What has actually happened to our defense?

[leachisabeast]

The highest I saw Jimmy was 23rd, Here:http://www.nfldraftdog.com/Mock-Draf...ck-part-2.html most had him as second round talent. Same with Cody. All kinda moot at this point as neither are living up to even those designations.

Wouldn't say that about Jimmy Smith. Corners still take a while to develop, Webb took a while, and I still believe in him. He's also had some good games that we seem to forget, like the AFCCG. It's funny how he plays well under Pagano but not Pees.

Mike Mayock had Jimmy Smith going to us too.

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...1#.UIV0UsX9ASE

[bacchys]

Yep I'm in the personnel camp. Sorry but we're starting a bunch of UDFA's and lower half draft players. Sometimes you get that diamond in the rough that turns out to be a great player, but were taking a risk on having so many. Coaching can't make up for talent. Add in the busts of our very few 1s and 2nd rounders out there and thats the problem. Kindle I'm willing to give a pass on, noone knew he was gonna fall down the stairs. But WTF said put Kruger so high on their board, when he was graded a 3rd rd talent at best? Jimmy Smith was graded as a 2nd-3rd in most mocks, Cody I don't remember but everyone was shocked when we picked him that high.

We need to put forth some serious draft picks into the D, along with gettin some FA's in here. Ray is gone more than likely, Reed very well may be also.

I'm not in the personnel camp. I think the new CBA plays some role in it, but not much, insofar as it changed the rules governing practices.

I don't think coaching is the reason Smith was schooled by Walters the same way he was schooled by that NE receiver: that's just experience. You can coach a kid all day about not biting on a double move, but it takes time and repetition to really learn that.

But, across the board, we're seeing poor technique. Players letting blockers get into their body. Pass rushers who run right at the blocker and then basically stand there. Kruger has been playing fairly well overall- his first responsibility this year is to set the edge, not rush the passer- but he seems limited in what he can do to shed a blocker. Suggs, with no real practice time, showed the difference between someone with pass rushing technique can do compared to those with poor technique. Suggs put pressure on Schaub most of the day, and was pretty much unblockable by a single player. No one else in our pass rush, the the possible exception of the dinged-up Ngata, is showing that.

All of these guys have a ton of talent. In this age of football, coaching is the single most important factor between the good teams and the not-so-good teams. Being able to coach sound, fundamental football while gameplanning to use the strengths of your players and nullify the strengths of the opposition. We didn't lose to the Texans because they are more talented than the Ravens. We lost to them because the players aren't playing with good technique and the gameplan didn't put our players in a position to succeed.

We needed more quick passes and to use Rice more in the passing game, especially after it became apparent Flacco wasn't going to have the time for some of our longer plays to develop.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

You're letting coaching off the hook too easily. Cody can't get off blocks because Cody has terrible technique. He allowed Myers to get into his body with leverage, and he did it all day. He stands up instead of surging forward on the snap of the ball. That's coachable. I don't know if the problem is Cody isn't coachable, but you don't have to be the best talent in football to learn proper techniques.

Position specific technique is taught by position coaches.

Clarence Brooks has been our DL coach for what...8 years now? 7 years of coaching up guys like Kemo, Kelly Gregg, Justin Bannan, Abrayo Franklin etc...

And now he doesn't know how to coach? Now he isn't teaching right?

Sorry, Brooks has as much of a proven track record at least in regards to his players playing with proper technique and frankly dominating opponents in the run game.

I'll go with Cody just either not using what he's been teached or flat out unable to do so over Brooks not doing a proper job of teaching technique.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

I'm not in the personnel camp. I think the new CBA plays some role in it, but not much, insofar as it changed the rules governing practices.

I don't think coaching is the reason Smith was schooled by Walters the same way he was schooled by that NE receiver: that's just experience. You can coach a kid all day about not biting on a double move, but it takes time and repetition to really learn that.

But, across the board, we're seeing poor technique. Players letting blockers get into their body. Pass rushers who run right at the blocker and then basically stand there. Kruger has been playing fairly well overall- his first responsibility this year is to set the edge, not rush the passer- but he seems limited in what he can do to shed a blocker. Suggs, with no real practice time, showed the difference between someone with pass rushing technique can do compared to those with poor technique. Suggs put pressure on Schaub most of the day, and was pretty much unblockable by a single player. No one else in our pass rush, the the possible exception of the dinged-up Ngata, is showing that.

All of these guys have a ton of talent. In this age of football, coaching is the single most important factor between the good teams and the not-so-good teams. Being able to coach sound, fundamental football while gameplanning to use the strengths of your players and nullify the strengths of the opposition. We didn't lose to the Texans because they are more talented than the Ravens. We lost to them because the players aren't playing with good technique and the gameplan didn't put our players in a position to succeed.

We needed more quick passes and to use Rice more in the passing game, especially after it became apparent Flacco wasn't going to have the time for some of our longer plays to develop.

I'll give you the offense stuff.

But defensively...

Denial is strong...

[bacchys]

Position specific technique is taught by position coaches.

Clarence Brooks has been our DL coach for what...8 years now? 7 years of coaching up guys like Kemo, Kelly Gregg, Justin Bannan, Abrayo Franklin etc...

And now he doesn't know how to coach? Now he isn't teaching right?

Sorry, Brooks has as much of a proven track record at least in regards to his players playing with proper technique and frankly dominating opponents in the run game.

I'll go with Cody just either not using what he's been teached or flat out unable to do so over Brooks not doing a proper job of teaching technique.

Cody not doing what he's being taught is still a coaching issue. It doesn't matter if someone knows what they are doing or not: whether or not what they are doing is working is what matters. With Cody, it isn't. He's getting beat up because he doesn't have good fundamentals for his position. Standing up at the snap and letting the blocker get into your body is going to get you beat every time on the D-line. He does it often.

Perhaps he's not coachable, and that's why he lost the starting job. But he is the player the coach has, and the coach needs to figure out a way to get through to that player or we're going to continue to have problems at that position.

[bacchys]

I'll give you the offense stuff.

But defensively...

Denial is strong...

Yes, it is. Suggs is a better pass rush today than he was when he first came into the league. He's not more physically talented than he was then. He certainly wasn't more physically talented yesterday than he was his rookie season. He's *learned* how to be a better pass rusher.

The talent argument is just a weak excuse for not analyzing the games and the teams. It's a cheap way of explaining why a team loses. It's amazing how talented a team can become just by winning a few games, and how quickly a talented team can become one lacking talent by losing a few.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

Cody not doing what he's being taught is still a coaching issue. It doesn't matter if someone knows what they are doing or not: whether or not what they are doing is working is what matters. With Cody, it isn't. He's getting beat up because he doesn't have good fundamentals for his position. Standing up at the snap and letting the blocker get into your body is going to get you beat every time on the D-line. He does it often.

Perhaps he's not coachable, and that's why he lost the starting job. But he is the player the coach has, and the coach needs to figure out a way to get through to that player or we're going to continue to have problems at that position.

What?

Players not doing what they are told is a coaching issue?

ok

Maybe Brooks should go out on the field with Cody and hold his hand to make sure he listens.

LMAO

[Raveninwoodlawn]

Yes, it is. Suggs is a better pass rush today than he was when he first came into the league. He's not more physically talented than he was then. He certainly wasn't more physically talented yesterday than he was his rookie season. He's *learned* how to be a better pass rusher.

The talent argument is just a weak excuse for not analyzing the games and the teams. It's a cheap way of explaining why a team loses. It's amazing how talented a team can become just by winning a few games, and how quickly a talented team can become one lacking talent by losing a few.

No it's not.

Some day some people are going to have to realize that some of your players just aren't good and no amount of coaching is going to turn them into NFL starting material.

Check out a man who is much more knowledgeable than you or I says on the subject...it's in my signature.

[bacchys]

Check out a man who is much more knowledgeable than you or I says on the subject...it's in my signature.

Appeals to authority are a logical fallacy.

We don't have a lack of talent on defense. We don't have a lack of talent on offense. Few teams, if any, lack talent in the NFL. Even the undrafted free agents are world-class athletes. In an era of salary caps and free agency, talent is spread fairly evenly across the NFL. Walsh's statement was made in a time when a team could keep their better players and didn't have to worry about seeing them pursue more money elsewhere.

If scheme didn't matter on defense, teams wouldn't scheme. The whole point of developing schemes is to work towards your strengths. We switched to a 3-4 because we had more linebackers and 'tweeners (defense end/OLB) than we had defensive linemen. That was a coaching decision that took advantage of the talent we had.

[s.r.genovese]

Appeals to authority are a logical fallacy.

We don't have a lack of talent on defense. We don't have a lack of talent on offense. Few teams, if any, lack talent in the NFL. Even the undrafted free agents are world-class athletes. In an era of salary caps and free agency, talent is spread fairly evenly across the NFL. Walsh's statement was made in a time when a team could keep their better players and didn't have to worry about seeing them pursue more money elsewhere.

If scheme didn't matter on defense, teams wouldn't scheme. The whole point of developing schemes is to work towards your strengths. We switched to a 3-4 because we had more linebackers and 'tweeners (defense end/OLB) than we had defensive linemen. That was a coaching decision that took advantage of the talent we had.

There's a reason why there are hundreds of UDFA's every year and only a few of them make teams. Did all the ones who got cut receive 'bad coaching?' No. They weren't as good as the guys who were drafted. Talent matters. Coaching matters too, but ultimately, there are guys who can hack it and guys who can't, regardless of the coach.

[Iscull]

The highest I saw Jimmy was 23rd, Here:http://www.nfldraftdog.com/Mock-Draf...ck-part-2.html most had him as second round talent. Same with Cody. All kinda moot at this point as neither are living up to even those designations.

Jimmy Smith is a top 10 talent. The problem is he is playing off-man and zone coverage. Neither are his strength. The problem of our coordinators is that they do not play to our players strengths. If they did that, Rice would get at least 20+ touches a game and Smith would be playing press coverage on the opposing teams #1 WR all game long. In addition, I just don't think McPhee is a 3-4 DE. I think he is really supposed to be a 4-3 DE or hands in the dirt OLB. He is getting abused in the run game IMHO, and it is adding to the fact we have our better players on IR.

This may be my PhD in armchair football kicking in, but I would like to see 3-4 of our bigger D-Lineman (Ngata, Cody, Kemo, Jones, Tyson) all on the field on 1st downs against running teams or 2 WR sets. I think a line of Ngata, Cody, Kemo, and Suggs would be pretty good group on 1st downs. Kemo and Cody could be rotated with Jones and Tyson. Then on 2nd/3rd downs or passing downs, McPhee is rotated in and Ngata is kicked inside. Suggs, Ngata, Mcphee, and Kruger become the four main rushers at this point.

[bacchys]

There's a reason why there are hundreds of UDFA's every year and only a few of them make teams. Did all the ones who got cut receive 'bad coaching?' No. They weren't as good as the guys who were drafted. Talent matters. Coaching matters too, but ultimately, there are guys who can hack it and guys who can't, regardless of the coach.

That's not exactly a rebuttal. The ones who don't make the team because they don't have enough talent aren't on the team.