PDA

View Full Version : Weaver, Greenwood, Reeves....


Polo
08-23-2008, 11:52 AM
Are the biggest problems with our defense IMHO.

I know some may not agree and think it's the D-coordinator, but I'm not going to discuss that anymore because my minds pretty much made up re: that subect.

Back to the three worse players on our defense.

If I'm not mistaken, a lot of times these guys are on the same side of the field together....

Weaver doesn't do much well IMO, except not get pushed back too much. He's doesn't rush the passer well, he's not all that quick out his stance and he's not that quick once he gets going. His run support is supposed to be his strength but he gets mauled inside at DT and at DE he's virtually invisible except when he's sloth footedly dropping into coverage.

Morlon Greenwood. A good guy. Not that great a football player. He's terrible IMO at the position he plays...This does two things...It severlely hurts us in pass coverage and in run support...He offers no help to DB's on underneath routes, and he gets dizzified in the run game. None of our LB's are particulary great against the pass, but I'm tempted to say Zach Diles is challenging Demeco for our best LB in pass coverage.

Jaque Reeves is scared. He's scared of getting beat in pass coverage and he's scared of being physical. There isn't a route that can't be completed on his side. He's not physical enough or good enough to break up short slants and he isn't talented enough to stick with recievers down field.

IMO, these are the three biggest problems on our defense. That's three MAJOR weaknesses on every level of the defense. Not sure how you scheme or play to our strengths when we really have none.

Blitzes don't work because we don't have guys that can get there. I'd say we have one good blitzer (in Demeco) at LB, and one o.k blitzer at DB is CC...

I really don't think there's a lot of hope on that side of the ball besides hoping our guys can find it in them to come up with unexpected big plays. We aren't going to impose our will on too many teams defensively this year. I think when we win games it will be because guys have made some unexpected big plays and our offense is clicking.

JMO.

Texan JBZ
08-23-2008, 12:05 PM
Weaver doesn't fit the 4-3. He's a 3-4 DE at best. He stinks. Slow, no pass rush moves, gets mashed against the run. Terrible investment in him.

Greenwood, I really don't know what to think about him right now. He started off last season slow, but came on strong toward the end of the season. He doesn't play good assignment football though. He seems to be out of place too much. Adibi will take his place soon enough.

I'm not too overly concerned with Reeves. He's just a band-aid right now. Once Dunta comes back, he's on the bench. Not a smart signing by Rick Smith.

Polo
08-23-2008, 12:22 PM
Greenwood, I really don't know what to think about him right now. He started off last season slow, but came on strong toward the end of the season. He doesn't play good assignment football though. He seems to be out of place too much. Adibi will take his place soon enough.


I'm sorry, but I don't know what anyone ever saw in Greenwood...

He's Jay foreman with a +1 boost...

He's never been anything more than a guy who knew his assignments and had some decent quickness..

He lacks strength, aggressiveness and instinct....He can't blitz, cover, or make plays in run support...

He knows his assignments though....

how many times have we seen Greenwood make plays on the other side of the line of scrimmage since he's been here ????

Just from pre-season I've seen Diles in the opponents backfield more than Greenwood has since he's been here. Passive linebacking makes for easy picking running and passing for opposing offenses.

GP
08-23-2008, 01:15 PM
Glad you mentioned those three guys, because I'm just now watching the game--it's in the 3rd quarter--and all three of those guys are getting pwned.

Reeves took a very very bad angle on the TE (Bennett). All he had to do is stand his ground, form tackle, and there were three more players who would come to help him take Bennett down (yards from the first down marker). One of those three guys, Weaver, then ALSO took a very very bad angle on Bennett. Had it not been for DEMECO RYANS stabbing an arm out there and basically arm tackling a TE...it would have been really bad.

Greenwood is slow. Reeves is constantly picked on, like the Saints' Jason David, and Weaver is just always out of position.

If we didn't have DeMeco Ryans and Fred Bennett, we'd be really awful.

As it stands, we're only "awful" thus far.

And we have a questionable defensive coordinator.

:kingkong:

Jackie Chiles
08-23-2008, 01:22 PM
I'm guessing Adibi didn't play in this game either seeing as he wasn't credited for a tackle. Hopefully hes better by next week and gets a ton of reps but I really wish he was healthy so we could see if he is an option.

Having said that I think its important for everyone to take a deep breath, step back a bit, and look at the big picture here. Dallas is one of the top 2-3 offenses in the entire league and they handed it to us last night. Well, mama said there'd be days like this and considering it was preseason I'm not going to give up on this unit.

Anyway the big picture is that when you look at this defense and the one we had at the end of last year, this defense should perform better throughout the course of a 16 game NFL regular season and I believe it will. Every position is either the same or very slightly improved. I know thats not saying much for a defense that gave up about 24 points per game but lets take a look at each position:

On the D-line its close to the same as last year, Mario has another year under his belt (He was invisible last preaseason btw) Amobi has another year under his belt (And he is still the 4th youngest player in the NFL if I'm not mistaken) TJ isn't going to be anything special and at the other DE spot at least Cochran is pushing Weaver. I still have faith that Colvin has something left in the tank. If Okam works his way into the rotation it could be a small plus as well but overall this unit is still a player or two away, just like it was last year.

At LBer we have Demeco and we all know what he can do. Does anyone really believe Diles is a downgrade over Danny Clark? Hes probably not going to be a real impact player but I think this is a small upgrade at least. Morlon is Morlon, nothing special and hopefully Adibi comes along fast because I really believe he will show up ala Slaton on offense. Overall though this unit hasn't changed much.

Secondary: Bennett has another year and showed a lot of promise last season. Reeves is replacing Von Hutchins who was every bit as bad as Reeves if not worse and the only reason no one roasted him was because he wasn't getting paid a lick(Not saying Reeves isn't looking like a bad signing but he isn't worse than what we had at the end of last year). Moulden is inexperienced and will have his share of bad plays but who was our third corner last year Faggins? At safety Demps gets a whole offseason and he isn't robotic arm man this year. CC is a decent player. If Dunta gets back and plays well he will be a nice boost for this unit and the defense/team as a whole.

Overall what I'm saying is that we survived with this defense last year and I don't think theres any reason to expect a step back. I would say that we are certainly an offense oriented team right now and the main improvements from the defense will come from our improved running game and hopefully less turnovers than we had last year. I still expect the defense to give up about 22.5-23 points per game which, although a small step, is a step nonetheless. I'd be curious if anyone believes the defense will take a step back and their reasons.

Jackie Chiles
08-23-2008, 01:31 PM
ignore

Kaiser Toro
08-23-2008, 01:55 PM
Per Keith Weiland's Salary Cap page (http://www.inthebullseye.com/cap.html) and some guestimation on my part here are the following cap situations of Weaver and Greenwood:

Weaver will cost us 6.2m if he is on the roster this year. If we cut him we would be on the hook for 8.1m (2.7m bonus allocation per year) as he is sigend through 2010. Therefore, before any fuzzy accounting, it would cost us 1.9m (8.1m minus 6.2m) to release him and have a roster spot. He is as good as gone, if there is someone who has looked better in camp. Since I have not been at camp I certainly cannot provide a valued opinion. All I know is that he is extremely expensive for the "value" he provides on the field.

Greenwood will cost us 4.017m if he is on the roster this year. He is signed through 2009 and his bonus allocation is 2.9m for the two years. Therefore, 4.017m minus 2.9m means we have immediate cap relief to the tune of ~1.1m by cutting him.

Therefore, if we cut them both it will cost us 800k this year on the surface. This is not a failsafe look as there are determiners, formulas and variables that must be considered, but on the surface an 800k pricetag on a 109m Cap is peanuts to get rid of these two players and get some playing time for some younger folk.

The Pencil Neck
08-23-2008, 02:17 PM
Does anyone really believe Diles is a downgrade over Danny Clark? Hes probably not going to be a real impact player but I think this is a small upgrade at least. Morlon is Morlon, nothing special and hopefully Adibi comes along fast because I really believe he will show up ala Slaton on offense. Overall though this unit hasn't changed much.

Did you know that Danny Clark is now the starting WLB for the Giants?

On the whole, I agree with you. This unit should perform better than the unit we put on the field last year.

But the unit we put on the field last year didn't out perform the unit that ended the season the year before. Over the last 13 games of the season 2 years ago, our defense was actually pretty good. (The first 3 games of the season 2 years ago were one of the worst 3 game stretches by a defense... evar.)

Just having better and more experienced players doesn't mean that we're going to improve. And if we're going to have a winning season, our defense needs to improve.

Jackie Chiles
08-23-2008, 02:28 PM
Did you know that Danny Clark is now the starting WLB for the Giants?

Yeah I saw him a couple weeks ago getting interviewed on Rome but I definitely think Diles will have a better year. Danny Clark is like an all time band aid and while he is physical Diles is a much better athlete imo. Clark is another one of those guys that doesn't get paid so people don't complain if he isn't playing at a really high level.

The Pencil Neck
08-23-2008, 02:41 PM
Yeah I saw him a couple weeks ago getting interviewed on Rome but I definitely think Diles will have a better year. Danny Clark is like an all time band aid and while he is physical Diles is a much better athlete imo. Clark is another one of those guys that doesn't get paid so people don't complain if he isn't playing at a really high level.

What's interesting to me is that he's playing WILL for the Giants.

Either the Giants are making a big mistake (which could very well be) or we made a very big mistake in how we used him (which could also very well be.) It's going to be interesting to see how he performs for them.

Maddict5
08-23-2008, 03:05 PM
Per Keith Weiland's Salary Cap page (http://www.inthebullseye.com/cap.html) and some guestimation on my part here are the following cap situations of Weaver and Greenwood:

Weaver will cost us 6.2m if he is on the roster this year. If we cut him we would be on the hook for 8.1m (2.7m bonus allocation per year) as he is sigend through 2010. Therefore, before any fuzzy accounting, it would cost us 1.9m (8.1m minus 6.2m) to release him and have a roster spot. He is as good as gone, if there is someone who has looked better in camp. Since I have not been at camp I certainly cannot provide a valued opinion. All I know is that he is extremely expensive for the "value" he provides on the field.

Greenwood will cost us 4.017m if he is on the roster this year. He is signed through 2009 and his bonus allocation is 2.9m for the two years. Therefore, 4.017m minus 2.9m means we have immediate cap relief to the tune of ~1.1m by cutting him.

Therefore, if we cut them both it will cost us 800k this year on the surface. This is not a failsafe look as there are determiners, formulas and variables that must be considered, but on the surface an 800k pricetag on a 109m Cap is peanuts to get rid of these two players and get some playing time for some younger folk.


thats great except what happens if adibi becomes the starter and gets injured?

either way its somewhat delusional to think either wont make the 53.. whether they should be starters is another thing

Kaiser Toro
08-23-2008, 03:32 PM
thats great except what happens if adibi becomes the starter and gets injured?

either way its somewhat delusional to think either wont make the 53.. whether they should be starters is another thing

Right now they are bodies occupying space. Smith has been much better in surfing the waiver wire and with the draft than he is in off-season FA acquisitions. Leverage his competency while getting his younger players minutes is fine by me. We know what Greenwood and Weaver can't do. As much as this about money, it is about getting snaps for players to fail and eventually produce.

Lastly, a good coach or scheme can hide players' deficiencies to some degree - I don't think a master defensive coach could hide Weaver's in his current state and in this scheme. Nice guy, bad fit.

Maddict5
08-23-2008, 03:59 PM
Right now they are bodies occupying space. Smith has been much better in surfing the waiver wire and with the draft than he is in off-season FA acquisitions. Leverage his competency while getting his younger players minutes is fine by me. We know what Greenwood and Weaver can't do. As much as this about money, it is about getting snaps for players to fail and eventually produce.

Lastly, a good coach or scheme can hide players' deficiencies to some degree - I don't think a master defensive coach could hide Weaver's in his current state and in this scheme. Nice guy, bad fit.

i have no problem with what you're saying (trying to get adibi,cochran PT) except why should we cut weaver and morlon when we'd be left with nothing behind them. they're vets that know the scheme and could replace an injured guy

The Pencil Neck
08-23-2008, 08:52 PM
i have no problem with what you're saying (trying to get adibi,cochran PT) except why should we cut weaver and morlon when we'd be left with nothing behind them. they're vets that know the scheme and could replace an injured guy

Yeah.

The best guys should be playing and the second best guys should be backing them up. It doesn't make sense to just cut Morlon or Reeves or even Ahman unless we absolutely can't use them. If nothing else, they can give us good, if expensive, depth.

But if they're not the best players and don't give us the best chance to win, they shouldn't be on the field. And the more I watch Greenwood, the more I think that he's regressing.

Lucky
08-23-2008, 09:51 PM
Weaver will cost us 6.2m if he is on the roster this year. If we cut him we would be on the hook for 8.1m (2.7m bonus allocation per year) as he is sigend through 2010. Therefore, before any fuzzy accounting, it would cost us 1.9m (8.1m minus 6.2m) to release him and have a roster spot.
The Texans are still on the hook for the $8.1 mil of unamortized bonus to Weaver. But since it is now past June 1st, the team would only have to take on the '08 allocated bonus pay ($2.7 mil) on this year's cap. So the Texans would actually save $3.5 mil (Weaver's '08 salary) on the cap this year. But would take a beating of $5.4 million in dead money on the 2009 cap.

I'm not a fan of the Charley Casserly school of "cut now, pay later" cap management. But if the Texans could find a defender with the $3.5 mil that could help this team via a trade, I think they should. Whatever Weaver once had when he signed that monstrous contract, he's lost. He's not one of the 53 best players on this roster. I think it's time to move on and move Weaver out.

CloakNNNdagger
08-23-2008, 10:23 PM
Did you know that Danny Clark is now the starting WLB for the Giants?
On the whole, I agree with you. This unit should perform better than the unit we put on the field last year.

But the unit we put on the field last year didn't out perform the unit that ended the season the year before. Over the last 13 games of the season 2 years ago, our defense was actually pretty good. (The first 3 games of the season 2 years ago were one of the worst 3 game stretches by a defense... evar.)

Just having better and more experienced players doesn't mean that we're going to improve. And if we're going to have a winning season, our defense needs to improve.

Danny Clark may be an example of coaching and coaching game planning "making the man." Some of our D coaching/scheming may be
discouraging development.

wolf123
08-23-2008, 10:32 PM
I've been saying for ever that Greenwood is average at best and Weaver was a desperation signing because we were switching defense and had no Defensive ends. This next draft will be heavily on the defensive side of the ball.

Polo
08-25-2008, 01:23 PM
Danny Clark may be an example of coaching and coaching game planning "making the man." Some of our D coaching/scheming may be
discouraging development.

If Danny Clark has a break-out year then I think that's definitely a possibility...

Second Honeymoon
08-25-2008, 01:30 PM
if anyone needs to see more proof that Richard Smith sucks, I am not sure they will ever come to that conclusion. If it ain't obvious yet, I doubt it ever will be.

gtexan02
08-25-2008, 01:55 PM
Per Keith Weiland's Salary Cap page (http://www.inthebullseye.com/cap.html) and some guestimation on my part here are the following cap situations of Weaver and Greenwood:

Weaver will cost us 6.2m if he is on the roster this year. If we cut him we would be on the hook for 8.1m (2.7m bonus allocation per year) as he is sigend through 2010. Therefore, before any fuzzy accounting, it would cost us 1.9m (8.1m minus 6.2m) to release him and have a roster spot. He is as good as gone, if there is someone who has looked better in camp. Since I have not been at camp I certainly cannot provide a valued opinion. All I know is that he is extremely expensive for the "value" he provides on the field.

Greenwood will cost us 4.017m if he is on the roster this year. He is signed through 2009 and his bonus allocation is 2.9m for the two years. Therefore, 4.017m minus 2.9m means we have immediate cap relief to the tune of ~1.1m by cutting him.

Therefore, if we cut them both it will cost us 800k this year on the surface. This is not a failsafe look as there are determiners, formulas and variables that must be considered, but on the surface an 800k pricetag on a 109m Cap is peanuts to get rid of these two players and get some playing time for some younger folk.

I agree that Weaver has been underwhelming, but when you are a team with minimal depth, the thought of starting 2 rookie LBs is not something I'm OK with.

I dont think Greenwood is stellar, but he's certainly not a liability. Phase someone in later in the year if you have to, but don't start Abidi and Diles with Ryans in the middle.

Polo
08-25-2008, 03:03 PM
I agree that Weaver has been underwhelming, but when you are a team with minimal depth, the thought of starting 2 rookie LBs is not something I'm OK with.

I dont think Greenwood is stellar, but he's certainly not a liability. Phase someone in later in the year if you have to, but don't start Abidi and Diles with Ryans in the middle.

Diles isn't a rookie.

That said...

I'm not too excited about starting Adibi either...

I'd like to see him play a little more...

And I disagree with you about Greenwood...He is liability...

Mr teX
08-25-2008, 04:05 PM
ummm, Greenwood, Weaver & Reeves?..... in that order, Garbage, hot garbage & sewer line garbage. I mean its getting to the point with Weaver & Greenwood that i'm tired of screaming their names at the television set when i see them getting owned, i just want to see someone else.....even if that means they start screwing up to.

Greenwood is inconsistent....1 minute he's a beast the next minute he looks lost....
weaver has like 3 sacks in 2 years....which is god awful....

& Reeves couldn't cover a 3-legged turtle walking in sand, pathetic. I never thought i'd wish for Faggins to come back as a starter....but here i am.

Polo
08-25-2008, 04:48 PM
Danny Clark may be an example of coaching and coaching game planning "making the man." Some of our D coaching/scheming may be
discouraging development.

Danny Clark was a starter for us...

He was brought to New York to be a back-up and is only a starter due to injury...

The Pencil Neck
08-25-2008, 05:04 PM
Danny Clark was a starter for us...

He was brought to New York to be a back-up and is only a starter due to injury...

He's playing pretty well for them. I didn't know he'd gotten the job via injury. I thought he'd played his way into it after last year's starter left the team.

I'll have to check on that...

mussop
08-26-2008, 06:19 AM
I'm sorry, but I don't know what anyone ever saw in Greenwood...

He's Jay foreman with a +1 boost...

He's never been anything more than a guy who knew his assignments and had some decent quickness..

He lacks strength, aggressiveness and instinct....He can't blitz, cover, or make plays in run support...

He knows his assignments though....

how many times have we seen Greenwood make plays on the other side of the line of scrimmage since he's been here ????

Just from pre-season I've seen Diles in the opponents backfield more than Greenwood has since he's been here. Passive linebacking makes for easy picking running and passing for opposing offenses.

DE and OLB HAVE to offer something in the form of a pass rush. Greenwood and Weaver do not. As long as they are starting we will be an average defense. I have been saying this for 2 years now. I would rather see Addibi starting and giving up the occasional rookie mistake but also making an occasional big play than watching Greenwood play his very average overall game with 1 or 2 good plays a year.

Offensive line should be the only position on offense that should get any consideration on the first day of the draft next year. We must improve our pass rush if we want to become a regular playoff team.

BattleRedToro
08-26-2008, 06:31 AM
Right now they are bodies occupying space. Smith has been much better in surfing the waiver wire and with the draft than he is in off-season FA acquisitions. Leverage his competency while getting his younger players minutes is fine by me. We know what Greenwood and Weaver can't do. As much as this about money, it is about getting snaps for players to fail and eventually produce.

Lastly, a good coach or scheme can hide players' deficiencies to some degree - I don't think a master defensive coach could hide Weaver's in his current state and in this scheme. Nice guy, bad fit.

I don't know if you meant to imply that Smith has been bad at making Off-season Free Agent acquisitions or that he has just been so good at waiver wire acquisitions.

I'm sure that you know this, but just to clarify for any newcomers here, Smith is not responsible for the signings of either Weaver or Greenwood.

Polo
08-26-2008, 09:08 AM
He's playing pretty well for them. I didn't know he'd gotten the job via injury. I thought he'd played his way into it after last year's starter left the team.

I'll have to check on that...



After Osi got hurt, Kiwi moved back to DE and Clark was next in line at OLB.

Texanmike02
08-26-2008, 09:08 AM
This is the problem I was talking about. At every level on defense we have someone you should be able to pick on. How do you make up for the defficiency. I will tell you one thing, I think our team speed on defense is lacking all the way around. I am in favor of starting Molden sooner rather than later. At least when he makes a mistake he's fast enough to try and recover. At the LB level, I would run to whichever side Greenwood is on. Every time. It wouldn't be an audible, the playcall would be, run to their "Greenwood, on 3, ready, break!". With Weaver, I'm not sure. Last year I thought he was good against the run, but that hasn't helped us this year as he looks like all of the talk about sacks has gotten to him because he is losing contaion a lot more it looks like. The one hole you didn't mention was at DT. The fact that we don't have someone who is just a monster up there is a problem. Okoye, I fear, will never be that guy. That's ok because he will be the guy who slips (as much as a man of his stature can slip by someone) by his guy and gets penetration but you need that cog. That guy to keep blockers off Demeco and force the middle of the OL into the running back/QB's face.



Lastly, a good coach or scheme can hide players' deficiencies to some degree - I don't think a master defensive coach could hide Weaver's in his current state and in this scheme. Nice guy, bad fit.


I know its not supposed to be a Smith debate, and again I'm not saying I'm a fan of his, but with four GLARNING deficiencies on his defense, how do you cover that up? These aren't like a guy has a weakness or two - these are serious deficiencies. Usually when you're able to hide a defficiency of someone, they have strengths that you play to. Several of the players outlined in the origional post seem to lack any real strength. At this point, I'm willing to sacrifice "talent/experience" for speed because we look far too slow on too many occasions. At least if we did that we might get a guy close to the QB when we blitz.

Mike

threetoedpete
08-26-2008, 01:24 PM
When they send five no one gets there. It's been like that for a long time. Back side corner is hopefully learning and will improve. Greenwood is absolutely going to kill us matching up with running backs. I shudder to think what Criss Johnson is going to do with the lad in space.

Firing Smith is the quickest way for a change....guess what ....the same players will be here this year after he is gone.

disagree with Alex Molden....lot worse things than going eight and eight once again. Losing a high end prospect because you rushed him into the fire too quick is one of them. Slow and easy with Alex if you please. If they loose him they've got to redraft it and put RB, OLB and DE on the back burner once again. And I don't think this staff is going to change their direction with the safties...they believe what they believe.

Put lipstick on the pigs Reeves, Weaver and Greenwood and load up the wagon.

They've got a good corps of players now. Just have to be patient and hope we can catch some breaks this season. Just need a six pack of patience to let the young ones grow up. Reeves isn't dead yet....if they can teach him to turn around & locate the ball....we'll see. Everyone and his brother is going to go after him untill he does. It'll either kill him or cure him.

Mr teX
08-26-2008, 03:21 PM
When they send five no one gets there. It's been like that for a long time. Back side corner is hopefully learning and will improve. Greenwood is absolutely going to kill us matching up with running backs. I shudder to think what Criss Johnson is going to do with the lad in space.

Firing Smith is the quickest way for a change....guess what ....the same players will be here this year after he is gone.

disagree with Alex Molden....lot worse things than going eight and eight once again. Losing a high end prospect because you rushed him into the fire too quick is one of them. Slow and easy with Alex if you please. If they loose him they've got to redraft it and put RB, OLB and DE on the back burner once again. And I don't think this staff is going to change their direction with the safties...they believe what they believe.

Put lipstick on the pigs Reeves, Weaver and Greenwood and load up the wagon.

They've got a good corps of players now. Just have to be patient and hope we can catch some breaks this season. Just need a six pack of patience to let the young ones grow up. Reeves isn't dead yet....if they can teach him to turn around & locate the ball....we'll see. Everyone and his brother is going to go after him untill he does. It'll either kill him or cure him.

I know of no CB that was cured once teams found out that they sucked and went after them..... & "Antuwan" Molden should at least be given a look at with the 1st team at this point imo. He's gonna wind up being a nickel back anyway if dunta can come back at 80% by midseason & thereafter. You might as well let him get his feet wet now. Reeves just needs to be let go off. I'll take fletcher over him for the dime CB as well.

threetoedpete
08-26-2008, 03:29 PM
Criss Dishman. that's one. Like it or not...for better or worse....they're going to keep running the lad out there. Up to you, might want to start pulling for the guy. He's your right Cb until Robinson gets back or Reeves gets hurt. Just guessing here, they're going to do to Molden exactly what they did with Fred Bennet. Go back and look at the boards...how many weeks did Kubiak hold fast and run Petie out there ? Four or five weeks wasn't it ? Am I a sooth sayer...no . But I know aggies and I know how this ball coach thinks.

Mr teX
08-26-2008, 03:42 PM
Criss Dishman. that's one. Like it or not...for better or worse....they're going to keep running the lad out there. Up to you, might want to start pulling for the guy. He's your right Cb until Robinson gets back or Reeves gets hurt. Just guessing here, they're going to do to Molden exactly what they did with Fred Bennet. Go back and look at the boards...how many weeks did Kubiak hold fast and run Petie out there ? Four or five weeks wasn't it ? Am I a sooth sayer...no . But I know aggies and I know how this ball coach thinks.

Umm, he was booted out of dallas b/c he couldn't play man & now he's already under the gun in Houston b/c he can't play zone. Everyone keeps talking about "well if he can just locate the ball, he'll be okay.." That's kind of a big deal in man coverage but it should be less of a problem in zone b/c you're looking right at the frickin' Qb taking your reads.... plus, your 10 yards off the WR. He just doesn't have it imo. i'd be tremendously surprised if he came through, but i'm not holding my breath.

& you're right about bennett & kubes but we'll never know what kubes would've done had bennett not been injured so much during the preseason... he inserted Meco & Mario immediately so what's to say he wouldn't have with Bennett had he been showing more than faggins & had he not been injured alot? You know he always touts that "our best players will be on the field..". & 4 or 5 weeks is fine by me as long as he gets in there this year... after what i've seen from reeves, this is a lost cause.

NBT
08-26-2008, 03:59 PM
Wrong he was supposedly let go by Dallas because he couldn't play off his man, or zone. Here he is supposed to play more man up. Of course during preseason we've been playing so much vanilla zone, that it is hard to tell if Reeves will be able to play man or not.

dalemurphy
08-26-2008, 04:05 PM
Umm, he was booted out of dallas b/c he couldn't play man & now he's already under the gun in Houston b/c he can't play zone. Everyone keeps talking about "well if he can just locate the ball, he'll be okay.." That's kind of a big deal in man coverage but it should be less of a problem in zone b/c you're looking right at the frickin' Qb taking your reads.... plus, your 10 yards off the WR. He just doesn't have it imo. i'd be tremendously surprised if he came through, but i'm not holding my breath.

& you're right about bennett & kubes but we'll never know what kubes would've done had bennett not been injured so much during the preseason... he inserted Meco & Mario immediately so what's to say he wouldn't have with Bennett had he been showing more than faggins & had he not been injured alot? You know he always touts that "our best players will be on the field..". & 4 or 5 weeks is fine by me as long as he gets in there this year... after what i've seen from reeves, this is a lost cause.


Well, he started for a team that went 13-3 and that was with Roy Williams playing safety behind him. He's clearly struggling right now and I would start Fletcher over him as things stand now. However, it's totally reasonable for the staff to believe he can play better than he is. He had a solid season for Dallas last year and he's got a lot of athleticism.

Polo
08-26-2008, 04:17 PM
Was it Richard Smith's idea to bring in Weaver, Greenwood and Reeves ?

If so, he needs to go.

ArlingtonTexan
08-26-2008, 04:25 PM
Wrong he was supposedly let go by Dallas because he couldn't play off his man, or zone. Here he is supposed to play more man up. Of course during preseason we've been playing so much vanilla zone, that it is hard to tell if Reeves will be able to play man or not.

I will agree here. His problem seems not staying with his man (TO missed TD not included), but finding and reacting to the ball. I know at least twice againt the Pokes, by the naked eye he did not play a ball correctly that wound up a reception.

The Pencil Neck
08-26-2008, 04:35 PM
Was it Richard Smith's idea to bring in Weaver, Greenwood and Reeves ?

If so, he needs to go.

Reeves was definitely his idea... or the idea of his assistants. Weaver may have been his idea; don't really know if he was in place when that decision was made.

Greenwood came a year earlier.

mussop
08-27-2008, 09:21 PM
My solution to those three? Cochran, Adibi, Molden.

ObsiWan
08-28-2008, 02:40 AM
After Osi got hurt, Kiwi moved back to DE and Clark was next in line at OLB.

I seem to recall Clark starting in the preseason game before Osi got hurt.

Edit:
Danny Clark (http://www.nfl.com/players/dannyclark/profile?id=CLA246253), a nine-year veteran who was signed as a free agent in the offseason, will move from weakside linebacker to the strong side to replace Kiwanuka. Gerris Wilkinson (http://www.nfl.com/players/gerriswilkinson/profile?id=WIL100381) will start at weakside linebacker
last line of this story Link (http://www.nfl.com/news/story;jsessionid=E538F52F7A1D6D768F8AC75F9E5FC661? id=09000d5d80a43db7&template=with-video&confirm=true)
This implies that Clark was the starting Will and was moved to Sam after Osi got hurt. But its not conclusive enough so I'm still looking...

beerlover
08-28-2008, 03:26 AM
All three have starting NFL expereince, lets give them one regular season game before we bury them 6 feet under :goodnight

Weaver has been hurt, alot but is as close to 100% as he's been since signing with Casserly via free agency. Not to mention he was brought into the mix as a 3-4 DT.

Greenwood, also signed by Casserly, was to be a 3-4 LILB. So its understandable he looks out of position @ times. Still he has been productive in his first season w/Texans in 05 he led the team by a large margin in total tackles with 112. His first season in the 4-3 (06) he finished 2nd on the team to DeMeco with 111. last year he recorded 119 tackles once again 2nd on the Texans behind DeMeco.

Reeves its kinda early don't you think? I mean be realistic here, new team & scheme with different coaches & players around him. just be patient. I know its hard but a tweak here & there (more physical @ the line of scrimmage, good hard jam/interference before the 5 yd rule, turn head & locate ball in flight & learn how to be a technically sound tackler like Bennett & Robinson) should get him straightend out when the games count.

Polo
08-28-2008, 12:00 PM
I seem to recall Clark starting in the preseason game before Osi got hurt.

Edit:
last line of this story Link (http://www.nfl.com/news/story;jsessionid=E538F52F7A1D6D768F8AC75F9E5FC661? id=09000d5d80a43db7&template=with-video&confirm=true)
This implies that Clark was the starting Will and was moved to Sam after Osi got hurt. But its not conclusive enough so I'm still looking...

The newly-created void at strong side linebacker will be filled by Danny Clark, who is entering his ninth NFL season and first with the Giants. Clark had been battling Gerris Wilkinson for the starting weak side linebacker spot. That battle has ended prematurely, with Wilkinson gaining the weak side starting spot.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08262008/sports/giants/kiwanuka_moved_back_to_defensive_line_126091.htm

My point stands....

He wasn't brought in with the intentions of him being a starter...

Polo
08-28-2008, 12:03 PM
Reeves was definitely his idea... or the idea of his assistants. Weaver may have been his idea; don't really know if he was in place when that decision was made.

Greenwood came a year earlier.

I was moreso speaking tongue in cheek...

I don't think it was his idea to bring in any of these players...

We'll never know, but I doubt he looked at his options and decided Reeves was his guy...I'm pretty sure if he had his say he would have aimed higher...Probably signed off on it, along with everyone else, but I doubt that he was the one that targeted him...

The Pencil Neck
08-28-2008, 01:29 PM
http://www.nypost.com/seven/08262008/sports/giants/kiwanuka_moved_back_to_defensive_line_126091.htm

My point stands....

He wasn't brought in with the intentions of him being a starter...

Then we were discussing different things.

My point was that by the time preseason started, he was a starter. He might have been in a fight for the job, but he had worked himself into a position to be the starter. Now, I was wrong that he got the spot because the previous starter left... but you were wrong that he got the spot because Kiwanuka (sp) moved back onto the line after Osi's injury. He was already starting when the preseason started.

If your point was that he wasn't BROUGHT IN to be the starter, then that's really a totally different thing and not something I consider particularly relevant.

Polo
08-28-2008, 02:07 PM
Then we were discussing different things.

My point was that by the time preseason started, he was a starter. He might have been in a fight for the job, but he had worked himself into a position to be the starter. Now, I was wrong that he got the spot because the previous starter left... but you were wrong that he got the spot because Kiwanuka (sp) moved back onto the line after Osi's injury. He was already starting when the preseason started.

If your point was that he wasn't BROUGHT IN to be the starter, then that's really a totally different thing and not something I consider particularly relevant.

Actually, He was never named a starter until Kiwi got hurt...

Up until that time he was just battling for the spot...

And the fact that he wasn't brought in to be a starter is relevant...

When we take guys that previously started for other teams (even if they suck/are coming of injury) they are pretty much guaranteed starting roles with our club...Most back-ups we take from other teams have legit chances at ample playing time...

When other teams take our guys that's not always the case...Most of the time they are brought in to "compete for jobs"...Alot of them end up cut...

But that's not saying much...Technically everyone there is competing for jobs...

Basically, Danny Clark wasn't some highly sought after player...

My original statement stands...

Basically he was a pretty key starter for us (an our talent laden defense [/sarcasm]) but was brought to NY to compete with Gerris Wilkerson...

leebigeztx
08-28-2008, 04:36 PM
Believe it or not, CClark had won the Will backer job and was playing better than wilkerson. Once Osi went out and they moved Mathius back to de, then they moved him to sam backer. Clark was pretty good to me, Greenwood is the weaklink. I hope Adibi makes it happen and takes his job.

ObsiWan
08-28-2008, 05:49 PM
Let me get this straight.
- Clark played for us... and we didn't try to resign him... did he suck or no?
- However, whilst playing for us, he showed the World Champion Giants enough to warrant a serious opportunity to win the starting WLB job. Not to play special teams, not a chance to be a backup, a chance to start.
- However... Richard Smith - or somebody - didn't think Clark was good enough to offer a second contract.

Is there some reason Clark wasn't good enough to hold down that spot?
Or did we think Zac Diles was progressing so fast that Clark became expendable?
And why couldn't Diles or Clark be taught to take Greenwood's place?

Enquiring minds want to know.