The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

[xwalker]

You can play semantic games all you like between a "pass" (cutting slack) and "free pass" (completely absolving). The bottom line of my original posts was that our DTs were a big part of our overall failures against stopping the run. You can blame Crawford as much or as little as you want. Either way, Marrinelli needs to address this.

Wrong.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Your stubborness is blinding you. You know the answers but would rather act ignorant. Go play your games with someone else.

I have no allegiance to Marinelli or the player. My concern is you stated something as fact. I asked to see your source. And now, after not showing me something which supports your original comments, you act like someone threw mud on your culottes.

Duly noted your "facts" are from here on just opinions with window dressing.

 

[xwalker]

As unproductuve as Heath was, you have to blame the interior linemen (except Crawford, who played well in limited snaps) for our poor performance against the run. You can also toss some shade at LVE for freelancing too much and getting caught out of position. Hopefully having Crawford back there more frequently will help, but a bunch of guys you are counting on to provide minutes and depth, did not play well. The Giants have an improved OLine (and maybe this performance won't look so bad as the season goes on), but there is no excuse for the way a number of DT's got blown off the ball.

The 59 yard run was outside the DE. Nothing DTs can do about that.

All other runs by Barkley totaled 61 yards.

 

[xwalker]

Crawford only played about 40% of the snaps. Of those limited snaps, he actually was used more against the pass than the run, so I'm not sure how you can assess much if any blame to him for the poor run perfomance of this team. When our most productive tackler at DT amassed only two tackles, you can be sure that the DTs did very little to slow Saquon down. The war on the run starts in the trenches and our foot soliders played like cr@p against the Giants.

Crawford played a significant number of his snaps at DT.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

And our S's have sucked even worse.

The combo that mostly works to get teams to the super bowl is decent CB's and great S's.

rams? new England? I wouldn't say Chung is great. eagles? falcons? not really great safties anywhere.

 

[kskboys]

rams? new England? I wouldn't say Chung is great. eagles? falcons? not really great safties anywhere.

Au contraire. Rams: Joyner is a stud, Johnson is an ascending talent.
Falcons: Neal/Allen, very good S combo.
Eagles: Malcolm Jenkins is a stud, Mcleod is very good. Considered one of the best S tandems in the NFL.
Pats: McCourty one of the best centerfielders in the game, Chung is solid.

I'm actually curious as to why you'd even say that. Lack of name recognition? Because every one of the teams you named has quality S's.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Au contraire. Rams: Joyner is a stud, Johnson is an ascending talent.
Falcons: Neal/Allen, very good S combo.
Eagles: Malcolm Jenkins is a stud, Mcleod is very good. Considered one of the best S tandems in the NFL.
Pats: McCourty one of the best centerfielders in the game, Chung is solid.

I'm actually curious as to why you'd even say that. Lack of name recognition? Because every one of the teams you named has quality S's.

sorry you said great previously. they maybe good, great they are not. solid they maybe, great they are not. very good S combo!!! now you are giving opinions....

ok, let me say it again, we may disagree in what we feel is a more important position on a defense. I think CB, you think safety, we both agree you need the right combination. if there is one weak spot on the defense, in the NFL they will eventually expose it...you can't hide in the film.....

with that said, the market says CB is a more important position given they make more money than Safetys and their average salaries are higher. I don't say that. the market does.

 

[kskboys]

sorry you said great previously. they maybe good, great they are not. solid they maybe, great they are not. very good S combo!!! now you are giving opinions....

ok, let me say it again, we may disagree in what we feel is a more important position on a defense. I think CB, you think safety, we both agree you need the right combination. if there is one weak spot on the defense, in the NFL they will eventually expose it...you can't hide in the film.....

with that said, the market says CB is a more important position given they make more money than Safetys and their average salaries are higher. I don't say that. the market does.

Just a trend.

Problem is, weak S's negate good CB play.