Who is our weakest Link?

[03EBZ06]

I think a guy like T.O. may be an emotional leader, funny as it may sound intially but he's known to get teammates jacked up...

When things are going well, he does get fired up. However, when things aren't going well, he tends to sulk, whine, and be argumentative, traits that are detrimental to overcome failures. A good leader motivates others regardless of challenge, not just when things are going your way.

IMO, TO will never be a leader until he truely believes in team concept and puts the team above his goals.

 

[Hostile]

This brings up an interesting point.

It is pretty much a widely held belief that Bill Parcells held them back. I don't buy it, but that is besides the point.

Has anyone asked why he did this? Why would he hold them back?

The answer is simple. To protect them from adversity. If you play conservative, there is less opportunity, in concept, to make an error. And even when we made mistakes, they were crippling. It is about trust. Now, perhaps he could have thrown them a little more faith, but there is probably a good reason why he did not. That is what I would like to know. If trust was a problem, why? It is entirely possible that since he saw these players every day, spoke with them and knew them, that he saw things that pushed him to minimize risk. Remember, we took a lot of risks in 2003. It did not exactly pay off in spades that year either.

We will see what "full throttle" looks like. I just question if mentally we have the ability to overcome mistakes because playing aggressive defense will cause a few.

I don't buy the idea that Parcells held them back either, but I do think he was afraid to think outside his game plan and adjust. After the whipping by the Saints he didn't do anything and we had guys like Jon Kitna and Mike Furrey of the 3 win Detroit Lions laughing at how predictable we were. Who was that on if not Parcells? It was his game plans.

If I am a player I don't want to be "protected." The very idea is appalling to me. Win or lose, I want you to react to me and my strengths, not me reacting to yours. It is ignorant to me to put a guy in deep coverage who is a liability in deep coverage but a force to be reckoned with nearer the LOS and over the middle. It is ignorant to me to not adjust to a dump off pass to a FB and leaving your play calling ILB exposed to that play. It is ignorant to me to have your best pass rusher 20 yards downfield in coverage while the QB surveys the field because no one is in his face.

Regardless of the legend that is Bill Parcells (and trust me I do respect his legend and his eye for the game) he did not have this team prepared to win. Some of that is on the players and I am speaking to this and pointing fingers at them when I say there is no leader. Parcells wanted it that way. He wanted to be the "face of the franchise." Fine, then be the big, bad, scary son of a biscuit eater that makes the other teams react to what you are doing. We never did that.

Our team was more frightened of Parcells than the teams we were playing.

That doesn't work.

All 4 of Parcells years here we went 2-3 after Thanksgiving, and each year we gave up more points than the year before. This with a Head Coach whose legend is that his defenses are solid. I won't miss that. I hope.

 

[carphalen5150]

That's not exactly true. For most of the season, we didn't give up many. When they did happen, they came in bunches. In other words, once we started giving them up we showed absolutely no ability to shake it off and overcome. We just got that deer in the headlights look in our eyes and got steamrolled.

OK...so then tell me how this is going to be different with a more aggressive defense?

Also, with a more aggressive defense we should create more opportunites to get to the QB and create turnovers. So opposing offenses will have to overcome as well.

 

[Alexander]

OK...so then tell me how this is going to be different with a more aggressive defense?

Also, with a more aggressive defense we should create more opportunites to get to the QB and create turnovers. So opposing offenses will have to overcome as well.

A little known fact is that San Diego had pretty much the same turnover production as our maligned defense had last year. So it is not like it is a proven concept. The Chargers offense also scored a lot of points and allowed for the aggressive nature on defense. Too much aggression causes 35-31 shootouts and is exciting, but won't win you championships.

The negative yards aspect is what will change. A 2nd and 10 after an incompletion is better than a 2nd and 20 with even more pressure.

It is not just the turnovers as I don't think they will change much. We will probably give up more big plays and more yardage. But the pressure will be what is key.

 

[Stautner]

I see your points about weak links and question marks.

Fullback is a weak link. The rest is more question marks.

No, I was just not looking at Witten. It is depth at tight end. The #3 guy can be a good tool in goal line situations. A good offense will face a lot of goal line situations and having a good group of tight ends can be a key to scoring in those situations. I did not see that as a strength last season. Hopefully it is stronger this year.

I suppose FB does have to be considered a weak link for the moment, but at least Deon Anderson gives us hope. Even so, Deon goes beyond an unknown - unlike the discussion about Davis, who we know to be capable at the NFL level, we haven't seen Deon yet, and he is a late pick, so we don't even know if he's capable of making the team. I think it goes without saying that if we end up stuck with Polite then there is no hope for the position to be strong.

 

[Hostile]

A little known fact is that San Diego had pretty much the same turnover production as our maligned defense had last year. So it is not like it is a proven concept.

The negative yards aspect is what will change. A 2nd and 10 after an incompletion is better than a 2nd and 20 with even more pressure.

It is not just the turnovers as I don't think they will change much. We will probably give up more big plays and more yardage. But the pressure will be what is key.

Great post. It's right in every way. I'm not some pie in the sky Pollyanna who believes every flaw will be fixed simply because we are more aggressive. I just like the idea of the excitement that will come with it. I'd be perfectly willing to have a conservative defense if we had guys like Everson Walls who simply stole the ball all the time and we held teams to few points.

 

[carphalen5150]

A little known fact is that San Diego had pretty much the same turnover production as our maligned defense had last year. So it is not like it is a proven concept. The Chargers offense also scored a lot of points and allowed for the aggressive nature on defense. Too much aggression causes 35-31 shootouts and is exciting, but won't win you championships.

The negative yards aspect is what will change. A 2nd and 10 after an incompletion is better than a 2nd and 20 with even more pressure.

It is not just the turnovers as I don't think they will change much. We will probably give up more big plays and more yardage. But the pressure will be what is key.

We scored alot of points last year, so our defense will be allowed an aggressive nature as well.

The nature of the turnovers will change though. They will be pressured TOs that should lead to big plays. I just see more off the back foot type interceptions, QB fumbles, and the type that leads to TD returns or great field position.

 

[AbeBeta]

To play devil's advocate. What if we didn't play a "pressure" D last year because the parts weren't there?

I saw one game where we played in attack mode -- that was the Detroit game. What did we see in that game? a) James got destroyed over and over and b) our CBs had a very rough day. Of course, Ware got 3 sacks and narrowly missed 2 others - that'll make some guys happy.

We heard SD front 7 guys bemoning Wade's departure but I didn't hear any of the 2ndary complaining. Maybe we are just trading one problem for another.

 

[Hostile]

To play devil's advocate. What if we didn't play a "pressure" D last year because the parts weren't there?

I saw one game where we played in attack mode -- that was the Detroit game. What did we see in that game? a) James got destroyed over and over and b) our CBs had a very rough day. Of course, Ware got 3 sacks and narrowly missed 2 others - that'll make some guys happy.

We heard SD front 7 guys bemoning Wade's departure but I didn't hear any of the 2ndary complaining. Maybe we are just trading one problem for another.

How in the world was that game "attack mode?"

 

[Stautner]

To play devil's advocate. What if we didn't play a "pressure" D last year because the parts weren't there?

I saw one game where we played in attack mode -- that was the Detroit game. What did we see in that game? a) James got destroyed over and over and b) our CBs had a very rough day. Of course, Ware got 3 sacks and narrowly missed 2 others - that'll make some guys happy.

We heard SD front 7 guys bemoning Wade's departure but I didn't hear any of the 2ndary complaining. Maybe we are just trading one problem for another.

This was similar to the question Alexander brought up earlier.

I suspect we will find that some players excel in the new defense and some get exposed.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

the only time he gets emotional is when he thinks he's not getting the ball enough.

Look over the Carolina game during the comeback. He was talking to the defense after the Witten TD trying to get them fired up.

 

[cowboyfreak]

I don't buy the idea that Parcells held them back either, but I do think he was afraid to think outside his game plan and adjust. After the whipping by the Saints he didn't do anything and we had guys like Jon Kitna and Mike Furrey of the 3 win Detroit Lions laughing at how predictable we were. Who was that on if not Parcells? It was his game plans.

If I am a player I don't want to be "protected." The very idea is appalling to me. Win or lose, I want you to react to me and my strengths, not me reacting to yours. It is ignorant to me to put a guy in deep coverage who is a liability in deep coverage but a force to be reckoned with nearer the LOS and over the middle. It is ignorant to me to not adjust to a dump off pass to a FB and leaving your play calling ILB exposed to that play. It is ignorant to me to have your best pass rusher 20 yards downfield in coverage while the QB surveys the field because no one is in his face.

Regardless of the legend that is Bill Parcells (and trust me I do respect his legend and his eye for the game) he did not have this team prepared to win. Some of that is on the players and I am speaking to this and pointing fingers at them when I say there is no leader. Parcells wanted it that way. He wanted to be the "face of the franchise." Fine, then be the big, bad, scary son of a biscuit eater that makes the other teams react to what you are doing. We never did that.

Our team was more frightened of Parcells than the teams we were playing.

That doesn't work.

All 4 of Parcells years here we went 2-3 after Thanksgiving, and each year we gave up more points than the year before. This with a Head Coach whose legend is that his defenses are solid. I won't miss that. I hope.

Truly excellent post!

 

[AbeBeta]

How in the world was that game "attack mode?"

well for one, Ware was pretty much rushing 100% of the time.

 

[Alexander]

We scored alot of points last year

We now have a first time coordinator in charge. Hopefully, we do not take a step back.

That is the nature of process improvement. Some things have to stay the same when you implement change. If not, then you spend as much time reacting to unknowns as you do improving the process you set out to rectify.

 

[Alexander]

To play devil's advocate. What if we didn't play a "pressure" D last year because the parts weren't there?

I saw one game where we played in attack mode -- that was the Detroit game. What did we see in that game? a) James got destroyed over and over and b) our CBs had a very rough day. Of course, Ware got 3 sacks and narrowly missed 2 others - that'll make some guys happy.

We heard SD front 7 guys bemoning Wade's departure but I didn't hear any of the 2ndary complaining. Maybe we are just trading one problem for another.

Precisely. Everyone is concerned about the front seven and the rush. I think that will probably take care of itself. I don't think Phillips has ever given any reason to doubt that. He has won with far less talent in the front seven than what he is going to inherit here.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

To play devil's advocate. What if we didn't play a "pressure" D last year because the parts weren't there?

I saw one game where we played in attack mode -- that was the Detroit game. What did we see in that game? a) James got destroyed over and over and b) our CBs had a very rough day. Of course, Ware got 3 sacks and narrowly missed 2 others - that'll make some guys happy.

We heard SD front 7 guys bemoning Wade's departure but I didn't hear any of the 2ndary complaining. Maybe we are just trading one problem for another.

what about the Indy game?

 

[carphalen5150]

We now have a first time coordinator in charge. Hopefully, we do not take a step back.

That is the nature of process improvement. Some things have to stay the same when you implement change. If not, then you spend as much time reacting to unknowns as you do improving the process you set out to rectify.

We also have Sparano back, so I really don't think there will be a huge change in the offense.

 

[AbeBeta]

what about the Indy game?

there was some aggression there -- there was also Ware showing exactly why BP wanted him to learn to be a complete player who can get it done in coverage too.

 

[Alexander]

what about the Indy game?

I am going to use a boxing analogy that might clear up some glaring misperceptions people have in regards to our defense.

You can think of the Saints game as a tactical boxing match where they jabbed us in our soft spots until we got split open and then poured it on until the knock out. Each game thereafter followed the same script.

The Colts game was a simple brutal slugfest. The matchups were straight forward and simple. They did not try anything fancy. They lined up, man to man and dared us to knock them out. We happened to play our most aggressive game to date and it worked.

But there was no magic involved. It was just a physical game and the Colts played right into our hands because they did not get very fancy and lined up the same players in the same place and simply dared us to execute better. They were very basic and did not attack the same weaknesses as everyone did post New Orleans. And I am sure that helped out quite a bit. Either they missed it or did not care.

 

[Alexander]

there was some aggression there -- there was also Ware showing exactly why BP wanted him to learn to be a complete player who can get it done in coverage too.

Case in point, he was in coverage on the game winning play where Manning threw the ball away.