Worried about this defense

[Risen Star]

The defense's performance was a direct result of ignoring accumalting talent in the trenches. We'll have to outscore most teams to win. Any injuries along the OL will hurt us badly.

Exactly right.

When Jason Hatcher is your stud DT, you've got a problem.

 

[bayeslife]

Not up front, no. This has been the story with the Cowboys the last several years. They lose the line of scrimmage and try to overcome it the entire game. You can't be a real contender when both of your lines are the weakness of your team.

This team was built the wrong way and that's why we don't win while watching the Giants hoist 2 Lombardis built the right way.

The Giants have about 8 starters on the their D-line and were struggling to get to Romo all night.

 

[jobberone]

Lots of good points in this thread.

We don't play a Cover-2 as our base. It's more of a Cover 3 although that's the very basic premise for one of the defenses we play.

I share some others concerns. This defense has weakness over the middle esp deep. And it takes good tackling to make it work properly. It doesn't care about yards but about points. It's designed to NOT give up big plays even without being in prevent. So I'm concerned about the middle even though I agree some of the problem was busted coverages, tackling not well enough at times, and playing with a huge lead. The latter doesn't explain it all. I haven't seen the coaches film so I can't comment on LB play in coverage or how well the safeties played.

While I agree that the DL played well I do agree in part with @Risen Star about a problem with depth along the DL. We did appear a little gassed in the 4th and Ware was fairly well dealt with. Getting Spencer and Rat back would make a huge impact on rotation. I was impressed with them stopping the run, team speed on D, swarming to the ball, and creating turnovers.

I think it's safe to say we saw some improvements in the D as well as recognizing some issues to deal with in the coming weeks.

 

[Zimmy Lives]

Not up front, no. This has been the story with the Cowboys the last several years. They lose the line of scrimmage and try to overcome it the entire game. You can't be a real contender when both of your lines are the weakness of your team.

This team was built the wrong way and that's why we don't win while watching the Giants hoist 2 Lombardis built the right way.

I'll agree with this to a point. Not having a dominant DT (Rat injured most of the time) hindered Dallas' ability to control the LOS. However, the greatest losses were Lee, Carter, and Church; all three players were physical against the run and played their positions well enough.

I do agree with your statement that the team was built incorrectly but I do believe that they are trying to remedy that now.

 

[jobberone]

Exactly right.

When Jason Hatcher is your stud DT, you've got a problem.

I think you're being too harsh. Hatcher is actually a pretty dang good DT/DE. And I'm not certain he's the best DT on the team although he's our best hybrid DT/DE.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Eh...We've used pretty much every system in the last decade plus and have now pretty much tried them all. Parcells with the 2-gap conservative 34... Phillips with the 1-gap, extremely aggressive kill-the-QB-at-all-costs 34... Ryan with the super complex trick-'em-into-making-mistakes 34... Now back to the 1-gap 43 cover 2 that Zimmer tried in the early 2000s. Some of us were saying when the switch was announced that fans were going to go berzerk watching other offenses run slants over and over and possibly having good TEs making plays on us, but that's the way it is -- all systems have holes in them if you know how to exploit them and have the players to do it.

This one isn't my personal favorite, but we know it can work if you have the players who can be disciplined (and of course have enough talent). I actually think it might be a good system for today when the powers that be keep making it harder and harder to play defense. If you can barely hit or cover anymore, it's probably as good a plan as anything else to keep the play in front of you and try to get some turnovers and limit TDs.

 

[Risen Star]

I'll agree with this to a point. Not having a dominant DT (Rat injured most of the time) hindered Dallas' ability to control the LOS. However, the greatest losses were Lee, Carter, and Church; all three players were physical against the run and played their positions well enough.

I do agree with your statement that the team was built incorrectly but I do believe that they are trying to remedy that now.

They're trying to remedy it now by adding no DL in veteran FA or the draft last offseason?

Don't you remember your genius of a GM telling you the DL is "one of the real strengths of the team"?

 

[Doomsday101]

Lots of good points in this thread.

We don't play a Cover-2 as our base. It's more of a Cover 3 although that's the very basic premise for one of the defenses we play.

I share some others concerns. This defense has weakness over the middle esp deep. And it takes good tackling to make it work properly. It doesn't care about yards but about points. It's designed to NOT give up big plays even without being in prevent. So I'm concerned about the middle even though I agree some of the problem was busted coverages, tackling not well enough at times, and playing with a huge lead. The latter doesn't explain it all. I haven't seen the coaches film so I can't comment on LB play in coverage or how well the safeties played.

While I agree that the DL played well I do agree in part with @Risen Star about a problem with depth along the DL. We did appear a little gassed in the 4th and Ware was fairly well dealt with. Getting Spencer and Rat back would make a huge impact on rotation. I was impressed with them stopping the run, team speed on D, swarming to the ball, and creating turnovers.

I think it's safe to say we saw some improvements in the D as well as recognizing some issues to deal with in the coming weeks.

I agree with you. I also agree with Kiffin who while he was happy with the turnover acknowledged that they had a lot to clean up but this was the 1st full game in this scheme vs a NY team who is very capable of putting up big numbers on offense no matter what defensive scheme you are playing.

 

[Risen Star]

I think you're being too harsh. Hatcher is actually a pretty dang good DT/DE. And I'm not certain he's the best DT on the team although he's our best hybrid DT/DE.

I like Hatcher but he shouldn't be the best DT on our roster.

And I don't want to hear about Jay Ratliff. This isn't 2009. He's finished as a top player.

 

[Zimmy Lives]

I think you're being too harsh. Hatcher is actually a pretty dang good DT/DE. And I'm not certain he's the best DT on the team although he's our best hybrid DT/DE.

Hatcher is a quality player but no one will confuse him with Randy White or even Russell Maryland. I do beleive that between he and Hayden, they can get the job done at DT until Rat comes back.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Despite the smoke blown by the Dallas brass, I think a fair amount of folks knew after the draft the defense might struggle at times due to the poor D-line depth. The guys they got off the street have played admirably ( I really mean that), but the starting four would have to be healthy for the defense to be anywhere close to a top ten unit. Rat was never going to play the full season, so here we are.

bygones

 

[Stash]

They're trying to remedy it now by adding no DL in veteran FA or the draft last offseason?

Don't you remember your genius of a GM telling you the DL is "one of the real strengths of the team"?

Heck, we're not even interested in 'Tryout Tuesday' where the rest of the league brings in free agents for workouts.

Must be great to have a roster so deep that nobody has even a chance of making it...

 

[jobberone]

Not up front, no. This has been the story with the Cowboys the last several years. They lose the line of scrimmage and try to overcome it the entire game. You can't be a real contender when both of your lines are the weakness of your team.

This team was built the wrong way and that's why we don't win while watching the Giants hoist 2 Lombardis built the right way.

How do you explain they lost the LOS. They held the Giants to 50 yds rushing at 3.6 per catch and only 3 FDs by rush. And while they gave up 9.5 YPC if you take away the big plays its average. They got adequate pressure on Manning and didn't blitz much at all. You can't blame much at all on either line with the exception of a subpar run blocking on the right side and what appears to be a dropoff in pass pressure at the end of the game again with mostly sending 4 guys. So I agree we could use more depth; which Rat and Spencer should provide.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

They're trying to remedy it now by adding no DL in veteran FA or the draft last offseason?

Don't you remember your genius of a GM telling you the DL is "one of the real strengths of the team"?

At the time he said that, it was. Geez, do you have any other lyrics to this sad song? When your projected starters are Spence, Rat, Hatch and Ware you have 3 out of 4 pro bowlers. When your back ups consist of Crawford, Bass, Lissamore and Wilber you have good to decent depth with young players on the rise. I guess Jones should have known that in 3 months several would be injured and unable to play on opening night. He should have drafted 3 or 4 DL and we should always carry 14 DL on the 53, because that what other teams with a real GM do. Give it a rest. The DL has been hit with some pretty big injuries. The team is doing what they can to shore it up until Spence and Rat are good to go. I think they have done a great job with getting Selvie and Hayden to step up and play. But all you can say is the same ole thing, when it would have made no sense to draft more DL this year.

 

[Stash]

Hatcher is a quality player but no one will confuse him with Randy White or even Russell Maryland. I do beleive that between he and Hayden, they can get the job done at DT until Rat comes back.

In all honesty, what choice do we have?

Options are slim.

 

[Nova]

Not up front, no. This has been the story with the Cowboys the last several years. They lose the line of scrimmage and try to overcome it the entire game. You can't be a real contender when both of your lines are the weakness of your team.

This team was built the wrong way and that's why we don't win while watching the Giants hoist 2 Lombardis built the right way.

The Giants have poured a considerable amount of resources into their DL, but the days of them having a great offensive line were a product of Ernie Accorsi. IMO, Reese has done a poor job recognizing the deterioration of Accorsi's guys on the OL and thus a poor job replacing them. They've actually tried to accumulate more skill players than big uglies when it comes to the offensive side of the ball.

But other than that, I agree. Need to build up the defensive line... just digging ourselves out of the hole the 08-09 takes longer than expected.

 

[AsthmaField]

Yeah, there will be some busted coverages (which is where the majority of the yards came from). Remember, that was the first game of the first season playing in the new defense... it is understandable to have a few breakdowns.

As they get more and more comfortable playing in the new scheme, those breakdowns will be further and further apart.

Fundamentals will always be important in football, and Kiffin and Marinelli drill those into the team like no one else.

We should be fine.

 

[Future]

How do you explain they lost the LOS. They held the Giants to 50 yds rushing at 3.6 per catch and only 3 FDs by rush. And while they gave up 9.5 YPC if you take away the big plays its average. They got adequate pressure on Manning and didn't blitz much at all. You can't blame much at all on either line with the exception of a subpar run blocking on the right side and what appears to be a dropoff in pass pressure at the end of the game again with mostly sending 4 guys. So I agree we could use more depth; which Rat and Spencer should provide.

Thats what I was thinking. Other than the right side on the OL, like you mentioned, I thought we won in the trenches. Hayden and Hatcher both looked really good.

 

[morasp]

Keep in mind the nature of how those yards were gained. On two pass plays, the Giants gained about 130 yards from busted coverage. And in the 4th quarter, Manning picked up free yards off of prevent defense while we were ahead by 3 scores.

This from a defense playing their first regular season game in the 4-3.

And when the game was on the line, they got it done.

Good post, spot on. I was little disappointed that they hadn't planned for the game time situation of a defense not getting called in time. Especially with how may teams are running no huddle now. Fortunately we won but if it happens again I'll start to wonder.

 

[jobberone]

I like Hatcher but he shouldn't be the best DT on our roster.

And I don't want to hear about Jay Ratliff. This isn't 2009. He's finished as a top player.

Again I'm not certain Hatcher is the best DT on the squad. In fact he's not actually a DT. He's a DT/DE hybrid and I think he plays better outside. He's a slightly above average DT. I don't know what we have in Hayden and Cohen but the interior of the DL played very well giving up 50 rushing yards and 3 first downs by rush. And you can't possibly know Rat is finished. I will agree that his injuries are a big concern and I think they will address that with less snaps. It's just too early to say anything definite. I'm more worried about the DE rotation but Spencer should help that. And I'd like to see Hatcher get some snaps at DE as well although not a lot. You have every right to be concerned about the DL but I think you're prematurely evaluating them in the worst scenario.