Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Pretty good start, especially given the era.

Don't know if they can keep it up but only 70 Vikings and 71 Colts allowed fewer (by a fair margin)

still, like good defense even in this era.

Niners were due a loss but to a back-up QB with that defense?
Might as well get it out of their system.

Giants get a reprieve on a pass interference but fail to win it at the end ... big day of upsets but TB busts me with their creamsickle uniforms. Bad loss at home.

If the Jets can just give the ball to Hall 25 times a game, they could win 8 or 9 games with Wilson. Good defensive win ...

Miami keeps doing their 2000 Rams imitation of offense. Can Philly's D slow them down next week?

Wow - that is a great stat to dig up. Thank you for posting it. Cleveland invested quite a bit in the draft for defense with early picks. A lot of first and second round picks on defense (especially secondary) going back to Myles Garrett and most are still with the team.

Fantastic knowledge drop!

The '70 Vikings and the '71 Colts - two "if only they had a better passing game" teams! Both teams, essentially, played one another on MNF Wk#6 in '71 at Minny. No ironies. It was a true blue defensive slug-fest as you'd obviously expect! Viking 10, Colts 3.

Cleveland, I think, is either going to just miss the playoffs or just make them while wreaking havoc among the league along the way! It's a shame for them that Chubbs went out. It's the reason why the Steelers beat them.

Staying with their '50s unis may not be a bad idea!

Jim Schwartz, I'can imagine, is now moving up another tier of reputable defensive minds. He, thus far, has been seen as a 'good' DC. Likely no more.

The Browns have allowed 200.4 yards per game which is great, all things considered.
The 1969 and 70 Vikings gave up 197.25 yards per game over the course of two full seasons.

74_75_78_79_ wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2023 11:08 am Jim Schwartz, I'can imagine, is now moving up another tier of reputable defensive minds. He, thus far, has been seen as a 'good' DC. Likely no more.

You can get whiplash following Jim Schwartz.
First, I like the scheme/philosophy
Second, it works sometimes -- kind of a function of how good the front 4 is. Not completely but it begins there.

It's a one-gap, play the run when you see it as opposed to the popular gap and a half Fangio stuff and the
quarters/6/8 match stuff you see everywhere. Eagles went to that right after JS.

If he's got good edge rushers and at least on "pig" in the middle and corners can can play some man he does well

Garrett may be best DE he;s ever had --- and he's had a few really good ones.

His signature will be the wide-9. He didn't invent it but IMO he popularized it. It wasn't a thing really, where
a team did it all the time until he did it and team copied it

But though the teams did did similar philosophy (Rams 1960s) didn't have ends that wide that often.
They'd "split" some ... being in a 9 but not as an most-of-the-time thing.

So, as kind of a fan, I like that he's having some success with it. If half the NFL is playing Fangio's gap-and-a-half
Cover 4/6 etc out of 5-1 front it gets boring.

I prefer the 4-man older school--Browns, 49ers, Jets and a couple of others. Or, better put, I like
a diverse look. Different week, different schemes ...

JohnTurney wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2023 6:22 pm You can get whiplash following Jim Schwartz.
First, I like the scheme/philosophy
Second, it works sometimes -- kind of a function of how good the front 4 is. Not completely but it begins there.

It's a one-gap, play the run when you see it as opposed to the popular gap and a half Fangio stuff and the
quarters/6/8 match stuff you see everywhere. Eagles went to that right after JS.

If he's got good edge rushers and at least on "pig" in the middle and corners can can play some man he does well

Garrett may be best DE he;s ever had --- and he's had a few really good ones.

His signature will be the wide-9. He didn't invent it but IMO he popularized it. It wasn't a thing really, where
a team did it all the time until he did it and team copied it

But though the teams did did similar philosophy (Rams 1960s) didn't have ends that wide that often.
They'd "split" some ... being in a 9 but not as an most-of-the-time thing.

So, as kind of a fan, I like that he's having some success with it. If half the NFL is playing Fangio's gap-and-a-half
Cover 4/6 etc out of 5-1 front it gets boring.

I prefer the 4-man older school--Browns, 49ers, Jets and a couple of others. Or, better put, I like
a diverse look. Different week, different schemes ...

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing. I always liked Floyd Peters because the intelligentsia would usually naysay him yet he always had success wherever he went. Schwartz is kind of the same, IMO. Do you see any similarities in philosophy with Peters and Schwartz?

Brian wolf wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2023 12:12 am Niners were due a loss but to a back-up QB with that defense?
Might as well get it out of their system.

That's the "silver lining" that I took from their loss. I'm VERY disappointed that they did but now they won't have to carry the burden of being unbeaten the rest of the season.

Bryan wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 8:04 am Do you see any similarities in philosophy with Peters and Schwartz?

Yes. IMO they are the same idea -- play the run on the way to the QB. It's the same as the George Allen philosophy, too. The Tampa-2 is built on that with Dungy and anyone who used that scheme.



On run downs, in those defenses, they'd look at keys, formation, strength, OL stance, remember tendencies from the gameplans, etc, and if run was far more likely they are not going to rush the passer with reckless abandon. They'd be aware that run was going to show so they'd still have an explosive first step but if the helmet was coming at them, they'd defeat the block. If there was no helmet (their guy pulled) then they'd think trap and look for that. But if the OL had a high hat, they'd just continue on the explosive rush. If it was a draw, then they'd have to use athleticism to stop it -- that's the kind of thing that is meant by playing the run on the way to the passer -- don't slow down to play draw or any run, play run only when it "shows".

Some runs show instantly. Some after a step. Some after 2-3 steps ...

Pete Carroll came from that tree (basically Kiffin) but before Kiffin merged with DUngry and tweaked Cover-2. Carroll (using Cover-3 buzz - LBers covering flats rather than using alternating CB or S in Cover-3 cloud (CB) or Cover-3 (Sky)) eventually changed the "get up the field" philosophy
in Seattle after having been that kind of coach with Jets and so on. He changed to having the weak side of his line play "up the field" and the strong side 2 gap. I guess he thought he needed to stop strong side runs and wanted big guys to neutralize blocks and read so LBers read.

So, he was part of the same as the previous guys you mentioned --- until he wasn't.

Aside from Swartz -- maybe 49ers do it--Ryans, Saleh. But it's so different now. Teams don't run base defenses much anymore so defenses are playing pass -- mostly in some form of nickel.

JohnTurney wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2023 6:22 pm I prefer the 4-man older school--Browns, 49ers, Jets and a couple of others. Or, better put, I like
a diverse look. Different week, different schemes ...

I am of the opinion (and wondering if you agree, John) that this is missing from football today in part because of the fact that free agency and limited practice times take away from the team aspect of the game and shift the focus to individual athleticism.

Unlike "yester-year" teams and teammates don't stay together long enough to learn and be able to play many variations and schemes so they learn one or two or three formations/sets and stick with that (basically) throughout much of the season.
Then, when the team changes dramatically over the off-season the whole defense has to be re-taught to new players which prevents any real depth of understanding and the ability to play too many variations on the base scheme(s).

Long gone are the days of the Steel Curtain and Purple People Eaters where teams played together season after season and developed their chemistry, adding on to what they'd done the previous year(s).
For how long did Deacon Jones and Merlin Olsen play next to each other?
Nowadays it is unusual for teammates to play next to each other for more than a couple of seasons... much less a decade of sustained excellence.


I know the above is a generalization but I do think this phenomenon has hurt the game.
Gone are the great teams of the past... today's game is about the individual athletes...