Tackling

Originally posted by mike1302:
where do they they this notion that rugby players can only gang tackle high..Sure since Phil Gould initiated the hold the ball runner up and slow the play the ball down,many league players are preferring not to put the man immediately on the ground.But given a scenario of one on one every nrl player is competent in hitting low and putting the player down.If you can not tackle you will not be in first grade because they will target the bad defender for the length of the game.But some c/b efforts are deplorable.Reminding me of Puig Albert(pipa)who declared if the twelve in front cant tackle him why should I.

I remember Benji Marshall hanging out on the wing for a long time simply because he can't tackle. But back to the NFL, Rawls broke a lot of runs because the tackles were ineffective - arm tackles, poor angles, poor point location of contact.

Originally posted by casualobserver:

Originally posted by mike1302:
where do they they this notion that rugby players can only gang tackle high..Sure since Phil Gould initiated the hold the ball runner up and slow the play the ball down,many league players are preferring not to put the man immediately on the ground.But given a scenario of one on one every nrl player is competent in hitting low and putting the player down.If you can not tackle you will not be in first grade because they will target the bad defender for the length of the game.But some c/b efforts are deplorable.Reminding me of Puig Albert(pipa)who declared if the twelve in front cant tackle him why should I.

I remember Benji Marshall hanging out on the wing for a long time simply because he can't tackle. But back to the NFL, Rawls broke a lot of runs because the tackles were ineffective - arm tackles, poor angles, poor point location of contact.

This wasn't the first game this defense played like this this year. There is a mental element missing from this defense as well. Other than the blown coverages and getting whipped on several one on one battles, the mental part of the game is at fault here too. This defense is really bad.

If you can't tackle, then point fingers at coaches....DC, DL, DB, and especially HC. Those guy all go if your team can't tackle.

As epitomised by the "big" hit by 49er on the ball runner last week,,that stopped the touch down. It got all the play time on TV. People were talking more about that then the several missed tackles that led up,to,the circumstance.

My Point is a player desire to be seen on TV to making the big plays with a big hit rather than just stopping a player Has led to lots of missed tackles.

Lack of desire to put the body on the line, at other times I see a player miss an assignment and then just stand around watching the rest of the play unfold instead of getting in on the follow up action...

Originally posted by fister30:

Originally posted by casualobserver:

Originally posted by mike1302:

where do they they this notion that rugby players can only gang tackle high..Sure since Phil Gould initiated the hold the ball runner up and slow the play the ball down,many league players are preferring not to put the man immediately on the ground.But given a scenario of one on one every nrl player is competent in hitting low and putting the player down.If you can not tackle you will not be in first grade because they will target the bad defender for the length of the game.But some c/b efforts are deplorable.Reminding me of Puig Albert(pipa)who declared if the twelve in front cant tackle him why should I.

I remember Benji Marshall hanging out on the wing for a long time simply because he can't tackle. But back to the NFL, Rawls broke a lot of runs because the tackles were ineffective - arm tackles, poor angles, poor point location of contact.

This wasn't the first game this defense played like this this year. There is a mental element missing from this defense as well. Other than the blown coverages and getting whipped on several one on one battles, the mental part of the game is at fault here too. This defense is really bad.

Agreed. They're not playing w the swagger they had under Fangio. I think they're confused on their assignments because Mangini's scheme is complex. If they aren't sure what to do, they'll be hesitant in everything they do. Including tackling.

They better get their heads in the game for defence and their bodies on the line. Cause it will be a blow out loss.

Rather then loosing with class.

Originally posted by fister30:
This wasn't the first game this defense played like this this year. There is a mental element missing from this defense as well. Other than the blown coverages and getting whipped on several one on one battles, the mental part of the game is at fault here too. This defense is really bad.

Yeah that's right. It was worse against the Cardinals last time we played. They got 47 points against us. Kaep was intercepted 4 times, sacked a few times and got only 50 yards in completed passing.

Not looking good for todays game.

I cant see them having worked up the tackling skills over a week. It just ain't long enough of a time.

Poor tackling is a symptom of generalized demoralization, poor coaching skills, lousy squad management....you all know the list. We need significant number of starters at 3 slots on the OL, passrushing OLB, starting DT, starting CB, starting RB, and we need to leave the QB slot alone at present, praying that gab at least can bridge QB for us in 2016. When you have structural problems, psychologic problems, coaching problems, execution problems....well, you are discussing a rudderless ship, with a failed captain. No, it wasn't tomsula's fault we lost the equivalent of 19 starters or guys who could start. The talent loss was multifactorial, including aging of players, the Borland deal,
, Aldon, injuries, understandable disatisfaction by some players and so on.

In sum, we are structurally in trouble with loss and lack of talent, and we are equally in trouble with DC, OC, and in particular HC. I believed JT could be a caretaker HC and we wouldn't lose much . Wrong. We now are in trouble with everything except the financial cap. Of course the disappearance of kap for all intents and purposes, has thrown the QB position into some turmoil, but with gab, that seems to be in control moreso than anywhere else on the team....thank God for small favors.

Point is need major restructuring everywhere, and to do that we don't need a caretaker HC...whether we owe him $7.5 mil or not. We need the best money can buy right now and anything short of that will just perpetuate the mass confusion and damage going on right now. Trying to get by with a caretaker HC will no longer cut it. Same goes for DC. Geep ...the jury is still out on him. But with all our multiple problems, beginning with the massive need for talent in both lines, OLB, DT, we need a shakeup from top to bottom.
We already know that jed has blown it with all his 4 coaching hires, but he is older now, and we can hope more reasonable when it comes to picking a HC. First, tho, he has to recognize and eat the contract of his current HC. After that, he better be looking for the exact right HC to pick to get us out of the mess we currently are in. One of his problems in times past has been that he had no idea who to hire after he fired his HC at the time. And that goes back to Dr York's firing of Mooch...with no idea who to hire as the replacement HC. Jed has just perpetuated that horrible fault.

A new HC is needed, yes. But just any HC will not do. It has to be a guy with extensive and successful experience as OC, or a head coach with impeccable credentials who has a proven long term success story. Only a few come to mind: Bellichek, maybe sean payton, and then a host of OCs only with no HC experience, eg gase, etc, who are the bright lites in the NFL today. Short of this, at this time next season i predict we will look exactly like we do today. Sure we can add 3 starting OLs, a passrushing OLB, a starting DT, startiing CB, but without the right guy at the head, the HC, we will continue to wander lost, unable to find our way, sweeping out the cellar , once again.

Bellichek? That's crazy most will say. But offer him ownership in the team, plus a $7-8 mil/yr salary, and no one would be able to not at least consider it. I pick bellichek because of his remarkable abilities in talent choosing, OCing, DCing and long term success. Ownership? Are you kidding? Well, 1% of a $3 billion team is worth oh, roughtly $30 million. So if the desire to acquire the best is strong enough, enough money can get any successful HC's attention. I don't think that is necessary, just mention it as a possibility that is NOT impossible. Still our best bet is with a super successful OC with serious experience who has shown he not only can coach, but can lead. Find that guy and then hire him...regardless of what it costs. Play the cards we have now, and prepare to have the end of next season look just like this one. But it isn't just adios tomsula. There HAS TO BE a great guy to replace him....if not, no point in making the change.

To summarize the above, poor tackling means lousy coaching and the above is why.

Well defence turned it around this game. I was quite shocked in the turn around in just one week.

But all credit to the plays and the DC for figuring out.

If they keep it tight for the rest of year we could be in for a few more wins to finish well in an awful season.

19-13 is a welcome result compared to 47-7. Big improvement