PDA

View Full Version : Cover Vs Man


CloakNNNdagger
12-13-2008, 02:26 PM
I know that we're now supposed to be playing more one-on-one "man." However, I've noticed commonly, and TOO commonly in even crucial stop situations where the opponent just needs 3-5 yds for a 1st down, our corners are lined up 10 yds off their man. A majority of these cases, the opponent converts to 1st down on a short out or curl. What's with this? I know our corners aren't calling where they line up. And I feel that this formation accounts for a significant factor why teams seem to come back on us in the 3rd and 4th quarters. What's with this? I know our corners aren't calling where they line up.

infantrycak
12-13-2008, 02:47 PM
Yup--keeps happening and it is inexplicable IMO. What I really want to know is who is calling that coverage, Smith or Hoke? If it is Smith against Hoke's advice then fire him. If it is Hoke with Smith's assent, fire them both.

TexansSeminole
12-13-2008, 02:51 PM
Yea, we did the same thing last year. It's the main reason I want a new defensive coordinator. RS puts the secondary in bad/weird positions pretty often. I never understood the hybrid SS/FS for both safety positions either. I'm not sure this is Hoke's fault. I don't think he controls the positioning of the corners.

TimeKiller
12-13-2008, 03:03 PM
I never understood the hybrid SS/FS for both safety positions either.

They want the safeties to be okay at everything but not good at anything...:thinking:

Probably why none of our safeties ever really make plays. As far as their coverages go they usually seem to be too far down the field to man cover, any zone they run usually just means stand back until you see the guy with the ball and go try to tackle him.

As far as the corners lining up 10 yards off on 3rd and 6...I just don't know what to say about that anymore. It's just time for a new DC. It's been time.

TexansFanatic
12-13-2008, 03:50 PM
Yup--keeps happening and it is inexplicable IMO. What I really want to know is who is calling that coverage, Smith or Hoke? If it is Smith against Hoke's advice then fire him. If it is Hoke with Smith's assent, fire them both.

And by that rationale, shouldn't Kubiak be held accountable as well?

Doesn't the DC also need the HC's assent?

gary
12-13-2008, 04:08 PM
I know that we're now supposed to be playing more one-on-one "man." However, I've noticed commonly, and TOO commonly in even crucial stop situations where the opponent just needs 3-5 yds for a 1st down, our corners are lined up 10 yds off their man. A majority of these cases, the opponent converts to 1st down on a short out or curl. What's with this? I know our corners aren't calling where they line up. And I feel that this formation accounts for a significant factor why teams seem to come back on us in the 3rd and 4th quarters. What's with this? I know our corners aren't calling where they line up.They need to play closer up on all three downs but even more so on third and short because that is when most teams run those short out or curl plays to pick up those few yards that they need to pick up the first down.

bah007
12-13-2008, 04:34 PM
I played CB my entire football life and I can tell you for sure this is on the defensive coordinator.

When you have a conservative defensive playcaller, he would rather guard against the fade and leave the slants open so that his CBs don't get beat deep.

It makes absolutely no sense. We give up 3rd down conversions on short passes all the time because our coaches are so afraid of moving our CBs up only to get beat deep on a double move or a fade.

When I played, my coach would constantly try to move me 10-12 yards deep on 3rd and 5. I would just pretend I couldn't hear him and stay where I was. You can get away with that in high school and college, if you don't don't play by their rules in the pros, you're gone.

It's an obvious sign that Smith has no confidence in his CBs.

gary
12-13-2008, 04:42 PM
If it is all on the DC then RS better be gone at the end of the season.

b0ng
12-13-2008, 04:44 PM
And by that rationale, shouldn't Kubiak be held accountable as well?

Doesn't the DC also need the HC's assent?

Sometimes. I know that Kubiak isn't calling the defensive plays or how the coverage schemes are going to act. Now if our coach was Bill Cowher, oh yeah you know it would be on his head.

RipTraxx
12-13-2008, 04:45 PM
Man press all the time!

Maddict5
12-13-2008, 05:21 PM
how have we done on 3rd down since dunta went back to cb1 and (presumably when) we went back to man? i dont have any stats but it seems we're quite good the last 3 weeks

ObsiWan
12-13-2008, 06:38 PM
I know that we're now supposed to be playing more one-on-one "man." However, I've noticed commonly, and TOO commonly in even crucial stop situations where the opponent just needs 3-5 yds for a 1st down, our corners are lined up 10 yds off their man. A majority of these cases, the opponent converts to 1st down on a short out or curl. What's with this? I know our corners aren't calling where they line up. And I feel that this formation accounts for a significant factor why teams seem to come back on us in the 3rd and 4th quarters. What's with this? I know our corners aren't calling where they line up.

This is just a SWAG but IMHO, its because our CBs are relatively small and cannot effectively jam WRs of decent size and/or strength.

So the question is, is it better to try and jam then fail, and possibly get beat deep OR do you play back a few yds and let the CBs keep the play in front of them and make the tackle (hopefully).

Our conservative coaching staff mostly always go with the latter choice - hoping our "awesome" pass rush will cause the opposing QB to make a mistake.

In my little fantasy world, our CBs would recognize down and distance, pretend to play off the WR, and jump those short yardage curls and outs for pick six's.

CloakNNNdagger
12-13-2008, 06:40 PM
how have we done on 3rd down since dunta went back to cb1 and (presumably when) we went back to man? i dont have any stats but it seems we're quite good the last 3 weeks

I haven't seen any let up on this 10 yard cushion mentality in the last 3 weeks. As I pointed out in my initial post, despite the fact that we have won, we have consistently "lost ground" in the 3rd and 4th quarters in significant part to using that approach. It makes no sense at all.

When the CB's play that far off the receivers, beside giving up easy yardage, it takes the threat of a CB blitz out of the play book for the most part, and essentially fails to keep the O "honest" for that possibility.

CloakNNNdagger
12-13-2008, 06:49 PM
This is just a SWAG but IMHO, its because our CBs are relatively small and cannot effectively jam WRs of decent size and/or strength.

So the question is, is it better to try and jam then fail, and possibly get beat deep OR do you play back a few yds and let the CBs keep the play in front of them and make the tackle (hopefully).


Our conservative coaching staff mostly always go with the latter choice - hoping our "awesome" pass rush will cause the opposing QB to make a mistake.

In my little fantasy world, our CBs would recognize down and distance, pretend to play off the WR, and jump those short yardage curls and outs for pick six's.


ObsiWan,

It really doesn't take a large, strong CB to effectively jam big, strong WRs. It just take a split second of messing up their timing.


And giving them 10 yds, as we've seen many times certainly has not avoided our CBs from getting beaten. But it sure has consistently given the O easy 1st downs.......and just as effective trots down the field.

ObsiWan
12-13-2008, 07:02 PM
ObsiWan,

It really doesn't take a large, strong CB to effectively jam big, strong WRs. It just take a split second of messing up their timing.


And giving them 10 yds, as we've seen many times certainly has not avoided our CBs from getting beaten. But it sure has consistently given the O easy 1st downs.......and just as effective trots down the field.

I know the jam is as much about technique as it is about size. But do you think really our guys have either the size or technique to do it effectively. I've seen them whiff on attempted jams many times then have to play catch-up to the WR. I just think our conservative coaching approach would rather not take getting beat deep on a whiffed jammed.

gary
12-13-2008, 07:21 PM
Still the amount of space they give up way too much.

CloakNNNdagger
12-13-2008, 08:50 PM
I know the jam is as much about technique as it is about size. But do you think really our guys have either the size or technique to do it effectively. I've seen them whiff on attempted jams many times then have to play catch-up to the WR. I just think our conservative coaching approach would rather not take getting beat deep on a whiffed jammed.


If it's technique, we have yet another reason to thank our coaching staff.

D-Frank
12-13-2008, 09:48 PM
how have we done on 3rd down since dunta went back to cb1 and (presumably when) we went back to man? i dont have any stats but it seems we're quite good the last 3 weeks

GREAT question! some stat guy/gal break it down for us please :mario3:

ObsiWan
12-13-2008, 11:20 PM
Still the amount of space they give up way too much.

I'm not disputing that. I was just hazarding a guess as to why it happens. Until the DBs get coached up more and get better technique like CNNND says, we'll most likely continue to play back.

dalemurphy
12-13-2008, 11:46 PM
Man press all the time!

NO! when you do that, things happen like what we did to GB on that final drive. The only reason OD gets wide open and picks up 25 yards on that play is because we knew to expect man coverage and we exploited it...

Mixing and disguising coverage is the key and we finally started doing some of it. Let's hope it continues. Dunta's interception last week was directly a result of giving a man look but falling into a zone. Watch the tape!

dalemurphy
12-13-2008, 11:48 PM
I haven't seen any let up on this 10 yard cushion mentality in the last 3 weeks. As I pointed out in my initial post, despite the fact that we have won, we have consistently "lost ground" in the 3rd and 4th quarters in significant part to using that approach. It makes no sense at all.

When the CB's play that far off the receivers, beside giving up easy yardage, it takes the threat of a CB blitz out of the play book for the most part, and essentially fails to keep the O "honest" for that possibility.

Right now I'm going to go to the DVRed game last week and count how often we're in press coverage at the snap.. Be back in a few minutes!

Ryan
12-13-2008, 11:54 PM
Man press all the time!

Should I revert you back to the 98 yard TD pass by Calvin Johnson against us? Yes, I know Faggins was covering him, but it probably still would've happened to any of our corners at that time.

dalemurphy
12-13-2008, 11:59 PM
Right now I'm going to go to the DVRed game last week and count how often we're in press coverage at the snap.. Be back in a few minutes!

Okay, so I just rewatched the first 3 series for GB:

1st series:
1. 2 wide receivers, 1 CB pressed 1 played off
2. 3 wide receivers, all 3 CBs pressed
3. 3 wide receivers, 2 CBs pressed
4. 1 wide receiver, 1 CB pressed
5. couldn't see the play
6. 3 wide receivers, all 3 CBs pressed

2nd series:
1. 2 WRs, 2 CBs pressed
2. 2 Wrs, 1 CB pressed
3. 3 WRs, 0 CBs pressed
4. 3 Wrs, 0 Cbs pressed
5. 3 WRs, 1 CB pressed

3rd series:
1. 2 Wrs, 1 Cb pressed
2. 2 Wrs, 0 Cb pressed
3. 2 Wrs, 0 Cb pressed
4. 4 WRs, 4 DBs pressed.

Looked like a pretty good mix to me - some based situationally and some simply for confusion or to combat tendencies.

dalemurphy
12-14-2008, 12:01 AM
Should I revert you back to the 98 yard TD pass by Calvin Johnson against us? Yes, I know Faggins was covering him, but it probably still would've happened to any of our corners at that time.

Unfortunately, we were playing 4 deep and Faggins was lined up 10 yards off of him and still got whipped. You may be thinking about the now infamous Buffalo game... Faggins did press, or attempt to, Lee Evans on at least one of the 80 yard TDs.

infantrycak
12-14-2008, 08:21 AM
And by that rationale, shouldn't Kubiak be held accountable as well?

Doesn't the DC also need the HC's assent?

Yes Kubiak should be held accountable, the question is how. Kubiak was not brought in as a defensive guru. I expect him to give some deference to his DC. At the same time, he is accountable for identifying problems and finding a solution. I will consider it a major black eye for him if something doesn't change on the defensive coaching staff.

This is just a SWAG but IMHO, its because our CBs are relatively small and cannot effectively jam WRs of decent size and/or strength.

Relative to what? Take a look at the pro-bowl CB rosters last year. Only Cromartie topped 200 lbs and just by a smidge--and the Texans have Bennett at just under 200 lbs. Dunta is diminutive but his physicality is not in question. The CB that looks like AJ is the exception rather than the rule and they all still have to face WRs like AJ.

TimeKiller
12-14-2008, 08:40 AM
Throw in Molden who is even a hair bigger than Bennett too.

If only there were some way for him to play...