Zimms Defense

[sportsman]

The key to the Cowboys success this year will be good old fashion Defense.
The D must create turnovers. Especially on the road..ie..this Sunday.

They can't make big stops on 1st & 2nd down to only get burned on 3rd.

To me the success or failure of this years defense will sorely fall in Zimmers lap. He finally has the talent, now he must produce.

 

[Clove]

I want to see if Zimm has become a part of the 3-4 mastermind coordinators. I'd like to see more disguised blitzes, and flood blitzes incorporated into the scheme.

ANd you're right, our success does depend on it.

 

[acheman]

The problem is Bill is just as conservative Defensively as he is offensively. I see the same thing year after year here at the University of TN with Fulmer. He will call off the dogs with a lead, and is never prone to open up the defense to becoming an all out attacking/blitzing D.
With that being said I think we will be stellar defensively, but not very aggressive.

 

[Duane]

This falls in Bill's lap if it doesn't work. He even said that Zimmer wanted to be more agressive but he (Parcells) had to tone it down.

 

[Shaun]

The problem is Bill is just as conservative Defensively as he is offensively. I see the same thing year after year here at the University of TN with Fulmer. He will call off the dogs with a lead, and is never prone to open up the defense to becoming an all out attacking/blitzing D.
With that being said I think we will be stellar defensively, but not very aggressive.

To Bill's credit, when he has a lead, he is one of the best to ever play the game at keeping it.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

He finally has the talent, now he must produce.

but 1st BIll must hand the reigns over to him, and let him do his thing, he's a very, creative coach, but with the scheme-change, and lack of talent in the secondary until now, Bill has had Zimm scale the D back, I hope he lets him loose...some

 

[Bizwah]

You know, it's like clockwork.

We make a great play on first and second down, and it's almost a guarantee that we'll give up a long third down.

I see it year after year.

I remember having a 3rd and 37 against the Saints.....well, we had an illegal contact penalty...5 yards and an automatic first down.

Things like that seem to happen a lot.

 

[Galian Beast]

Umm guys... if we were going to be conservative on defense, we never would have moved greg ellis to linebacker.

and if you look at our starting nickel defense (Which we play 50% of the time), we're not going to get beat on 3rd down...

Henry - Newman - Watkins - Williams - Glenn
James - Burnett
Ware - Hatcher - Ratliff - Ellis

 

[zrinkill]

Hey what ever happened to the king of the Zimmy haters ? .... I have not seen Wolverine on here in ages.

 

[Bizwah]

Umm guys... if we were going to be conservative on defense, we never would have moved greg ellis to linebacker.

and if you look at our starting nickel defense (Which we play 50% of the time), we're not going to get beat on 3rd down...

Henry - Newman - Watkins - Williams - Glenn
James - Burnett
Ware - Hatcher - Ratliff - Ellis

That's one way to look at it.

But take a look at the preseason.

Yeah, we dominated the Aints. But San Fran and Minny both were able to convert long third downs.

We were running vanilla defenses to be sure...but they weren't running complex offenses.

 

[Cbz40]

You know, it's like clockwork.

We make a great play on first and second down, and it's almost a guarantee that we'll give up a long third down.

I see it year after year.

I remember having a 3rd and 37 against the Saints.....well, we had an illegal contact penalty...5 yards and an automatic first down.

Things like that seem to happen a lot.

I concur Bizwah.....it happens way to often and as we witnessed last season it will lose you ballgames.

We can't give up the big play.

 

[Crown Royal]

I concur Bizwah.....it happens way to often and as we witnessed last season it will lose you ballgames.

We can't give up the big play.

When your offense decides to score points, your defense doesn't have to worry about losing to a team because it gave up 14-17 points.

 

[Cbz40]

When your offense decides to score points, your defense doesn't have to worry about losing to a team because it gave up 14-17 points.

LOL.....I can't argue that point.

 

[big dog cowboy]

GROZ lives.

 

[jazzcat22]

I want to see if Zimm has become a part of the 3-4 mastermind coordinators. I'd like to see more disguised blitzes, and flood blitzes incorporated into the scheme.

ANd you're right, our success does depend on it.

Hopefully they can create some short field positions for our offense. Get the OL some confidence by scoring. Then it will help their confidence in those long drives.

As for other post on here. Yeah, too many 3rd & longs we gave up because of poor play, too agressive or not agressive enough, penalties. Ill timed blitzes, called at wrong time or not well executed. Take your choice. But maybe it came down to just not having the talent. Now we do. Let's see how agressive Zimmer & BP will be now and if they can execute those plays.

 

[Crown Royal]

LOL.....I can't argue that point.

I'm completely serious on that point, too. I'm tired of hearing about how our defense 'gives it up at the end of games.'

Most of the time that's ridiculous - you pitch a shutout for 3 quarters agains washington and then give up 2 TDs. Yeah - it sucks the manner in which you gave them up, but you still only GAVE UP 14 POINTS REGARDLESS OF WHEN IT CAME! IF YOU LOSE BY ALLOWING 14 POINTS TO BE SCORED IN A GAME, IT STRIKES ME THAT YOUR DEFENSE IS NOT YOUR PROBLEM.

You let NY come back to take it to OT by SCORING 13 POINTS?!?!?! YOU HAVE TO KICK A FIELD GOAL IN OT?!?!? YOU WIN BY SCORING 16 PTS?!?! YEP - TOTALLY ON THE DEFENSE.

Seattle beats you when they come back at the end - BY SCORING 13 WHOOOOOOOOOLE POINTS. THAT DURNED ZIM - DOESN'T HE KNOW THAT OUR DEFENSE HAS TO BE THE BEST THE LEAGUE HAS EVER SEEN SINCE OUR OFFENSE CAN'T PUT POINTS?!?

Dang - the Giants beat us in game two....by scoring 17 points. Gosh Zim - you're on the hot seat now. Nevermind the ineptitude of the offense!

Pardon the rant - but excuse me if I give little heed to the Zim haters. It seems to me that the defense has been holding it's end of the bargain. The offense could give a LITTLE help.

Hopefully it won't be an issue this year.

 

[Cbz40]

I'm completely serious on that point, too. I'm tired of hearing about how our defense 'gives it up at the end of games.'

Most of the time that's ridiculous - you pitch a shutout for 3 quarters agains washington and then give up 2 TDs. Yeah - it sucks the manner in which you gave them up, but you still only GAVE UP 14 POINTS REGARDLESS OF WHEN IT CAME! IF YOU LOSE BY ALLOWING 14 POINTS TO BE SCORED IN A GAME, IT STRIKES ME THAT YOUR DEFENSE IS NOT YOUR PROBLEM.

You let NY come back to take it to OT by SCORING 13 POINTS?!?!?! YOU HAVE TO KICK A FIELD GOAL IN OT?!?!? YOU WIN BY SCORING 16 PTS?!?! YEP - TOTALLY ON THE DEFENSE.

Seattle beats you when they come back at the end - BY SCORING 13 WHOOOOOOOOOLE POINTS. THAT DURNED ZIM - DOESN'T HE KNOW THAT OUR DEFENSE HAS TO BE THE BEST THE LEAGUE HAS EVER SEEN SINCE OUR OFFENSE CAN'T PUT POINTS?!?

Dang - the Giants beat us in game two....by scoring 17 points. Gosh Zim - you're on the hot seat now. Nevermind the ineptitude of the offense!

Pardon the rant - but excuse me if I give little heed to the Zim haters. It seems to me that the defense has been holding it's end of the bargain. The offense could give a LITTLE help.

Hopefully it won't be an issue this year.

Thank you for ranting for mem as I could not agree more....I don't know the stats but I would bet we haven't averaged 17 pts a game in years.

 

[jobberone]

Thank you for ranting for mem as I could not agree more....I don't know the stats but I would bet we haven't averaged 17 pts a game in years.

Without looking it up I'll bet you're pretty close.

The goal of Jerry was to get this team to score on average at least 22 points a game. Something I've harped on for several years and to which very few seem to appreciate. I'm so glad someone else has gotten on this.

There is one thing I would mention. I totally agree with most points made. Although I very much agree in principle that you should win games in which you only give up 14 points, I believe the difference between a great D and a good one is great ones stop opponents when they must. We've lost too many leads.

Too many years we have been paper tigers and seemingly just couldn't stop someone when we needed to.

However, I very much agree in principle that the O should shoulder the vast majority of the burden the last several yrs. We shouldn't have to be in the position to hold 10-7 leads. Especially when we march up and down the field seemingly at will but can't score seven. Heck many times we came away with nothing and cost us games and the playoffs.

 

[Crown Royal]

Without looking it up I'll bet you're pretty close.

The goal of Jerry was to get this team to score on average at least 22 points a game. Something I've harped on for several years and to which very few seem to appreciate. I'm so glad someone else has gotten on this.

There is one thing I would mention. I totally agree with most points made. Although I very much agree in principle that you should win games in which you only give up 14 points, I believe the difference between a great D and a good one is great ones stop opponents when they must. We've lost too many leads.

Too many years we have been paper tigers and seemingly just couldn't stop someone when we needed to.

However, I very much agree in principle that the O should shoulder the vast majority of the burden the last several yrs. We shouldn't have to be in the position to hold 10-7 leads. Especially when we march up and down the field seemingly at will but can't score seven. Heck many times we came away with nothing and cost us games and the playoffs.

Even great defenses can't be expected to hold an opponent to 10 or under, even if it is the last 2 minutes and they have scored only 3 or 6. I refuse to place any blame with the defense on ANY of those games.

 

[Cbz40]

Without looking it up I'll bet you're pretty close.

The goal of Jerry was to get this team to score on average at least 22 points a game. Something I've harped on for several years and to which very few seem to appreciate. I'm so glad someone else has gotten on this.

There is one thing I would mention. I totally agree with most points made. Although I very much agree in principle that you should win games in which you only give up 14 points, I believe the difference between a great D and a good one is great ones stop opponents when they must. We've lost too many leads.

Too many years we have been paper tigers and seemingly just couldn't stop someone when we needed to.

However, I very much agree in principle that the O should shoulder the vast majority of the burden the last several yrs. We shouldn't have to be in the position to hold 10-7 leads. Especially when we march up and down the field seemingly at will but can't score seven. Heck many times we came away with nothing and cost us games and the playoffs.

You articulate a thought so beautifully my friend.