5-1-5? Pretty damm imposing if it can be pulled off... http://www.newsday.com/sports/footb...vel-defensive-alignments-1.1358813?print=true Giants creating novel defensive alignments August 9, 2009 by TOM ROCK / tom.rock@newsday.com ALBANY - Having Justin Tuck and Osi Umenyiora at opposite ends of the defensive line would be enough to give any offense a migraine. Imagine putting them side by side on the quarterback's blind side. The Giants' coaches have imagined it, and they've been dreaming up plenty of other schemes and systems. On Sunday, the Giants unveiled a 5-1-5 look, with five defensive backs and Antonio Pierce at linebacker. Then, reading from left to right, as a quarterback would see them across the front, were Umenyiora, Tuck, Barry Cofield, Jay Alford and Mathias Kiwanuka. That sound you hear is the collective gulp of every offensive lineman in the NFL. "There's more to come," Tom Coughlin said. "Different alignments, different situations. Try to create some issues for people . . . That's just getting started." Anyone who wondered how the Giants would be able to get all of their talented defensive linemen on the field might have just gotten the answer: Put 'em all out there. And that's not even the projected starters. Coughlin said as injured players return to the field - defensive tackle Fred Robbins came off the physically unable to perform list yesterday - the defense will take on more and more shapes and sizes. "The guys who are not practicing [Rocky Bernard and Chris Canty] are part of that package, too," Coughlin said. Five of the Giants' best defensive linemen against five of any other team's best offensive linemen. No chance for double teams on Tuck or Umenyiora. No time to adjust blocking packages on the fly. It's almost diabolical. How many combinations can the Giants come up with? Plenty. "It's like a calculus formula sometimes with all of these different groups out there," defensive line coach Mike Waufle said. "There is some science to it." Waufle spent a good part of his offseason watching film of the 2008 season and trying to think about the personnel he would put on the field for each play and how those permutations would unfold. It was a little like fantasy football. "Fantasy football doesn't have defensive linemen,'' Waufle said. "And I don't really like fantasy football because I really don't like quarterbacks, and they're all over fantasy football." In this fantasy, it's the linemen who get to be all over the quarterbacks. < back to article
One Problem lets see how they hold up in coverage or handle the run. You think the eagles Te was abusing them last year. Even great pass rushers need a little time to get to QB. I see quick three step Qb drops and ball out to the Rbs or Te. I don't see that defense being that effective. You better have a Lb better in coverage than Antonio Pierce.
Isn't the only problem how it will hold up against the run or in coverage? Is there even anything else to observe? Joe, thanks for playing.
orginally I have my doubts that they would be very effective in Coverage. Tes and Rbs would hurt them in that alignment. The eagles TE and everyone simple abuse them last year. (there is a reason why they went for undersized M boley) A pierce had his problems in coverage last year. On further thought I don't think that alignment would hold up to well against the run either.(this is a bigger problem than even in coverage) Yes you have alot of pass rushers but they aren't the best defending against the run(giving up alot of size) . The best way to slow down a pass rush is being able to pound the football. Once the Rb gets pass the line of scrimmage he not dealing with Lbs but Dbs. (opening yourself up to some very big plays) So correction there is more than one problem using this alignment. Biggest be defending against the run. Still see problems in coverage also. Jmo You can run that alignment but it better be obvious passing down only. I would substitute Boley for Pierce. Gives you much better chance of matching up.
Absolutely. Please tell me how the Raiders would be able to use this scheme because they have far superior talent on defense than the Giants do.
NO what the Raiders have is Lbs better in man to man coverage than the Giants.( T Howard and Alston) Raiders would probably be a 5-2 -4 defense. Not to mention have a SS Tyvon Branch that can take the te man to man. (excellent in coverage) We know the raiders leave their Cbs on an Island. (there speciality is man to man coverage) Their Dline would consist of three dTs Gerard warren 6'4 335 DT Terdell sands 6'7 335 and Tom Kelly 6'6 305 and two pass rushers(Greg ellis 6'6 265 and Trevor scott 6'5 258/Greyson gunheim 6'5 265) with two lightning quick lbs running to their gap responsibility. With size up front on their Dline ,their undersized lbs wouldn't be seeing the traffic . Giants lineup would consist of three pass rushers(not as good against the run) and one LB antonio Pierce wasn't very good in coverage last year. Giants Cbs are average at best, made to look alot better because of the front seven. (see Chargers) last point Giant Front four is good enough to apply pressure. Yiou don't need to bring anymore pressure(open yourself to getting hurt by bringing extra people)
The Giants will probably go to this formation in certain situations only. They will almost certainly play Kenny Phillips in the box on this play and will either use Safety CC Brown as a big nickel or bring in Terrell Thomas as he pretty good size for a corner. I would LOVE to see what kind of stunts the DL runs in this alignment, it could be downright scary.
Oh yeah, how could I forget about the dynamic Jon Alston. Is it fair that NFL offenses will have to go up against this guy? Do you think it'd be justified to give everybody else steroids just so they have a fighting chance of eluding that fucking monster?
All of that means nothing. Please quote height, weight, and 40 times for those players. Those are the only things that matter. Well, in Joe's world anyway.
Chris Canty is like tall and has long arms, they are hoping his long arms can deflect passes. He is going to play some DT and DE. That is all I will do in regards to height!
The Giants were better than the Raiders in ever Defensive passing stat last year except one pass completion which they were very close but was more than made up with by a lower YPC and YPA average allowed. They also played a much tougher schedule than the Raiders.
Jon Alston is what he is . Very very fast lb 4.4 and very good in man coverage. Just like strong safety Tyvon Branch 4.34 another guy who excellent in man coverage. (you can put Branch, Alston ,or Thomas Howard on the TE or the RB in man coverage) Mike"Im going to make you cry" Mitchell is not only a good physical tackler but is pretty good in coverage also. Can't wait till Thursday night to see what cowboy this Mitchell kid KO. Stay down cowgirls if you value your health.
The Giants were better than the Raiders in ever Defensive passing stat last year except one pass completion % which they were very close but was more than made up with by a lower YPC and YPA average allowed. They also played a much tougher schedule than the Raiders. There is simply no way the Raiders stack up with the Giants in any defensive capacity. What the Raiders have in backfield speed the Giants make up with pressure. They simply are a more talented team and a much better coached team as well.
Remember how fast WR Mike Williams (6'5 242 4.5) was? He's going to be a nightmare for DC's all across the UFL.
Yea there front seven was that good . Like the Chargers. They hide a very average secondary. Also the Giants were alot better defending the run. You get the other team in obvious passing situations. A defense can give up the reception and just make sure that offensive player gets no where close to first down marker. Giant played a tougher schedule but I wouldn't go so far to say they playing tougher passing offenses. They couldn't slow down the Cowboys passing attack( off memory) Raiders last year The TE simple abused them as gibril Wilson was horrible in coverage. That won't hapen as Tyvon Branch is a big time upgrade as he very good in coverage. Giant secondary no where close to the Raiders secondary, but they were better because their front seven is way better than the raiders fgront seven. Giant schedule last year 1.washington 2. rams 3. Bengals 4.Seattle 5 Browns 6. 49ers 7. Steelers 8. dallas 9. eagles 10. Ravens 11 arizona 12 Redskins 13. eagles 14. Cowboys 15 carolina 16 Vikings, Cowboys and Cardinals are great passing offenses. Versus Raiders.1. Denver 2. KC 3. Buffalo 4 Chargers 5. Saints 6. Jets 7Ravens 8 Atlanta 9. Carolina 10 Miami 11 Denver 12 KC 13 Chargers 14 Patriots 15 Houston 16 tampabay Look at the diffrence in top 12 passing offenses Raiders played in comparison the Giants.(again not saying Raiders played better schedule) http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst..._NET_YARDS_GAME_AVG&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-n=1
You can't say a team that stops the run and the pass isn't as good in pass defense as a team that just stops the pass. Especially if the stats don't back up the passing stats. If teams don't have to pass on you why would they? The NFL is all about match up football. The Raiders didn't score points and sucked in run D. Why in the world would teams pass on you if they didn't have to. What the stats really point to is teams didn't pass on the Raiders that much because they didn't have to. Teams passed on the Giants more then they did against the Raiders and yet the Giants let up less passing yards than the Raiders. By the way teams are allowed to pass on first and second down they don't have to wait until they have been stuffed twice to pass in third and longs.
Again look at how many top passing offenses Raiders played on their schedule in comparison to the Giants. look at the link. You look at the link and it pretty obvious Raiders played way better passing offenses than the Giants. I gave the schedule for both teams. http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst..._NET_YARDS_GAME_AVG&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-n=1 Raiders top passing offenses they played 1. saints(1 game) 3 passing offense Denver(2 Times) 4 Texans ( 1 time) 7. Chargers (2) 10. Miami (1) 11 . Tampabay 12 NE Versus Giants 2 cardinals (1) 6 eagles(twice) , 9 cowboys (2) 13. 49ers(1)
Again they played all those big passing teams but they ran the ball down the Raiders throats and didn't need to throw the ball to beat the shit out of your crappy team. What exactly is your point? If passing teams can beat you without throwing the ball that doesn't mean you have a great pass defense it just means your team absolutely sucks which it does.
