We all know that after a team wins the Super Bowl that many other teams will try to copy their strategy. Will teams start to copy the Giants strategy?

 

The Giants won first and foremost on the strength of a fearsome pass rush generated almost exclusively from it's front four and anchored by two great DE's. I think their LB's were pretty good. However, the secondary, IMO, was a weakness that couldn't be exploited because of their great D-line...the cool thing to me about the Giants is that they often played their 4 best players rather than trying to fit the prototype with big space-eating tackles.

 

Do you think some teams will try to copy this? And by that I mean, will they be less enamored with getting a big DT to fill the middle and look to stockpile guys who can rush the passer.

 

I mean, realistically, a good secondary can only cover so long if you can't rush the passer...on the flipside, if you can rush the passer like the Giants did, you can cover up a weakness and make an average secondary look good.

 

Should a team like Cincinnati consider trying to land the best pass rusher available rather than a stud DT as many, including myself, seem to think? Especially since they already have Geathers and just signed Odom...getting a guy like Gholston, or whoever could suddenly make them a pretty good team at getting in the QB's face.

Every team already tries to have a stout DL, this is nothing new.

Every team already tries to have a stout DL, this is nothing new.

 

They don't all stockpile pass rushers and play 4 DE's across the line do they?

They don't all stockpile pass rushers and play 4 DE's across the line do they?

 

Nope, that's a new concept provided by the G-Men. Other teams will probably try to rush the passer a lot more this year because of the success the Giants had.

We all know that after a team wins the Super Bowl that many other teams will try to copy their strategy. Will teams start to copy the Giants strategy?

 

The Giants won first and foremost on the strength of a fearsome pass rush generated almost exclusively from it's front four and anchored by two great DE's. I think their LB's were pretty good. However, the secondary, IMO, was a weakness that couldn't be exploited because of their great D-line...the cool thing to me about the Giants is that they often played their 4 best players rather than trying to fit the prototype with big space-eating tackles.

 

Do you think some teams will try to copy this? And by that I mean, will they be less enamored with getting a big DT to fill the middle and look to stockpile guys who can rush the passer.

 

I mean, realistically, a good secondary can only cover so long if you can't rush the passer...on the flipside, if you can rush the passer like the Giants did, you can cover up a weakness and make an average secondary look good.

 

Should a team like Cincinnati consider trying to land the best pass rusher available rather than a stud DT as many, including myself, seem to think? Especially since they already have Geathers and just signed Odom...getting a guy like Gholston, or whoever could suddenly make them a pretty good team at getting in the QB's face.

 

The Giants secondary may have been average during the season, but they stepped their game up in the playoffs. They were playing with tons of injuries in the first and second rounds (Dockery and Madison were out) and had practice squad guys in there against Dallas! That's tough, and they deserve some credit too.

I have been beginning to think that the best defense seems "backwards".....get pass rushing defensive linemen and run stopping defensive backs.

Nope, that's a new concept provided by the G-Men. Other teams will probably try to rush the passer a lot more this year because of the success the Giants had.

 

:thumb:

 

Which was the point of my thread...I'm well aware that D-line is a top priority for all teams, but the Giants went in a new direction, IMO, by forgetting the prototype and playing their four best guys frequently, which meant they had 4 DE's on the field a lot of the time. I haven't seen many teams do that and never with the frequency the Giants did it.

You have to take into account who the GMen played in the Super Bowl. The Pats were a run-and-shoot team who never once tried to establish the run. That allowed for the Giants to pin their ears back and put Justin Tuck in the three technique. Knowing that they were going with a 7:3 pass/run ration allowed Tuck to get more reps with Strahan and the other DE(I have no idea how to spell his last name).

The Giants secondary may have been average during the season, but they stepped their game up in the playoffs. They were playing with tons of injuries in the first and second rounds (Dockery and Madison were out) and had practice squad guys in there against Dallas! That's tough, and they deserve some credit too.

 

They deserve some credit, I agree. They stepped up and did their job...however, their job was made easier than any secondary in the NFL because of the unstoppable pass rush their front four produced. Put them in a situation where they aren't benefitting from that and they'd be exposed in a big way, IMO. I'm not purposely trying to knock them, just calling it as I see it. A DB's job is exponentially easier when he knows the opposing QB isn't going to have much time to survey the field...

 

I think the Giants strategy may be one worth exploring, especially for a team like Cincinnati. As cch said, look at it backwards. If you can get decent players in the back seven, particularly guys who tackle well and can help out vs. the run and combine that with a front four that produces consistent and relentless pressure on the QB...look out. The pass rush can mask coverage shortcomings to a large degree, whereas the opposite doesn't work nearly as well...and if everyone can do their job and limit an opponent's effectiveness vs. the run, I think this is a great defensive strategy.

 

I like it.

You have to take into account who the GMen played in the Super Bowl. The Pats were a run-and-shoot team who never once tried to establish the run. That allowed for the Giants to pin their ears back and put Justin Tuck in the three technique. Knowing that they were going with a 7:3 pass/run ration allowed Tuck to get more reps with Strahan and the other DE(I have no idea how to spell his last name).

 

Justin Tuck played all year long. And when Kiwanuka was healthy he and Tuck, and Umenyiora and Strahan were all on the d-line at once. Kiwanuka and Tuck at DT and Strahan and Umenyiora at DE.

 

Tuck and Strahan I believe had 9 sacks apiece, Kiwanuka was on pace to get over 10 and Umenyiora had around 14 I believe.

You have to take into account who the GMen played in the Super Bowl. The Pats were a run-and-shoot team who never once tried to establish the run. That allowed for the Giants to pin their ears back and put Justin Tuck in the three technique. Knowing that they were going with a 7:3 pass/run ration allowed Tuck to get more reps with Strahan and the other DE(I have no idea how to spell his last name).

 

They did this against everyone...the Patriots were just another victim. Their rush defense wasn't great when you look at yds per carry against them, but it was good enough. Combine that with the fact that their pass rush may be the best I've ever seen and they made it really tough on opponents.

 

That's part of the point....you don't have to have a suffocating run defense, just one that can hold up enough to allow you to take advantage of your pass rush. Any penalty or negative play really puts you at a huge disadvantage against the Giants...

Justin Tuck played all year long. And when Kiwanuka was healthy he and Tuck, and Umenyiora and Strahan were all on the d-line at once. Kiwanuka and Tuck at DT and Strahan and Umenyiora at DE.

 

Tuck and Strahan I believe had 9 sacks apiece, Kiwanuka was on pace to get over 10 and Umenyiora had around 14 I believe.

 

:thumb:

 

Great strategy by Spags...if the Giants can keep their D-line in place and Strahan returns, regardless of their other free agency losses, they're going to be a formidable group once again. Of course, you've always got to wonder about that letdown after winning the big one. It's not likely they'll be able to keep that same edge that closed with last season. I do expect the offense to make some big strides next year though....the running game is great and Eli should be a far more confident player going into 2008. They better be ready because the NFC East is tough.

:thumb:

 

Great strategy by Spags...if the Giants can keep their D-line in place and Strahan returns, regardless of their other free agency losses, they're going to be a formidable group once again. Of course, you've always got to wonder about that letdown after winning the big one. It's not likely they'll be able to keep that same edge that closed with last season. I do expect the offense to make some big strides next year though....the running game is great and Eli should be a far more confident player going into 2008. They better be ready because the NFC East is tough.

 

The Giants will play with a chip on their shoulder again, because most will probably predict them to miss the playoffs next year.

The Giants will play with a chip on their shoulder again, because most will probably predict them to miss the playoffs next year.

 

It's not out of the realm of possibility...that would probably be the best thing for them as a team. If their offense improves and plays like it should, assuming they stay healthy, they ought to at least make it back to the post-season.

They deserve some credit, I agree. They stepped up and did their job...however, their job was made easier than any secondary in the NFL because of the unstoppable pass rush their front four produced. Put them in a situation where they aren't benefitting from that and they'd be exposed in a big way, IMO. I'm not purposely trying to knock them, just calling it as I see it. A DB's job is exponentially easier when he knows the opposing QB isn't going to have much time to survey the field...

 

I think the Giants strategy may be one worth exploring, especially for a team like Cincinnati. As cch said, look at it backwards. If you can get decent players in the back seven, particularly guys who tackle well and can help out vs. the run and combine that with a front four that produces consistent and relentless pressure on the QB...look out. The pass rush can mask coverage shortcomings to a large degree, whereas the opposite doesn't work nearly as well...and if everyone can do their job and limit an opponent's effectiveness vs. the run, I think this is a great defensive strategy.

 

I like it.

 

The thing is, I'm not sure Cincy has anywhere near the talent that the Giants have up front...so I'm not sure they could pull it off.