Analysis Week 13 Post-game AMA: Back to the drawing board (5 Viewers)

[TCUDan]

Does our Defense look as old (and or slow) to you as it does to me?

I don't really think it's old and slow. I think they're soft and mushy in the middle. Bresee has turned out to be way more of a pass rush specialist on the interior than I expected, but it's not just that.

Think about the way the Saints' defense has been trending pretty much since DA returned as the DC. Even back in the Kenny Vaccaro days they were basing out of this nickel big/4-2-5 look and putting a premium on pass rushers up front. The returns were great--the Saints were fast and athletic and able to match up in a league full of 5,000 yard passes and rules engineered to favor explosive passing games. This also helped them in the draft, where instead of needing to find a premium, 3-down SAM LB, they could draft a tweener like CGJ in the mid rounds and have a 3-down player at nickel.

But there's been a shift in recent years. Partially due to the type of QBs coming out of college and the league embracing RPOs and a variety of option football. But also just as an overcorrection to the emphasis of defenses as of late toward athleticism over size. The fullback was disappearing, tight ends were becoming more F-type players, flexing out and serving as matchup/size advantages in the passing game rather than in-line blockers in the run game.

Now fullbacks are back, and so are in-line tight ends. Running games are dominating the league and passing is down. The Saint defense, which spent a decade building for this new pass-happy league, is caught a little with its pants down. I think it's this one-dimensionality of the team--along with a little bit of aging and some injuries (as well as some key departures at key positions)--that is taking a toll on the defense.

 

[TCUDan]

How about the Saints D-line inability to shed blocks? It appears the whole bunch, maybe except Granderson, really enjoys ballroom dancing.

Yea I think it's kind of frustratingly ironic that the Saints seem to have better run-stoppers on the edge (Granderson and Jordan) but their best pass rusher is in the middle (Bresee). And none of them are really multi-dimensional threats--at least not in terms of being a difference-maker. I wouldn't say the issue is as straightforward as them being able to shed blocks.

As a DL your advantage is your toolbox. How many moves and countermoves do you have. How strong are you at each of them. And how much can you keep the OL guessing as to which you're going to deploy.

The fact is that when the offense is dictating tempo, you toolbox shrinks. So when they're gashing you for 7, 9, 14 yards on runs right up the middle, that toolbox shrinks. When they're able to play-action off that, that toolbox shrinks. When you can't force the opposing offense into a corner by taking things away--be it the gap runs, the zone runs, the RPOS, the screen game, the play-action or bootleg game--it's difficult to come up with a plan at the line for how you're going to attack the man across from you.

When you're the one always guessing, it's hard to dictate anything.

 

[TCUDan]

I don't think Fuaga "drifted" downfield. I think he tried to throw a block and whiffed...

Oh it was definitely way more than a whiff. I've never seen a whiff on a pass play carry an OL 4-5 yards down the field.

To me it looked like he either 1) missed the play action tag and thought it was a run play; 2) had the wrong play entirely and thought Carr was going to boot out in that direction (this is the most generous interpretation as it looks like he's ghosting the backside of zone, then trying to hinge back to seal for the boot and is just unaware of how far he drifts); 3) doesn't know how to quick set.

Just look at the sets of the rest of the OL (including the TE next to him). It's all quick set/anchor. Meanwhile Fuaga is firing off when all he really needs to do is step and hinge.

 

[TCUDan]

How did you feel about the performance of our young tackles in this game? It seems like Jared Verse had his way with Penning this week, putting him on his back at least once. Fuaga had a few misses as well as a crucial penalty.

I'd have to go back and really dig in, but my initial impression was that they struggled where I would expect them to but still held up pretty well in the run and pass game for the most part.

The Fuaga penalty was a killer. There is no getting around that.

Also, the full slide away from Verse on the final play, leaving him 1-on-1 with Moreau, was less than ideal, THOUGH Moreau did actually do a decent job and Carr had time. The Rams out-foxed the Saints on that play, simulating pressure from the field, then bringing it from the boundary and allowing the Rams to drop underneath their quick-game concept and cover everything up.

Honestly, this is where the WR depth (or lack there of) finally came back to bite them. Valdes-Scantling should've been working to a second window rather than just sitting there, covered. Carr sees it and is waiting for him to do exactly that (it's why he doesn't try to scramble, he knows the second-window throw is there), but because Scantling just sits there, Carr has to hold onto the ball for way too long and Verse forces the fumble.

 

[TCUDan]

Do you feel like we abandoned the run in the second half?

Do you think 20 snaps for Taysom at Wide Receiver is a misuse of his skillset?

Do you think Kamara's dropped passes are on AK41 or were they Carr's fault for bad placement?

Oh the drops are definitely AK and for whatever reason this has been an issue for him this season--untimely drops. Carr is putting the ball in his hands, there isn't much more he can do.

Yes, we could have run the ball more in the 2nd half, but I don't think it was necessarily abandoned. The Rams tightened up on early downs and that kind of affected play-calling.

I don't think that's a misuse of Taysom's skilset. I'd like to see more designs specifically to get the ball to him--some quick screens out of bunch or stack alignments, stuff like that. I think the Rams gameplan kind of dictated how they were using him in base situations--the QB runs were all kind of 3rd down or change-up plays with little tread.

There is no real "misuse" of Taysom's skillset. There can be underuse, especially when he isn't used much in the run game, but it did seem to really be a decision based on self-scout and--more-so, probably--the Rams defense.

 

[Rouxble]

I'd have to go back and really dig in, but my initial impression was that they struggled where I would expect them to but still held up pretty well in the run and pass game for the most part.

The Fuaga penalty was a killer. There is no getting around that.

Also, the full slide away from Verse on the final play, leaving him 1-on-1 with Moreau, was less than ideal, THOUGH Moreau did actually do a decent job and Carr had time. The Rams out-foxed the Saints on that play, simulating pressure from the field, then bringing it from the boundary and allowing the Rams to drop underneath their quick-game concept and cover everything up.

Honestly, this is where the WR depth (or lack there of) finally came back to bite them. Valdes-Scantling should've been working to a second window rather than just sitting there, covered. Carr sees it and is waiting for him to do exactly that (it's why he doesn't try to scramble, he knows the second-window throw is there), but because Scantling just sits there, Carr has to hold onto the ball for way too long and Verse forces the fumble.

Carr appears to audible on the play (“can can”), I wonder what the other call was.

Given the front as pictured (and ball on hashmark), what would be your thought process during game planning for determining slide direction?

 

[St. Widge]

I don't really think it's old and slow. I think they're soft and mushy in the middle. Bresee has turned out to be way more of a pass rush specialist on the interior than I expected, but it's not just that.

Think about the way the Saints' defense has been trending pretty much since DA returned as the DC. Even back in the Kenny Vaccaro days they were basing out of this nickel big/4-2-5 look and putting a premium on pass rushers up front. The returns were great--the Saints were fast and athletic and able to match up in a league full of 5,000 yard passes and rules engineered to favor explosive passing games. This also helped them in the draft, where instead of needing to find a premium, 3-down SAM LB, they could draft a tweener like CGJ in the mid rounds and have a 3-down player at nickel.

But there's been a shift in recent years. Partially due to the type of QBs coming out of college and the league embracing RPOs and a variety of option football. But also just as an overcorrection to the emphasis of defenses as of late toward athleticism over size. The fullback was disappearing, tight ends were becoming more F-type players, flexing out and serving as matchup/size advantages in the passing game rather than in-line blockers in the run game.

Now fullbacks are back, and so are in-line tight ends. Running games are dominating the league and passing is down. The Saint defense, which spent a decade building for this new pass-happy league, is caught a little with its pants down. I think it's this one-dimensionality of the team--along with a little bit of aging and some injuries (as well as some key departures at key positions)--that is taking a toll on the defense.

Dan, given the shift in the league to more running, particularly in the Shanahan/Kubiak systems that are starting to dominate the league, do you think it would help to move to a 3-4 defense or some sort of hybrid of the 3-4?

My thinking is that it allows you to get three big guys in the middle to stop the inside run while having 4 LBs to make run fits and run down the running QBs that our big DE often seem to have trouble with. It would also seem to allow the Saints to take advantage of what I think are some bargains in the draft with run stuffing 3-4 DEs and NTs as well as take some of those tweener guys at LB/Edge that aren't big enough to play DE in a 4-3 but work as blitzing LBs in a 3-4. It seems to me that it's hard to find the big DEs we need for our current scheme that can play the run and rush the passer but 3-4 DEs, NTs, and LBs in general are undervalued in the draft which allows a team drafting those types of players to get great value and talent in the middle rounds. What do you think?

 

[BreesusSaves]

Dan, given the shift in the league to more running, particularly in the Shanahan/Kubiak systems that are starting to dominate the league, do you think it would help to move to a 3-4 defense or some sort of hybrid of the 3-4?

My thinking is that it allows you to get three big guys in the middle to stop the inside run while having 4 LBs to make run fits and run down the running QBs that our big DE often seem to have trouble with. It would also seem to allow the Saints to take advantage of what I think are some bargains in the draft with run stuffing 3-4 DEs and NTs as well as take some of those tweener guys at LB/Edge that aren't big enough to play DE in a 4-3 but work as blitzing LBs in a 3-4. It seems to me that it's hard to find the big DEs we need for our current scheme that can play the run and rush the passer but 3-4 DEs, NTs, and LBs in general are undervalued in the draft which allows a team drafting those types of players to get great value and talent in the middle rounds. What do you think?

For what it is worth, four of the top five scoring defenses this season run a 3-4.

 

[St. Widge]

For what it is worth, four of the top five scoring defenses this season run a 3-4.

It also seems like a transition we could make now since we really need to more or less rebuild the front 7 outside of Werner, Breese, Granderson, and Demario (old and needs the heir apparent on the team). I also think Jordan, if he comes back, and Breese could work at 3-4 DEs and we need a NT anyway.

Maybe it would even given Foskey new life to be moved to a stand up rush LB position?

 

[Jesse Custer]

It also seems like a transition we could make now since we really need to more or less rebuild the front 7 outside of Werner, Breese, Granderson, and Demario (old and needs the heir apparent on the team). I also think Jordan, if he comes back, and Breese could work at 3-4 DEs and we need a NT anyway.

Maybe it would even given Foskey new life to be moved to a stand up rush LB position?

It would be so Saints to switch to a 3-4 after letting a good rush LB leave in free agency.

 

[ELLIASJWILLIAMS]

Dan, given the shift in the league to more running, particularly in the Shanahan/Kubiak systems that are starting to dominate the league, do you think it would help to move to a 3-4 defense or some sort of hybrid of the 3-4?

My thinking is that it allows you to get three big guys in the middle to stop the inside run while having 4 LBs to make run fits and run down the running QBs that our big DE often seem to have trouble with. It would also seem to allow the Saints to take advantage of what I think are some bargains in the draft with run stuffing 3-4 DEs and NTs as well as take some of those tweener guys at LB/Edge that aren't big enough to play DE in a 4-3 but work as blitzing LBs in a 3-4. It seems to me that it's hard to find the big DEs we need for our current scheme that can play the run and rush the passer but 3-4 DEs, NTs, and LBs in general are undervalued in the draft which allows a team drafting those types of players to get great value and talent in the middle rounds. What do you think?

I’m hoping they trend that way. Bresee is ineffective in run defense on interior. If you switch to more of an under front he could move to 5tech on base downs and then slide inside on pass downs. This would allow you to get bigger at both DT spots and a bit bigger longer on the edge.

 

[AARPSaint]

The thought of a 3-4 defense brings back memories of the Dome Patrol, of course. Not sure we have the correct pieces and certainly not a NT. Are the current DEs suitable for a 3-4? Who would be the LBs?

Playing into this is the likelihood that a new DC will be on board. Personally, I don’t care about 4-3 or 3-4. Just give me a defense that can keep the opponent at bay.

 

[TCUDan]

Carr appears to audible on the play (“can can”), I wonder what the other call was.

Given the front as pictured (and ball on hashmark), what would be your thought process during game planning for determining slide direction?

All things being equal I prefer sliding to the 3-tech, but it seems like the protection was influenced by the formation structure. Having Moreau backside and keeping him in as that 6th player then full-sliding to the pass concept side (the side Carr will be looking). Again, the Rams did well to simulate pressure from the field then drop the edge rusher out underneath the quick game. It really comes down to Valdes-Scantling not sitting in coverage and finding that second window.

Full-slide protection (usually for quick game) doesn't create many windows or lanes in the pocket, so if the play isn't there, there isn't a lot of room to step and slide an extend. Carr just kind of sits there waiting for Scantling to find the next window and ends up with the sack/fumble by Verse.

The idea of singling him up with Moreau is that the ball is gonna get out of there before he can run the edge. The play took too long. I know a lot of people will put that on Carr, but he's in a bind right there. He's not a big play creator/extender, so he's trying to stay within the structure of the call. But that depends on his WRs being savvy.

As for the "can can" call, that's just the opposite of a "kill kill." What it means is two plays were called in the huddle and Carr was confirming the first play.

 

[TCUDan]

Dan, given the shift in the league to more running, particularly in the Shanahan/Kubiak systems that are starting to dominate the league, do you think it would help to move to a 3-4 defense or some sort of hybrid of the 3-4?

My thinking is that it allows you to get three big guys in the middle to stop the inside run while having 4 LBs to make run fits and run down the running QBs that our big DE often seem to have trouble with. It would also seem to allow the Saints to take advantage of what I think are some bargains in the draft with run stuffing 3-4 DEs and NTs as well as take some of those tweener guys at LB/Edge that aren't big enough to play DE in a 4-3 but work as blitzing LBs in a 3-4. It seems to me that it's hard to find the big DEs we need for our current scheme that can play the run and rush the passer but 3-4 DEs, NTs, and LBs in general are undervalued in the draft which allows a team drafting those types of players to get great value and talent in the middle rounds. What do you think?

It's not a terrible idea if you can find the guys, but it also means bringing in a DC who is not only versed but bought in on that system. Even if you go to a 34 you're still gonna have to find that top-tier edge rusher, that DE/LB hybrid (probably in the early rounds).

The Saints still play the majority of their snaps in nickel, which is a testament to the fact that even though FBs and TEs are making a comeback, teams are still basing out of a lot of 11 and 20 personnel.

So you still might be talking about that nickel taking 70-75% of snaps (where it used to be 25-30% 15-20 years ago). What we could see is an evolution of the nickel position, to more LB-S hybrid vs. CB-S hybrid. Either way--even if your SAM LB is still a subpackage guy, it's gonna have to be a more premium position, regardless of whether in you're in a 34 or 43 front.

 

[TCUDan]

For what it is worth, four of the top five scoring defenses this season run a 3-4.

This really has to do with pressure more than anything. Gameplanning against an odd front is always way more difficult than your standard, 4-down over or under front. Keeping track of where that 4th rusher is coming from, as well as pressure (5+)... it's why most teams, regardless of base defense, move to reduction front on passing downs.

In truth the Saints--while they do maintain a mostly 1-gap, over/under structure--usually have one or both edge rushers without their hand in the ground. The way a 3-4 vs 4-3 front is defined is really way more blurred than it used to be. Now it's more about personnel and how you fit gaps. Who's 2-gapping and where? Are you using more head up/tightly shaded techniques on the DL (a 4 or 4i with the ends)? And how, where, and with whom are you pressuring?

Just like offenses, defenses have become way more multiple in recent years. My general philosophy is go bring in the best players you can at specific units and tool your scheme to your talent. Yes--you have your philosophy and maybe your overall structure set, but be multiple and be schematically intelligent about what you're going to major and minor in.