| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39259
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 6:47 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle |
Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.
The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans? |
Their only good years they had Chris Johnson and Albert Haynesworth in their prime.
Every other year they were mediocre.
For all the crap we give Haynesworth, if you weren't triple-teaming him he was probably collapsing the pocket.
_________________
 | theuntouchable wrote: | | Think about this phire. I am the real chow. |
| stevec0008 wrote: | | I read all the time, and laugh, a lot. Mostly at oland. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 9950
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle |
Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.
The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans? |
My points was more to say that we're missing the key component[see Haynesworth, Albert; Suh, Ndamukong] to the wide nine. It wasn't very good last year and now with this loss of Patterson and the downgrade in play from Jenkins, it's gotten worse.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39259
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The funny thing is, despite how bad the wide-9 has been for us Castillo lost his job over it 
#4Juan
_________________
| theuntouchable wrote: | | Think about this phire. I am the real chow. |
| stevec0008 wrote: | | I read all the time, and laugh, a lot. Mostly at oland. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RainbowCarebear
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 22706
Location: Avenging his brother by slaying three of Prince Rhaegar's bannermen and later Rodrik Greyjoy
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Phire wrote: | | RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle |
Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.
The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans? |
Their only good years they had Chris Johnson and Albert Haynesworth in their prime.
Every other year they were mediocre.
For all the crap we give Haynesworth, if you weren't triple-teaming him he was probably collapsing the pocket. |
That's not true at all. They had good run defense prior to Haynesworth, I'm not going to look up the sacks, but I'm going on a limp and say they were good probably 35-40 +
We led the league in sacks, how wasn't the wide 9 good last year?
_________________
"Of gold and silver and gemstones, it had none; bronze and iron were the metals of winter"
"He is part of you, Robb. To fear him is to fear you."
"These are northmen, Uncle. The north remembers." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eagles_808
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 24806
Location: Torrance, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Phire wrote: | The funny thing is, despite how bad the wide-9 has been for us Castillo lost his job over it
...
#4Juan |
I know feel bad for Juany boy. He didn't deserve to be the scapegoat.
_________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 9950
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | We led the league in sacks, how wasn't the wide 9 good last year? |
Our run defense was freaking awful last year.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39259
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Phire wrote: | | RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle |
Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.
The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans? |
Their only good years they had Chris Johnson and Albert Haynesworth in their prime.
Every other year they were mediocre.
For all the crap we give Haynesworth, if you weren't triple-teaming him he was probably collapsing the pocket. |
That's not true at all. They had good run defense prior to Haynesworth, I'm not going to look up the sacks, but I'm going on a limp and say they were good probably 35-40 + |
How could you possibly tell me "that's not true at all" without looking up stats or giving me something to look at?
Washburn was hired as DL coach in Tennessee in 1999.
Top 5 defenses in PTS: 2000, 2008
Top 6-10 defenses in PTS: 2007
Top 11-15 defenses in PTS: 1999, 2002, 2003, 2010
Bottom 16-20 defenses in PTS: None
Bottom 20-25 defenses in PTS: 2001
Bottom 26-32 defenses in PTS: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009
His defense against yardage is even worse.
Top 10 finishes: twice (Haynesworth)
Middle 10 finishes: 3 times
Bottom 12 finishes: 6 times
Not sure if completely accurate on the years.
His defense was good when he had the best defensive player in the league on his roster, ala Jevon Kearse and Albert Haynesworth.
Without them, his defenses have been lackluster. That's why Tennessee hasn't been a dominant team in the last decade...
| Quote: | | We led the league in sacks, how wasn't the wide 9 good last year? |
And we still finished 8-8.
a) looking just at sack totals is pulling a "PE".
b) I never said the wide-9 wasn't good last year, I felt they had good pressure on the quarterback.
c) I don't know what Tennessee's run defense was prior or after Haynesworth, all I know is that Washburn had some good defensive players in Tennessee for his entire tenure and that helped him look good, although their defenses had way more mediocre defenses than good ones.
It should be noted that I DO NOT BELIEVE defensive stats should be directly attributed to the defensive line coach.
_________________
| theuntouchable wrote: | | Think about this phire. I am the real chow. |
| stevec0008 wrote: | | I read all the time, and laugh, a lot. Mostly at oland. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RainbowCarebear
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 22706
Location: Avenging his brother by slaying three of Prince Rhaegar's bannermen and later Rodrik Greyjoy
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Phire wrote: | a) looking just at sack totals is pulling a "PE".
b) I never said the wide-9 wasn't good last year, I felt they had good pressure on the quarterback.
c) I don't know what Tennessee's run defense was prior or after Haynesworth, all I know is that Washburn had some good defensive players in Tennessee for his entire tenure and that helped him look good, although their defenses had way more mediocre defenses than good ones. |
a) Was just me being lazy, Washburn have always gotten a good amount of sacks, regardless of 1st rounders or UDFA's.
b) wasn't talk to you, was talking to someone else.
c) 2000 and 2001 they had top 5 run defenses, both prior Haynesworth. 2000 55 sacks, 2001 32 sacks.
And are you seriously judging the overall defense based on the Dline? Sacks and run defense are probably the best way to judge that unit.
The fact you need a "dominate" DT in the wide 9 is bs. It's a good thing, but not a need at all.
Are we going to forget we had a short off season and bad Linebackers and blame the wide 9 on our not very good run defense last year?
_________________
"Of gold and silver and gemstones, it had none; bronze and iron were the metals of winter"
"He is part of you, Robb. To fear him is to fear you."
"These are northmen, Uncle. The north remembers." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky_b27
Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 17010
Location: Nottingham, England
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Phire wrote: | a) looking just at sack totals is pulling a "PE".
b) I never said the wide-9 wasn't good last year, I felt they had good pressure on the quarterback.
c) I don't know what Tennessee's run defense was prior or after Haynesworth, all I know is that Washburn had some good defensive players in Tennessee for his entire tenure and that helped him look good, although their defenses had way more mediocre defenses than good ones. |
a) Was just me being lazy, Washburn have always gotten a good amount of sacks, regardless of 1st rounders or UDFA's.
b) wasn't talk to you, was talking to someone else.
c) 2000 and 2001 they had top 5 run defenses, both prior Haynesworth. 2000 55 sacks, 2001 32 sacks.
And are you seriously judging the overall defense based on the Dline? Sacks and run defense are probably the best way to judge that unit.
The fact you need a "dominate" DT in the wide 9 is bs. It's a good thing, but not a need at all.
Are we going to forget we had a short off season and bad Linebackers and blame the wide 9 on our not very good run defense last year? |
I judge a defense by:
Points per game
Third down percentage
Turnovers
_________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 9950
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | The fact you need a "dominate" DT in the wide 9 is bs. It's a good thing, but not a need at all. |
There's nothing that proves this is true. I've seen Detroit have success with the wide nine and they have one of the most dominant defensive tackles in the league. You've also seen Tennessee's best years coming when Haynesworth was being a man child, dominant.
....and then there's us, who've struggled with this for two years. Let's look at what we don't have on ur defensive line; a dominant defensive tackle. I don't really think there's anyways you can prove that you don't need a dominant defensive tackle to have decent success with the wide nine.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oland11
Joined: 15 Jul 2011
Posts: 7273
Location: "This ****ing game is over!" - Chuck Bednarik
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
So pretty much we're coming o the conclusion/argument that we need a dominant NT to eat up blocks and free up one on ones for the other guys and this will help our DL be more dominant?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39259
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
We need to abandon the wide-9 the same way the wide-9 abandons discipline.
_________________
| theuntouchable wrote: | | Think about this phire. I am the real chow. |
| stevec0008 wrote: | | I read all the time, and laugh, a lot. Mostly at oland. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 9950
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Phire wrote: | | We need to abandon the wide-9 the same way the wide-9 abandons discipline. |
pretty much this; I can't wait until this clown Washburn is gone.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phire
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 39259
Location: #championchip 2012 HoF
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eagles_808
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 24806
Location: Torrance, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Might as well give him a chance. It's not our ends are lighting the world on fire this season.
_________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
