More Bite, Less Bark
From the Associated Press:
Safety Michael Huff said he’s happy to be playing a "real defense" in his seventh season with the Raiders. "Nothing personal but, obviously, before with Al, rest in peace, he had his hands in all the defense." Huff said. "He had all his little things he liked to do. Now with D.A. out there, we got all kinds of blitzes, we got 3-4, 4-3 fronts, just a lot of different variety and a lot of different things going on. So, I’m going to love it."
Training camp is finally here. It's already starting to feel like autumn, even though the calendar says it's July.
Michael Huff sounds pumped up. Tommy Kelly has made similar comments. But here's the thing: talk is cheap. If anyone should know that, it's Raiders fans.
It's time for Huff, Kelly and Company to step up and turn our defense from a farce into a force. It's sounds like they are retroactively blaming the scheme for the defense's poor performance in recent years.
Okay fellas, now you're getting what you say you've always wanted, so no more excuses. Go ahead and talk about how you've been limited, and how you're finally being unleashed. But from this point forward, we need less bark and a lot more bite on the defensive side of the ball.
Safety Michael Huff said he’s happy to be playing a "real defense" in his seventh season with the Raiders. "Nothing personal but, obviously, before with Al, rest in peace, he had his hands in all the defense." Huff said. "He had all his little things he liked to do. Now with D.A. out there, we got all kinds of blitzes, we got 3-4, 4-3 fronts, just a lot of different variety and a lot of different things going on. So, I’m going to love it."
Training camp is finally here. It's already starting to feel like autumn, even though the calendar says it's July.
Michael Huff sounds pumped up. Tommy Kelly has made similar comments. But here's the thing: talk is cheap. If anyone should know that, it's Raiders fans.
It's time for Huff, Kelly and Company to step up and turn our defense from a farce into a force. It's sounds like they are retroactively blaming the scheme for the defense's poor performance in recent years.
Okay fellas, now you're getting what you say you've always wanted, so no more excuses. Go ahead and talk about how you've been limited, and how you're finally being unleashed. But from this point forward, we need less bark and a lot more bite on the defensive side of the ball.
posted by Raider Take at 10:40 AM
15 Comments:
As always, it ultimately boils down to execution.
At least now the D will be attempting to play chess proficiently instead of checkers.
Consistent with the singular approach the Raiders had on D, one complaint has long been the Raiders inability to make adjustments (except to a prevent D, of course).
Being more multiple in scheme should benefit the Raiders.
This is on the coaches as well as the players. It's time to put up or shut up.
I look forward to not being able to predict the defense weeks ahead of time. In past years I've been able to say "in the 2nd quarter of the game 4 weeks from now, the Raiders will line up in man coverage on 3rd down, rush 4, and give up 15 yards on a crossing pattern. If the safety misses a tackle, it goes for a touchdown." Mike Austin shredding Nnamdi comes to mind . . .
What kills me....I was watching NFL Network and the 'experts' were asked what the most "intriguing story going into the season" was accordng to these experts. One said the coaching change in Tampa and how interesting it will be with a HC that won't be a players coach. The other 'expert' said something about some other team and I just shook my head. In Oakland, we had an Owner/HC/GM/Head Scout who had run the org since '63. He passed and a whole new culture, schemes, coaches, front office, staff, players AND NOT ONE WORD SAID by these 'experts'? Then you have other experts who talk about the Raiders as if there has been no change at all? Like it's being run in the same fashion as the last 50 years. I'm sure glad these 'experts' aren't my stock broker.
JONES
JACK....execution can only occur if the players are put in a position to be able to execute. Like Storminator wrote, the other teams knew exactly what was coming from the Raiders and it's very hard to execute when the Offense has that much of an advantage over them, play after play. Now the D will have the element of surprise, the element of deception in coverages. This will give the players a higher probability of execution. I believe the returning vets are going to have a good time on D this year.
JONES
I'm optimistic
Agreed Jones which is why I made the analogy of Chess vs. Checkers.
The Raiders D will no longer be static, singular or predictable.
A more aggressive, dynamic, cutting edge, complex, multi-pronged approach will be incorporated into our defensive philosophy.
This keeps the offensive opponent off-guard and more prone to making mistakes.
I think we can expect more turnovers from our D this year. They previously spent too much time playing M2M with their backs to the QB. More zone, disguising formations and blitzing should improve our takeaways... and you don't need to be a stats guy to know there's a strong correlation between takeaways and winning.
It's interesting to read local sportswriters in McFadden's health will determine how far the Raiders go this season. I shake my head with disdain on that comment.
Our offense will perform better with McFadden, but if we get Cedric Benson, then there will be a better balance offensively.
I think the determining factor of how far the Raiders will go lies solely on the defensive play at stopping the run. Will the players put themselves in a position to execute? That is the biggest question mark coming into the new season. With a Defensive minded coach, I think they are moving toward that direction.
Paul Gutierrez had this quote in an article late yesterday:
"'We don't execute, it's going to be the same as last year.' -- defensive tackle Tommy Kelly, on the Raiders' run defense."
It seems that even the players are getting it.
JUST WIN, BABY!
based on al davis' past defenses, you would need a superstar at every position to make that work. obviously, we don't have superstars. well, we do (seymour) but he's way past his prime. with the changes (mostly in the front office) we don't need superstars, we just need a team concept, especially on defense. if this coaching staff can get these guys to play together, they just might be decent. we don't need superstars, we just need these guys to do their job. so if the defense sucks AGAIN this year with the new scheme, its time to clean house because we'll know if this group can play or not. so far they cannot. that is until they prove otherwise.
"
if this group can play or not. so far they cannot. that is until they prove otherwise."
I think we saw them play in a Defense that put them in positions to make plays. When Marshall was DC, he went against Mr.Davis' wishes (Nnamdi quote of "getting yelled at") and used more blitzing and more looks. When Marshall did that, the Defense would have a good game, of course the D went back to it's roots the next game. IMO, the talent has been and is there, with the new look D, it's going to be very interesting to see what happens.
JONES
Marshall actually made progress, then was canned in favor of Bresnahan, who previously hadn't been able to find employment in the NFL.
It's been a painful nine years.
The D is a work in progress due to the significant changes in philosophy. I still expect to see tangible improvements this year.
As a fan it will be very interesting to watch our D evolve and be far more unpredicatable.
New take is up!
golden goose sneakers
fake rolex watches
stephen curry 5
bape hoodie
golden goose
kobe byrant shoes
yeezy 500
michael kors outlet
vapormax
hogan outlet
Post a Comment
<< Home