Burke Needs To Stop

[Avigatorx]

Numbers-wise the D looked great today. Not to mention, they actually made some EXCELLENT impact plays, turnovers and stops.

That said, OP is right.

Sure, we got away with that soft zone coverage against the Jets and Titans, but that **** aint gonna fly against teams with REAL skill position players and vet QBs.

Dont get me wrong, im happy, hell, im THRILLED with the win and a very good performance by the D, but other teams will eat us alive if we continue the soft coverage and only rush 4 99% of our snaps.

 

[Mach2]

Numbers-wise the D looked great today. Not to mention, they actually made some EXCELLENT impact plays, turnovers and stops.

That said, OP is right.

Sure, we got away with that soft zone coverage against the Jets and Titans, but that **** aint gonna fly against teams with REAL skill position players and vet QBs.

Dont get me wrong, im happy, hell, im THRILLED with the win and a very good performance by the D, but other teams will eat us alive if we continue the soft coverage and only rush 4 99% of our snaps.

You are right in saying rushing 4 won't always get it done. Especially so if you are trailing a good squad.

There haven't been many situations where bringing a LB or safety would have made sense from a risk/reward standpoint.

I know "flashy" sells, but you don't take risks that aren't warranted.

Also, the less you show, the less the better teams have film on.

 

[Avigatorx]

You are right in saying rushing 4 won't always get it done. Especially so if you are trailing a good squad.

There haven't been many situations where bringing a LB or safety would have made sense from a risk/reward standpoint.

I know "flashy" sells, but you don't take risks that aren't warranted.

Also, the less you show, the less the better teams have film on.

And that was one of my biggest head scratchers today. We rush 4, the jets have 4-5 skill guys running through our secondary like free-range farm animals. We have 7 defenders back in coverage and still cant cover them. The soft zone is crap and will be picked apart by better teams.

With the wide nine we need to be in press-man coverage.

All I can say is I hope you're right about hiding looks, but we ran the same **** last year and teams ate us alive.

 

[Mach2]

And that was one of my biggest head scratchers today. We rush 4, the jets have 4-5 skill guys running through our secondary like free-range farm animals. We have 7 defenders back in coverage and still cant cover them. The soft zone is crap and will be picked apart by better teams.

With the wide nine we need to be in press-man coverage.

All I can say is I hope you're right about hiding looks, but we ran the same **** last year and teams ate us alive.

I certainly understand your pessimism, given the recent track record of the team.

There are only a few players on D who were here before Gase/Burke. I may be an optimist, but I like what they are doing on D, as far as utilizing the players individual skills.

Not a big fan of the wide nine against teams that run inside. I think we are building to a time when we can install entirely different defensive base looks within a game.

 

[Coach_Rob]

I was premature. sorry.

but i do stand playing not to lose in certain situations.

 

[gregorygrant83]

Defense has allowed 12.5 points per game through two weeks, gave up 2 yards per rush attempt against the Jets and has averaged three turnovers per game.