Create Account


Board Performance Issues We are aware of performance issues on the board and are working to resolve them! The board may be intermittently unavailable during this time. (May 07) x


The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
What is broken with the run defense?

#1

Are linebackers not respecting their gaps? Are we too light in the LB position so they get run over easily? Was Roy Miller that good?
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#2

Our run defense is so bad I can't credit Roy Miller for making it good in the past. This could be a tradeoff for improving the pass defense, I don't know.
Reply

#3

I think Miller was really good and I think Malik may not be 100%. Primarily that. Honestly I don’t think our run defense is that bad, the numbers just look that way. Outside of the yets game and the tacks game the run Defense wasnt that bad. They kept Bell in check, Gurley didn’t really dominate and the tinhorns got some hidden yards from Watson. The tacks and yets game was so bad it really skewed the numbers. Can they be better yes but it’s not like they are giving up a legit 185 a week. We just had two really bad games. If we have three games where we hold a team to 20 rushing yards, then the numbers will adjust. But watching the games, I only saw two really bad rush defense days. The other 4 were decent.

We also played 6 solid teams record wise to start the season. Let’s play some bad teams and see if the numbers start to even out.
Reply

#4

(10-17-2017, 07:52 PM)Etdavis2006 Wrote: I think Miller was really good and I think Malik may not be 100%. Primarily that. Honestly I don’t think our run defense is that bad, the numbers just look that way. Outside of the Jets game and the tacks game the run Defense wasn't that bad. They kept Bell in check, Gurley didn’t really dominate and the Tinhorns got some hidden yards from Watson. The tacks and Jets game was so bad it really skewed the numbers. Can they be better yes but it’s not like they are giving up a legit 185 a week. We just had two really bad games. If we have three games where we hold a team to 20 rushing yards, then the numbers will adjust. But watching the games, I only saw two really bad rush defense days. The other 4 were decent.

We also played 6 solid teams record wise to start the season. Let’s play some bad teams and see if the numbers start to even out.

The thing is, a good run defense would never give up a lot of yards to Jets backups. Bilal Powell and a player I had never heard of? I thought we would benefit from Matt Forte being ruled out. No, it was not skewed by two games, because one of them was against second and third string no-name RBs.
Reply

#5
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2017, 08:29 PM by flgatorsandjags.)

(10-17-2017, 07:42 PM)haveaseat Wrote: Are linebackers not respecting their gaps? Are we too light in the LB position so they get run over easily? Was Roy Miller that good?

Yes Roy Miller was that good.  When he was at Tampa they were first against the run.  He left and not so much.  He came here and we were top 5 against the run when he was healthy.  The time he was here, when he was out injured, our run D was nothing like it was when Roy was playing.  Marks was better than Jackson against the run too.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#6

2 LBs are too light and one is old and slow. Move the 2 light and fast LBs to safeties and acquire through draft/free agency 3 physical thumper LBs
Reply

#7

(10-17-2017, 09:54 PM)Jagsfan32277 Wrote: 2 LBs are too light and one is old and slow. Move the 2 light and fast LBs to safeties and acquire through draft/free agency  3 physical thumper LBs

Is there a minimum weight for LBs to be good run defenders?
Reply

#8

(10-17-2017, 09:54 PM)Jagsfan32277 Wrote: 2 LBs are too light and one is old and slow.  Move the 2 light and fast LBs to safeties and acquire through draft/free agency   3 physical thumper LBs

Myles Jack is 244. How heavy do you want you LB's?
Reply

#9

(10-17-2017, 10:05 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote:
(10-17-2017, 09:54 PM)Jagsfan32277 Wrote: 2 LBs are too light and one is old and slow.  Move the 2 light and fast LBs to safeties and acquire through draft/free agency   3 physical thumper LBs

Myles Jack is 244. How heavy do you want you LB's?

That looks big enough to me. Traditional LBs are typically in the 250 range.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#10

(10-17-2017, 10:05 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote:
(10-17-2017, 09:54 PM)Jagsfan32277 Wrote: 2 LBs are too light and one is old and slow.  Move the 2 light and fast LBs to safeties and acquire through draft/free agency   3 physical thumper LBs

Myles Jack is 244. How heavy do you want you LB's?

My  OLBS would be 250-255 and run a 4.5, 4.6, and the ILB would be a nasty hard hitting 255 to 260 run 4.6 to 4.7
Reply

#11

(10-17-2017, 10:15 PM)Jagsfan32277 Wrote:
(10-17-2017, 10:05 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: Myles Jack is 244. How heavy do you want you LBs?

My OLBs would be 250-255 and run a 4.5, 4.6, and the ILB would be a nasty hard hitting 255 to 260 run 4.6 to 4.7

That is ~10 pounds heavier than Myles Jack. If he needs to bulk up, that is not a problem.
Reply

#12

(10-17-2017, 10:15 PM)Jagsfan32277 Wrote:
(10-17-2017, 10:05 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: Myles Jack is 244. How heavy do you want you LB's?

My  OLBS would be 250-255 and run a 4.5, 4.6, and the ILB would be a nasty hard hitting 255 to 260 run 4.6 to 4.7

Luke Kuechly says hello. At 6'3" 238, would not make your roster.
If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley

[Image: kiWL4mF.jpg]
 
Reply

#13

(10-17-2017, 10:22 PM)rollerjag Wrote: Luke Kuechly says hello. At 6'3" 238, would not make your roster.

I knew there was another elite LB under 250.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#14
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2017, 10:51 PM by FreeAgent01.)

Good luck finding linebackers that weigh 255 and run a 4.5 or that weigh 260s and run a 4.6. There aren't very many of them.
Reply

#15

The simple stuff. Wrapping up. Bad angles. Not touching the runner down.
Reply

#16

It's a personnel problem mostly. Our front 7 is just light in the pants. Abry Jones was a backup 3 tech that got forced to play starting 1 tech when Roy Miller got hurt. He overachieved and the team decided to just let him stay in that role despite not being best suited for that role. Other than that Yannick is among the worst run defending DEs in the game and our nickel linebackers are both small.

It's a trade off that the team is willing to make for the sacks and ball hawking LB abilities, and I don't necessarily disagree with it. The only thing that could really improve going forward is getting a true run stuffing 1 tech like Roy or Pot Roast in the offseason. The rest of the personnel is pretty locked in as is.
Reply

#17

(10-17-2017, 11:30 PM)Upper Wrote: It's a personnel problem mostly. Our front 7 is just light in the pants. Abry Jones was a backup 3 tech that got forced to play starting 1 tech when Roy Miller got hurt. He overachieved and the team decided to just let him stay in that role despite not being best suited for that role. Other than that Yannick is among the worst run defending DEs in the game and our nickel linebackers are both small.

It's a trade off that the team is willing to make for the sacks and ball hawking LB abilities, and I don't necessarily disagree with it. The only thing that could really improve going forward is getting a true run stuffing 1 tech like Roy or Pot Roast in the offseason. The rest of the personnel is pretty locked in as is.

Yep, we a Sacksonville, not runstoppingville. Doesn't even sound right.

Are the line personnel overrunning their gaps to get to the quarterback on every play, even run plays? Are they being pushed around by the opposing line?

As far as LBs go, there was a trend going for smaller faster cover guys because the league was becoming pass heavy. No the pendulum is swinging the other way. Many teams are returning to big physical RBs. So it will be a natural response over the next several years for the league to start returning to big slower run stuffing backs. Speed kills until you overrun your target.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#18

(10-17-2017, 11:40 PM)jseymour Wrote: Yep, we a Sacksonville, not runstoppingville. Doesn't even sound right.

Are the line personnel over-running their gaps to get to the quarterback on every play, even run plays? Are they being pushed around by the opposing line?

As far as LBs go, there was a trend going for smaller faster cover guys because the league was becoming pass heavy. No the pendulum is swinging the other way. Many teams are returning to big physical RBs. So it will be a natural response over the next several years for the league to start returning to big slower run stuffing backs. Speed kills until you overrun your target.

I don't agree with the size/speed tradeoff. Yes, smaller guys tend to run faster, but how would you explain Leonard Fournette's 40 time being similar at 240 and 228 pounds? I doubt it would be much different for LBs who gain or lose 12 pounds.
Reply

#19

Yannick isn't a good run player

Malik is playing with an injured groin

All of our depth players on the DL are geared towards pass rushing.

Our LBs aren't as disciplined as they could be.
Reply

#20

The Jets gashing us with the long TDs was discipline issues. That can be fixed and isn't a huge deal overall.

The Titans and Rams just relentlessly ripping off 5 yard chunks after we started getting a little tired is a personnel issue that isn't really fixable this year. Any relatively strong rushing attack that doesn't get down quick from giving us defensive touchdowns will wear us out and control the 2nd half.
Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!