| |
|
"If you look at what Jim Schwartz is doing with Detroit and now what Chuck Cecil is doing in Tennessee, they are the two worst pass defenses in football. And their commonality is they are not a good pressure team. They don't do a lot of zone blitz. They basically say, 'OK, we're going to rush our ends up field; we're going to play solid coverage underneath and keep everything in front of us. We'll keep the score down because you won't be able to get big runs against us." Brian Baldinger 10/21/09
"This is the same defensive system that we’ve used over the last number of years." Jeff Fisher, 10/19/09
"Overall, it's the same defense. It's just as rugged. It's just as tough. (DT Albert Haynesworth is) the only guy missing. He's the only one not back out of that group. Certainly, he is a force in and of himself, and a very rare individual in terms size and speed and ability and those kinds of things." Colts head coach Jim Caldwell, 10/09
"We've carried on with this defensive scheme. Week-to-week there's some minor modifications." Jeff Fisher, 10/5/09
"It is the same defense, the same things we did last year." Kyle Vanden Bosch, 9/24/09
I'm not concerned about it because basically we've got the same people doing what we were doing last year, and we were effective. With some tweaks and some of the schematic things I think things will improve." Jeff Fisher, 8/23/09
In the three games Haynesworth missed in 2007:
Total defense ranking: 28
Total rushing defense ranking: 32
Total points scored against ranking: 32
Record: 0-3
Granted, you don't expect your defense to play as well without its best player, but you shouldn't sink from top five to bottom five either. Frankly, IMO this tells me you give more credit to the FO that drafted Haynesworth than to who's running the defense.
Do the Titans need more of a right-brain approach?
For nearly a century, Western society has been dominated by a form of thinking and an approach to life that is narrowly reductive and deeply analytical. But that is changing. We are entering a new age. It is an age animated by a different form of thinking and a new approach to life. Our brains are divided into two hemispheres. The left hemisphere is sequential, logical, and analytical. The right hemisphere is nonlinear, intuitive, and holistic. Today, the defining skills of the previous era - the "left brain" capabilities that powered the Information Age - are necessary but no longer sufficient. And the capabilities we once thought frivolous - the "right brain" qualities of inventiveness, the capacity to detect patterns and opportunities, to combine seemingly unrelated ideas into something new, increasingly will determine who flourishes and who flounders. Dan Pink, A Whole New Mind.
Think eBay vs Sears, Wikipedia vs Encyclopedia Britannica, hopefully not the Patriots vs Titans.
 Disaster Averted
Any game that brings up horrifying memories of the greatest collapse in NFL history deserves to be scrutinized. Sage Rosenfels' fourth-quarter passing yardage was the second-most in NFL history (3 yards short of the record).
Jeff Fisher after the 10/21/07 Texans game: "Jim (Schwartz) was aggressive and he was doing the same thing he was doing in the first three quarters". Not true, just watch the tape, or ask Texans Coach Gary Kubiak, "They got the lead and didn’t actually blitz as much." ... and it's not just about blitzing, it's about keeping the offense out of rhythm. You don't do that by doing the same thing over and over again, which is exactly what the Titans did...
Fast forward in the fourth quarter and you'd think it was stuck on pause - we lined up in the same 'parallel of predictability' (the bane of our shortcomings, and the fountain of youth meets excalibur for opposing QBs) defensive formation on just about every play for the last four scores. The images on the left show the formations we were in on each of the big plays or scores - all the same. By the time we tried anything different, and not for more than one play at that, the QB was already in an untouchable rhythm, and at that point it doesn't matter which QB was playing (as you saw), they're going to score at will. We will exit in the first round of the playoffs if we continue this.
To say that the players suddenly decided to all play bad (and that's 29 points in the 4th quarter bad), is just unrealistic. When the defense allows the QB (and his pass blocking OL) to get a rhythm (ie Kobe on his 81-point night) with predictive formations and schemes, he can do no wrong, whether it's 'no-names' Frank Reich or Sage Rosenthals. "And once they got in that groove and got some confidence, then they made play after play," Fowler.
"We should have kept doing what we were doing earlier, just kept getting after him and knocking him down and we would have been all right," Haynesworth.
This parrelel of predictability (4 DL, stationary LBs set back 4-5 yards) is what this entire website was about from the beginning of last year (see below), and predictably we proceeded to finish dead last in total defense. That's the first time we've gone back to this for an entire quarter this year, and based on the coaches comments, we'll see it again. Even worse, it's been creeping back in slowly each week. Don't let it happen!
That's four touchdowns in one fourth quarter, vs none in five previous fourth quarters. Don't blame the players on this one.
 
"Where we got in trouble over the last couple years was handing away jobs for free. You need to earn your position every single year." Schwartz, 5/21/07
See date of quote at top right, then defensive ranking to the left, then note the date of the above quote. At this rate...
Chow's opinion on Titans' D?
Here's Chow's indirect opinion of Schwartz's conservative/non-aggressive defense, after interviewing for Arizona's head coaching job:
"I would be aggressive. Obviously we would need to hire a good defensive coordinator and I would try and express to him a style that gave me the most problems coaching against, the aggressive style.''
Opposing RBs figuring Schwartz out?
- Avg. yards per rush allowed in the last 8 games (top right). Not a good sign for next season, but a good sign for opposing offensive coordinators who seem to figure out Schwartz's schemes with increasing success.
The result for ranking dead last is...
Schwartz's contract was quietly renewed. That's the reward for coming into the season regarded by many as the team's weak link and promptly coodinating the Titans to dead last in total defense.
Schwartz as GM instead?
My prediction five years down the road - Schwartz will make a great GM, using the same statistical strategic approach like Daryl Morey is starting to use as GM with the Rockets and the Athletics' have had with GM Billy 'Moneyball' Beane for years. However, neither of those guys are coaches, and nor should Schwartz, an economist at heart (and education). Stats are for personnel decisions, not for playcalling (see Boise State's two-point conversion). Two different sides of the brain (See 'Do analytics kill emotion?' below).
Rhythm and Player-Driven
This story about Travis Henry and the offensive linemen having a player-only meeting once a week, and the players-only meeting led by Keith Bulluck after week 4 may signify the future of success in the NFL. It's about rhythm, (like a players-only daily meeting or on-field huddle during commercial breaks (rather than just standing on the field). It's about motivating players by letting them take matters into their own hands. It's how the fastest growing companies are run, and the same results will apply to the NFL.
vs. Patriots
- A team's last few games are a hint of next season. It's the third week in a row the defense has allowed more yards than the average of the team with the worst total defense, which not surprisingly is the one led by Schwartz.
- The game vs the Pats showed what happens when an opposing team limits their mistakes . The game also showed what happens when the defense is consistently unpredictable throughout the entire game - Vince Young was out of rhythm and actually looked human.
"The only stats I care about are winning." Jim Schwartz post-game
That's like a person saying they're a loyal spouse except when they cheat. The last six Superbowl winners allowed 286.9 yards/game on average. The Titans allowed around that amount in only three games, and technically, went lower than that only once. They won two of those, and should have won all three (Miami). Stats do matter, just don't use them to motivate your players (see 'Made to Stick' below.)
 Do analytics kill emotion?
- Schwartz has continuously blamed his players' lack of emotion for poor play, but he may have to share in that blame when looking at the research behind what is billed as 'one of next year's best-selling business books', Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Some Die. One of the book's main points is that if you're too analytical (Schwartz's trademark), you don't appeal to people's emotions. In one study, participants experienced three different scenarios asking for donations:
1. One that showed the statistical benefits.
2. One that appealed to emotions and showed how it benefitted one person.
3. One that did both.
The second emotional scenario attracted more than twice as much monetary support. However, you would think the third option would be higher still because it showed both benefits? No, the third option actually attracted only half the support of the second one as well. As the authors state, "Once we put on our Analytical Hat, we react to emotional appeals differently. We hinder our ability to feel." Hard to win games without emotion. Analytics were made famous by the success of the Oakland Athletics, but those stats are applied to personnel decision-making during the offseason, not during games, especially emotion-driven ones like football. If anyone should be choosing analytics over emotion, it should be Reese in the off-season, not a coach on the field.
 Why opposing running backs and quarterbacks play so well against us.
- If it's not the QB, it's the RBs. If it's not the RBs, it's the QB. Either way, Schwartz doesn't know how to stop both of them in the same game, during the game, leading us to last place in total defense rankings. Why?
- Want to get good at something? You practice it over and over again until it becomes second nature. Thanks to Schwartz's system of repeatedly playing the same predictable formations, ever get the sense that the opposing offensive line's pass protection actually gets better as the game goes on? The same with the running backs?
- QBs love the no huddle because the DEs tire rapidly, running sprints against 300 lbers without rest. Now, to have the Titans DL go at it without pressure help all game long is just plain cruel, knowing full well that their chances to get to the QB gets slimmer with each and every play (see first paragraph). Who knows what that does to your adrenalin or psyche, but of course, to Schwartz it doesn't matter what his players think - that's just his personality, what they classify as a coercive manager type who leads by fear and control.
- Once a player is 'in the zone' no blitz is going to rattle them, no all-pro coverage is going to prevent a pass. It's too late. It's like watching Kobe on his 81-point night.
 What's the best Schwartz ever did?
- With a star-studded defense including Jevon Kearse, Kevin Carter, Randall Godrey, Keith Bulluck and Samari Rolle, he could do no better than 10th and 12th in 2002 and 2003, and that's with McNair and George leading the offense to #1 (tied) and #2 (tied) in time of possession in those years respectively. That was also after inheriting a defense that was ranked #1 the previous year.
-
The Titans total defense rankings, points allowed since Schwartz took over:
2001: 25th, 24.2
2002: 10th, 20.2
2003: 12th, 20.2
2004: 27th, 27.4
2005: 19th, 26.3
2006: 32nd, 25.0 30th vs the run, 27th vs the pass (as of 12/31/06)
- Either way, that's still allowing an average of over 24 points a game throughout his tenure. As the chart shows, there is no improvement over the last 50 games (even slightly getting worse.)
The economy is evolving faster than the Tennessee Titans defense
We're in an unprecedented economic shift from the industrial age to the knowledge age. Many of us didn't even have email or internet access ten years ago. The internet economy evolved suddenly within a few years, known as punctuated equilibrium. With universal access to information, the economy today is customer-driven (Wikipedia, eBay) rather than mass produced (Ford, Sears), and the best NFL teams have quickly adapted to take advantage of this by being more player-driven than coach-driven, such as the Colts' offense and the Patriots' defense. However, Schwartz's controlling, inflexible, numbers-driven system is rooted in the outdated industrial economy, and it's causing players to go insane (literally).
 Our defense is like GM. Inflexible, unchanging.
Notice how the front seven alignment of 4 DL on the line of scrimmage (LOS) and 3 LBs (2 LBs/1 NB vs 3 WRs) four yards back rarely changes? The defensive set is static. This allows the offense to get a rhythm for what's coming. Then watch just about any other team with a solid defense, and their LBs are moving all over the place, especially along the LOS, making decisions based on what they see. It's not like our LBs aren't intelligent or capable of making reads on their own, it's that they're not allowed to. Our defensive tackle rotation is (was) among the best in the league, and KVB was a pro bowler. Yet is that talent utilized to cause any unpredictability as far as a pass rush is concerned? No. Schwartz will run the same four man rush, play after play, season after season, until we get another Kearse that can play every down every season - and so far no such player even exists. If you fast forward the Titans defensive sets you'd swear that the tape got stuck and started looping.
Players ride on emotion, adrenalin. How Schwartz's schemes sap that out of them.
- The major factor here is of motivation, an overall defensive mindset of the defense to make plays rather than prevent plays. Not to get too psych here, but it's about creating a love for making plays rather than a fear of giving them up, and the Titans' fear-based approach to the game makes it looks like Schwartz may have had one bad relationship too many.
-
Studies continuously show that job motivation is a bigger factor than salary, and one of the biggest job motivation factors is the ability to make your own decisions - essentially autonomy vs automation. Evidence shows people are increasingly not motivated at work because systems haven't kept up with the times - rapid technological changes (video diagrams of every player/play), rising productivity demands (meritocracy, not seniority), and changing employee (player) expectations (to make their own on-the-job decisions). Exceptions? Hmm, sounds like a certain football team that's won a few Superbowls lately.
- More than any job, more than any sport, football players need emotion, motivation and adrenalin to make plays (just see Derrick Thomas' 7 sack-day when they saluted his father in the pre-game) - what do you think home field advantage is all about? Emotion and adrenalin can't flow if you don't feel like you're leading the cause rather than following orders, and fear-based ones on top of that. Once Schwartz realizes their players are human beings and not video game pawns, maybe they'll factor that into the game plan a little more.
So what is a an example of applying the modern economy and learning to the game?
- Here's but one example. Listen to the first fifteen minutes of this program on progressive economic trends, an interview with USC communications professor Doug Thomas of Fisher's alma mater and author of publications on game theory and learning. He states that contemporary teaching (eg coaching) should take into account the innovative, different ways of thinking and focus on possibility rather than certainty that comes with video game playing (...and what do NFL players love doing in their spare time?), and how music (...and what else do NFL players love doing in their spare time?) can enhance rhythm (mentioned many times here) which can be used to improve the understanding of mathematics - a basis for why players take the Wonderlic. Like playing speed chess (Schwartz is a fan of chess) to hip hop? Something tells me Schwartz can't dance.
-
This isn't 'crazy stuff', this is how forward-thinking companies (ie Google, MySpace, YouTube - now worth $1.6 billion) are growing faster than others - it's simply about improving productivity by taking advantage of how modern/next gen workers and learners (ie young NFL players) think, learn and are motivated, which is tough because coaches/teachers learned it differently in a different time - and before the internet. Bill Belichick understands this beautifully, which is why his team thrives seemingly unaffected by the salary cap.
Why even running backs are starting to run roughshod all over us.
Same exact thing. Notice that it happens in the second half, then gets worse in the fourth quarter? Once the OL and RBs get into a rhythm of blocking and reacting to the same Titans front seven alignment, not even an all-pro LB and DT crew can stop them. Notice that it mirrors the QB rating/rhythm chart over time.
How Schwartz helps opposing QBs get into a rhythm, and how other coaches prevent this:
You know how much easier it is to shoot the second free throw since the first gives you some rhythm. Now imagine how 'comfortable' the OL gets if the same four guys are rushing on every down - the entire game. Maybe a stunt now and then disrupts that rhythm, but not much. Bring in a TE or RB to double-team the 'hot' player, and you pretty much stifled any kind of rush, unless you have exceptional talent at DE, and only a handful of teams have that. Then, incorporate how the game has changed where every OT has hours of videotape of every possible move , tendency and habit a DE has on his laptop (see 'rapid technological changes' above), and you don't have to wonder why DEs don't get as many sacks as they used to...
This is why I like Belichick's (and Cowher's) modern approach to the game, compared to Schwartz's:
- Belichick - the opposing OL has no idea which four are rushing
- Schwartz - the opposing OL has a strong idea which four are rushing
- Belichick - the opposing OL has no idea from which angle and when the four are rushing
- Schwartz - the opposing OL knows exactly from where and when the four are rushing
- Belichick - the LBs make decisions to rush or drop back based on how the play unfolds, adjusting by the second
- Schwartz - the LBs are assigned to rush or drop back no matter how the play unfolds, adjusting between series (I'm guessing to allow Schwartz to collect statistical data based on a 'control' - something that doesn't change to study how it affects things around it, really the only way to get meaningful statistics)
- Belichick - emphasizes players who are given responsibility to make their own decisions on the field
- Schwartz - blasts his players for not strictly following his rigidly-controlled scheme with heart and desire (guy apparently doesn't have a right brain). Instead, he has guys like Kassell manning the heart of the defense, limited athletic talent, not the most cerebral player, but will do whatever the coach says and go all out. I think the notion of having a team full of guys like this went out back in the 70s.
Why you can't automatically blame the players.
- If the Titans had the best pass rusher in the game, the opposing O would simply double-team the guy the entire game, and as I said, get better at it as the game went on, because he'd be rushing from the same spot, without any added help, the entire game. The blockers would start to get a rhythm.
- We replaced Kassell with Thornton and Tank with Hope, and did Hill suddenly become a terrible player after working on his game in the off-season? It just doesn't add up. To me, the only difference is it seems Schwartz is your typical coercive power manager (the least effective of the five types) who demands even more control the worse he's perceived as a lousy leader, and OCs are taking full advantage of it. I don't see our overall defensive talent being much different from NE's, but boy do they make it a nightmare for both the OL and the QB when it comes to applying pressure.
- SD has a premiere pass rusher in Shawne Merriman. That means, if he played in Schwartz's system, he'd rush from the same spot, battling the same OT, at the same time, on every single play, with the OL easily getting back-up because of the blatant predictability. As an OC, I couldn't possibly dream of a better situation. If we had Merriman, when he gets only 7 sacks on the year in our scheme, we'd be crying out for lack of talent with intent of using our top draft pick and half our remaining cap on getting a premier pass rusher. Playing as rigidly-controlled, factory assembly worker with no responsibility to make decisions will sap the life out of anyone, especially an adrenalin-dependent guy like Merriman.
-
Still, with Merriman, what do the Chargers do? They move Merriman around, and as Bulluck likes to say, creating disruption in the backfield. Imagine how much more effective KVB would be if he were in a better scheme. Oh that's right - he had two sacks playing against the top OL in the NFL in Hawaii. Soon enough, we'll be saying KVB was a one-year wonder as well unless things change.
Schwartz's predictable schemes
- In short yardage (ball control) situations, aka smash mouth football, the play is over in a few seconds. That's a lot less opportunity, if any, for an offense to analyze a defensive scheme to take advantage of its weaknesses as the play unfolds. This is why the Titans are better in short yardage situations - opposing OCs don't have enough time to take advantage of Schwartz's predictability.
- However, in long yardage situations, the offense has a few seconds to analyze how the defense is attacking it, and since Schwartz doesn't allow his LBs to adjust in real time based on the offense's maneuvers as the play unfolds, the offense knows exactly how to take advantage in the first half second. For instance, once the ball is snapped with 7 Titans on the LOS, if 3 plan to drop back, they'll do so at the snap, letting the offense know immediately how many are rushing, which would be 4. The TE and RB can choose to stay and block based on that, and the WRs can run longer single-coverage routes to the outside knowing the LBs are covering the middle (where no one is), which may cause the CBs to start to give larger amounts of cushion as well as bite on double moves. The Pats however, move their LBs around and if they sense a TE is staying to block, an LB on the other side may come in for a late rush a second later. It's impossible for the offense to predict the defense because the defense is reacting to the offense in real time.
-
This is like a pitcher who doesn't realize he's taking a much longer stride on his fastball than on his change-up, then getting walloped because the hitter knows what's coming before the ball leaves the pitcher's hand. This is what the Titans D does on every play, and why sometimes the offense makes it look incredibly easy to march down the field. Bend-but-don't-break defenses aren't what you plan to have, it's what you call it when you don't know how to stop a team and can only slow them down in the red zone (mainly because they have fewer options with the short field).
Letting the LBs make real-time decisions disrupts the opposing OL and QB's rhythm, and thus accuracy
-
What would be even more effective is if Bulluck recognized that any RB was staying in to block, then if he was, to rush the passer, and to switch roles with Thornton, the DBs, so the OL/QB didn't know which one was coming. Still, he was disruptive because he at least adjusted at the snap, and this was not happening when the Jets were moving the ball at will with RBs staying in to block and the LBs not adjusting - exactly as Haynesworth was telling the press was the problem with the defense, almost with a tone of voice that it wasn't even fair. I for one am not surprised he eventually lost his marbles.
- You don't go improvising on any play, at any time, especially on short yardage/running plays. Improvise means to wing it, and that's certainly not what you want players doing, much less every single one of them all the time. In fact, the DTs are the last players to adjust to the play as it unfolds - that is not and never has been their role - they are the control that allows the LBs to make a read. The glaring weakness is that the LBs are seemingly not allowed to immediately adjust on any play, at any time, and react in real time, primarily on long yardage/passing plays, except against Miami, when they gave up only 13 points.
During the Bears-Seahawks playoff game in 2007, one of the announcers repeated that Brian Urlacher used to analyze a lot of game film only to find he was guessing a lot. It wasn't until he focused on being more reactive to how the game unfolded in real time and used his instincts did he become a top defensive player. When opposing QBs call audibles, Urlacher calls audibles to counter. You'll rarely see such a thing by players under Schwartz.
Schwartz's insecurity makes things increasingly worse
People are people. I can just see the controlling, egotistical boss taking away more and more decision-making responsibility from his second-line managers (Bulluck, Thornton, Sirmon) as punishment if he senses any resentment to his system (viewed to this type of boss as utter disrespect) to show, well, who's boss. Classic old school management.
Why playing defense for the Titans is worse than asking an American to work in a sweatshop
- NFL players are taking minutes of their life away with every body slam on each play, so it's tough on the psyche to be giving your life away when you know the likelihood of anything positive coming from it is unlikely. Players are human, not machines. The mind won't let you play 110% if you're sacrificing your body already knowing it's for naught. Schwartz is giving his players Mini Coopers in a demolition derby of Escalades - would you drive with 110% aggressiveness then?
Why Beane Ball (statistical analysis) works for baseball, but not football.
- Schwartz boasts his utilization of 'regression analysis.' All that means is simply calculating the odds of something happening - this works well in baseball (eg Oakland) which is an extremely linear game, with plays being made in isolation and little emotion and adrenalin. This hardly works in something as dynamic as football, which relies on reading and analyzing strengths and weaknesses on the fly under countless variables and constant chaos every second. In baseball, if you bring in a left-handed pitcher because a left-handed batter is next, that's predictable and it works. In football, if your defense takes a 3rd and 7 instead of a 2nd and 17 (see Cowboys game) because you're statistically better at preventing third down conversions, you're an idiot.
-
Statistics in football should be used by general managers to build personnel and strategy (ie x ranked defenses win x more super bowls, teams with 40+ sacks win x more super bowls, etc.), but not to call plays. Chow's success will come from calling plays that take advantage of the opposition's weaknesses on each particular play based on instincts (player confidence, rhythm, recent games, fatigue etc.), not from going with what the odds say has been successful in the past, which also happened to occur under completely different conditions. Odds are an opposing playoff-caliber coach already sees the 'regression analysis-based' play coming anyway.
-
I don't know how heavily Schwartz is using 'numbers' to call plays, but I sure hope he isn't. If so, maybe he should try managing the Cubs instead.
- Smart coaches eat other teams' 'tendencies' for lunch, especially if the opposing coach has a national reputation for doing so. If the Titans' O is weak on 3rd and 1 when Chris Brown runs, then on 3rd and 1, does the DC scheme to stop the run, knowing that's already a weakness, or watch for the play action knowing that's a counter to the team's weakness, or stack their best run stuffer against the blocker they run behind 70% of the time? Well, the smart OC will bait the numbers guys into traps and take advantage of the weaknesses they create because of it.
-
If a play is calculated by numbers by one team, it can be predicted by numbers by the other. Instincts however, can't. You can't calculate if the WR knows he can beat the DB because he's having confidence problems, got hurt on the previous play, and looks a bit confused with crossing patterns, and that the WR knows he will be (and is) wide open this entire series until they change the match-ups, while Schwartz is calculating 'this CB has successfully defended 95% of the time against this WR, so we'll keep him on that guy throughout the game and assume the odds will catch up (they never do).
 vs. the Jets
- The same static 4 DL/ 3LBs (2LBs/NB vs 3WRs) four-yards-back formation used throughout the game, with a simple nickelback substitution vs. 3 WRs.
- Schwartz needs to let his LBs and Ss supercede his play calling. For instance, if the Jets have a 2WR/TE/2RB set and only the two WRs go out while the rest block, why have all the LBs and Ss drop back into coverage? Why do you think just about every completion was to the outside WRs? It became a warm-up routine for Pennington to the point where Coles' double-move on Hill would be impossible for Hill not to bite on. What's amazing is thatt Schwartz didn't playcall them out of it. Instead he had 3 LBs and a S defending no one when half of them could have been applying pressure once they recognized that the TEs/RBs were playing a blocking scheme rather than a receiving scheme.
- Haynesworth - "We were trying to get pressure but they were blocking seven or eight up and it's hard. We've just got to make adjustments."
 vs. Chargers
- Schwartz lined up the same four man front with 3 LBs (2LBs/NB vs. 3WRs) four yards back just about the whole game. However, as I loosely recall, there were about five plays where they either brought in an LB to the LOS, faked blitzing an LB, or rushed just three - anything to change up the OL and QB's rhythm - resulting in only one completion. Those were about half of all his incompletions the entire day, or in other words, when the Titans gave Rivers the basic front seven look, he was 24-30, or 80%. How's that for statistics.
-
After the game Fisher gives his players credit for playing with maximum effort at the same time Schwartz blames his players for the defense's failure... that just further tells you where the problem is.
- Kyle Vanden Bosch, "I don’t have any idea, but when a team gets beat like this, obviously something needs to be changed. I look forward to changes because change can be a good thing."
 vs. Dolphins
- Can this be? Dolphins show a 4WR/RB set, 2nd and 9, 1st quarter. We show a 3 DL line with all three LBs on the LOS threatening to blitz. Thornton drops back before the snap. Then at the snap, Sirmon drops back and Bulluck rushes. However, Culpepper is sacked because Finnegan (top of screen) rushes untouched from the slot. Nobody saw that coming. Now that's the way to play D. They should be this unpredictable on every long-yardage play, through a variety of looks, obviously not just this one either, that's the point. They played their best defense of the year so far, giving up only 13 points.
- Chris Hope, “We played with a lot of emotion and played with a lot of confidence today. We dictated what the offense could do and what we could do to them.
“(The opposing team) gets paid to make plays, so if you sit back and allow them to be defenseless, confident, no pressure, 9 times out of 10, the quarterback is going to make the throw.”
Kyle Vanden Bosch, “We were aggressive with our play calling today. We gave (Culpepper) too much time at times today. I want to be an aggressive defense that makes plays. We don’t want to be known as a bend but don’t break defense. We felt we needed to do some things to create pressure and rush them.”
- Could it be Schwartz saw the reasoning of having his players inspired by playing in an attacking, unpredictable defensive scheme? Unfortunately no, because...
 vs. Cowboys
He all but broke their spirit in this game. We go right back to the DC-controlling, predictable, static, 4 DL on the LOS, 3 LBs (2LBs/NB vs 3WRs) dropped-back-four-yards formation at the snap, no-LB-decision-making scheme that we showed 80% of the time in the first two games. Bledsoe finds his long-lost rhythm, and for the first time I can even see the Cowboys' RBs and OL pick up a rushing rhythm against the predictable front seven alignment where Bledsoe only had to throw five times in the second half. The players are subjected to a humililating defensive scheme to the point one of them completely loses his mind.
- Robaire Smith, "Maybe it ain't the personnel. As far as the talent and ability, I think we have it here to be a good team."
- Keith Bulluck, "Someone needs to give me some answers cuz im out here like the rest of my teammates busting our ass and doing what we need to do and sh-- just isn't panning out."
 vs. Colts
- The players as a team deserve a standing ovation.
- Manning's QB rating in the first half was 60.4, when the Titans used unpredictable defensive front formations (top image), except the first series when the Colts had a rushing rhythm. The announcers even described it as such.
- Not so in the second half. The Titans reverted to the predictable (ie the same) defensive front formations (lower image), where Manning's QB rating was 106.3 (141.0 if Reggie Wayne doesn't even try catching the ball that is then deflected to Hope). Naturally, the Colts gain their rhythm and don't punt the rest of the game, outside of the last series to run out the clock. Manning is said to have commented after the game that the defense did the same thing over and over (assuming he's referring to the second half).
- Keith Bulluck, "All Reggie Wayne did on that play was turn around and catch the ball. It was a Pop Warner play. But that's Peyton Manning, man. We showed him the same look maybe three or four times in a row and he figured it out. But you know what? That's a lesson.''
- The players should be allowed to win the game, rather than the coaches 'not losing' it for them. Rather than play the second half to win the game 20-0, they played it to win 16-14. After the 10-0 half, the gameplan seemed to reflect a sense of fear that it couldn't be sustained to 20-0, and the defensive schemes went conservative. Teams with the heart of champions expect to win 20-0, period. The coaches should listen to the players... Drew Bennett, "...No one's going to walk out of here thinking, 'Yeah, we almost won.' That makes me sick. I expect to win."
-
Still, it shows the Titans are capable of beating anybody when they choose to utilize both their on-field and off-field talent. They simply chose not to in the second half, playing a game equivalent of losing it 28-6.
 vs. Redskins
- The players deserve another standing ovation.
- Schwartz started the game off utilizing the same predictable 4 DL, 3 LBs set back four yards (top image) with no vertical movement before the snap and the Redskins scored TDs on their first two possessions with relative ease. He did allow them lateral movement, but that simply wasn't nearly enough. The Skins were moving down the field again late in the second quarter, until Pacman forced a Randle El fumble on a 16-yard gain. Kudos to player effort there. Thank goodness Henry and company controlled the clock, since the Redskins only punted once in the half. No one covered Cooley on the second TD - the D wasn't prepared for the formation shifts at all. If only they applied that to their own defensive mindset.
- The 3rd quarter was a completely different story, when they played to win, played to make plays rather than with fear of giving them up. They showed 4, 5 and 6 man fronts, blitzed, faked blitzes (lower image), and the LBs were allowed to shift both vertically and horizontally before the snap, resulting in three straight 3-and-outs, unnecessary time-outs, delay of games, stuffed runs and badly thrown passes. The point is, it's not that Brunell was sacked or hit as he threw as much as his rhythm was thrown off, and the same for the OL and the RBs.
- The 4th quarter they went completely conservative again, since of course, they had a 'whopping' 8-point lead. On the bomb to Lloyd, the Titans were playing the same predictable 4-3 formation, and Brunell took advantage. He had no pressure, and for some reason that made little sense, Hill had no help either, and Brunell threw it absolutely perfectly. Hill couldn't be any closer without making a play. They stayed in that formation the rest of the game, and Brunell inexplicably missed several wide open receivers, until the Titans showed a different 3-DL front zone on the last series and intercepted on the first play.
- Jeff Fisher, "We changed some things up and I thought we did a nice job of it. We got him out of his rhythm a little bit."
vs. Texans
- The players deserve yet another standing ovation.
- First half. It's clear they're capable of shutting down a team when given an unpredictable scheme designed to keep the offense off rhythm. In fact, in the first half, they did so well that it prompted the coach to do something extraordinarily rare - replace your QB at the half (one that's been having one of his best seasons ever) because his rhythm was so out of whack. Once again, for the most part, the Titans faked blitzes, blitzed, put an unpredictable number of LBs on and off the line of scrimmage, and generally gave Carr little chance of getting any kind of rhythm, finishing with a QB rating of 64.2.
- Second half. Pretty much the same old, predictable, play-not-to-lose schemes. They ran the same 4-3 'parallel of predictability', with 4DL and the LBs set back four yards for 90% of the rest of the game - and you could of course, predict what would happen. Sage Rosenfels, a sixth-year journeyman who has thrown six TDs in his entire career, threw three of them in just one half, with an astronomical QB rating of 116.4, and would have been 133.1 had the ball not bounced off of Andre Johnson's chest. After that pick, the Texans scored TDs with relative ease on three of their next four possessions, with a dropped ball causing them to punt the one time. The few times the Titans did blitz it was of no consequence - the Texans knew it was coming well before the play and could adjust (since the Titans played the parallel of predictability when they weren't blitzing) and Rosenfels already had his rhythm down. I mean, his passes were absolutely perfect, and they had to be with the tight coverage Johnson was getting. That can only come from being 'in the zone'... and this is Sage Rosenfels we're talking about.
-
If Pac doesn't run the punt back for a TD, the Titans could have very well lost the game. For the Texans to be as close as they were despite five turnovers vs none for the Titans is alarming... especially vs. a 2-5 team that played one of their worst games of the season. We are now dead last in total defense, and again, it's not the fault of the players.
vs. Jaguars
- Before any excuses are made that Pac and Thornton were out, the Jags were missing their top two DL, LB and later their top CB. VY's interceptions were costly though, so overall, it's not a good week to analyze the defense fairly, but still...
- The first Jags drive was vs. the predictable parallel (4 DL, 3 LBs set back 4 yards), and Garrard got his rhythm from the very beginning. The Titans mixed it up in the second series after the VY interception, and a couple of missed tackles negated what would have been defensive stops before they gave up the second TD vs the predictable formations. The rest of the game was the same, mixing the predictable formations with the unpredictable formations (the first time the Titans seemed to do this within each series) and the problem with that is you're allowing the QB a chance to regain his rhythm when he starts to lose it (thus, effectively, never losing it), to the tune of Garrard's 120.6 passer rating, almost doubling his passer rating from the week before. David Garrard folks.
- For an example of what unpredictable formations and schemes do to a QB, just rewatch what the Jags do to VY. Blitzes, delayed blitzes, fake blitzes, 4 men on the line of scrimmage (LOS), 5 men on the LOS, 6 men on the LOS..., LBs and safeties moving vertically back and forth from the LOS, zone defenses, man defenses, zone defenses disguised as man defenses, man defenses disguised as zone defenses - VY was obviously confused, frustrated, and wasn't able to get any kind of rhythm - the same for the OL and RBs. Remember, the Jags were doing all this without their top four defensive players. Meanwhile, Garrard has a career game and Fred Taylor is said to have found the fountain of youth.
vs. Ravens
- Does this sound familiar?... The opposing QB throws for more yards and more TDs in this game than any other this season. Just happens to be McNair this time - 373 yards, 3 TDs - he's never done that in this century, maybe ever. It's probably safe to say he got a nice rhythm going against Schwartz's schemes once he went conservative with the 26-7 lead, again. The evidence:
- They went aggressive the first four series - including a 10-yard rushing loss on a CB blitz. There was a blown coverage play off a conservative scheme resulting in a 65-yard TD, but they remained aggressive and unpredictable on D until they built a 26-7 lead. Without the blown play, McNair's QB rating up until then was a 3.6. Then the conservative defense returned, and McNair marched the team to two consecutive scores with a 119.5 rating the rest of the half, and a 102.5 the rest of the way. The D mixed it up a little in the second half to force 4 punts and an INT, but when it counted the most, they went completely predictable and conservative in giving up the final TD, with all three completions off the predictable parallel of 4DL/3LBs set back four yards with no movement. McNair by the way, had a QB rating of 158.3 on that drive - what the NFL considers a 'perfect QB rating' - you can't get any higher.
- For comparison, David Garrard had a 120.6 QB rating playing against Schwartz's schemes vs 72.4 the week before and 25.5 the week after.
- It's the same thing week in and week out. When the Titans play their basic defense - theof 4DL with 3LBs set back four yards throughout the snap count, teams pick up a rhythm and march downfield - 421 yards worth to easily cement last place in total defense, and in fact widening the lead. Their best defensive plays occured when the LBs and Ss shifted in and out from the line of scrimmage, disrupting the offense's sense of play execution and rhythm. There just wasn't enough of it, as usual, and for the maddeningly conservative play-not-to-lose approach the coaches like to take, the killer plays happened in the basic predictable defense that's designed not to give up such big plays. Rhythm trumps conservative play calling most every time. You're simply not supposed to lose a game with a 26-7 lead, unless you play-not-to-lose.
vs. Eagles
- At least the Titans' total defense ranking went up one to second to last, despite giving up more yards in the last game than the worst team does on average. Did not watch game.
vs. Giants
- This just shows what the defense is capable of when given the chance. Great job everyone! Best defensive effort of the year.
- This also shows what happens to a team that plays 'not to lose'. They had it coming to them. I hope we learn from that. The Titans/Oilers of all teams should know that even a 35-3 lead in the third quarter is no reason to get conservative.
- As the players have been given more and more freedom and responsibility to make decisions, and as Bulluck says, "just play football", the defense has made more plays and been increasing effective overall. On one play for instance, Bulluck dropped back on his left side of the field, noticed Manning was looking soley to the opposite side along with the rest of the players, so he decided to blitz. He almost, and actually should have had a sack, but that's the kind of decison-making the LBs and Ss should be allowed to have to make plays. They still suffer from being forced to 'play not to lose' by the coaches, which explains the dead last ranking in total defense despite allowing the fewest yards so far this season vs the Giants. That just tells you it isn't the players holding the defense back. Let's hope Schwartz continues to give more control to the players.
- This also shows what happens to a team that plays 'not to lose'. They had it coming to them. I hope we learn from that. The Titans/Oilers of all teams should know that even a 35-3 lead in the third quarter is no reason to get conservative.
- As the players have been given more and more freedom and responsibility to make decisions, and as Bulluck says, "just play football", the defense has made more plays and been increasing effective overall. On one play for instance, Bulluck dropped back on his left side of the field, noticed Manning was looking soley to the opposite side along with the rest of the players, so he decided to blitz. He almost, and actually should have had a sack, but that's the kind of decison-making the LBs and Ss should be allowed to have to make plays. They still suffer from being forced to 'play not to lose' by the coaches, which explains the dead last ranking in total defense despite allowing the fewest yards so far this season vs the Giants. That just tells you it isn't the players holding the defense back. Let's hope Schwartz continues to give more control to the players.
vs. Colts
- How does one win a game by giving up 451 total yards? With Young controlling the clock, Bulluck's one-handed INT, Harrison deflecting a sure first down into Sirmon's hands, a missed FG, a near-miracle FG, and timely penalties. You simply can't count on this every week, but the players deserve all the credit in the world.
- The defense played aggresively the first three series, with one formation that had only 2 DL! (which resulted in a punt.) The one TD allowed was pretty much blown coverage on third down due to player error in a series that was heading for another punt situation. They then immediately, probably out of fear, resorted to the predictable stuff (covered ad nauseum here) on the next drive and sure enough, Manning got his rhythm back leading the Colts to an easy TD. The Colts were driving at will in the second half, and the Titans were fortunate in key Colts 5 and 10-yard penalties at 3rd and 4 in the third quarter and 2nd and 2 at the goal line in the fourth. On the one 4-and-out series in the second half, Hope was allowed to play aggressively/blitz on 3rd and 1 causing a two-yard loss.
- Why did the Colts lose? They played like the Titans D did the first four games of the season, with the predictable parralel of 4 DL, LBs set back 4 yards in static formation, allowing Young to easily read the defense and get a rhythm, "They did nothing differently... watching those guys rush up field and seeing how those guys leave different things open and I took advantage of that." Young was allowed to get a rhythm for the second time in as many weeks, the last time being when the Giants did the same exact thing when they played not to lose with a 21-0 lead. Serves 'em both right.
vs. Texans
- The Titans went with their predictable formations on the first three series, and aided by penalties, managed three 3-and-outs, but of course, the Texans, especially the running backs, would soon pick up a rhythm against that and scored a TD. The D came back with a varied series of formations to force a punt and get them out of that dangerous rhythm, but then came right back with their predictable scheme (the same one that the Colts used to allow 375 yards rushing vs. the Jags, whom the Titans play next week) and gave up another TD. This against a team that had negative 5 yards passing last week. After the Texans went conservative with a lead (rushing on 3rd and 6), they immediately lost it (sound familiar in the past?), and by then the Titans decided to mix it up with more people in the box in varied formations to keep the Texans offense from getting into too much of a rhythm.
- This conservative, predictable defensive approach will not work vs. a team like the Jaguars - and Schwartz needs to quit making arrogant statements such as the only defensive adjustment needed vs. the Texans was 'attitude' by the players (see quote at top of site). That's downright condescending considering the herculean effort the players have been giving when the opposing offensive players are often quoted for knowing what the Titans defense is going to do next, as well as the lack of emotion provided to them (see next paragraph) and the fact his defense is still dead last (not the players' fault).
vs. Jaguars
- Once again, the players deserve a standing ovation. The defense allowed 396 yards of offense, more than the worst average (the Titans), yet the turnovers - a great read by Pac, a Finnegan fumble recovery by a free running Garrard, and a Hope INT on a QB-TE miscommunication resulting in 21 points - were clearly not the results of any coaching. If the Jags had scored one TD and two FGs off those drives, the score could have very well been 30-3.
- As the announcers repeatedly said, the Jaguars were dominating on offense, but extraordinary individual player effort saved the Titans.
- On the positive side, the defense showed several different formations and schemes, effecting defensive stops on the Jags. They resulted in sacks, short gains and punts, but otherwise the 'predictable parralel' of 4DL and static LBs set back four yards gave up the biggest plays, including a 35-yard run, several other sizable runs and passes, and the scoring drives. However, it was enough to keep Garrard off his rhythm into throwing INTs.
- One major negative of playing a defensive scheme that never leaves the field is that it becomes difficult for the offense to get a rhythm by the time they finally get back on the field.
vs. Bills
- It's the 15th game of the season and these last few games are a hint of what's to come next year - two dominating performances by the opposing offense vs a defense run by Schwartz.
- The defense went conservative with the preditable parralel (4 DL, static LBs set back four yards) and of course the Bills gained a rhythm. By the time the defense played more aggressively, the offense had gained such a rhythm that it actually worked against them - a blitz simply isn't very effective against a QB that is hitting on all cylinders. This is why the D has to be aggressive, unpredictable from the start. Once the O gains momentum there isn't much a D can do to stop them.
- 368 yards of offense by the Bills - that's worse than the average yards allowed by the worst team defense in the league, which of course is the one run by Schwartz. The fact that they've still won six straight is a testament to the individual players.
- The Bills scored 7 out of the first 9 times they had the ball. You aren't supposed to win ball games like that. That's simply too much reliance on Vince Young, who will probably save Schwartz from losing his job.
If I were an opposing OC, what would I want to see?
I'd want to see the same four rushers rush from the same four positions, so I can get used to blocking them. I want the LBs to sit back about four yards up until the snap when they're not blitzing, so I know they're not coming. But if they do blitz, then I want to know who and when by having them come up to the line of scrimmage just before the snap so I can audible or change my primary receiver. I don't want any of the LBs to be allowed to make decisions before the snap, but to have their assignments from the coach, so they're predictable and don't adjust to what we're doing or to each other in real time. I want them to do this all game long so I can build up rhythm and confidence.
And this folks, is Schwartz's defensive scheme.
You gotta love making big plays, not fear giving them up.
|
|
|
