Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Breaking down the defense

Peppermint9030

By Peppermint9030,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Jackofalltrades Community Regular

Jackofalltrades

Posted
Posted

It's not ineptitude, it's a lack of speed and power. When Beason hits you, you stop where you are. Connor is a better form tackler, but has to be to stop ball carriers and usually allows ball carriers to fall forward or drag him.

Two Hightower runs Beason wouldn't have allowed just because he would have gotten there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

First of all to say that our whole defense is problematic and to just go down the list with everyone underperforming shows a lack of understanding of what scheme we are running and how it works. McDermott's defense is a high accountability defense in that everyone has a role and must be where they are supposed to be. For example if you are blitzing 6 players that leaves 5 primarily in zone. If like Washington did on Sunday, they put out 3 receivers, a tight end, and running back in the pattern, someone is going to be wide open. On the other hand you have 6 defenders rushing 5 linemen and the quarterback. There should be an uncovered rusher who should be able to hit the QB before he can release the ball. If they don't get to the quarterback, there will be a huge gain.

Or like has been the case too often this year, if you blitz up the middle and the DE takes an inside rush, he gets easily caught inside and the runner can go outside with lots of running room with no one to stop him.

Does that mean our players suck and are bad?? Of course not, it means our players are not fundamentally sound and disciplined. They don't recognize the offense and call the right fits. There is lots of blame to go around but some things missing are more important than others. Most people assume that we miss Beason the most because of his tackling and speed but that pales in comparison to how we miss him as the defensive captain who calls defensive alignments and the coverage. Anderson has zero experience doing it and likely is still learning. Add that with new players shuffling in each week due to injury (short and long-term) and you have a different defense out there every week. How do you develop consistency when you can't keep the same guys on the field??

Is this defense worse or better than Fox's defenses of the past few years.???

Through 7 games we are giving up 26 points and 358 yards with 46% of third downs made.

In 2010, our defense gave up right at 25.5 points and 335 yards a game with 34% of third downs made.

In 2009 our defense gave up 19 points a game with 315 yards a game and 36% of third downs made.

In 2008 our defense gave up 21 yards a game, 331 yards per game and 40% of third downs made.

So comparing the defenses reveals that we are surrendering an average of 5 more points a game and roughly 30-40 yards. But the bigger issue is that we aren't getting off the field giving up way too many third down opportunities. I attribute it to 2 areas, failure to control the line of scrimmage on third down and penalties which extend drives.

I don't think it is personnel but execution. I think that they will improve over the course of the season. Fox's defense under Meeks was easy to learn and easy to run. Problem was it was easy to exploit. McDermott's defense is harder to learn and execute but harder to exploit as well.

Is Fox's defense better than McDermott's? So far it is. But lets see how this plays out before we make too many conclusions. I was not a fan of the bend until you break defense but need to see our current aggressive defense play better before I become a fan of the new system. I still have faith that things will turn around even with the current players as they are together more and gel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HeatCheck Newbie

HeatCheck

Posted
Posted

Tom Brady is slow and unatheletic, doesn't make him inept.

Connor is a good LB, just think he's better suited for a Fox type, read and react D rather than an aggressive, attack style D.

I guess what I am saying is Connor, and even Brady aren't good because of their natural skills. What makes Connor good is that he is blue collar and works hard. I wouldn't say Connor's success is based off his skills but his hard work. Not all players who are good are skilled and vice versa. Cutler is highly skilled but doesn't always produce like he should. I just think Dan's lack of skill is what hurt him in the end.

And you are probably right, he is better suited for read and react D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

Dan Connor pro day 40- 4.67. Vertical leap-35 inches, broad jump-9ft,7 inches. short shuttle- 4.25

Compare that to Beason- 40 yard dash- 4.72, Vertical leap- none, broad jump 9 ft- 3 inches. no short shuttle

I won't argue that Connor is more athletic than Beason because I don't think that is true. Beason is more instinctive and has a better feel for the play and better lateral and backward movement. But the numbers suggest Connor is more athletic and quick than most folks assume.

And contrary to what folks have said he is not more suited for a read and react defense. Read and react defenses require a player to read the play see what develops and then react and respond. That usually requires a linebacker to be very quick and have closing speed on a running back or receiver. Attacking defenses require you to attack an area or gap which is actually easier and doesn't require you to be particularly quick or athletic, simply be where you are supposed to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HeatCheck Newbie

HeatCheck

Posted
Posted

Said like a true huddler when the facts have totally invalidated his whole argument.

Connor is actually playing pretty well when he is in there.

I've seen those numbers before so it's nothing new to me. But when you watch him play on the field (where it matters), you can tell he is slower than those around him. So no, it hasn't invalidated my whole argument.

And contrary to what folks have said he is not more suited for a read and react defense. Read and react defenses require a player to read the play see what develops and then react and respond. That usually requires a linebacker to be very quick and have closing speed on a running back or receiver. Attacking defenses require you to attack an area or gap which is actually easier and doesn't require you to be particularly quick or athletic, simply be where you are supposed to be.

I am not sure that's entirely true. I think as a read and react linebacker, you have to have good instincts (which Connor has). I agree with you that you have to be quick but instincts can make up for natural quickness. As for attacking defenses, getting to a spot quickly is key because you don't want to be caught in no man's land where you have no effect on a play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackofalltrades Community Regular

Jackofalltrades

Posted
Posted

Connor tested well in underwear, Beason playals better in pads.

Combine numbers have their place, but most analysts said Beason played faster than his times and had great sideline to sideline speed.

Beason is the better athlete and the better LB for a myriad of reasons, instincts being just one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...