Can the problems with our O-line have to do ......

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Originally posted by grooves12
I understand the term well. I just haven't seen 8 men in the box with the exception of the Giants game. And even if the safeties are playing slightly closer than they normally would, they are not "selling out, to stop the run."

The defenses we have faced have mostly double-covered our WR's with a safety and CB, and allowed them to read-and-react to any running plays. Teams are NOT blitzing us or sending extra men to stop the run. They are playing disciplined coverage schemes, overpowering our offensive line with a four or five-man rush, and allowing the linebackers react to the ball.

If that means an obvious passing situation (and almost all of our play-calls have been obvious) It means 6-7 guys are back in coverage, and they are STILL getting pressure on fiedler.

I don't mind the term 8 men in the box when it is being used properly. But people are using it as an excuse for the O-line, and trying to make it sound like they are facing more men than they can block. Which in turn would mean someone, somewhere should be uncovered or at the very least one-on-one. But that is not the case. The O-line is often being beaten one-on-one, or even very often with MORE O-lineman than rushers.

Good post and totally correct.

 

[ZOD]

One asks a question which I took literally and answered and the other to offense to my "Do you understand?". At first read I thought it was a real question. Obviously I know now that the original question was rhetorical.

Let me address just a couple of "jabs" though without getting into philosophy because the one post could turn into a book and this is afterall a conversation.

You cannot expect me to believe that our oline is getting tricked into blocking nobody.

Actually I can. I've seen it. You've seen it. Which is part of your reasoning for complaint.

the fins are not facing 8 in the box.......there would be more tackles by safeties near the line of scrimmage on running plays.

Houston CB Aaron Glenn 5 solos 2 assists, S Matt Stevens 3 solos 1 assist, LB Jamie Sharper 9 solo 5 assists, LB Jay Foreman 7 tackles 1 assist

Thats 4 of the top 5 tacklers from the houston game.

S Lawyer Milloy 11 tackles, CB Antoine Winfield 7 tackles. Two of the top three tacklers from Buffalo.

S Rodney Harrison 12 tackles, LB Roman Phifer 7 tackles, LB Bruschi 7 tackles. Four of the top five tacklers from New England.

I don't know where I would get the idea that they sell out to the run especially since (let me quote here)
"witness Rodney Harrison chasing McMichael all over the field"
Yes, that would be chasing. As in giving chase. As in "I played the run first and got caught so I missed a step or two or three."

Ramble on..........

 

[ZOD]

Originally posted by FinfanInBuffalo


Buffalo does not play the 4-6. there is no such thing. Its the "46"

Would it irritate you if I called one the 4-3, how about the 6-0, or maybe the 5-2, what about if I went really crazy and labeled one the "wide tackle 6"?

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Originally posted by ZOD


the fins are not facing 8 in the box.......there would be more tackles by safeties near the line of scrimmage on running plays.

Houston CB Aaron Glenn 5 solos 2 assists, S Matt Stevens 3 solos 1 assist, LB Jamie Sharper 9 solo 5 assists, LB Jay Foreman 7 tackles 1 assist

Thats 4 of the top 5 tacklers from the houston game.

S Lawyer Milloy 11 tackles, CB Antoine Winfield 7 tackles. Two of the top three tacklers from Buffalo.

S Rodney Harrison 12 tackles, LB Roman Phifer 7 tackles, LB Bruschi 7 tackles. Four of the top five tacklers from New England.

So I ask why safeties aren't making more tackles on running plays near the LOS and you list tackle totals by safeties, LBs, and CBs with no indication of where the tackles were made or whether they were on runs or passes. That is your explanation?

I had previously noted that several of the tackles by the NE seconday were more than 10 yds down field.

I just picked A. Glenn to test your theory. Of his 7 tackles 5 were on pass plays and two were on runs (2 yd gain and 4 yd gain). So 1 of his tackles was near the LOS.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Oops, I misread the stats the tackle for 2 yds by A Glenn was actually a tackle at the 2 yd line after a 48 YARD GAIN!

So I correct myself. He made no tackles near the LOS on running plays.