Baldinger

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from lloydchristmas. Show lloydchristmas's posts

    Baldinger

    I have heard Brian Baldinger on NFL Network numerous times mention that he thinks that the Pats defensive schemes are outdated? He recently brought this up while interviewing Shawn Springs on NFL network. Springs had kind of a flakey answer to the question saying something like the defense works if the offense scores 30pts a game.
      
     I find this hard to believe but I do not know enough about football to know for sure. Any thoughts??
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Re: Baldinger:
    In Response to Baldinger : Wow that's a shocker. Shawn Springs talking negative about the Pats
    Posted by Sam-Adams


    he proved to be a complete dud
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Baldinger:
    I have heard Brian Baldinger on NFL Network numerous times mention that he thinks that the Pats defensive schemes are outdated? He recently brought this up while interviewing Shawn Springs on NFL network. Springs had kind of a flakey answer to the question saying something like the defense works if the offense scores 30pts a game.     I find this hard to believe but I do not know enough about football to know for sure. Any thoughts??
    Posted by lloydchristmas


    What's outdated are the all pro players we've had to move on from. I also saw this and almost laughed. This is ESPN Caliber. Instead of looking at the obvious. I.E. We just lost Bruschi, Vraebel, Seymour and Samuel. He wants to make it look like BB is a dunce. Unfortunately for him BB's Defense has been working for the last 20 years and winning Superbowls.We just need Guys like the Above mentioned to play in it.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mannyortez3424. Show mannyortez3424's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    Obviously you are gonna say the defense s*cks if you are what s*cks in it...the only person he could've interviewed from last years team worse than Shawn Springs is Adalius Thomas...
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZigZig. Show ZigZig's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    it is outdated, u can't win without a PASS RUSH.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZigZig. Show ZigZig's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    I wouldn't get your hopes up this yr. I don't see any difference in the D this yr.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    Most fans in the country would be thrilled to have a D that gives up fewer then 300 points year in and year out.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZigZig. Show ZigZig's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    were not great anymore, were not what we use to B, can't people just face it. look what happened at the baltomore game, thats who we R. no pass rush = no BIG WINS.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZigZig. Show ZigZig's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    I'm not happy with making the playoffs and then getting knocked out,if u guys R happy with that year in and year out, then good. I'm not.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Pancakespwn. Show Pancakespwn's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    They were saying the same thing about Bill Parcells before he left. Baldy is a bit true to a certain extent and I think we all have to take off our homer glasses to understand what hes getting at. 

    Hes talking about sending rushers in different places. Stunting the OLB inside and making a mismatch for the offense. With the Pats they keep their OLBs at home and rush off the edge and Baldy pretty much wants to see the Pats dial up more exotic blitzes and I dont blame him. 

    Like I said its a good statement from Baldy as you have to watch game film to understand it and rewind and continue but its there and hes right. The D though is doing a perfect job and Bill is doing an amazing job so why fix something thats not broken? Its just the players in the roles at least last year that was the problem.

    The other night I rewatched the Bills game from week 1. Adalius Thomas has no job for a reason right now. He blew about 5-6 coverages on the final drive for the Bills where they scored to make it a two possession lead. The Pats were in man coverage and he didnt know who to pick up. You plug in a Tully Banta Cain and a Shawn Crable at least they will give it their best shot. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from patriots44. Show patriots44's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Baldinger:
    I have heard Brian Baldinger on NFL Network numerous times mention that he thinks that the Pats defensive schemes are outdated? He recently brought this up while interviewing Shawn Springs on NFL network. Springs had kind of a flakey answer to the question saying something like the defense works if the offense scores 30pts a game.     I find this hard to believe but I do not know enough about football to know for sure. Any thoughts??
    Posted by lloydchristmas
    What they fail to mention about this Years Defense, is how fast and explosive it should be come december. You Put Butler Bodden, and McCourty and then add Mayo and Guyton. Merriweather and Chung back deep. That adds alot more speed than the Pats have ever had on the field at one time. Give this Defense a chance to Jell. I like this Defense come December
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jonbam. Show jonbam's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Re: Baldinger:
    In Response to Re: Baldinger : So.......then why was Ray Rice running right by him?
    Posted by Sam-Adams


    I thought Springs did a decent job last year...when he was on the field.  On Rice's early, long TD run over the right-center side of the Pats D and that sideline, Springs was actually split out far left in coverage.  He may have been one of the few Pats players that Rice did NOT run by on that play.  Rice may have run by Springs on other plays but not on that big play in the game.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    The only thing outdated is assuming Baldinger and his disgusting finger have any intimate knowledge of football.

    Good for him though, set himself up to look like the ignorant fool he is.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    To ALL:

    First off, I gotta apologize- I sorta jumped into this thread under the presumption, that we were gonna be tearin' into Kim Basinger...I ahh, I don't really know WhoTH Brian Baldinger is.  Kim's husband?  Scr#w it, but seeing as I'm here, I'll give the topic an actual shot...

    RE: The Remarks about The NE Patriots Defensive Scheme being outdated...

    Kim's husband is sorta right but wrong, I'll explain:  New England & Belichick use The Most Classic (1st developed) form of the 3-4 Defense, the first was Chuck Fairbanks, then it was tweeked a bit by Hank Bulloughs, I believe?  Either way, The MOST original 3-4 version, Is NOW simply called "The Fairbanks-Bulloughs" 3-4 Defense.  Ya see, alot of the newer 3-4 D's do things like play 1-gapping D-Lineman (meaning: the D-Linemn are tryin to spearhead through the spaces in between the O-Lineman)-<See Bum-Philips /> San Diego does this I think.  OTHER 3-4 D's use 1 or 2-gapping D-Lineman, BUT they do a ton of zone-blitzing with their LBs and Safeties (sorta like massively overcrowding and running over 1 side of the O-Line)-Dallas does alot of this I think.   Finally, some D's smply through every page in the 3-4 textbook at the Offense-zone-blitzing, 1-gapping D-lineman, scissoring The D-Lineman and LBs (D-line shifts one way, and TheLBs shift another), and even sending D-lineman & the LB switching jobs, As the D-lineman gets sent out to play a short zone area as the ball is hiked, and Now the LB is rushing the O-line...  Anyway, It gets crazy (see-Pittsburgh's D).  

    Here's the thing:  New England AND Belichick uses the Most original/classic 3-4 D (Fairbanks-Bulloughs).  And HERE is where Baldinger/Springs, just might be somewhat correct (in their ambiguous and nondescript point @ NE's specific form of the 3-4)...   Now, As most here nowalready, NE most often has their 3 D-Lineman 2-gapping the O-Linemen-Meaning (in layman's terms): The job of the 3 D-lineman is to occupy NOT the single space between 2 of those O-Lineman (as is a 1-gapper), BUT occupying 2 O-Lineman themselves (or better, the 1 space between 2 O-lineman, AND an extra space on either one of 1 side of those 2 O-lineman)=Called 2-gapping. 

    Now, The BIG point to take away from this is the following:  BY 2-Gapping, These 3 D-Lineman are ideally freeing up those 4 LBs, SO they can make a far more open play on the ball.  The idea is that, WITH the most number of O-Lineman being occupied, The LBs can read and thus react to what the play actually IS as it's developing at the sap of the ball.  The GOOD thing here, Is that those 4 LBs, as they are set further back from the LOS, CAN make a more, longer, And thus-easier DIAGNOSIS as to what and how the Offense's actual play-call Is developing...BUT see, THIS is ALSO a somewhat bad thing too:  As those 4 LBs ARE set further back from the LOS, It will and does-Take just a fraction of a second longer for the LBs to get to the ball/play (as opposed to having a 1-gapping D-Line that actually IS trying to make a play on the ball, raher than NE's 2-gapping D-Line who's job description is far less-making a play on the ball, but ffar More-Eating up the O-lineman in order to free up the LBs).

    So, WHAT does this ALL mean?

    Well, Some good things about having and using The 3-4 Are:
         That having and acquiring even moderately skilled & sized 3-4 DEs and 3-4 NTs (let alone great ones even), Is NOT the easiest thing.  It's a bit easier getting 3-4 LBs (but even THIS hasn't been easy for NE and other 3-4 teams lately).
         Also, Ya got that added reaction time of those ideally "freer" LBs, In order to diagnose the play as it's beginning.  And HERE, I'll add that by having an extra LB in a 3-4 as compared to a 4-3, Suddenly Now, In the new Pass-Happy NFL, A 3-4 Team that has 4, rather than 3 LBs, Has an extra man (If they so want)- To drop back into coverage on an actual Pass-Play.
         Next, Ya got wider, and again-freer OLBs, and thus- IF ya got a decent one (or two), Those 3-4 OLBs are hopefully able to turn a play going towards the outside of the field, NOW inwards instead.  Thus= Ideally, Better containment possibilities.
         Next, As we all now-The 3-4 is a better than the 4-3 in terms of versatility...  Here, 1 thing NE WILL do, IS scissor the D-Line 1 way and then, Scissor the LBs the OPPOSITE way (thus, now for instance, Ya got a perfect opportunity to have that furthermost scissored OLB, an open situation to EITHER: move right up on the D-Line and play as the furthermost Defensive End, OR for him simply NOT to, and thus-remain as an OLB still).  Simple Point of this?  Give the Offense an added "wrinkle" to NOT know what the Defense is gonna do.       



    ~So, After my usual 27 Page post, THIS is where Springs and Baldinger WERE correct about NE's version of the 3-4 Defense BEING Outdated...  It comes in the form of, WHAT is/are the drawbacks of playing The Fairbanks-Bulloughs classic 3-4 Defense.

    Disadvantage 1:  As those 3 D-linean are 2-gapping AND as there is an actual 1-less D-Lineman (compared to a 4-3 Defense), It DOES give the QB for a much greater part=MORE time and less overall pressure in the pocket on a passing play.  NEEDED:  Big, yet athletic LBs...AND (in terms of Springs)=Imho, Just a bit Better Cornerbacks than a 4-3 Defense needs, As those 3-4 Defense CBs, just might be on an 1-person island covering the oppossing WR, 1 second longer.

    Disadvantage 2:  Recall like I said earlier, How those LBs ARE set a couple steps further back from the LOS, AND how those LBs ARE the true "playmakers" of Belichick's 3-4 Defense?  Remember the "negative" part of this?  It's that how As a PLUS-The LBs are freer to diagnose the actual play, YET as a MINUS- It WILL take them 1 fraction of a second LONGER to make a play on the ball-carrier...

    And for THAT Reason, You ARE gonna here (and we ALWAYS DO here)-That The Classic Burroughs-Fairbanks 3-4 Defense, IS a Containment Defense.   It IS gonna take them 1 fraction of a second longer to make the play (than having that extra man on the D-Line as in a 4-3 Defense).  
         Q:  What's The Most CRITICAL RESULT of this? 
         A:  Well, think specifically in terms of a basic running play up the middle...1 less D-lineman AND those 3 D-lineman FAR more concerned with playing the multiple O-Line and FAR less concerned, With making an actual play on the ball-carrier.  Now, Ya got to add in how the actual play-makers (those 4 LBs) ARE set further back, The obvious & simple net result=FAR better chance for (here: a simple up the middle run)-That Offense here, Getting a 1 or two extra yards per run (spec. run up the middle)...  Now, when you take into consideration how that oppossing QB (again-for the greater part)-HAS more time and less pocket pressure, The End Result is the following:

    LONGER & FURTHER extended Overall Drives For The Offensive Team...

    WHY PLAY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE then?
    A: Because you're gambling that You eventually WILL stop the Offense.  They'll get just a couple of more yards here and there...BUT, eventually they WILL get frustrated, tired, Or simply fail to coinvert, OR make a mistake (Int, Fumble, etc).

    WHY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE WILL FAIL then?
    A: Because you fielded your squad full of people none better than Shawn Springs.  You NEED to actually CAPITALIZE (i.e. jump and take advantage of)- When the oppossing offense, DOES get tired, frustrated, fails to convert, And/OR FULLY capitalize when that offense makes any sort of mistake..

    THIS is the entire idea behind WHY New England's version of the 3-4 Defense, Is called and dubbed: A "Bend but Don't Break" Defense.

    ~Hey, that only took 1 1/2 hours, yahhh (sorta wish this HAD been about bashing Kim Basinger to begin with)!      


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronf. Show ronf's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    he NFL has turned into a pass happy league. A league where flags are thrown way too often for hitting the QB or just barely touching the WR. Speed is the most valued asset today. The Pats just haven't had much speed off the edge and opposing QBs have had plenty of time to sit back there and pass. We haven't put much pressure on QBs. In contrast, the Steelers with a Dick Lebeau style 3-4 scheme mix up where the pressure is coming from. Less predictable. The Colts in their 4-3 defensive scheme have two smaller but faster edge rushers. They get pressure on opposing QBs.  Hopefully Cunningham and Crable can be the edge rushers the Patriots have been missing for several years. Right now both of them are big question marks. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Re: Baldinger:
    To ALL : First off, I gotta apologize- I sorta jumped into this thread under the presumption, that we were gonna be tearin' into Kim Basinger...I ahh, I don't really know WhoTH Brian Baldinger is.  Kim's husband?  Scr#w it, but seeing as I'm here, I'll give the topic an actual shot... RE: The Remarks about The NE Patriots Defensive Scheme being outdated... Kim's husband is sorta right but wrong, I'll explain:  New England & Belichick use The Most Classic (1st developed) form of the 3-4 Defense, the first was Chuck Fairbanks, then it was tweeked a bit by Hank Bulloughs, I believe?  Either way, The MOST original 3-4 version, Is NOW simply called "The Fairbanks-Bulloughs" 3-4 Defense.  Ya see, alot of the newer 3-4 D's do things like play 1-gapping D-Lineman (meaning: the D-Linemn are tryin to spearhead through the spaces in between the O-Lineman)-<See Bum-Philips /> San Diego does this I think.  OTHER 3-4 D's use 1 or 2-gapping D-Lineman, BUT they do a ton of zone-blitzing with their LBs and Safeties (sorta like massively overcrowding and running over 1 side of the O-Line)-Dallas does alot of this I think.   Finally, some D's smply through every page in the 3-4 textbook at the Offense-zone-blitzing, 1-gapping D-lineman, scissoring The D-Lineman and LBs (D-line shifts one way, and TheLBs shift another), and even sending D-lineman & the LB switching jobs, As the D-lineman gets sent out to play a short zone area as the ball is hiked, and Now the LB is rushing the O-line...  Anyway, It gets crazy (see-Pittsburgh's D).   Here's the thing:  New England AND Belichick uses the Most original/classic 3-4 D (Fairbanks-Bulloughs).  And HERE is where Baldinger/Springs, just might be somewhat correct (in their ambiguous and nondescript point @ NE's specific form of the 3-4)...   Now, As most here nowalready, NE most often has their 3 D-Lineman 2-gapping the O-Linemen-Meaning (in layman's terms): The job of the 3 D-lineman is to occupy NOT the single space between 2 of those O-Lineman (as is a 1-gapper), BUT occupying 2 O-Lineman themselves (or better, the 1 space between 2 O-lineman, AND an extra space on either one of 1 side of those 2 O-lineman)=Called 2-gapping.  Now, The BIG point to take away from this is the following:  BY 2-Gapping, These 3 D-Lineman are ideally freeing up those 4 LBs, SO they can make a far more open play on the ball.  The idea is that, WITH the most number of O-Lineman being occupied, The LBs can read and thus react to what the play actually IS as it's developing at the sap of the ball.  The GOOD thing here, Is that those 4 LBs, as they are set further back from the LOS, CAN make a more, longer, And thus-easier DIAGNOSIS as to what and how the Offense's actual play-call Is developing...BUT see, THIS is ALSO a somewhat bad thing too:  As those 4 LBs ARE set further back from the LOS, It will and does-Take just a fraction of a second longer for the LBs to get to the ball/play (as opposed to having a 1-gapping D-Line that actually IS trying to make a play on the ball, raher than NE's 2-gapping D-Line who's job description is far less-making a play on the ball, but ffar More-Eating up the O-lineman in order to free up the LBs). So, WHAT does this ALL mean? Well, Some good things about having and using The 3-4 Are:      That having and acquiring even moderately skilled & sized 3-4 DEs and 3-4 NTs (let alone great ones even), Is NOT the easiest thing.  It's a bit easier getting 3-4 LBs (but even THIS hasn't been easy for NE and other 3-4 teams lately).      Also, Ya got that added reaction time of those ideally "freer" LBs, In order to diagnose the play as it's beginning.  And HERE, I'll add that by having an extra LB in a 3-4 as compared to a 4-3, Suddenly Now, In the new Pass-Happy NFL, A 3-4 Team that has 4, rather than 3 LBs, Has an extra man (If they so want)- To drop back into coverage on an actual Pass-Play.      Next, Ya got wider, and again-freer OLBs, and thus- IF ya got a decent one (or two), Those 3-4 OLBs are hopefully able to turn a play going towards the outside of the field, NOW inwards instead.  Thus= Ideally, Better containment possibilities.      Next, As we all now-The 3-4 is a better than the 4-3 in terms of versatility...  Here, 1 thing NE WILL do, IS scissor the D-Line 1 way and then, Scissor the LBs the OPPOSITE way (thus, now for instance, Ya got a perfect opportunity to have that furthermost scissored OLB, an open situation to EITHER: move right up on the D-Line and play as the furthermost Defensive End, OR for him simply NOT to, and thus-remain as an OLB still).  Simple Point of this?  Give the Offense an added "wrinkle" to NOT know what the Defense is gonna do.        ~So, After my usual 27 Page post, THIS is where Springs and Baldinger WERE correct about NE's version of the 3-4 Defense BEING Outdated...  It comes in the form of, WHAT is/are the drawbacks of playing The Fairbanks-Bulloughs classic 3-4 Defense. Disadvantage 1:  As those 3 D-linean are 2-gapping AND as there is an actual 1-less D-Lineman (compared to a 4-3 Defense), It DOES give the QB for a much greater part=MORE time and less overall pressure in the pocket on a passing play.  NEEDED:  Big, yet athletic LBs...AND (in terms of Springs)=Imho, Just a bit Better Cornerbacks than a 4-3 Defense needs, As those 3-4 Defense CBs, just might be on an 1-person island covering the oppossing WR, 1 second longer. Disadvantage 2:  Recall like I said earlier, How those LBs ARE set a couple steps further back from the LOS, AND how those LBs ARE the true "playmakers" of Belichick's 3-4 Defense?  Remember the "negative" part of this?  It's that how As a PLUS-The LBs are freer to diagnose the actual play, YET as a MINUS- It WILL take them 1 fraction of a second LONGER to make a play on the ball-carrier... And for THAT Reason, You ARE gonna here (and we ALWAYS DO here)-That The Classic Burroughs-Fairbanks 3-4 Defense, IS a Containment Defense.   It IS gonna take them 1 fraction of a second longer to make the play (than having that extra man on the D-Line as in a 4-3 Defense).        Q:  What's The Most CRITICAL RESULT of this?       A:  Well, think specifically in terms of a basic running play up the middle...1 less D-lineman AND those 3 D-lineman FAR more concerned with playing the multiple O-Line and FAR less concerned, With making an actual play on the ball-carrier.  Now, Ya got to add in how the actual play-makers (those 4 LBs) ARE set further back, The obvious & simple net result=FAR better chance for (here: a simple up the middle run)-That Offense here, Getting a 1 or two extra yards per run (spec. run up the middle)...  Now, when you take into consideration how that oppossing QB (again-for the greater part)-HAS more time and less pocket pressure, The End Result is the following: LONGER & FURTHER extended Overall Drives For The Offensive Team... WHY PLAY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE then? A: Because you're gambling that You eventually WILL stop the Offense.  They'll get just a couple of more yards here and there...BUT, eventually they WILL get frustrated, tired, Or simply fail to coinvert, OR make a mistake (Int, Fumble, etc). WHY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE WILL FAIL then? A: Because you fielded your squad full of people none better than Shawn Springs.  You NEED to actually CAPITALIZE (i.e. jump and take advantage of)- When the oppossing offense, DOES get tired, frustrated, fails to convert, And/OR FULLY capitalize when that offense makes any sort of mistake.. THIS is the entire idea behind WHY New England's version of the 3-4 Defense, Is called and dubbed: A "Bend but Don't Break" Defense. ~Hey, that only took 1 1/2 hours, yahhh (sorta wish this HAD been about bashing Kim Basinger to begin with)!      
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium


    Aha! Laz has been unmasked:

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2. Show Tcal2's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    I can't take a guy seriously who has a porn name.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Re: Baldinger:
    he NFL has turned into a pass happy league. A league where flags are thrown way too often for hitting the QB or just barely touching the WR. Speed is the most valued asset today. The Pats just haven't had much speed off the edge and opposing QBs have had plenty of time to sit back there and pass. We haven't put much pressure on QBs. In contrast, the Steelers with a Dick Lebeau style 3-4 scheme mix up where the pressure is coming from. Less predictable. The Colts in their 4-3 defensive scheme have two smaller but faster edge rushers. They get pressure on opposing QBs.  Hopefully Cunningham and Crable can be the edge rushers the Patriots have been missing for several years. Right now both of them are big question marks. 
    Posted by RonF

    I guess that's true about the Steelers but their defense was horrible last year.  And really none of those teams are exactly running new schemes.  The Colts run a cover 2 and the Steelers use zone blitzes. 

    The question  Springs should have asked is "What schemes are outdated?"  I'm guessing the guy couldn't name a single one.  Nobody out there is reinventing the wheel, any defensive coordinator has seen all the coverages and blitzes before.  Coordinators don't outsmart the other team, they pick which coverage matches up best with the personnel matchups and have players practice to execute. 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    First, Mighty:  Whehh (wiping sweat from brow)- I'm glad I enlarged that picture ya gave m~...
     
    Because, At first I thought it was this guy:
    Charles Grodin

    I'm thinkin', WhatTH does Charles Grodin have to do with the 3-4 Defense?  I mean, the movie "Clifford" was hilarious, and who on earth woulda thought an acting duo of Martin Short & Charles Grodin could make a veritable Comedic Masterpiece?  But really, That's another story I'm savin' up for a trully special subject, preferably it's very own thread...


    Now shenanigan, THIS...
    "The question  Springs should have asked is "What schemes are outdated?"  I'm guessing the guy couldn't name a single one."
    ...Seems to be DEFINATELY the exact question IF asked to this Baldinger guy, Would of had him cutting to a commercial, before he could say, "I was trully hoping we were gonna stick with casting bold & sensational remarks, answered solely with simple generalizations."  Honestly shenanigan, IS this guy an ESPN commentator (I honestly don't know)...?  IF he's not, then worse-He's a WANNABE- ESPN analyst.  Either way, shame on you shenanigan, for even expecting a poignant & insightful answer, backed up by actual research or (gulp)...proof. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    Why God, WHY God...Can't I see the Charles Grodin comparison pic vs Him and Bill Belichick...WHhhhy?!? 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from gmbill. Show gmbill's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Baldinger:
    I have heard Brian Baldinger on NFL Network numerous times mention that he thinks that the Pats defensive schemes are outdated? He recently brought this up while interviewing Shawn Springs on NFL network. Springs had kind of a flakey answer to the question saying something like the defense works if the offense scores 30pts a game.     I find this hard to believe but I do not know enough about football to know for sure. Any thoughts??
    Posted by lloydchristmas


    I am sorry, did you say "balllicker", I do not remember a player of any great report by that name. (or anything like it) WGAF what he might say!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZigZig. Show ZigZig's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    everybody's counting on the young guys 2 get 2 the QB this yr. that ant gona happen, so keep living your pipe dream.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from gmbill. Show gmbill's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Re: Baldinger:
    To ALL : First off, I gotta apologize- I sorta jumped into this thread under the presumption, that we were gonna be tearin' into Kim Basinger...I ahh, I don't really know WhoTH Brian Baldinger is.  Kim's husband?  Scr#w it, but seeing as I'm here, I'll give the topic an actual shot... RE: The Remarks about The NE Patriots Defensive Scheme being outdated... Kim's husband is sorta right but wrong, I'll explain:  New England & Belichick use The Most Classic (1st developed) form of the 3-4 Defense, the first was Chuck Fairbanks, then it was tweeked a bit by Hank Bulloughs, I believe?  Either way, The MOST original 3-4 version, Is NOW simply called "The Fairbanks-Bulloughs" 3-4 Defense.  Ya see, alot of the newer 3-4 D's do things like play 1-gapping D-Lineman (meaning: the D-Linemn are tryin to spearhead through the spaces in between the O-Lineman)-<See Bum-Philips /> San Diego does this I think.  OTHER 3-4 D's use 1 or 2-gapping D-Lineman, BUT they do a ton of zone-blitzing with their LBs and Safeties (sorta like massively overcrowding and running over 1 side of the O-Line)-Dallas does alot of this I think.   Finally, some D's smply through every page in the 3-4 textbook at the Offense-zone-blitzing, 1-gapping D-lineman, scissoring The D-Lineman and LBs (D-line shifts one way, and TheLBs shift another), and even sending D-lineman & the LB switching jobs, As the D-lineman gets sent out to play a short zone area as the ball is hiked, and Now the LB is rushing the O-line...  Anyway, It gets crazy (see-Pittsburgh's D).   Here's the thing:  New England AND Belichick uses the Most original/classic 3-4 D (Fairbanks-Bulloughs).  And HERE is where Baldinger/Springs, just might be somewhat correct (in their ambiguous and nondescript point @ NE's specific form of the 3-4)...   Now, As most here nowalready, NE most often has their 3 D-Lineman 2-gapping the O-Linemen-Meaning (in layman's terms): The job of the 3 D-lineman is to occupy NOT the single space between 2 of those O-Lineman (as is a 1-gapper), BUT occupying 2 O-Lineman themselves (or better, the 1 space between 2 O-lineman, AND an extra space on either one of 1 side of those 2 O-lineman)=Called 2-gapping.  Now, The BIG point to take away from this is the following:  BY 2-Gapping, These 3 D-Lineman are ideally freeing up those 4 LBs, SO they can make a far more open play on the ball.  The idea is that, WITH the most number of O-Lineman being occupied, The LBs can read and thus react to what the play actually IS as it's developing at the sap of the ball.  The GOOD thing here, Is that those 4 LBs, as they are set further back from the LOS, CAN make a more, longer, And thus-easier DIAGNOSIS as to what and how the Offense's actual play-call Is developing...BUT see, THIS is ALSO a somewhat bad thing too:  As those 4 LBs ARE set further back from the LOS, It will and does-Take just a fraction of a second longer for the LBs to get to the ball/play (as opposed to having a 1-gapping D-Line that actually IS trying to make a play on the ball, raher than NE's 2-gapping D-Line who's job description is far less-making a play on the ball, but ffar More-Eating up the O-lineman in order to free up the LBs). So, WHAT does this ALL mean? Well, Some good things about having and using The 3-4 Are:      That having and acquiring even moderately skilled & sized 3-4 DEs and 3-4 NTs (let alone great ones even), Is NOT the easiest thing.  It's a bit easier getting 3-4 LBs (but even THIS hasn't been easy for NE and other 3-4 teams lately).      Also, Ya got that added reaction time of those ideally "freer" LBs, In order to diagnose the play as it's beginning.  And HERE, I'll add that by having an extra LB in a 3-4 as compared to a 4-3, Suddenly Now, In the new Pass-Happy NFL, A 3-4 Team that has 4, rather than 3 LBs, Has an extra man (If they so want)- To drop back into coverage on an actual Pass-Play.      Next, Ya got wider, and again-freer OLBs, and thus- IF ya got a decent one (or two), Those 3-4 OLBs are hopefully able to turn a play going towards the outside of the field, NOW inwards instead.  Thus= Ideally, Better containment possibilities.      Next, As we all now-The 3-4 is a better than the 4-3 in terms of versatility...  Here, 1 thing NE WILL do, IS scissor the D-Line 1 way and then, Scissor the LBs the OPPOSITE way (thus, now for instance, Ya got a perfect opportunity to have that furthermost scissored OLB, an open situation to EITHER: move right up on the D-Line and play as the furthermost Defensive End, OR for him simply NOT to, and thus-remain as an OLB still).  Simple Point of this?  Give the Offense an added "wrinkle" to NOT know what the Defense is gonna do.        ~So, After my usual 27 Page post, THIS is where Springs and Baldinger WERE correct about NE's version of the 3-4 Defense BEING Outdated...  It comes in the form of, WHAT is/are the drawbacks of playing The Fairbanks-Bulloughs classic 3-4 Defense. Disadvantage 1:  As those 3 D-linean are 2-gapping AND as there is an actual 1-less D-Lineman (compared to a 4-3 Defense), It DOES give the QB for a much greater part=MORE time and less overall pressure in the pocket on a passing play.  NEEDED:  Big, yet athletic LBs...AND (in terms of Springs)=Imho, Just a bit Better Cornerbacks than a 4-3 Defense needs, As those 3-4 Defense CBs, just might be on an 1-person island covering the oppossing WR, 1 second longer. Disadvantage 2:  Recall like I said earlier, How those LBs ARE set a couple steps further back from the LOS, AND how those LBs ARE the true "playmakers" of Belichick's 3-4 Defense?  Remember the "negative" part of this?  It's that how As a PLUS-The LBs are freer to diagnose the actual play, YET as a MINUS- It WILL take them 1 fraction of a second LONGER to make a play on the ball-carrier... And for THAT Reason, You ARE gonna here (and we ALWAYS DO here)-That The Classic Burroughs-Fairbanks 3-4 Defense, IS a Containment Defense.   It IS gonna take them 1 fraction of a second longer to make the play (than having that extra man on the D-Line as in a 4-3 Defense).        Q:  What's The Most CRITICAL RESULT of this?       A:  Well, think specifically in terms of a basic running play up the middle...1 less D-lineman AND those 3 D-lineman FAR more concerned with playing the multiple O-Line and FAR less concerned, With making an actual play on the ball-carrier.  Now, Ya got to add in how the actual play-makers (those 4 LBs) ARE set further back, The obvious & simple net result=FAR better chance for (here: a simple up the middle run)-That Offense here, Getting a 1 or two extra yards per run (spec. run up the middle)...  Now, when you take into consideration how that oppossing QB (again-for the greater part)-HAS more time and less pocket pressure, The End Result is the following: LONGER & FURTHER extended Overall Drives For The Offensive Team... WHY PLAY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE then? A: Because you're gambling that You eventually WILL stop the Offense.  They'll get just a couple of more yards here and there...BUT, eventually they WILL get frustrated, tired, Or simply fail to coinvert, OR make a mistake (Int, Fumble, etc). WHY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE WILL FAIL then? A: Because you fielded your squad full of people none better than Shawn Springs.  You NEED to actually CAPITALIZE (i.e. jump and take advantage of)- When the oppossing offense, DOES get tired, frustrated, fails to convert, And/OR FULLY capitalize when that offense makes any sort of mistake.. THIS is the entire idea behind WHY New England's version of the 3-4 Defense, Is called and dubbed: A "Bend but Don't Break" Defense. ~Hey, that only took 1 1/2 hours, yahhh (sorta wish this HAD been about bashing Kim Basinger to begin with)!      
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium



    You have got to cut your Sunday Papers down to a simple post. There might be some useful info in here but I don't have the time or interest.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Re: Baldinger:
    In Response to Re: Baldinger : You have got to cut your Sunday Papers down to a simple post. There might be some useful info in here but I don't have the time or interest.
    Posted by gmbill


    Don't say that.  Every message board needs at least one contributer fluent in stream of conscience. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Baldinger

    In Response to Re: Baldinger:
    In Response to Re: Baldinger : Don't say that.  Every message board needs at least one contributer fluent in stream of conscience. 
    Posted by themightypatriotz


    The key word here being "fluent" -- which I'm assuming is short for effluent in this case.

    Why is it always the guy with the least to say who takes the longest to say it?

     

Share