Ron Edwards

**OpIv37** · 08-22-2005, 11:43 AM

Re: Ron Edwards

I'm sorry, but I have to call this article out as homer BS. I've been watching Edwards in the two preseason games so far and I've been completely unimpressed. He gets stood up on every running play. He did have a few QB pressures but no sacks.

Fortunately Schobel has stepped up his outside run D and Clements has been coming up to assist with runs to the outside as well, much like Winfield did a few years ago. I see teams having more like up against the middle, but struggling in the passing game and runs to the outside (particularly to the left).

JD · 08-22-2005, 12:03 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

I was very surprised to see Green Bay breaking down our D on the run though...we let Rodgers run 37 yards? Thats unheard of for any player against us, especially a QB. Pass coverage was great imo.

**OpIv37** · 08-22-2005, 12:17 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Originally posted by JD SabreFan

I was very surprised to see Green Bay breaking down our D on the run though...we let Rodgers run 37 yards? Thats unheard of for any player against us, especially a QB. Pass coverage was great imo.

good point- the Indy game was the opposite. Our pass D gave up some uncharacterstic plays while the run D was absolutely stifling. It will come together. I think the problem is that right now, the coaching staff is concentrating on practice for starters and evaluations of players on the bubble/competing for 2nd string. Once they focus on game planning for a specific opponent, our D will show it's true strength.

**casdhf** · 08-22-2005, 12:22 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

I agree alot, I also think that some of our starters are coasting....Edwards, Adams, Schobel...none of these guys seem to be going all out, not that I blame them.

**mysticsoto** · 08-22-2005, 12:29 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Can you give me instances of Edwards looking terrible. I kind of feel he was a non-factor in this game. Against the Colts he was fine and in this past game, he was just quiet. That means he didn't do anything outstanding...but he didn't allow anything outstanding either. GB prepared for our blitzes by working on their draw plays and they did really well on them. But our blitzes were very plain compared to how we blitzed them last time. Most of the time we were coming up with the strong safety. A few times we did a very vanilla zone blitz. In fact, that's how they scored their only touchdown...Schobel on Ahman Green is not a good idea...

But for Edwards to terrible implies that he was letting people run all over him and that he was getting pushed around. And I don't think that's the case.

**OpIv37** · 08-22-2005, 12:35 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Originally posted by mysticsoto

Can you give me instances of Edwards looking terrible. I kind of feel he was a non-factor in this game. Against the Colts he was fine and in this past game, he was just quiet. That means he didn't do anything outstanding...but he didn't allow anything outstanding either. GB prepared for our blitzes by working on their draw plays and they did really well on them. But our blitzes were very plain compared to how we blitzed them last time. Most of the time we were coming up with the strong safety. A few times we did a very vanilla zone blitz. In fact, that's how they scored their only touchdown...Schobel on Ahman Green is not a good idea...

But for Edwards to terrible implies that he was letting people run all over him and that he was getting pushed around. And I don't think that's the case.

quiet is an understatement. I'm at work and I don't have the game in front of me, so I can't provide specifics at the moment. But in the GB game, I recall several running plays where he got absolutely no push- he was stopped right at the line of scrimmage. This means that he was not involved in the tackle or in disrupting the play at all- he was completely neutralized. It's not like he's a huge liabililty, but he's definitely a step backwards from Pat Williams. And it scares me- if teams can run up the middle, they're going to wear down our defense.

**casdhf** · 08-22-2005, 12:44 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

hey op, was he singled or doubled?

**OpIv37** · 08-22-2005, 12:49 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Originally posted by casdhf

hey op, was he singled or doubled?

both- he was doubled a couple times (which confused me- of all the guys on our D, he'd be the LAST one I'd double), but I also saw him get stood up by single coverage a few times. I should watch it again and take a better look.

Last year, teams basically had to choose between double teaming Sam or Pat. And those guys even fought off double teams on occasion. This year, it seems like they'll be able to double team Sam and leave one guy to handle Edwards, or double team Edwards and push him into the cheap seats. I don't like it.

**mysticsoto** · 08-22-2005, 02:09 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Originally posted by OpIv37

both- he was doubled a couple times (which confused me- of all the guys on our D, he'd be the LAST one I'd double), but I also saw him get stood up by single coverage a few times. I should watch it again and take a better look.

Last year, teams basically had to choose between double teaming Sam or Pat. And those guys even fought off double teams on occasion. This year, it seems like they'll be able to double team Sam and leave one guy to handle Edwards, or double team Edwards and push him into the cheap seats. I don't like it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that doesn't sound worst than Pat. Pat rarely penetrated and usually help his spot as a run stuffer to prevent a running back from getting through. Sounds to me like what you described from Edwards is what Pat used to do - maybe they asked him to... In the Colts game, I thought he penetrated through the line several times. As I said, in this one, I wouldn't call it a great game for him, but I wouldn't use the word terrible either. Terrible means he was man-handled, and running backs were going by him at will. And I don't think that was the case. The best runs for GB were draw plays that had us blitzing. A draw play takes a second to develop, giving the RB time to pick his hole away from where the DT has chosen to rush and attack.

Interestingly, I could have sworn that Marv or Tasker mentioned that Edwards is now the leader of the D-line - meaning he makes the calls at the D-line on how they are going to attack. I thought that was pretty interesting...

**OpIv37** · 08-22-2005, 02:14 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Originally posted by mysticsoto

Interestingly, I could have sworn that Marv or Tasker mentioned that Edwards is now the leader of the D-line - meaning he makes the calls at the D-line on how they are going to attack. I thought that was pretty interesting...

well I'm out of the Buffalo market and NFL Network showed the Bills game at 3 am, so I TiVo'd it and fast forwarded through most of the commentary between the plays. I like Marv a lot, but most announcers have their heads up their asses and don't contribute much with their comments.

**ParanoidAndroid** · 08-22-2005, 02:57 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Question.....Green Bay had success running the ball on our defense. Why is this a reflection on Ron Edwards and Ron Edwards only? All he has to do is occupy an o-lineman on running plays and make the occassional shed and tackle. If he's on his ass and the o-lineman is getting to our linebackers, then there's a problem, but I never saw him get pancaked. If he was fooled on a couple draw plays, then he needs work on recognition, but that's not uncommon. Draw plays are difficult to sniff out for anyone.

I think he's doing fine. Is he as good at shedding blockers as Williams was, I don't think so, but then, not many DT's in the league are.

**OpIv37** · 08-22-2005, 03:02 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Originally posted by andyxc71

Question.....Green Bay had success running the ball on our defense. Why is this a reflection on Ron Edwards and Ron Edwards only? All he has to do is occupy an o-lineman on running plays and make the occassional shed and tackle. If he's on his ass and the o-lineman is getting to our linebackers, then there's a problem, but I never saw him get pancaked. If he was fooled on a couple draw plays, then he needs work on recognition, but that's not uncommon. Draw plays are difficult to sniff out for anyone.

I think he's doing fine. Is he as good at shedding blockers as Williams was, I don't think so, but then, not many DT's in the league are.

I'm not solely blaming Edwards- a lot of the running plays went to the opposite side and he would have had to run 10 yards in less time than the RB ran 6 to make the tackle- no one expects that. But I was watching him as much as I could with the crappy camera angles in order to get some kind of a feel for how he plays. I saw him stopped at the line of scrimmage a bunch of times and didn't see him do anything impressive.

**ParanoidAndroid** · 08-22-2005, 03:48 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

Originally posted by OpIv37

I'm not solely blaming Edwards- a lot of the running plays went to the opposite side and he would have had to run 10 yards in less time than the RB ran 6 to make the tackle- no one expects that. But I was watching him as much as I could with the crappy camera angles in order to get some kind of a feel for how he plays. I saw him stopped at the line of scrimmage a bunch of times and didn't see him do anything impressive.

Yeah. I kind of figured that you were taking that into account, but I just thought that the discussion needed that included.

**EDS** · 08-22-2005, 06:05 PM

Re: Ron Edwards

As long as the defensive tackle is occupying one or two blockers I think the Bills will be fine. The whole idea is for them to occupy blockers so that Fletcher and co. can flow to the ball carrier.

Ron Edwards

Ron Edwards

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment