Doug Farrar over at Yahoo! Sports asks this question: Can Keith Bulluck, the Giants new starting middle linebacker, play well in Defensive Coordinator Perry Fewell’s fast paced Tampa-2 defensive scheme?
Just so you know, the question is completely moot. But to get the answer, he asked Tom Gower from Total Titans who said:
"Bulluck was a great player to watch in the vintage years. He only made one Pro Bowl, but for a couple of years he was probably the league’s best pursuit linebacker. He played well as part of the great defense of 2008 but was clearly on the downside of his career then, and his play slipped even more as the quality of the defense around him fell in 2009. This was maybe most clearly the case in pass defense.As you mention, though, Bulluck’s FO metrics for pass defense were actually pretty good. These are a little misleading, though. If you look at the charting data, there are 46 passes with Bulluck listed as Defender 1. 21 of those 46 were incomplete passes. Since Bulluck was primarily an underneath defender, holding quarterbacks to a 54% completion percentage is very good. If you look at why those passes were incomplete, though, 19 of those 21 incompletions were for reasons having nothing to do with Bulluck. The receiver dropped the ball, the defensive line’s pressure forced an errant pass (hit in motion/tipped), or the QB simply missed the receiver in some manner (thrown ahead, thrown behind, overthrown, thrown away).Bulluck’s problems in 2009 in pass defense were twofold. First, he started the year playing with a lack of discipline in zone defense. This is something he’d done in the past, but his speed declined from excellent earlier in this career to merely good/very good, meaning he was less able to recover from the freelancing. The Steelers and Texans were able to exploit him at the beginning of the year because of this. After those first couple weeks, I thought he played with more disciplined in zone defense, but that also meant he played less aggressively and couldn’t attack players the way he did in the past. This was most true against running backs and other players with more agility-he simply can’t stay with them the way he could when he was younger.All this, of course, was before the ACL injury that prematurely ended his 2009 season. The list of old linebackers who have an ACL injury and are still effective after the injury is a very short one. Bulluck, for his entire career, has been a pursuit linebacker who’s depended on his speed to chase after guys, not a stout point of attack run defender. If he can’t run, I strongly doubt he can be an effective player. If the Giants try him in a Gary Brackett(notes) role, they better have much better safety play than they got in 2009, because they’re going to need it covering for Bulluck."
If you took the question at face-value, maybe now you’re a bit nervous whether or not Bulluck can do the job he’s been brought to NY to do. However, there is no evidence that Fewell is going to run a Tampa-2 scheme with the Giants. In fact there’s only evidence that points to a highly dynamic, multiple front scheme from the Giants defense in 2010.
Way back in June of this year, Mike Garafolo posted an interview with Giants secondary coach Peter Giunta and safeties coach David Merritt. The topics discussed were quite enlightening:
"“I would label Coach Fewell as a multiple-front, multiple-, multiple-coverage defensive coordinator,” Merritt said. “He is the furthest from a Tampa-2 guy.”"
Case and point. But here is the rest of it:
"“We used to match up on the snap of the ball,” Giunta said. “Now, in certain coverages, we’ll drop to our area and then pick up people as they come through our zone.”“They’ll be able to use their tools. They’ll be able to mix in the press, mix in the bail, mix in the off coverage with them,” Giunta said. “We’ll give them the tools and, based on the guys they have to play, they’ll be able to mix those as much as they can. We’ll obviously give them some guidance and direction, but hopefully they’re going to be able to say, ‘Hey, this is how we’re going to play it.’“(Fewell) gives them a lot of leeway. We have to develop that trust factor with the players. Once that trust factor’s there, it’s going to be very, very exciting.”“We’re rotating, we’re disguising, we’re moving around,” Merritt said. “I say, ‘Guys, I want you to push it. Stretch yourself as far as the disguise package. Give false calls, false dummy calls. Maybe it’s the correct call, but yell it out so loud that the offense may think it’s the incorrect call.’ That’s what these guys – Deon and Rolle – are bringing to the table.”"
So it sounds like the analysis of Bulluck going into a Tampa-2 scheme is just as unfounded as Perry Fewell being categorized as a Tampa-2 coordinator. Simply amazing.
And giving the MLB more leeway to make the right call sounds a whole lot more intriguing now that an 11-year veteran is going to be captaining the defense, doesn’t it?
But what’s more… the article actually points to the effectiveness of using the 4-3 scheme where the MLB’s job is to take away the underneath route, while of course the front 4 are required to apply consistent pressure to the QB and the secondary is adequately covering the deeper options. When that happens, the results are undeniably effective. Let’s read this segment again and unpack what it really means without the misleading part:
"Bulluck’s FO metrics for pass defense were actually pretty good… Since Bulluck was primarily an underneath defender, holding quarterbacks to a 54% completion percentage is very good. If you look at why those passes were incomplete, though, 19 of those 21 incompletions were (because) the receiver dropped the ball, the defensive line’s pressure forced an errant pass, or the QB simply missed the receiver in some manner."
It doesn’t say anything about Bulluck reading the QB/play/route, taking away the easy underneath pass or stopping the run — essentially doing his job effectively. The article looks to assign blame more than make a decent comparison. Look at PFF’s numbers for Bulluck if you want an unbiased breakdown.
Quite honestly, in a similar role with the Giants I read this as good news more than anything… a 4-3 scheme with Bulluck works because he can do his job well within it. That may be WHY the QB threw the ball way and missed the receiver… Bulluck was in the right place and took the option away. That may be why he’s tied for the third most passes defended in the league last year. It may be why QB’s throwing into his coverage had a rating of only 72.2 (7th best in NFL). It may be why he had 3 interceptions and a batted pass – he does his job!
But if you want to think about the defense as a unified whole that requires everyone simultaneously doing their job for the defense to be successful, I’ll go there too because it goes without saying. I don’t see a repeat of last year where the Giants defense collapses like a house of cards, and I’ll tell you why. The Giants are likely going to have a better front 4 this year, one that will apply more consistent pressure from every position. Canty and Alford will hopefully stay healthy. Joseph and Pierre-Paul will provide the hungry youth. The Giants secondary is definitely going to be better, with Rolle and Grant signings and a hopefully rehabbed Phillips and Ross ready to go. Perry Fewell and his coaching staff are taking a much more dynamic and deceptive approach to the defense this year, that will not be a strict Tampa-2 scheme… compare that to Sheridan’s streamlined, stubborn and stale Cover-2 scheme. What a difference a year makes.
So Bulluck’s job even from the sound of it certainly sounds doable… and it doesn’t sound like he’ll have to worry much about the Tampa-2 scheme because the Giants won’t be running it.
Happy Monday everyone!