News: FWST: Garrett, Marinelli not happy with defense

[BoysFan4ever]

The tackling comment was interesting. This team has tackled poorly for many years.

 

[Bizwah]

Yes, the Cowboys were missing a number of starters on defense. That is a fact that should be considered in any appraisal of team performance last night.

However, according to the coaching staff, the success of this defense is going to be predicated on the depth of the defensive line and sending "waves" after the offense. That was our depth that was torn apart like wet tissue paper last night.

I don't think you understand depth (you aren't alone). Depth doesn't mean that your second and third stringers can all come in together and play well. Again, we were without a ton of starters and their backups. We played raw, young guys almost the whole game against the top lineup players from the cChargers.

We started:
Crawford, Hayden, Coleman,and Mincey. Of those players, I really think Crawford is the only one the coaches were hoping to start.
We then brought in these guys for the second wave:
Wilson, Bishop, Coleman, and Rayford. Now, if these players make the team, it will be as spot duty players.

I believe we were hoping to start this way for the beginning. Of the season:
Crawford, McClain, Melton, and Lawrence.
This would've been the second wave:
Selvie, Hayden, Coleman, and Mincey. This doesn't include Spencer or Brent. Now, is this DL better than what we put out there last night? Yes.....and with all those players injured or sitting, the "waves" of DL naturally wasn't going to happen.

Every year when we get hit with our cluster injuries and start guys that are 3 or 4 on the depth chart....or even further down...we have people lament our "lack of depth". No thought is given to the fact that most teams would suffer if playing their entire second OL, or their 3 and 4 CBs were starters.

We have good depth at RB, IMO. We could survive without Murray. We've done it before. But if we also lost Dunbar and Randle/Williams, and had to start Malena we would suffer. Invariably someone would make some quip saying, "where's all this depth at RB we were supposed to have"?

 

[peplaw06]

The overreaction to the first preseason game of the year played by a defense minus 5 starters and the rest only playing for a series, is predictable but laughable.

In order for it to be an overreaction, I would need to know that someone changed their opinion based on last night's game. If someone wasn't concerned about the defense, but is now, then you might say overreaction. If someone was already concerned and it's just a matter that the game didn't assuage any concerns, then that's not an overreaction IMO.

 

[Rockport]

In order for it to be an overreaction, I would need to know that someone changed their opinion based on last night's game. If someone wasn't concerned about the defense, but is now, then you might say overreaction. If someone was already concerned and it's just a matter that the game didn't assuage any concerns, then that's not an overreaction IMO.

SMH. Just look at all the negative posts being made about the defense. That's the overreaction I'm talking about. I hope that's clear to you now. SMH.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

I don't think you understand depth (you aren't alone). Depth doesn't mean that your second and third stringers can all come in together and play well. Again, we were without a ton of starters and their backups. We played raw, young guys almost the whole game against the top lineup players from the cChargers.

To have good depth, a team must have backup players winning their one-on-one battles even if the defense as a whole is playing poorly. As Garrett and Marinelli have conceded, the play was poor across the board in the front seven. No one was shedding blocks, and the gap control was abysmal at every level. This defense is predicated on having seven or eight linemen who play substantial minutes, not having four guys who take 90 percent of the snaps.

 

[Bizwah]

To have good depth, a team must have backup players winning their one-on-one battles even if the defense as a whole is playing poorly. As Garrett and Marinelli have conceded, the play was poor across the board in the front seven. No one was shedding blocks, and the gap control was abysmal at every level. This defense is predicated on having seven or eight linemen who play substantial minutes, not having four guys who take 90 percent of the snaps.

I agree it was poor, but how can you judge depth when we had 27 players sitting? My point is, when you play the guys at the bottom of the depth chart as early as we did, then you'll see poor play. Those players are 3 and 4th string players for a reason.

Now, I'm willing to wait a bit before railing on the defense too much. I want to see the starters play first, followed by the second string and so forth. That's the natural progression that was so disrupted last night.

I was bothered by last night...no mistake about that...but I'm willing to give us the benefit of a doubt for a couple more games. And, if we show no improvement after our first and second stringers play more minutes, then I'll prepare myself for a long season.

 

[Corso]

I'm starting to think the same way. Hey, it's all great and good and stuff that you want your "rushmen" to get after the passer. But doing so at the expense of getting completely gouged in the run game isn't the answer.

And all these comments about having Crawford moving into DT when he should be focusing on DE. Saying Mincey could be effective at DT when he isn't even effective at DE. Playing Rayford at DT and some of the new DEs at DT.

I know he wants speed guys that can get penetration. But speed guys aren't especially suited to take on 320lb guards and double teams all game. There is also a question about how these smaller type players can hold up, not only during a game, but all season. I get the feeling that Crawford is NOT on board with all the moving around. And I'm sure he's not the only one.

Poignant and excellent post.

 

[Dodger12]

I predict we will force an incompletion once our starting CBs are back.

After how many games? I may just take you up on that........

 

[peplaw06]

SMH. Just look at all the negative posts being made about the defense. That's the overreaction I'm talking about. I hope that's clear to you now. SMH.

How is it an overreaction to be negative about the defense when the coach and DC were negative about the defense and we're coming off the worst defensive performance in franchise history?

It's not a clean slate you're working with here. You can glean something from the lack of performance of the guys who are holdovers on the roster.

If you aren't at least somewhat concerned about the prospects of the defense based on recent history, then I'd have to question your sanity.

 

[Rockport]

How is it an overreaction to be negative about the defense when the coach and DC were negative about the defense and we're coming off the worst defensive performance in franchise history?

It's not a clean slate you're working with here. You can glean something from the lack of performance of the guys who are holdovers on the roster.

If you aren't at least somewhat concerned about the prospects of the defense based on recent history, then I'd have to question your sanity.

The coaches were upset with the defense with 5 starters missing and the rest only playing a series. They aren't upset with the defense that's projected to start on opening day at least not yet. Big difference. And of course I'm worried about our defense. Never said I wasn't. I'm just saying laymen fans like yourself are freaking out over a defense that you will never see come opening day.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

the first preseason is not a game that tells a story about a offense or an defense.
That first game is to train the team to line up correctly and try to run some plays, that's all.

The BIG news is no major injuries occurred. Period. Pointe Blanc.

I'm not willing to analyze nuthing until the first half of the last preseason game. And even then, it will be a dress rehearsal.

No major injuries occurred, but we had:

Romo
Murray
Claiborne
Johnson
Church
Lee
Lawrence

and many others....

out due to injury.

I have yet to see any evidence whatsoever that the Coachie McClapper and Woicik will *ever* field a reasonably healthy squad on the field.






YR

 

[peplaw06]

The coaches were upset with the defense with 5 starters missing and the rest only playing a series. They aren't upset with the defense that's projected to start on opening day at least not yet. Big difference.

Oh, did they qualify it like you just did? No. They said that we didn't tackle well, couldn't get off blocks, and didn't make enough stops.

There's nothing in this article that says that they were giving the defense a pass because they didn't have all their projected starters going. That's an excuse you're giving so you can blissfully ignore the problems we have.

And of course I'm worried about our defense. Never said I wasn't.

If that's true, then why are you in here insulting people who are expressing their worries?

I'm just saying laymen fans like yourself are freaking out over a defense that you will never see come opening day.

LOL. Laymen fans. Like you're something above a layman. I think the only person in here freaking out is you because people are voicing their legitimate concerns... apparently you share concerns, but are scared to talk about them.

But by all means, continue insulting the intelligence of those who are voicing the concerns you share.

 

[Rockport]

Oh, did they qualify it like you just did? No. They said that we didn't tackle well, couldn't get off blocks, and didn't make enough stops.

There's nothing in this article that says that they were giving the defense a pass because they didn't have all their projected starters going. That's an excuse you're giving so you can blissfully ignore the problems we have.

If that's true, then why are you in here insulting people who are expressing their worries?

LOL. Laymen fans. Like you're something above a layman. I think the only person in here freaking out is you because people are voicing their legitimate concerns... apparently you share concerns, but are scared to talk about them.

But by all means, continue insulting the intelligence of those who are voicing the concerns you share.

I'm smart enough to know that it's the first pre-season game of the year where the starters don't play for just a series and we had 5 starters on defense not play at all.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

No major injuries occurred, but we had:

Romo
Murray
Claiborne
Johnson
Church
Lee
Lawrence

and many others....

out due to injury.

I have yet to see any evidence whatsoever that the Coachie McClapper and Woicik will *ever* field a reasonably healthy squad on the field.






YR

Let me rephraze the comment: The BIG news is no major injuries occurred in THIS GAME.

 

[ConstantReboot]

I'm starting to think the same way. Hey, it's all great and good and stuff that you want your "rushmen" to get after the passer. But doing so at the expense of getting completely gouged in the run game isn't the answer.

And all these comments about having Crawford moving into DT when he should be focusing on DE. Saying Mincey could be effective at DT when he isn't even effective at DE. Playing Rayford at DT and some of the new DEs at DT.

I know he wants speed guys that can get penetration. But speed guys aren't especially suited to take on 320lb guards and double teams all game. There is also a question about how these smaller type players can hold up, not only during a game, but all season. I get the feeling that Crawford is NOT on board with all the moving around. And I'm sure he's not the only one.

This just baffles me why were doing this. We have a plethora of DTs and not enough run stuffers. Yet they want to move these DEs into positions that they're going to be tossed like rag dolls. I don't understand why this is being done and it seems to be counterproductive especially when we don't have enough edger ushers.

 

[peplaw06]

I'm smart enough to know that it's the first pre-season game of the year where the starters don't play for just a series and we had 5 starters on defense not play at all.

And?

You've done nothing but state the obvious. It's certainly not something that evidences you have any more expertise than I do.

You said yourself you have concerns about the defense... Are we supposed to ignore the concerns that were evident last night just because it was a preseason game?

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Um, don't you mean LAYPERSON fan? Some of you need to check your male privilege.

 

[Western]

It is a talent acquisition business.
They have acquired no significant upgrades on the defensive side of the ball with the losses of Lee, Hatcher, & Ware (not to mention that the secondary is comprised of injured players).

The notion that the Tyrone Crawford's, the Jeremy Mincey's, or the Ben Bass's are the missing pieces to an all-world defensive unit is naive.

Given the abysmal performance of last year's defensive unit combined with no noteworthy replacements of substance, the 2014 defensive unit could equal last year's sad production or even worst, produce a more ghastly result.

When Marinelli had the likes of Derrick Brooks, Warren Sapp, "Booger" McFarland & John Lynch in Tampa Bay or Brian Urlacher, Tommie Harris, Charles Tillman, Lance Briggs & Julius Peppers in Chicago, he looked invincible.
But in Detroit, when Marinelli had the likes of Chuck Darby, Langston Moore, Dewayne White and Darnell Bing, his defensive units performance were poor.

Sometimes at the end of the day, Talent matters.

 

[silver]

Sometimes at the end of the day, Talent matters.

always, not sometimes, always matters. The OL looks good now with 4 first rounders, is not that complicated. We have a bunch of undrafted free agents and castoffs on defense. No wonder Jerry wants Brent to be cleared and McClain to be eased back, we're hurting for talent on defense. The talent we have acquired like Carr, Claiborne, Carter, Lee & Lawrence has yet to pan out. Maybe it will, maybe it wont. In the meantime we need castoffs like Hayden, Selvie and Wilson to hold the fort. That's too many sub-par players to hide on defense. You can hide maybe one Larry Brown in a great defense. But you cant have 8 out of 11 guys from the scrap heap.

 

[jobberone]

Gap control was a major problem last year too,i think its partly the scheme.

I so. Anytime you shoot gaps you can over run the play.