Dallas Cowboys Game Tape Review: Defense

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Tripp...in your opinion, how are our d-linemen playing in the 3-4 scheme? In the offseason, I saw teams give a high priority to retain their NTs (Wilfork in NE, Hampton in Pittsburgh, and Franklin in San Fran) and honestly I feel like we don't have a good 3-4 NT. I feel that Haynesworth doesn't fit the 3-4 scheme in general, and Kemo is not a good player for such important position. Also, how do you see Carriker/Daniels/Holliday playing in this scheme?

Our defensive line isn't great. Haynesworth is going to be neutralized as a great/dominant player being asked to do what we ask of him against the run. Against the pass, he will be himself. I don't think it was a coincidence that Dallas ran or threw quick screens whenever he entered the game.

Carriker is going to be our best DLman when he's healthy, but that's not going to be for 16 games. Golston is bad as a two-gap. Daniels is better for the scheme, but really, really plays like an old man out there. I think we could use Holliday more on regular downs and Haynesworth on passing downs. Holliday might be the best DE we have, if not Carriker.

Jarmon figures to get up to speed at some point. He could be the fresh blood we are looking for.

Regardless, we don't need a lot of DLmen. In our nickel package, we just need two. Teams like to spread us out more than we like to spread them out, so that limits the amount of DL on the field. If we keep Haynesworth in the fold, we will never have a problem on the defensive line. If we get rid of him, quality depth, even in a 2-4 front, becomes really scarce.

Defensive lineman just aren't a big part of this scheme, generally speaking. I doubt we draft a big nose tackle next year because it's all about the linebackers and corners and safeties. With that said, I don't like a lot of the defensive linemen we are playing, specifically, Daniels and Golston are weaknesses.

[Dirtbag59]

For some reason when I was watching the game I kept on thinking that #91 was Jarmon, not Holliday.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Tripp...in your opinion, how are our d-linemen playing in the 3-4 scheme? In the offseason, I saw teams give a high priority to retain their NTs (Wilfork in NE, Hampton in Pittsburgh, and Franklin in San Fran) and honestly I feel like we don't have a good 3-4 NT. I feel that Haynesworth doesn't fit the 3-4 scheme in general, and Kemo is not a good player for such important position. Also, how do you see Carriker/Daniels/Holliday playing in this scheme?

What we're seeing now is the by-product of an important point that was made by some during the offseason. We really don't have the proper personell to effectively make a 3-4 defense work to the peak of effeciency. N/T is the key clog in a 3-4 and we don't have one. We have a player lining up at the position that cannot effectively play it. That fact could contribute to why so much emphasis has been placed on trying to get Haynesworth to play at the position. As it stands right now, we just don't have a lot going with the three players we're starting as down linemen.

[tryfuhl]

Love defensive breakdowns, thanks.

[tryfuhl]

Letting them get to the 10 is a problem as well.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Letting them get to the 10 is a problem as well.

Well, right, and the biggest thorn in our side on Sunday (both inside and outside of the ten) was clearly Miles Austin.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Let's not forget about the LBs. In a 3-4 it's not always about which line pushes which. If the DL can hold blocks to free up the LBs, then it doesn't matter if they are "pushed around", within reason.

I'd also like to point out that the 3-4 was born out of necessity, because it's hard to find good pass rushing DEs. So, the idea is to get a few stiffs for the DL, and let all the LBs do the work. Of course your need switches from DE to NT, but in theory that is easier, because they don't need to be very athletic.

[GTripp0012]

The 2006 Colts and 2009 Saints were pretty weak versus the run. Those teams did other things well (passing offenses), but they were very good defenses overall.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The 2006 Colts and 2009 Saints were pretty weak versus the run. Those teams did other things well (passing offenses), but they were very good defenses overall.

Which why I said "Not to many Sb winning teams that were weak against the run. Just a fact."

Interesting side note on the 2006 Colts while not good during the season against the run, they shut down the other teams run in the playoffs when it mattered.

2006 Playoffs
Wildcard game vs. KC = 44 yards rushing total

Division playoff game vs. Ravens= 83 yards rushing

Conference Championship game vs NE = 93 yards rushing

Super Bowl vs CHI = 111 yards rushing

And their opponents knew their weakness.

[Lotus]

GTripp, that was a fine analysis. It is much appreciated.

However, I have to agree with Defensewins and others. The weak Cowboys line led to about a 5 ypc. A stronger offensive line will lead to worse. The long runs may have been 11 and 12 yards, but against a better (and better coached) offense those longs could turn into 15 or 20 yards.

Giving up yards even in just 5 yard chunks makes it difficult to put offenses in third and long situations, where conversion is difficult and we can turn dogs like Rak loose.

Our run defense just has to tighten up. It may take an offseason to happen, given that we need to stop putting 4-3 square pegs in 3-4 round holes and we really need a real NT.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Our run defense just has to tighten up. It may take an offseason to happen, given that we need to stop putting 4-3 square pegs in 3-4 round holes and we really need a real NT.

Well stated.

[tryfuhl]

Apparently D. Ware suffered a minor concussion during the game. Means Trent was all up in his face probably as only he and I believe, Cooley on one play, really touched him the whole game.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Apparently D. Ware suffered a minor concussion during the game. Means Trent was all up in his face probably as only he and I believe, Cooley on one play, really touched him the whole game.

It was probably from the hit he took from LJ late in the game

[exit0]

I give the defense an overall A- against this Dallas team who is suppose to have this high powered, 30 points a game offense (although noted is their OL injuries). Even with throwing the ball almost 50 times in this game, Dallas still only averaged 5.8 yards per attempt... pretty lousy for what is suppose to be the "most talented" offense in the league. Dallas may not have even scored a touchdown without that shanked punt by the Skins.

As for the upcominmg Houston game, I would hope to see the Skins stack the line of scrimmage and play "offensive" defense against the run... ala the Jets and Ravens. I still remember way back in the George Allen days when the Skins had a playoff game against the Packers who had a great running game with John Brockington and Allen stacked the DL and stuffed Brockington all day long. Make Houston beat us with the pass and negate their strong running game.

[MTK]

Thought this was good stuff

Mike Shanahan SFX From The Sidelines Of The Dallas Game

The most revealing part of the video, and the part I'd most be interested in following up on, is London Fletcher's reaction from the very end. Here's Steinberg's recounting of it:

"That was my fault for making it that close," Fletcher said when Shanahan tried to congratulate him on the field right after the game ended.

"Ohhhhh no," Shanahan scoffed, seemingly incredulous.

"I busted coverage on Austin," Fletcher said.

"No," Shanahan said. "I'm so proud of you."