PDA

View Full Version : D: gave up a ton of yards, but not points



TeeTee
10-19-2015, 02:09 PM
Yea, that first half, we gave up like a record in passing yards.

They were gouging the D.

But...and I kept thinking....anytime you move the ball all over but don't score....it comes back to bite you, as we have seen ourselves a lot of times.

But even though they "bent" an awful lot, they didn't allow them to score much at all.

Oh, and I noticed Jarvis Jones as much in this game as others, and he wasn't even playing!

Harrison had a throw back game. Did you see him eye up that poor Brown and knock him into next week, causing the fumble and knocking his helmet off? That was vintage 92. Plus he had our only sack.

He has slowed down a step, and you notice it when he is pursuing down field. But the man still brings the lumber, big time. And it ain't no 2 x 4, my man is bringing in that 4 x 4 stud. WACK!

This D has become what I thought it might: shows it's youth and gives up some long plays, but is scrappy and has some "rough riders" to make up for it.

When Ben comes back, the D will be plenty good enough.

I still like Cockrell. Blake blew some plays but also delivered some good hits. Moats had a few plays. Golden seems pretty solid.

D is work in progress, but it seems to be progressing. This is a better D than what we would have if LeBeau was still DC. I fully believe that.

Out with the ring kissing, paying homage to vets. In with a young pack of wild dogs.

ALLD
10-19-2015, 02:15 PM
We should be 5-1 with a 3rd string QB starting except for that thing we had with the K.

polamalubeast
10-19-2015, 02:20 PM
The reason that the defense give plenty of yards this is because they are often in the field because the offense did a lot of 3 and out with Vick.

TeeTee
10-19-2015, 02:32 PM
The reason that the defense give plenty of yards this is because they are often in the field because the offense did a lot of 3 and out with Vick.

That is a big part of it, but but when you give up 300 yards of passing in a HALF of football, there is more to it than JUST being about the O going 3 and out.

There is no question the Vick/Haley led total shit offense hurt the D, but there must be a little more to it than that.

hawaiiansteeler
10-19-2015, 03:08 PM
the Cardinals went 1-for-4 in the red zone, typical Bruce Arians offense...

polamalubeast
10-19-2015, 03:14 PM
the Cardinals went 1-for-4 in the red zone, typical Bruce Arians offense...

But the cardinals was great this year in the red zone before yesterday.

- - - Updated - - -

Right now this defense looks like the Patriots in recent years.A lot of yards, but always in the top 10 in points allowed.

zulater
10-19-2015, 03:35 PM
We should be 5-1 with a 3rd string QB starting except for that thing we had with the K.

We could just as easily have lost to the Chargers than beat them. Same with yesterday. We were lucky the Cards didn't run away and hide when the chance was there. Credit the defense, but also we had some luck on our side. 4-2 is a reflective record of the season we're having. All that said how I would love to trade either( not to be confused with combined) of the previous two wins straight up for the win over the Ravens.

86WARD
10-19-2015, 07:03 PM
Steelers could have also blown the Cardinals out yesterday...easily winning by 30 had they had a competent offense in the first half...

SteelMayhem72
10-19-2015, 07:15 PM
The reason that the defense give plenty of yards this is because they are often in the field because the offense did a lot of 3 and out with Vick.

Very good and accurate point!

Craic
10-19-2015, 07:20 PM
Very good and accurate point!

Not really. Not with the zone type of defense we're running. It's all about keeping everything in front of them and letting them dip and dunk until the field shortens up, and then they can no longer convert because there's too many people covering too small a field. If this was the 2008 defense, we'd still have an excess amount of yards with this type of defense.

(One thing to note, however, the 2008 defense seemed to know how to tackle a little more. Not too much, hence, the penalties for ESPN hits, but more than this team).

Butch
10-19-2015, 07:54 PM
Not really. Not with the zone type of defense we're running. It's all about keeping everything in front of them and letting them dip and dunk until the field shortens up, and then they can no longer convert because there's too many people covering too small a field. If this was the 2008 defense, we'd still have an excess amount of yards with this type of defense.

(One thing to note, however, the 2008 defense seemed to know how to tackle a little more. Not too much, hence, the penalties for ESPN hits, but more than this team).

yes really the D would hold it's own many times with Vick in there only to have the Offense go 3 and out time after time after time. I won't argue that there are times when the tackling is horrible, but when the O continuously goes 3 and out and can't even convert one 1st down after a turn over the D is bound to lose steam.

Shoes
10-19-2015, 08:22 PM
Cockrell's grab play does concern me, he's gotten away with a few over the last few games. It could be very costly down the road.