• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

“Defense is Designed to Lose” – LB Vince Williams

Steeler Nation

Steeler Nation

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Apr 7, 2014
Messages
2,542
Reaction score
4,985
Points
93
By Jess Costello SteelerNation.com   NFL players take to Twitter to drop some knowledge on people who might be questioning their reasoning (on whatever topic it may be). We’ve seen this with plenty of Pittsburgh Steelers players, past and present. *But when Steelers’ linebacker Vince Williams puts out a tweet, it’s usually a good one. […]

More...
 
Pffft, the knowledgeable folks here at SN figured that out two years ago.
 
Scoring draws casual viewers and fuels fantasy leagues. That's how the league wants it.
 
What is the best way to play defense?

1. Be physical. With practice restrictions, this is hard to accomplish. The concussion hysteria almost nobody tackles in practice, from high school to the NFL, it's very limited.

2. Hit the QB to make him nervous in the pocket. This is nearly outlawed.

3. Disrupt WR routes. This is now nearly illegal as well. Nobody wants DBs holding a WR 10 yards downfield, but there has to be some contact allowed or the DBs can't cover.

4. Punish WRs after they touch the ball. Not a shot to the head, but clean, hard, contact. This is also pretty much illegal now.

A guy like Edelman should not be in the NFL. The only reason he, and so many other small, quick slot WRs are in the league is because they made it illegal to hit a WR over the middle.

For most of NFL history, the middle of the field was for TEs and big WRs. That was because if a guy like Edelman ran over the middle, he was getting blown up.

That's why the run-n-shoot disappeared from the NFL. The small WRs like Ernest Givens couldn't take the punishment week after week.

That's why the college spread offenses are gaining traction. Because now you can have multiple quick WRs on the field and they can't be touched and the LBs have to allow them to catch the ball and take a few steps before they can hit them. Then they better not hit too hard.

It's all artificial. These young coaches aren't geniuses. They are just taking advantage of the handcuffs the NFL slapped on the defense.
 
DEFFINATELY Bince,.......the "D" is designed to lose. The rules / officials / Billicheat / owners / RATINGS / have all combined to make the "D" lose. Add in the "rog" and ding ding ding, you have a loser................





Salute the nation
 
He's never played for another coach, so it's not surprising, except in it's self-awareness. I'm trying to imagine someone from one of our dominant defenses, or any dominant defense, saying that.
 
CharlesDavenport said:
He's never played for another coach, so it's not surprising, except in it's self-awareness. I'm trying to imagine someone from one of our dominant defenses, or any dominant defense, saying that.
Click to expand...

You mean back when these rules were not in effect? He is not say OUR D is designed to lose, he is saying the whole NFL is designed that way.

I'm pretty sure, while watching game film he sees what other coaches are doing and sees the same stuff. The NFL is not set up so the D is intended to be successful.

Similar to what ive brought up multiple timelast years SD game and LBs covered WR. Allen goes off and SD scores several points. If only we hadn't done that! Well l, other teams weren't doing that and SD scored just as many points and didnt need blatant referee fuckups to do it.

We allowed Gronk to score 3 TDs in a game. Everyone goes crazy. Rex ryan says he wouldn't allow that. "That's a coach!". Well, ryan, didn't. Yet, *'s scored more points against them than us. IIRC, it was game 5 or so that year that the *'s were held tonless points.
 
The defense is designed to not fail every time. We need the defense to get just enough stops so the offense can score just enough to win. Dominant defenses absolutely change games, hit QBs and cause hurried throws, INTs and come away with clutch turnovers. We haven't had that in quite a while. Defense is our identity, its brought us 6 Super Bowls. We need that spark on defense back.
 
Hines57 said:
The defense is designed to not fail every time. We need the defense to get just enough stops so the offense can score just enough to win. Dominant defenses absolutely change games, hit QBs and cause hurried throws, INTs and come away with clutch turnovers. We haven't had that in quite a while. Defense is our identity, its brought us 6 Super Bowls. We need that spark on defense back.
Click to expand...

With Ben at QB, we don't HAVE to have a dominant defense. We have one that van get to the QB. The main thing we are missing is TO.

Hell, we can win even without those. The biggest seems to be that the O makes TO at the worst possible times. If our D could get just a couple of those back, we can win even more. They just don't.

One thing i noticed for other teams, when we fumble (see juju/Conner) os the the defender tackling from behind is punching the ball. our guys try to rip the ball out. Seems like the punch should work better, but with our tackling issues...trying anything extra tackling feom behind seems like disaster.
 
He's just repeating the horse **** Tomlin and the staff have been selling him (and this organization) for a long time.

This team cares about and relies too heavily on turnovers. They are already resigned to not "stopping" anyone without it. Risk taking is fine. Who cares about how physical you are. Gap responsibility? Don't need it, I need to strip the ball out!

This team fails time and time again because their fundamentals are horrible and their assignments and mental parts of the game are below average. That comes from the way Tomlin teaches and what he preaches week-in, week-out. That's why he's a bad defensive coach. That's why we haven't been great since 2010 (that's a DECADE now folks).

Nothing is going to change about this group. Turnovers can't be taught. What can be taught is all the fundamentals and smarts about defensive football that LEAD to turnover chances. You can't find one statistical data that supports that turnovers follow players or coaches or even year-to-year with practically the same defensive team. To design you defense based on something so random and fleeting (and the data supports that it is), is a failure of this coaching staff and causes irreparable harm to improving the team (because we actually base SCOUTING on turnovers in college, which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard).
 
ark steel said:
With Ben at QB, we don't HAVE to have a dominant defense. We have one that van get to the QB. The main thing we are missing is TO.

Hell, we can win even without those. The biggest seems to be that the O makes TO at the worst possible times. If our D could get just a couple of those back, we can win even more. They just don't.

One thing i noticed for other teams, when we fumble (see juju/Conner) os the the defender tackling from behind is punching the ball. our guys try to rip the ball out. Seems like the punch should work better, but with our tackling issues...trying anything extra tackling feom behind seems like disaster.
Click to expand...

Dominant defenses get those turnovers. We just haven't been producing the turnovers. Some of our offensive turnovers are self inflicted dumb *** moves, Grimble fumble, Conner fumbling off his own arm, some of Ben's INTs. We can eliminate those if we take better care of the football. When we get that turnover differential it changes the outcomes of games.
 
ark steel said:
You mean back when these rules were not in effect? He is not say OUR D is designed to lose, he is saying the whole NFL is designed that way.
Click to expand...
No, any self-respecting defense. Not sure I agree with your interpretation of what he said, but either way it's still a loser thing to say. Sounds like he thinks they should just run around and hope for **** up by the offense.
 
And yet, which teams advance in the playoffs? Teams with better Ds. How did Pats win the Super Bowl? With their D.
 
CharlesDavenport said:
No, any self-respecting defense. Not sure I agree with your interpretation of what he said, but either way it's still a loser thing to say. Sounds like he thinks they should just run around and hope for **** up by the offense.
Click to expand...
Defense is designed to lose it’s just the nature of our game. The fulcrum is turnovers, making ppl mess up.

​
It’s easy to score points in the NFL. The game is made to score. That’s why defense is the ultimate troll move. Most defensive players are natural jerks. We love seeing things not go as planned.
​
Click to expand...

It is, clearly, what he is saying.
 
Hines57 said:
Dominant defenses get those turnovers. We just haven't been producing the turnovers. Some of our offensive turnovers are self inflicted dumb *** moves, Grimble fumble, Conner fumbling off his own arm, some of Ben's INTs. We can eliminate those if we take better care of the football. When we get that turnover differential it changes the outcomes of games.
Click to expand...

I'm saying "dominant" is not required. Even 2 or 3 more turnovers last year could have changed the outcomes of some games. Even with being middling D (poor with regard to turnovers), it took blatant ref blunders to keep us from the beating two PO teams.

With our poor ability to get turnovers, those self-inflicted wounds are killers that we cannot recover from.
 
Bobby Bufford said:
And yet, which teams advance in the playoffs? Teams with better Ds. How did Pats win the Super Bowl? With their D.
Click to expand...

ark steel said:
Seriously?
Click to expand...

Cheating aside, to get to the SB, they allowed SD to score 28 and the chiefs to score 31. That is only 5 more points than SD scored against us. yeah, I know it isn't SD anymore. Dominant D only gets you 5 points?

When you know the other teams plays, it is way easier to play Defense.
 
This is why "cover" guys are so important these days. It is also why I valued Greedy Williams so much. That said, the draft worked out well as we got a bigger DB in Layne.....I am glad we gor a bigger DB for a change....
 
ark steel said:
I'm saying "dominant" is not required. Even 2 or 3 more turnovers last year could have changed the outcomes of some games. Even with being middling D (poor with regard to turnovers), it took blatant ref blunders to keep us from the beating two PO teams.

With our poor ability to get turnovers, those self-inflicted wounds are killers that we cannot recover from.
Click to expand...

I hear you. Those referee calls v NO and SD ****** us hard. Losing the Bronco game was also a back breaker.
 
the rules are definitely slanted towards the offense, but in no era under no rules is it smart to ask your ILB to cover the other teams #1WR, something we did vs SD and have tried over and over again vs NE with Timmons. Also in no era or under any rules is it smart to use just 2 Dlinemen(hail mary excluded) especially in short yardage or goal line situations, something we continually do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top