Middle of the Field Concerns

[khiladi]

Eli's 2nd throw of the game was a slant to Nicks over the short middle that went for 57 yards. On that drive he also converted a 3rd and 10 to the short middle to Randle for 15 yards.

Not sure what the point is...

Considering it was the first game of the season, let alone first drive the defense had to defense, I'd more likely attribute that to jitters and just getting in the flow of the game than anything else....

At the same time, I do think it's much harder for the middle to be defended than the corners..

 

[reddyuta]

did anybody read the Strum article? punchjudy maybe right in assuming the LBs may be concerned about our patchwork DL.those those 2 pics in the article is not pretty.

http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/n...efensive-debut-wi?blockID=938591&feedID=10194

 

[Future]

That's fine. But that play wasn't the play that burned us every single down.

The slant route killed us. Over and over. That was bc of the linebackers

So if we agree that the TD I mentioned was on the safety, and the blown coverage that lead to the long TD was a blown coverage by a safety, that's pretty significant. Cruz' third TD was also directly over Scandrick, having nothing to do with the LBs. I'd even say that the 57 yard slant, that @Nation mentioned, might have been completed b/c the LBs didnt get a good drop, but poor safety angles are why it went so long.

One of the things that Kiffin preaches is that yards are insignificant, but points matter. The secondary, safeties in particular, were responsible for the majority of points surrendered.

 

[bayeslife]

Giants had 6 plays (I believe) over 20 yards. 1 was the huge screw up on the 70 harder to Cruz.

4 of the other 5 happened in the 4th quarter. In large part due to the soft coverages we ran. It's safe to say we played prevent style defense when we went up 17

They were completing easy passes over the middle as early as the first quarter though.

 

[ric]

That's fine. But that play wasn't the play that burned us every single down.

The slant route killed us. Over and over. That was bc of the linebackers

wasn't the slant but the use of play-action that opened the middle vacated by the linebackers

 

[Nation]

Not sure what the point is...

Considering it was the first game of the season, let alone first drive the defense had to defense, I'd more likely attribute that to jitters and just getting in the flow of the game than anything else....

At the same time, I do think it's much harder for the middle to be defended than the corners..

The point is that it had nothing to do with being in prevent defense

 

[Crown Royal]

Those concerns are legit. The primary weakness of our defensive scheme is up the middle particularly deep. Receivers need to be bumped off their routes or at least delayed. And yes the LBs need a proper drop for the play and defense called. And we have to get to the QB. I think we blitzed 6 once. Not sure that's correct but that's what I remember. That needs to be several times a game if we aren't getting enough pressure and the QB is carving us up. And they have to either sack or disrupt the QB when the opportunity arises.

I felt that Eli was adequately harassed. I said it before the game and I say again here, Eli Manning is possible the hardest pocket QB in the league to bring down. He understands the protection schemes and has the best pocket presence in the league. He knows exactly where to step and how to avoid pressure when it arises. He is excellent in this regard.

By the fourth quarter, though, our lack of depth on the DL showed up. Those guys were gassed. But overall, I felt we did a better job in protection than we have in a long time. The one thing I wish we would do, though, is run more man coverage against teams like NY. We have the DBs to do it.

 

[dallasdave]

Safeties have to work the middle of the field, not just the deep ball.

 

[jobberone]

I felt that Eli was adequately harassed. I said it before the game and I say again here, Eli Manning is possible the hardest pocket QB in the league to bring down. He understands the protection schemes and has the best pocket presence in the league. He knows exactly where to step and how to avoid pressure when it arises. He is excellent in this regard.

By the fourth quarter, though, our lack of depth on the DL showed up. Those guys were gassed. But overall, I felt we did a better job in protection than we have in a long time. The one thing I wish we would do, though, is run more man coverage against teams like NY. We have the DBs to do it.

I completely agree with the latter. That's why I think we should blitz more. It's awful easy for me to say that though and another for you to have a 2-3 score lead, blitz and give up a 20 second TD drive when you're trying hard to burn the clock up. That scheme has to get pressure or the DBs die. Of course you could say that about a lot of defensive schemes I guess.

 

[reddyuta]

I completely agree. That's why I think we should blitz more. It's awful easy for me to say that though and another for you to have a 2-3 score lead, blitz and give up a 20 second TD drive when you're trying hard to burn the clock up. That scheme has to get pressure or the DBs die. Of course you could say that about a lot of defensive schemes I guess.

Agree with this .

 

[blackbull]

I dont really buy into the fact that it was all on the LBs. If you look at the second Cruz TD, where he may or may not have dropped the ball, Lee ran with the TE. That means that the seam route is CLEARLY Allen's responsibility, and he was late getting there.

Anybody can see that was bum Allen's fault

 

[NorthwestDallas40]

did anybody read the Strum article? punchjudy maybe right in assuming the LBs may be concerned about our patchwork DL.those those 2 pics in the article is not pretty.

http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/n...efensive-debut-wi?blockID=938591&feedID=10194

thanks for posting reddyuta. this is a great article. and i agree with punchjudy that our lbs were over aggressive in the run game to help our patchwork DL. hopefully, with spencer back this week, our LBs can be a little more two dimensional.

another interesting part of the article is how claiborne played with his butt to the sidelines expecting help inside by the LBs. during the game, looked like claiborne was the main culprit for the long gain. but it may have been more the LBs not getting depth, Church being sucked in by the play fake, or Allen not coming up quickly enough.

 

[CT Dal Fan]

I remember the first couple of games back in 2009; the pass defense was just awful and everybody was wondering what was wrong. Dallas got it together and allowed the fewest points in the conference. One game isn't a sufficient body of work to start assuming things. In Kiffin I trust to fix this.

 

[Deep_South]

I remember Wade saying our "prevent defense" was nothing more than the basic 3-4 defense.

 

[Teren_Kanan]

I feel like we've been weak to slants and such over the middle for years now. Don't know why but it always seems like when a team goes big on us, it's a pass over the middle.

 

[al124]

did anybody read the Strum article? punchjudy maybe right in assuming the LBs may be concerned about our patchwork DL.those those 2 pics in the article is not pretty.

http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/n...efensive-debut-wi?blockID=938591&feedID=10194

Good find reddyuta. There's no question that our DL is extremely thin. It's the one thing that concerns me the most about this year's team. The scary thing is that we don't really have any answers except to wait for Ratliff to come back. This DL is bound to hit a wall by the end of the season. I hope the FO has a plan.

 

[jobberone]

I'm not exactly happy with the DL but they played a pretty good game. We checked their rushing game and I thought we got decent pressure. If you add Spencer to that group and move Selvie inside on passing downs then I like that a lot. We miss Bass and Crawford though but I think we are much better than I thought we'd be.

 

[KJJ]

I would be more concerned if we hadn't been playing the Giants. They always have really huge plays against us. It doesn't necessarily translate into a weakness against every opponent. Sunday will be interesting.

If bus driver Alex Smith who only passed for 173 yards last week vs JAX carves the Cowboys up for 300+ yards and hits on several big plays down the field there's going to be a lot of concern with the caliber of QB's the Cowboys have coming up this season. They'll be facing Peyton Manning in a few weeks (ouch) along with Drew Brees who put up 440 yards on the Cowboys last season. They'll be facing Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler who played pitch and catch with Brandon Marshall vs the Cowboys last season and they'll be facing Eli again up in NY.

The Cowboys have had issues the past few seasons with pass coverage. It's been one of those negative trends we keep seeing. We're seeing a lot of wide open receivers and we're continuing to see some busted coverages. It's not the amount of passing yards that concerned me last Sunday it was the 4 TD passes that resulted from all those yards. It's one thing to bend but it's another to break. Sunday will be interesting.

 

[Doomsday]

Does it show how Dallas did passing over the middle of the field?

It seems to me like everything in JG's offense is towards the sidelines with very few passes going down the intermediate or deep middle of the field. I would love to know if there are any facts to backup this feeling I have.

 

[Nation]

Does it show how Dallas did passing over the middle of the field?

It seems to me like everything in JG's offense is towards the sidelines with very few passes going down the intermediate or deep middle of the field. I would love to know if there are any facts to backup this feeling I have.

Outside Numbers - Left Side of Field
Minus Yards: 3 for 3 for 10 Yards
0-9 Yards: 4 for 6, 24 Yards, 1 INT
10-19 Yards: 0 for 2
20 Yards+: 0 for 1

Middle of the Field
Minus Yards: 5 for 6, 11 Yards
0-9 Yards: 18 for 19, 149 Yards, 1 TD
10-19 Yards: 2 for 5, 41 Yards
20 Yards+: 1 for 2, 15 Yards

Outside Numbers - Right Side of Field
Minus Yards: No Attempts
0-9 Yards: 3 for 3, 13 Yards
10-19 Yards: No Attempts
20 Yards+: No Attempts