Are the New York Giants a great football team? I don't know. Are the New York Giants the world champions of the greatest sport on the planet? Without a doubt. Now the question remains: what does the the Giants victory on Sunday teach the remainder of the NFL (primarily the NFC) about how to survive and thrive in a supposedly lopsided league?
The answer is frighteningly simple. If you hit the other guys' quarterback and hit him often, you can beat any team in the NFL. This is not a new lesson for Halas Hall; at least it shouldn't be. This is the lesson of Buddy Ryan. The lesson of the 46 defense. The lesson of the only Super Bowl champion this organization has ever been honored to celebrate. Watching Strahan dominate the left side, Osi battle through double teams, Justin Tuck play like a man possessed and even Kavika Mitchell surge through the Pats O-line on well-designed blitz assignments made me think of that ballgame in January of 1986. Eli Manning might have been named the MVP but the Giants defensive line won the football game. And they wont by hitting the covery boy every chance they got.
The Bears must understand that the arrogance of the Tampa-2 format is no longer a viable gameplan when tested against the elite offensive powers of the AFC. You must attack the quarterback. You must utilize the speed and closing ability of a Brian Urlacher. The Bears have an incredibly talented defensive line but any offensive coach worth his salt will find ways to block four. It's when that coach doesn't know where the fifth guy is coming from that makes your attack devastating.
The Bears have holes on defense. They are desperately in need of a safety who can bring players to the ground and depth at the defensive tackle position. They'll need to replace the sure-to-depart Lance Briggs. But perhaps their most pressing need is a re-evaluation of their defensive scheme. In the copycat NFL, the Giants have set the blueprint. Get to the quarterback, get the trophy.
#2 mikebdot said . . .I highly doubt that the Bears will go away from the Cover-2 anytime soon. I dont think its as dooming to a teams chance agianst an AFC powerhouse as you do. I think it depends mainly on the personel you have running it. I personally am fine with our scheme, we just need some better/healthy players at key positions and we need to set up some different blitz packages and get creative that way. Overall, I like our scheme, we just need some modificiation and blitz packages.
February 6, 2008
#3 Phil from SATX said . . .Well, as it turns out, if we weren't missing three of 11 of our defensive starters for most of the year, perhaps we wouldn't be having this discussion. Not to mention the fact that there is no way TH or BU were healthy all year.
Talking shit about the scheme is ok if it just plain doesn't work, but when the talent you have acquired that fits perfectly into the scheme is hurt, well, that certainly doesn't aid one's quest to the Super Bowl. Especially, when the year before you used the scheme and actually made it to the big game. Only problem is, Indy's offensive line was just plain awesome last season. They really hit their peak. Brady's line looks like it's on the downside, not to mention the Giants D-line is fucking amazing. If Dusty can actually play a full season and TH is back to healthy, and Dan Bazuin can actually play football, who the hell knows how good our line can be.
The brain trust will acquire the talent necessary at each position. Then it's a numbers game beyond that. Honestly, I thought acquiring Archuleta was a good move, mostly because he would have looked much better lining up next to Mike Brown. But since he's no longer a viable option (you pretty much just have to expect him to miss the upcoming season or to retire outright), I think JA and co. will definitely acquire someone to fill that gaping hole in our secondary. Who knows, Kevin Payne might develop into "that guy". If we pick Phillips in the draft, I will be enthralled. Then again, if we picked an O-lineman (if we don't get one in free agency) I will be happy as well.
February 6, 2008
#4 jdawg said . . .Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the cover 2 be modified to incorporate zone blitzes? It's those that seem to work the best, when coupled with better-than-average D linemen. I think we have better-than-average D linemen (when healthy) but our guys are not very well schooled at zone blitzing, likely because they don't do it too often.
Still think that our scheme in last year's SB, and mostly lack of adjustment, was flawed. But was it flawed enough to dump the system and try something else? No - just have better adjustments ready, because my recollection of that game was there was NO adjustments - looked very plain vanilla to my (unschooled) eye. And Jeff's right in his main point - if you can't get to the QB, you can't win a SB in this era.
February 6, 2008
#5 willie from chicago said . . .If I'm not mistaken we only play the cover2 about 30% of the time, mainly on third down and medium - to - long.
Go back and look at the game against SD. We had a lot of blitz packages and disguises that stymied the Chargers for most of the game, until DD and MB went down and the D ran out of gas because the O couldn't stay on the field.
Jeff, think about that opening 10-minute drive last Sunday. The Pats were on the field for less than 6 minutes in the first quarter. I think the ToP had a lot to do with the Giants win and their D staying aggressive.
February 6, 2008
#6 Susie said . . .During the super bowl i think we watched what Tom Brady would play like in our O-line. Most of his throws were WAY off.
As far as some people ranking Eli as a great QB, Eli is basically Rex Grossman on a better team, In fact I think Rex would out preform Eli with what Eli was given this year. I have to admit though, Eli would have out played every quarter back the way he performed in the superbowl. However if Rex was given 3 GREAT Running backs to begin the season and 3 good WRs then we would be in the super bowl EASY, or at least in the playoffs.
POd, I agree with you man, we should stay in the cover 2, it has done us good in the past, HOWEVER, we get beet underneeth way too easily. SO I suggest we get a shutdown corner like an Al Harris with green bay or A. Samuals from New England. So i suggest we get one from Free Agency. Next year were playing the Colts which can kill us underneath so we need to fix it.
Mikeb, i also agree with you were you said that we wouldnt be talking about this if we were healthy last year but we still need help underneath. Kenny Philips would be amazing if we get him, Hes from the U which means hes a garenteed player lol.
BEAR DOWN
February 6, 2008
#7 Pissed Off said . . .I love your line that reads.. and learn to attack the quarterback.. and our offense needs to learn not to let that happen. It seems whoever was the QB, never had any protection!
February 6, 2008
#8 Rancid said . . .I LOVE both of our corners. I would say that they both are probably better than Al Harris (Tillman for sure). Samuel is pretty good I guess but I have no problem with our corners. They are great when healthy.
February 6, 2008
#9 PolygonHell said . . .When a team has players that are highly skilled in place (which we do) it is far better to create a system that works for them instead of trying to push them into an existing system. Therefore :
1. Our D stunk this year because we tried to continue in a system that was designed for players that were either out injured or playing injured to the degree that they couldn't pull off what was expected of them in that system. I know it is hard to adjust a system during the season, but I feel like that's what a coordinator is for.
2. It would be a mistake to attempt to copy the Gmen's defense UNLESS we have similar pieces in place.
A wise move is to look at that game, what they did and see if there are pieces or stunts that could be implemented in our personell.
February 6, 2008
#10 start Olsen said . . .Like Offense you need to design your defensive scheme around the players you have. Or bring in players for the system you have in place.
The D was poor this year, but I don't think that was a lack of blitzing, or playing cover 2 on every down (the Bears don't).
In fact I'd say that the Bears were more aggressive on defense this year than they were in 06.
I'll buy into the lack of adjustment for injured players. And I have to wonder if Lovie isn't a big part of that. The run defense Chicago plays is very dependant on people being in the right place and trust for the man next to you and I suspect that's one of the reasons it was so badly impacted by the injuries and shuffling of positions.
I think that like many aspects of football the scheme itself isn't as important as the execution by the players.
It's hard to get a read on where the Bears will be defensively next year with the personell they have healthy. But my gut says they'll be competitive.
February 6, 2008
#11 Shady McBears Fan said . . .someone said "Eli is basically Rex Grossman..." Which I have said many times. So, the obvious here is this: with an improved O line, and our D healthy plus a real NFL safety (or Chris Harris for shitsake) we could go to a superbowl.
wait... we did. lets get the Oline fixed and do it again.February 7, 2008
#12 jeff said . . .The Bears actually recorded more sacks this year (41) than they did last year (40).
They ranked 6th this year (2007) and 8th last year (2006)... Miami was 3rd and Green Bay 4th last year. While I think this statistic is important, without an offense to take advantage, it really doesn't matter how strong your defense is...
February 7, 2008
#13 Mike said . . .i actually agree with greg blache on this. sacking the quarterback numbers don't always translate to your pressure. the giants only had about five sacks sunday but they hit brady about fifty times.
February 7, 2008
#14 Megan said . . .Enough with the excuses for why the Bears disappointed in 2007. This has gotten pathetic. "We're just as good as the Giants," "Rex is every bit the QB that Eli is," "our defense is superior to the Giants."
You people are nuttier than squirrel shit and come across as totally clueless, whiny fools.
February 7, 2008
#15 mikebdot said . . .Mike,
Why the hell do you even bother to come here you worthless bag of doughnuts? If you don't like it, leave!
February 7, 2008
#16 Shady said . . .Yes, Mike, because it is oh so much more productive to sit around calling each nuttier than squirrel shit over and over. My god man, "pathetic"? You've got to be kidding us with that. I agree with Megan, if you have nothing to offer but lame ass criticisms, what the hell is keeping you here? It obviously isn't love of the Chicago Bears. If you don't like the organization, quit being a fan. If you don't like coming to this site, what kind of stupid moron are you? Don't come here again. It's that simple. Why torture yourself so?
February 7, 2008
#17 jeff said . . .Jeff, the Giants only had 5 sacks against Brady? Think about that. How many times has Brady been sacked all year, 21? Yes. That's about an average of 1.3 per game.
So what is a stronger correlation? The number of TD passes per year to a Superbowl victory or the number of sacks? I don't know.
Bottom line:
Statistics can be used to prove anything, 98% of people know that...
February 7, 2008
#18 jeff said . . .shady, i was just responding to the post above which stated the bears were better at rushing the passer this year because they had more sacks. the five sacks the giants had in the game were not half as important as the other times they hit him. two of those sacks were at garbage moments.
February 7, 2008
#19 Rancid said . . .as for mike, don't go anywhere. you keep people fiery.
February 7, 2008
#20 : - ) said . . .Yeah, stick around Mike. If it weren't for all the assholes in the world, it'd be harder to figure out who the good guys are.
February 7, 2008
#21 Jimbo said . . .Rancid is funny
February 7, 2008
#22 Jimbo said . . .Here is an article by Rick Gosselin, who writes for the Dallas Morning News and is pretty good. One website rated his mock drafts as the most accurate over the course of the last few years.
"Sack attack: Tackling QB is overrated stat"
http://www.dallasnews.com/s/dws/nwsltr/sports/fromthe50/stories/120507dnspofromthe50.68622bcc.html
February 7, 2008
#23 jeff said . . .Ranking the Mocks...
I posted this here a few weeks back, but here it is again. If for nothing else, it amounts to a nice long list of mock draft sites for all of us to drool over.
http://www.thehuddlereport.com/FREE_CONTENT/top100mock.shtml
February 7, 2008
#24 Pissed Off said . . .thanks for the info, jimbo.
February 7, 2008
#25 Phil from SATX said . . .46% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Mike, you are a complete tool. I dont know how else to describe you. You actually make me laugh with your comments. You used to piss me off but now I just laugh cuz I know you better. I would love to meet you in person and see what you are truly like. You strike me as a slightly intellegent person but something just isnt right. I cant put my finger on it but something is loose. Something about the way you write, which makes it painfully obvious when you post under another name, and something about the way you repeat the same phrases and hammer the same things. For example "nuttier than squirrel shit", you being from DeKalb and an alum on NIU, how Garret Wolf weights 175 pounds "soaking wet" etc. All these things you just keep repeating month after month, week after week. I just cant quite figure out your game.
February 7, 2008
#26 RandomName said . . .Excellent commentary on Mike, PO'd. There's something strangely Manchurian Candidateish about Mike's repetitive phrases. Not quite human, really. I still say the person Mike reminds me most of is not actually a person at all, but Plankton. It's much more fun to read Mike's posts if you hear them in Plankton's bombastic voice. Try it, it's fun! For those of you without kids, is it possible you wouldn't know who Plankton is? If not, ask someone.
Remember when Plankton goes through the food analyzer? His composition is 1% evil, 99% hot gas. Sounds about right for Mike, huh?
Appreciate those posts, Jimbo. Excellent article on sacks, and now you have be chasing down the top mockers. Good job.
February 7, 2008
#27 Pissed Off said . . .ok afc vs nfc pro bowl
who wins?
February 7, 2008
#28 Al in WI said . . .Who gives a shit?
February 7, 2008
#29 Z said . . .Po'd excellent post. I've noticed all that as well, that's why you can always tell when Mike is posting under an assumed name. Whatever I guess.
I don't want to get into the whole SB XLI debate again but this post nails in my opinion why we lost that game. We played a passive game plan and had no pass rush on Manning. There were other factors of course but this might have been the biggest.
I'm just looking forward to getting some answers on our free agents in a couple of weeks.February 7, 2008
#30 Giants Fan said . . .14 days and counting for teams to use the Tags. Who will dare.
February 8, 2008
#31 Elliott said . . .Mike is right.The Bears arent as good as the GMen on defense. I don't know why you guys don't see the obvious. And Rex has potential but he is terribly undersized for this league which I think will always limit his potential.
Look I'm a Giants fan and my team was basically a top 10 team that matured and got amazingly hot at the right time. If the Defense can sustain this level for another full season maybe they can make another run at the title but it will be really hard and you have to appreciate seasons like this when you have them. Like what you guys had last year which was an amazing season.
Can the Bears put together a Giants-like run next season? No doubt. But you ought to be realistic about what you have and what you need.
February 9, 2008
I disagree about the whole "get to the quarterback and you win" thing. It's not that simple. Remember, even after the Giants defense did an amazing job on Brady, he still managed to pull out his usual Brady-to-Moss last quarter touchdown. The end of the game depended on how well the offense (and Manning) responded. If Manning had been a lesser quarterback, we all would be talking about the "Perfect Pats" until Armageddon. It can't be all about the defense, no matter how good it is. The offense has to step up.
February 22, 2008
Here at DaBearsBlog, you are free to kill us or the Bears as you so wish. You are not free, however, to be an asshole. So if you spew racism or ill-meaning foul language (cursing about football is just fine) or anything of that ilk, your comments ain't gonna last long, jerk.