Heroes and Goats: WAS @ ARI

[kerouac9]

With all the talk lately about the idiocy of playing Bucannon at LB, and the obvious evidence that he is indeed unable to play the run or cover a pass... i'm wondering WTF happened since 2015-2016, when even the "fat idiot" Bettcher managed to coach the Cards' D to #5 and #2 in yards with Bucannon at "$B", and many articles like this one touted the "moneybacker" and held up Bucannon as the exemplar of a trend that was beginning to be copied, and would soon dominate the league.

Did Bucannon just get much slower? Is he unable to figure out how to get to the ball carrier in the new D? Are Wilks and Holcomb unable to figure out how to use him properly in their D? All of the above?

Seriously... WTF!

...dave

I think part of it was that he had 5 blockers in front of him in the old front; now he only has 4. He’s never been able to defeat blocks, but was quick enough to run around them. Now he’s got to go through an offensive lineman and just can’t do it.

 

[Chopper0080]

You corrected me on this yesterday and you were right sir... still would like a space eater in the interior even though it's not a 3-4 to slow the reaction time for the LBs

My guess is that they are hoping Gunter fills that role

 

[Chopper0080]

With all the talk lately about the idiocy of playing Bucannon at LB, and the obvious evidence that he is indeed unable to play the run or cover a pass... i'm wondering WTF happened since 2015-2016, when even the "fat idiot" Bettcher managed to coach the Cards' D to #5 and #2 in yards with Bucannon at "$B", and many articles like this one touted the "moneybacker" and held up Bucannon as the exemplar of a trend that was beginning to be copied, and would soon dominate the league.

Did Bucannon just get much slower? Is he unable to figure out how to get to the ball carrier in the new D? Are Wilks and Holcomb unable to figure out how to use him properly in their D? All of the above?

Seriously... WTF!

...dave

The more you ask him to do in regards to reading and reacting, the more he struggles. If he is your 3rd best LB, you can scheme against this issue. If he is your best LB, the issue is magnified. We have no one who an make up for his false steps and misreads.

 

[MadCardDisease]

I have no problem rotating them in, but do it one at a time. You don't bring in your entire second unit at the beginning of a series. Show me when Washington did that.

I just watched some of the replay and Pierre and Gunter got knocked back 2 yards after the snap by the interior 3 of the Redskins OL. I agree. They can't be out there at the same time.

 

[MadCardDisease]

Pierre and Gunter in the middle

You must be registered for see images attach

They get pushed back 2 yards at the snap!

You must be registered for see images attach

Then the OL made a wall out of them.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[MadCardDisease]

I thought the Depth on the Cardinals OL would be a strength of the team. Man did Gunter and Pierre get pushed around! Very disappointing.

 

[Chopper0080]

Pierre and Gunter in the middle

You must be registered for see images attach

They get pushed back 2 yards at the snap!

You must be registered for see images attach

Then the OL made a wall out of them.

You must be registered for see images attach

Ok...there are multiple issues with this shot

1-Redskins have 4 blockers to the right of the C. Cardinals show 2 defensive linemen. Bucannon may be lined up nose over the C.

2-This means the run play is an automatic cutback to the strong side of the formation because all of those blocks turn into down-blocks.

3-For some reason Bucannon attacks the A gap, and the C reaches him and walls him off from the play.

4-Bucannon has to read the cutback and bounce around the 3 technique who is getting blocked down by the OG.

5-Bynes plays this correctly as he fills the play side B gap while Chandler Jones controls the edge.

6-Boston gets blocked coming up from S by the TE I think.

7-I'm pretty sure the call should have been to shift the defensive line once the motion man crossed the C. That would have ensured that our front 7 was balanced up front and did give leverage to the strong side of the formation. I'm guessing the green dot missed making that call.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Mike Jurecki‏Verified account@mikejurecki

#AzCardinals LB Josh Bynes earned an 88.3 overall grade, as he made 11 tackles and seven stops. He only allowed one catch for five yards. Bynes' 90.4 run defense grade was the best among LBs in week 1. @PFF

1:29 PM - 11 Sep 2018

 

[football karma]

I think part of it was that he had 5 blockers in front of him in the old front; now he only has 4. He’s never been able to defeat blocks, but was quick enough to run around them. Now he’s got to go through an offensive lineman and just can’t do it.

I think this is it -- and not just 5 going to 4. Its three defensive linemen from OT to OT to two.

combine fewer big bodies in front of him with a penetrating scheme -- and you are giving offensive linemen free runs at linebackers

 

[kerouac9]

I think this is it -- and not just 5 going to 4. Its three defensive linemen from OT to OT to two.

combine fewer big bodies in front of him with a penetrating scheme -- and you are giving offensive linemen free runs at linebackers

Yeah. I don't think we're running a penetrating scheme. I mean, we'll ask guys to penetrate sometimes (Nkeimdiche did a few times), but what I saw looked a lot like a two-gap scheme. Which of our interior OL are good enough to command a doubleteam?

 

[Hoodhero]

Rewatching game & Buc was way worse than I had imagined. I know he was hurt & played only a few snaps in preseason but that's no excuse. That play on second redskins drive where he completely ignores gap & runs straight into Trent William's is very concerning to say the least.

 

[GoldGloveschmidt]

I'd like to see what Bynes and Hodges can do together. Buc is just not the right LB for this system.

 

[juza76]

I'd like to see what Bynes and Hodges can do together. Buc is just not the right LB for this system.

should they consider trading him?

 

[GoldGloveschmidt]

should they consider trading him?

He's a free agent after this season.. probably not a whole lot of value.

 

[juza76]

He's a free agent after this season.. probably not a whole lot of value.

Didn't they exercise the 5th year option?

 

[GoldGloveschmidt]

Didn't they exercise the 5th year option?

Yes.. this is his 5th year

 

[juza76]

Yes.. this is his 5th year

What a waste of money, there were on march more efficient lb's available with a lower salary

 

[Chopper0080]

What a waste of money, there were on march more efficient lb's available with a lower salary

8 mil

but we couldn't afford to pay Calais because HE would have wrecked our cap.

 

[juza76]

8 mil

but we couldn't afford to pay Calais because HE would have wrecked our cap.

Even if its pretty hard i try to see the glass full empty, with the extra pick we received from Campbell we got Cole, hopefully he will be our perennal center

 

[Cheesebeef]

8 mil

but we couldn't afford to pay Calais because HE would have wrecked our cap.

and Gresham at 7 million per...

 

[82CardsGrad]

8 mil

but we couldn't afford to pay Calais because HE would have wrecked our cap.

Isn't the issue more about paying $8 million for this year only, versus paying Calais roughly $15 million over 4 years with $30 million guaranteed?

 

[Jetstream Green]

I would not start Bucannon, simple as that. In the 4-3/ nickel hybrid or whatever the crap you want to call the scheme, he is not big enough to fend off any big man on the move and he is strictly a situational player... I can state with full confidence that Gardeck has more to offer

 

[Chopper0080]

Isn't the issue more about paying $8 million for this year only, versus paying Calais roughly $15 million over 4 years with $30 million guaranteed?

The issue is acknowledging that the Cardinals didn't WANT to pay Calais Campbell, not that they COULDN'T.

His annual salary wasn't wrecking anything, and preventing the team from competing.

 

[82CardsGrad]

The issue is acknowledging that the Cardinals didn't WANT to pay Calais Campbell, not that they COULDN'T.

His annual salary wasn't wrecking anything, and preventing the team from competing.

Perhaps... or, could just be that they felt getting locked into a multi-year deal with a heavy guarantee value, with an aging d-lineman might not have been the best move.

 

[MadCardDisease]

The issue is acknowledging that the Cardinals didn't WANT to pay Calais Campbell, not that they COULDN'T.

His annual salary wasn't wrecking anything, and preventing the team from competing.

Not signing an aging Campbell and paying him $17.5M a year was the right decision for the Cardinals at the time. Signing Gresham for $8M a year was the wrong decision. The Cardinals won't be able to cut Gresham till next season.