Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Vrabel seems like a guy who wanted to play every down as a player and if Landry is telling him something similar then he's going to let him play himself to death.  I think he needs to rethink that obviously...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, japan said:

Vrabel seems like a guy who wanted to play every down as a player and if Landry is telling him something similar then he's going to let him play himself to death.  I think he needs to rethink that obviously...

 

And if Vrabel is the one telling him that he needs to do that then The Boys need to go ahead and chop his dick off anyway, Super Bowl or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

And if Vrabel is the one telling him that he needs to do that then The Boys need to go ahead and chop his dick off anyway, Super Bowl or not.

I don't see Vrabel telling just Landry he needs to play every snap.  I think Vrabel addressed it during the season saying that Landry told him that he wanted to be out there almost every snap.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2021 at 4:42 PM, Thrill said:

I mean I thought this was obvious back when Washburn had his units leading the league in sacks every year. Even guys like Travis Laboy and Ford and Babin looked like studs when they were able to just go all out for 20 snaps a game. It’s amazing that coaching staffs are still operating like it’s the Stone Age. 

The scheme plays a big role. Those guys were in the wide 9 tech.
 

Your premise is still 100% correct. Having your guys who are paid mainly to get after the QB play so many snaps ends up with such a low ROI. Landry should be playing 50 snaps a game most of the time. 
 

It’s a coaching issue at the end of the day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

The scheme plays a big role. Those guys were in the wide 9 tech.
 

Your premise is still 100% correct. Having your guys who are paid mainly to get after the QB play so many snaps ends up with such a low ROI. Landry should be playing 50 snaps a game most of the time. 
 

It’s a coaching issue at the end of the day. 


Just to play devil’s advocate -
 

The level of energy exertion is also a factor in terms of scheme differences. 
 

Washburn had no choice but to rotate pass rushers because he was asking guys to go balls to the wall 110% every play from the wide nine alignment like there was no tomorrow. 
 

In this scheme, guys aren’t all out rushing all that often. They’re mush rushing playing contain or on certain plays purposefully engaging and directing the OL in order to “build a wall.” 
 

Washburn’s thing was to play the run on the way to the QB, but unless it’s a sub package passing down - the philosophy of this scheme is to “build a wall” (as Pees and Vrabel always say) and hold the edge first and foremost, and also to drop into zone coverage at times in Landry’s case. 
 

Point being, the level of exertion needed for OLBs to execute this defense is different than the level of energy exerted in the Washburn scheme - it’s a different kind of endurance that is required. 
 

I bet though that if Vrabel had a worthy third rusher that he’d play them more, esp on pass rush downs. I just dont think he believes in rotating in backend players (like LaBoy, Odom, Hayes, etc) just to rotate as Washburn did. But for Washburn, it was absolutely necessary - he needed guys going 110% not 90%. 

Edited by tgo
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tgo said:


Just to play devil’s advocate -
 

The level of energy exertion is also a factor in terms of scheme differences. 
 

Washburn had no choice but to rotate pass rushers because he was asking guys to go balls to the wall 110% every play from the wide nine alignment like there was no tomorrow. 
 

In this scheme, guys aren’t all out rushing all that often. They’re mush rushing playing contain or on certain plays purposefully engaging and directing the OL in order to “build a wall.” 
 

Washburn’s thing was to play the run on the way to the QB, but unless it’s a sub package passing down - the philosophy of this scheme is to “build a wall” (as Pees and Vrabel always say) and hold the edge first and foremost, and also to drop into zone coverage at times in Landry’s case. 
 

Point being, the level of exertion needed for OLBs to execute this defense is different than the level of energy exerted in the Washburn scheme - it’s a different kind of endurance that is required. 
 

I bet though that if Vrabel had a worthy third rusher that he’d play them more, esp on pass rush downs. I just dont think he believes in rotating in backend players (like LaBoy, Odom, Hayes, etc) just to rotate as Washburn did. But for Washburn, it was absolutely necessary - he needed guys going 110% not 90%. 

People do forget we were number 1 in TO differential. Our offense was very efficient, and while our defense was terrible if it was solid at anything it was causing turnovers. 
 

The problem came from lack of aggression on certain down and distance along with our pass rushers being out there every snap. Those are pretty easy fixes. Rotate the the OLBs/DEs more often while making sure to be aggressive (press man blitz/zone blitz) on 3rd and long. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

The scheme plays a big role. Those guys were in the wide 9 tech.
 

Your premise is still 100% correct. Having your guys who are paid mainly to get after the QB play so many snaps ends up with such a low ROI. Landry should be playing 50 snaps a game most of the time. 
 

It’s a coaching issue at the end of the day. 

I am not saying they are the same but when we run(a bunch of the time) a 3 and 4 or 5 tech and then 2 olb that is very similar to the wide 9 scheme. The problem is we are playing contain. Not saying we would have had a dozen more sacks just changing scheme but we are not going to get many when gap integrity is all the coaches preach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Callidus said:

I am not saying they are the same but when we run(a bunch of the time) a 3 and 4 or 5 tech and then 2 olb that is very similar to the wide 9 scheme. The problem is we are playing contain. Not saying we would have had a dozen more sacks just changing scheme but we are not going to get many when gap integrity is all the coaches preach.

We don’t run a 3-4 on passing downs. It’s a similar package in the nickel as a 4-3 team. 
 

To your point though, yep you’re correct. The mush rush scheme they’re deploying is one of the worst in the league. It only works against a handful of QBs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He can be upgraded eventually imo. His speed / bend game is nice, but the fact that he's an all or nothing guy kind of sucks. He's not imposing enough to push o-lineman backwards and suffocate the pocket on a qb - which leads to scrambling and clean up sacks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, stormi said:

He can be upgraded eventually imo. His speed / bend game is nice, but the fact that he's an all or nothing guy kind of sucks. He's not imposing enough to push o-lineman backwards and suffocate the pocket on a qb - which leads to scrambling and clean up sacks. 

For a total speed and bend guy playing that many snaps he’s actually quite excellent when you view it through the scheme. He’s become a good edge setter and is a force in the run game. Tweak the scheme and he’s easily a 10+ sack guy on less snaps.

Edited by IsntLifeFunny
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

We don’t run a 3-4 on passing downs. It’s a similar package in the nickel as a 4-3 team. 
 

To your point though, yep you’re correct. The mush rush scheme they’re deploying is one of the worst in the league. It only works against a handful of QBs. 

I was saying what you said about us running 2-4 I just said 3-4 beacause that is technically what it is even if we run the 2-4 60+% of the time 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

For a total speed and bend guy he’s playing that many snaps he’s actually quite excellent. He’s become a good edge setter and is a force in the run game. Tweak the scheme and he’s easily a 10+ sack guy on less snaps.

Imo he is fantastic at his job. He is very derick Morgan in that he is not elite at anything but for a 2nd rounder to be able to do everything at a solid level to me he is a 10+ year titan who has the potential to do more if we set him loose on the qb bit that just is not our defense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...