Chow thinks Schwartz is terrible too

Hopefully this was the last year we're discussing those two from any view other than ST and backup depth

 

i know, i was being sarcastic. all the schwartz followers use these millions of excuses like he had too many injuries, we dont have a pass rush, we dont have the corners. well, we have a perfectly healthy defense with three or four pro bowlers in 2002 and 2003 and they were nothing but an above average, rush four drop seven zone.

 

My point exactly. Without a pass rush you just expose your secondary even worse. We didn't have the quality to leave people isolated like that, nor did we have anyone except KVB that could apply pressure. If we can get a quality RDE improvements would be immediate. My only real complaint about Swartz is his rush 3 scheme. That has proven to be a complete bust. I can't comment about his decision to play LT and Hill, because I don't know if that is Fisher's call or not. I don't believe LT is capable of improvement, but Hill made the same mistakes all year long, never looking back for the ball. You really have to wonder what the coaches do all week.

 

You guys know those superbowl winners from last year? The Steelers? Remember how aggressive their defense was? Now tell me they have so much more talent then our defense...
Their cornerbacks were no better than ours, and their safety was Chris Hope to play deep. So why don't we have the personnel?

 

A lot of that is Fisher. He firmly believes that few teams can drive the ball 80 yards. He uses the style of defense to make an O have 12-15 plays. The only problem with that has been LT. When you play that way, you are never supposed to give up the kind of stuff he does. I honestly believe we could plug in a stud DE and Safety and finish mid pack in defense with just those two changes.

 

If he truly belives that, then he is dumber than he looks. You wan't to get your defence off the field as quick as possible, otherwise they wear down and won't stop anything in the last stage of the game.

 

First off, a 3-4 defense can blitz and still only send 4 pass rushers. A blitz for them isn't necessarily numerically any different than a base 4-3 for us in terms of the number of pass rushers. Plus, they can come from any direction.

Secondly, I'd say they had a far superior front 7 capable of pressuring the QB, which allowed them to be far more effective at blitzing than we would be.

As far as the secondary, let's say Pacman balances off with Ike Taylor. Clearly Chris Hope balances out with... himself. Reynaldo is a weaker link at CB than the Steelers had. And Lamont Thompson versus Polamalu? Hmmm, let me think who wins that one... :hmm:

 

Fisher backed off the 46 in 1998 because we didn't have the right personnel to run it. It's not at all true that having less talent means you are going to be more successful playing aggressive D.

The next year, they basically added Kearse and move Rolle into the starting lineup. That was all they needed to play the 46 successfully: a stud pass rusher and a shutdown CB (plus a good #2 in Denard Walker).

IF we added a stud pass rusher at DE, we might be able to play aggressively with success. But until we get that, or some realistic upgrades, we just can't do it and expect to be successful.