In the first two games, I believe the defensive coaches were falling for the “keep a half-circle around this running qb” and keep him in it so much that it was detrimental to actual pressure. I also suspect that AG was listening to his head coach and defensive assistants and it could be that HE HIMSELF said “Enough of that crap” and he just let his Dline go and allowed them to go full steam at the qb. 1 sack in the first two games, SEVEN against the Falcons.
It was pretty obvious the Dline was just pinning their ears back and coming instead of trying the contain stuff. I think we may have been blaming AG when he might have been against that crap from the start and against the Falcons he was the one who said he had seen enough of that stuff.
Were we blaming AG when he may have never felt good about that stuff to start with and he was the one who put his foot down last week and said he was done taking all the heat when he never wanted that to start with?
The defense should do exactly what they did last week from here on out. Let that Dline just explode after the qb.
Which is interesting, since last year our defensive struggles out of the gate were because we were being too aggressive. It wasn’t until AG dialed it back that we started to play better.
This year we had the opposite problem. I suppose it’s a fine balance to hit.
I mean, we beat the returning SB champs, and made the MVP have a good (rather than great or amazing) day. Then, we lost in overtime after multiple turnovers.
I don’t think the defensive schemes were inherently ‘wrong’ in either case, based on the opponent and results. This week, we dialed up the pressure on a young QB… and it worked well. I don’t have a huge problem with playing more ‘contain’ against certain QBs or schemes.
This is really it. The pressure was working vs Ridder, who lets be honest kinda stinks. So we kept the pedal down and the pressure coming all day. No need to change because it was working. AG’s issues seem to be adjustments when his original game plan isn’t working.
A talented veteran QB would have probably shred that strategy apart. Week to week the game plan is going to be different depending on the opponent.
The good news is we have a lot of inexperienced QB’s on the schedule, that we should in theory be able to take advantage of.
Absolutely right. 1 sack in 2 games, 7when we let them pin their ears back. We had clearly gone way too far over to that nonsense and it hindered our Dline to a ridiculous level. Some coach, Dan, AG, maybe the players themselves said this crap sucks, let the Dline just go get the qb. I would be shocked if they do that crap again from here on out. Even a running qb may have put up 17 to 20 against what we did, but we still get 3 or 4 sacks probably. Had we just done this against Seattle we win that game no doubt imo.
While containment of a mobile QB is the primary goal, the idea isn’t to provide a perfect pocket, it’s to collapse the pocket in a coordinated way. Dan talked a little bit about this a few days ago. If you have a mobile QB and your outside rusher gets too deep, he gone.
The lack of pressure against Seattle was not on purpose and Dan apologized for applying pressure on his coaches this last week to correct their problem.
Each year that goes by I question more and more AG’s ability to grasp, delegate and supervise. By his own words he doesn’t “micromanage”. That’s good, right up until your Head Coach begins to micromanage due to instructions and intent being lost in translation.
This! I think we are zeroing in on Glenn’s ability or opportunities as a coach.
He knows the game. He’s smart. He’s a motivator.
His problem is a more nuanced issue of either being too hands off at times or maybe unclear on the objectives and priorities. We are getting closer to identifying his gap and if it’s as simple as the right communication at the right time, that can be accounted for by other coaches including DC.
The “coordinated way” was the problem. What that means is try to stay in gaps cause the qb might run through it if you don’t and all thet crap does is tell your Dline NOT to just get past the OL as fast as you possibly can and nail that qb. Letting them just go also helped the run defense. If the Lions go back to that crap any time in this season they would be foolish. You do exactly what we just did to the Falcons, running qbs may put up an extra 14 points or so, but that would still be fine. When you get to the qb all kinds of good things can happen too, sack/fumble, which we saw in this game. INT’s can happen when you pressure the qb.
There have been many a running qb run for 50, 60, 70 yards and still lose because they were sacked a few times and pressured into an INT or two.
If the Lions simply do what they did exactly as they did against the Falcons they will be good to go. As said above, qb’s and Olines WANT that round pocket with plenty of time to throw. So at least one of our coaches or the players themselves put a stop to that nonsense and good for tem, not just do that the rest of the year, and the sacks, incompletions, fumbles and all will come plenty enough. I’ll be glad to take a qb rushing for 70 yards and a TD if we sack him 4 times and force him to throw a pick or two and lower his completion percentage a few points.
The problem is this is the exact approach we took at the beginning of the year last season, and we were all time terrible as a defense. There is a balance, you can’t just pin your ears back all the time.
I thought it was opposite. We started last year playing read and react and half way through the season Campbell said he wanted to simplify it and play more aggressive.
Against the Falcons it appeared they went back to what was successful the last half of the season.
I agree with those who think they just did the same, but better. - IDL winning their one-v-ones while staying in their lanes & driving guys back. no looping or being moved laterally or luckily getting back to the QB or runner after being blocked or over-committing to getting upfield . Not doing the kind of stuff, in other words, that used to have me screaming at my tv when AD99 & co did it for the gazillionth time & the QB made LAR pay. Looks like pressure, gets recorded as a positive stat ( a hit, a pressure, a pass run win by the clock) but really doesn’t affect the offense or create nearly as many chances for the other defenders as some claim. Fisher & infamous DC Gregg Williams finally got him/them to play it differently & McVay & his DCs were smart enough to emulate.
The complementary thing, which is key, too, was super-evident; Hutch & Harris finished like terminators as the IDL not only held their lanes, but shrank the pocket when they weren’t able to shed, fun to watch after the close-no-cigar Benny Hill run-arounds vs SEA. Charles Harris, btw, seems to be knocking off big chunks of rust every game ; that sack was sweet. The LBs and DBs filled and backed up contain outside very well, vs run & pass.
Again, I’ve seen this strategy work well vs SEA in the Wussell days. DET finally did it well. Ridder didn’t handle it well, for sure, but you can only beat the guy in front of you. Kudos.
As to the QB rush 50+ TD thing being an acceptable trade-off ? No sir, absolute bullpickles, imo… Even in games where DET got pressure/sacks, eg vs BUF, it was a difference maker.
It was hyper aggressive. We were blitzing like crazy early in the year, sending DBs all the time. A lot of single coverage behind it (with Oruwariye, gag), Aidan especially was playing too aggressively and leaving huge run lanes, as were the rest of our linemen.
Through the first half of the season we were third in the league in blitz rate yet 22nd in sack rate (and most of those came against Carson Wentz). We still blitzed at a league average rate over the last half of the season and were much more successful. It will always be a part of AG’s identity.
Our biggest improvement was against the run (save the Carolina game), and that was because we asked our DL to become less aggressive. Our interior guys 2-gapped a lot more often. Basically, we focused much more on stopping the run as we went to the QB, whereas before they were just rushing like maniacs.
Let me paraphrase a couple of things Dan Campbell has said in his pressers.
’ Look, each week I go in to the coordinators and say, ‘here’s how we’re going to beat this team’, and they put together a game plan to get it done’
‘We’re not transitioning from contain to pressure fast enough.’ We have to shed blocks and get after the Qb.
The second one was aimed at players, but I felt like it was aimed at AG as well. And the results against Ridder and the birds seemed to go along with my thinking.
They have to play contain against guys like Mahomes and Hurts, but get after lesser QB’s like Geno and Ridder.
I think it was an adjustment in the way AG interpreted Dan’s plan for a win vs Seattle. Maybe both Dan and AG got it wrong we will never know.
But I sure hope it’s corrected on all sides now, players, staff, and HC.
Oh, by the way, Dan did mention the staff post game.
