14, 2010 2:15 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Big Blue View is the best independent site on the Internet for year-round news and discussion about the New York Giants.

Community Guidelines
Start posting about the Giants »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Plaxshittin_small
Giants Fandom in Pictures
Perry2_small
Eli Manning is Elite.

Recent FanPosts

Small
The Giants are Changing, for Better or Worse
Small
The 2010 Giants, Contender or 2009 all over??
Images_small
JPP and Joseph - Contract game
Images_small
Rookie Hazing
Small
DO WE HAVE A GAME BREAKER?
All-pro-football-jerseys_2095_31376433_small
Training Camp Battles
Small
Imagine the havoc
Sp_strahan_small
Keith BULLUCK
All-pro-football-jerseys_2095_31376433_small
NYG Sign Keith Bullock

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

SPONSORS

Get Your Giants' Gear

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Washington Redskins defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth signs autographs during the NFL football team's training camp and fan appreciation day, Saturday, Aug. 8, 2009, at Redskins Park in Ashburn, Va. (AP Photo/Nick Wass) +3 updates

NFL Training Camps News: Albert Haynesworth Fails Conditioning Test

Photo +9 updates

Giants Waive Chad Jones, Likely To Return After Clearing Waivers

FILE -- This is a Feb. 3, 2008, file photo showing New York Giants receiver David Tyree (85) catching a 32-yard pass in the clutches of New England Patriots safety Rodney Harrison (37) during the fourth quarter of Super Bowl XLII in Glendale, Ariz. Tyree is back in the NFL, hopeful his health won't be an issue in his quest to earn another Super Bowl ring, this time with the Baltimore Ravens. (AP Photo/Gene Puskar, File) +1 updates

David Tyree To Re-Sign With, Retire As A Giant

More from SBNation.com >


Editor-In-Chief

Ed_valentine_2_small Ed Valentine

Editors

Blueshirt_banter_small Jim Schmiedeberg

Small brisulph

Authors

Tyree_believe_small cjmulrain