I think a lot of people are overlooking the impact of those two big rushes.
We went from playing with a lead which is our strength, to playing catch up which is our weakness.
The D needs to get better on their gap assignments. I noticed Jack missed his gap on one of the big runs.
The D is the strength of this team. They can't nullify their positive impact by allowing huge negative plays like this and expect to win games, not with this offense.
Those two plays got us behind and changed the whole complexion of the game.
Jets fans do not agree with me on this one, but from every angle I could see Telvin Smith and/or Calais Campbell making contact with Bilal Powell. Andrew Catalon and James Lofton agreed it was too close to call, which leaves open the possibility Powell was down by contact. If Gene Steratore ruled the runner was DBC, Al Riveron would have upheld that too and most of the 75 yards would not count against us in the run defense statistics. But even if that call was correct - and I hope Riveron talks about it tonight either way - you have to say our run defense sucks because Powell and McGuire (I forget his first name) burned us all day. There is no question Myles Jack screwed up on one play in the second half and 69 yard TDs are inexcusable.
I'm guessing we'll see more base D next week as the Jags look to shore up the run defense.
I also think Barry Church can and will re-focus a bit after seeing the jets game film.
I don't expect miracles, but I think they are capable of defending the run better.
(10-03-2017, 01:45 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing we'll see more base D next week as the Jags look to shore up the run defense.
I also think Barry Church can and will re-focus a bit after seeing the Jets game film.
I don't expect miracles, but I think they are capable of defending the run better.
Barry Church is very good against the pass, As the last line of defense, he is not supposed to be needed on running plays - the LBs should get to RBs first. However, I do worry about his ability to stop better running backs who can easily get past the second level.
(10-03-2017, 02:01 PM)JaguarsWoman Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2017, 01:45 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing we'll see more base D next week as the Jags look to shore up the run defense.
I also think Barry Church can and will re-focus a bit after seeing the Jets game film.
I don't expect miracles, but I think they are capable of defending the run better.
Barry Church is very good against the pass, As the last line of defense, he is not supposed to be needed on running plays - the LBs should get to RBs first. However, I do worry about his ability to stop better running backs who can easily get past the second level.
Are you seriously saying the strong safety isn't needed on running plays?
(10-03-2017, 02:07 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2017, 02:01 PM)JaguarsWoman Wrote: [ -> ]Barry Church is very good against the pass, As the last line of defense, he is not supposed to be needed on running plays - the LBs should get to RBs first. However, I do worry about his ability to stop better running backs who can easily get past the second level.
Are you seriously saying the strong safety isn't needed on running plays?
Are you questioning JDub????
(10-03-2017, 02:10 PM)jags_r_bake Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2017, 02:07 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ]Are you seriously saying the strong safety isn't needed on running plays?
Are you questioning JDub????
Yeah... I shouldn't even bother.... I know better.
(10-03-2017, 01:45 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing we'll see more base D next week as the Jags look to shore up the run defense.
I also think Barry Church can and will re-focus a bit after seeing the jets game film.
I don't expect miracles, but I think they are capable of defending the run better.
The Steelers are in 11 personnel with Brown/Martavis/Juju more than just about anyone. It's going to be a whole lot of nickel for us Sunday.
(10-03-2017, 02:07 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2017, 02:01 PM)JaguarsWoman Wrote: [ -> ]Barry Church is very good against the pass, As the last line of defense, he is not supposed to be needed on running plays - the LBs should get to RBs first. However, I do worry about his ability to stop better running backs who can easily get past the second level.
Are you seriously saying the strong safety isn't needed on running plays?
She's using new math. Be patient.
(10-03-2017, 03:34 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2017, 01:45 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing we'll see more base D next week as the Jags look to shore up the run defense.
I also think Barry Church can and will re-focus a bit after seeing the jets game film.
I don't expect miracles, but I think they are capable of defending the run better.
The Steelers are in 11 personnel with Brown/Martavis/Juju more than just about anyone. It's going to be a whole lot of nickel for us Sunday.
So what you are saying is Bell is gonna have a huge day against us. Sigh, it was nice being 0.500 and over for a bit.
(10-03-2017, 03:34 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2017, 01:45 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing we'll see more base D next week as the Jags look to shore up the run defense.
I also think Barry Church can and will re-focus a bit after seeing the jets game film.
I don't expect miracles, but I think they are capable of defending the run better.
The Steelers are in 11 personnel with Brown/Martavis/Juju more than just about anyone. It's going to be a whole lot of nickel for us Sunday.
The question is whether or not they run Bell out of that formation frequently or not.
If they are smart, they'll run a lot. Will they show it often with a FB or a two TE set that allows us to get in base? If they are running out of "11" all day it'll be tough sledding for the Jags.
(10-03-2017, 02:07 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ] (10-03-2017, 02:01 PM)JaguarsWoman Wrote: [ -> ]Barry Church is very good against the pass, As the last line of defense, he is not supposed to be needed on running plays - the LBs should get to RBs first. However, I do worry about his ability to stop better running backs who can easily get past the second level.
Are you seriously saying the strong safety isn't needed on running plays?
I am saying if a linebacker tackles the RB he won't get to the SS. Barry Church needs to stop the RB if the OLB does not. Is my logic flawed there?
(10-03-2017, 03:48 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]The question is whether or not they run Bell out of that formation frequently or not.
If they are smart, they'll run a lot. Will they show it often with a FB or a two TE set that allows us to get in base? If they are running out of "11" all day it'll be tough sledding for the Jags.
Through the first 3 weeks 45 of the Steelers rushes were out of 11 while only 21 rushes were out of 12 or 21, and that includes a few kneels that count as rushes. I'll edit if I see updated numbers through week 4 but I'd say it's safe to assume they are along the same lines. I'd expect a lot of spread us out and run it.
Are the Jags missing Roy Miller? I haven't heard Abry Jones' name called all that often on run D.
I’m honestly not worried about the running defense. These numbers are extremely skewed especially after the jets game and titans game. Baltimore even got some cheap rushing yards in after we benched the starters.
I saw one fluke play on Sunday and two good runs by the jets. That’s it. They still only gave up 20 points (really 17 due to an interception inside the seven). This run game and the defense is not my concern. They could give up 1000 yards on the ground for all I care. They are still tops in point given up and that is the important stats to be worried about.
Giving up 5.7ypc. I think we’ll get it cleaned up, but it’s definitely a concern as of now.
What's "11"? Running out of "11", etc.?
Don't attack me, just explain it so I can keep up.
(10-03-2017, 04:38 PM)Etdavis2006 Wrote: [ -> ]I’m honestly not worried about the running defense. These numbers are extremely skewed especially after the jets game and titans game. Baltimore even got some cheap rushing yards in after we benched the starters.
I saw one fluke play on Sunday and two good runs by the jets. That’s it. They still only gave up 20 points (really 17 due to an interception inside the seven). This run game and the defense is not my concern. They could give up 1000 yards on the ground for all I care. They are still tops in point given up and that is the important stats to be worried about.
Half of our season so far we gave up a lot of rushing yards that were
not on fluke plays or with the backups. If you are not concerned about that, you need to get your eyes checked.
(10-03-2017, 05:04 PM)PF* Wrote: [ -> ]What's "11"? Running out of "11", etc.?
Don't attack me, just explain it so I can keep up.
No prob, I got you.
Think of it as a way to distribute your backs, TEs, and WR personnel, with the assumption you have 5 total. The order of the two numbers goes backs, TEs, with the understanding that WRs fill the rest.
So:
11 is 1 back, 1 TE, 3 WRs
12 is 1 back, 2 TE, 2 WRs
21 is 2 backs, 1 TE, 2 WRs
Or at least that’s what I’ve always been taught.
(10-03-2017, 05:15 PM)RedRooster28 Wrote: [ -> ]Think of it as a way to distribute your backs, TEs, and WR personnel, with the assumption you have 5 total. The order of the two numbers goes backs, TEs, with the understanding that WRs fill the rest.
So:
11 is 1 back, 1 TE, 3 WRs
12 is 1 back, 2 TE, 2 WRs
21 is 2 backs, 1 TE, 2 WRs
Or at least that’s what I’ve always been taught.
I hear 11 personnel and 12 personnel often but not 21 personnel. I think it is 10, 11, and 12. The number 21 makes no sense.