Kareem Jackson's plight.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Rey

None of that matters.

He was in one one on one coverage and he got beat.

The safety doesn't have to be blitzing he could be doubling up on someone else. No extra pressure but you're still expecting Jackson to be able to man up on his assignment.

Look people around you are going to screw up. That's not a reason for you to get beat.

Either a reciever is beating multiple people, one person, or he was left wide open. Jackson was the only one holding the receiver he got beat. He didnt have help for one reason or another. And be got beat.

If I'm to believe 76 that Jackson can see where his safeties are during the play then I fully expect for him to know whether or not the safety that is supposed to be giving help is on the field pre-snap.

Um. No.

In the coverage he was running, his job was to take away the outside and the safety's job was to take away the inside. The safety wasn't there. KJ did his job. He took away the outside. He didn't get beat.

He was standing at the line concentrating on his man. He wasn't looking back behind him to verify that the safety was where he was supposed to be. That's not what he's supposed to do.

"Safety help" doesn't mean that the corner's job is to smother the receiver and take away the whole field and maybe get a little help if things aren't all peaches and cream. "Safety Help" means that it's NOT pure man-on-man. "Safety Help" means that the safety has a responsibility regarding that receiver. It's a double team situation IF that receiver does certain things. And in this case, the receiver DID one of those certain things but because the safety wasn't there, he didn't do his job.

It's like blaming Mario for not taking away a gap that Amobi was supposed to take care of. Part of team defense means doing your job and not trying to take care of other people's jobs as well. You have to trust the rest of the guys to do their jobs. In this case, KJ did his job and trusted the safety to do his... but the safety didn't hold up his end of the bargain.

[76Texan]

When I have time, I'm going to post the pass from Collins.
It was the two-man route that we spent a lot of time discussing

In that play, all three parties invloved played it right:

Jackson less than 3 yards from his man; he was in position to defend the play.

Quin coming over on a drop-kick call and was ready for an INT (as Collins threw the ball too far inside; ie. Jackson squeezed the route well.)

Nolan let the crossing route go free (he anticipated that Collins will go deep as Collins did not put on any fake of any kind) and came back;
too bad, Nolan deflected the ball and the receiver caught it.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

It was another one-receiver route.
If there was a safety, he can only be doubling up with Jackson.

Another assumption. You have no idea what a defensive coordinator as his players to do.

Safety could double up or than can be asked to key on a rb if the coordinator is protecting against a screen.

My point is that there could be any number of reasons where Jackson has to cover one on one. If you want to argue that be was expecting help and it threw him off a bit then I can respect that.

But I don't see how he is not aware of whether or not a db is missing from the field pre snap. It's possible.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Rey

Another assumption. You have no idea what a defensive coordinator as his players to do.

Safety could double up or than can be asked to key on a rb if the coordinator is protecting against a screen.

My point is that there could be any number of reasons where Jackson has to cover one on one. If you want to argue that be was expecting help and it threw him off a bit then I can respect that.

But I don't see how he is not aware of whether or not a db is missing from the field pre snap. It's possible.

Remmber the Chris Johnson play in 2009 where nobody was on him?

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Rey

My point is that there could be any number of reasons where Jackson has to cover one on one. If you want to argue that be was expecting help and it threw him off a bit then I can respect that.

There may be a zillion reasons and times when Jackson has to cover one on one. This just wasn't one of them.

He played the coverage he was supposed to play. He didn't make a mistake. He didn't play poorly. The play succeeded because we were playing 10 on 11.

But I don't see how he is not aware of whether or not a db is missing from the field pre snap. It's possible.

Think of where he lines up and what he's looking at. He's not looking back behind him to see if there's a safety there. He's focused forward on the receiver. Unless someone yells at him to tell him that there's no safety, he has no way of knowing.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

Um. No.

In the coverage he was running, his job was to take away the outside and the safety's job was to take away the inside. The safety wasn't there. KJ did his job. He took away the outside. He didn't get beat.

He was standing at the line concentrating on his man. He wasn't looking back behind him to verify that the safety was where he was supposed to be. That's not what he's supposed to do.

"Safety help" doesn't mean that the corner's job is to smother the receiver and take away the whole field and maybe get a little help if things aren't all peaches and cream. "Safety Help" means that it's NOT pure man-on-man. "Safety Help" means that the safety has a responsibility regarding that receiver. It's a double team situation IF that receiver does certain things. And in this case, the receiver DID one of those certain things but because the safety wasn't there, he didn't do his job.
.

Your idea if safety help is flawed.

Safety help doesn't mean you have your own personal protector over the top. He's going to take one route away and you just worry about the rest. No.

Often times a safety is looking at multiple routes. He supposed to position himself the best way possible to make a play on the ball. Good safeties do this more often than not by instincts, speed, film study ect. .

As a corner you can not always expect the safety to be right there over the top. It's just not going to happen that way. Sometimes the safety is doubling with you, but if he's just in a deep zone the he may not be right with you when the ball is thrown because he's looking at multiple things.

Too often if the safety wasn't with Jackson he got beat. That's not acceptable. You have to win some of those one on one battles.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Rey

Your idea if safety help is flawed.

Safety help doesn't mean you have your own personal protector over the top. He's going to take one route away and you just worry about the rest. No.

Often times a safety is looking at multiple routes. He supposed to position himself the best way possible to make a play on the ball. Good safeties do this more often than not by instincts, speed, film study ect. .

As a corner you can not always expect the safety to be right there over the top. It's just not going to happen that way. Sometimes the safety is doubling with you, but if he's just in a deep zone the he may not be right with you when the ball is thrown because he's looking at multiple things.

Too often if the safety wasn't with Jackson he got beat. That's not acceptable. You have to win some of those one on one battles.

I hate to say this, but Rey, you keep on generalizing things while all we're doing here is to look at each play seperately.

The Galloway play was a one-receiver route.
If there was a deep safety, what do you expect that safety to be doing?

[Rey]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

There may be a zillion reasons and times when Jackson has to cover one on one. This just wasn't one of them.

He played the coverage he was supposed to play. He didn't make a mistake. He didn't play poorly. The play succeeded because we were playing 10 on 11.



Think of where he lines up and what he's looking at. He's not looking back behind him to see if there's a safety there. He's focused forward on the receiver. Unless someone yells at him to tell him that there's no safety, he has no way of knowing.

presnap DBS do a lot of communicating. If all he is doing is focusing on the receiver how is be getting the playcall?

Often times the safeties are the ones making adjustments for the secondary since they can see more.

Like I said it's possible that he didn't know. Still not a reason to get beat on a deep ball when you have one on one coverage. Yes It's a tough cover, but he was not able to to it.

If you are only effective when you have deep safety help or when the safety plays it exactly right then you are not an asset. As a corner you have to make some plays when you are left one on one. Kareem got beat more often than not when he was forced into those situations. He was not talented enough to go out and make some plays in those situations.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Rey

presnap DBS do a lot of communicating. If all he is doing is focusing on the receiver how is be getting the playcall?

Often times the safeties are the ones making adjustments for the secondary since they can see more.

Like I said it's possible that he didn't know. Still not a reason to get beat on a deep ball when you have one on one coverage. Yes It's a tough cover, but he was not able to to it.

If you are only effective when you have deep safety help or when the safety plays it exactly right then you are not an asset. As a corner you have to make some plays when you are left one on one. Kareem got beat more often than not when he was forced into those situations. He was not talented enough to go out and make some plays in those situations.

Well, then answer me why Hayden played the outsde the way he did (against Walter).
And why Asomugha played way to the outside the way he did? (Raiders/Chargers)

Neither of them was expecting help over the top?

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Rey

Your idea if safety help is flawed.

Safety help doesn't mean you have your own personal protector over the top. He's going to take one route away and you just worry about the rest. No.

Often times a safety is looking at multiple routes. He supposed to position himself the best way possible to make a play on the ball. Good safeties do this more often than not by instincts, speed, film study ect. .

As a corner you can not always expect the safety to be right there over the top. It's just not going to happen that way. Sometimes the safety is doubling with you, but if he's just in a deep zone the he may not be right with you when the ball is thrown because he's looking at multiple things.

Too often if the safety wasn't with Jackson he got beat. That's not acceptable. You have to win some of those one on one battles.

CBs shade their coverage based on where they have help and IF they have help.

If a CB is getting safety help over the top, that means that he has to take away the underneath. If a CB is getting safety help on the inside, that means he has to take away the outside. If a CB is playing straight up man, he's got to be on the guy like glue.

Plays are designed to pull that safety in lots of different directions. But once the ball is in the air, the safety has to be able to respond and take care of his responsibilities.

In the play we're talking about, KJ had safety help to the inside and he played it that way. It wasn't his job to take away the inside.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

I hate to say this, but Rey, you keep on generalizing things while all we're doing here is to look at each play seperately.

The Galloway play was a one-receiver route.
If there was a deep safety, what do you expect that safety to be doing?

I think you are missing my point with generalizing is that these individual circumstances don't matter because

1) we have no real clue what the defensive coordinator had a player doing on any given play and can only guess based on how it looks to us

2) when for whatever reason you deem Kareem was left one on one (bad call, player messed up, player next to him sucked, wr pushed him, he was expecting something that wasn't) he grossly underperformed in those situations.

A corner will be left one on one by the sheer nature of the position. Just like the LT.

Just because he is expecting the te or rb to help him out on his man doesnt mean he is ok if he lets his man get through to crush the qb. Not sure how you are not seeing that basic fact.

You are at a position that is hard. You are at a prime position. You need to man up and make some things happen or you're going to get beat Everytime the circumstances aren't perfect.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Rey

I think you are missing my point with generalizing is that these individual circumstances don't matter because

1) we have no real clue what the defensive coordinator had a player doing on any given play and can only guess based on how it looks to us

2) when for whatever reason you deem Kareem was left one on one (bad call, player messed up, player next to him sucked, wr pushed him, he was expecting something that wasn't) he grossly underperformed in those situations.

A corner will be left one on one by the sheer nature of the position. Just like the LT.
Just because he is expecting the te or rb to help him out on his man doesnt mean he is ok if he lets his man get through to crush the qb. Not sure how you are not seeing that basic fact.

You are at a position that is hard. You are at a prime position. You need to man up and make some things happen or you're going to get beat Everytime the circumstances aren't perfect.

I get your points.

You still haven't anwer me what Hayden and Aso were supposed to be doing in those plays I mentioned.

Also, answer me why Weddle stayed back to protect Jammer on the two passes to JJ and Casey.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

CBs shade their coverage based on where they have help and IF they have help.

If a CB is getting safety help over the top, that means that he has to take away the underneath. If a CB is getting safety help on the inside, that means he has to take away the outside. If a CB is playing straight up man, he's got to be on the guy like glue.

Plays are designed to pull that safety in lots of different directions. But once the ball is in the air, the safety has to be able to respond and take care of his responsibilities.

In the play we're talking about, KJ had safety help to the inside and he played it that way. It wasn't his job to take away the inside.

No.

That is called double coverage. If a safety is playing in a deep zone he's looking at more than one route. There is no such thing as inside help unless the safety is doubling up on your man.

If a safety is in a medium zone then he's playing the zone and not your man. He's there to provide support, not have you pass your man off to him because if the receiver runs past the "inside help" then he's going to be open anyways.

If the safeties job is to follow the receiver even after he crosses his area then he's playing man.

If he's just in a zone then Jackson will be beat after the receiver crosses. You don't rely on your help. You use it but you are not excused if it fails you.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Rey

No.

That is called double coverage. If a safety is playing in a deep zone he's looking at more than one route. There is no such thing as inside help unless the safety is doubling up on your man.

I consider that absolutely incorrect.

But that doesn't matter.

If you want to use the words that way, fine. We'll use your definitions.

In your vernacular, it was supposed to be double coverage with the safety picking up the inside half and the safety wasn't there.

[76Texan]

Here's something I found that is quite specific concerning the 2-man route vs cover 3.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...k-Cover-3.html

"The corners must maintain outside leverage and use the free safety to their advantage. If they get beat to their outside, they have no help to rely on. That is why they use zone technique (back to the sideline) and widen with any vertical release to protect the sideline.

The free safety is the top of the defense. He must honor his responsibilities and not chase any intermediate routes. Offenses will run a deep dig (15-yard square in) to entice the free safety to jump the route — while running a post from the opposite side of the field, leaving the corner naked and playing from outside in with zero help. A classic Cover 3-beater."

Any kind of crossing route works the same as the dig route.
As I mentioned before, the only way the deep safety can step down on the intermediate route is to have the off-side CB to take over the post.

I will show a few more 2-man route.
On an 86-yd TD by Jennings (Packers) against the Dolphins earlir this yr, you will see that the on-side CB V. Davis plays exactly the same way Aso, Hayden, Mathis, or Jackson played.

They all have to protect the side line.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

I consider that absolutely incorrect.

But that doesn't matter.

If you want to use the words that way, fine. We'll use your definitions.

In your vernacular, it was supposed to be double coverage with the safety picking up the inside half and the safety wasn't there.

Just saw this, but I dont think you understand what in saying.

If a corner is in man and a safety is in zone the safety is not playing one route, so therefore he can't be any one corners "inside help".

He's playing his zone and reading the qb.

Which brings me back to my original point. If a corner is playing man coverage on a receiver it's never acceptable to get beat and not be within range of the guy they are holding.

The purpose of a safety helping out a corner is to force double coverage. The safety is not supposed to completely bail the corner out.

Kareem was beaten so bad on plays last year that even if a safety would have been in position it'd still be a one on one play.

Safeties are reading the play as a whole. They aren't supposed to be a cb's personal guardian.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Rey

Kareem was beaten so bad on plays last year that even if a safety would have been in position it'd still be a one on one play.

The only play that I can think of is the 28-yd TD by Arijotutu.

So far, the plays I've been talking about in this thread all belong to the category of safety help was expected!

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Rey

Just saw this, but I dont think you understand what in saying.

If a corner is in man and a safety is in zone the safety is not playing one route, so therefore he can't be any one corners "inside help".

This is where you make your mistake.

He's playing his zone and reading the qb.

Which brings me back to my original point. If a corner is playing man coverage on a receiver it's never acceptable to get beat and not be within range of the guy they are holding.

The purpose of a safety helping out a corner is to force double coverage. The safety is not supposed to completely bail the corner out.

Kareem was beaten so bad on plays last year that even if a safety would have been in position it'd still be a one on one play.

Safeties are reading the play as a whole. They aren't supposed to be a cb's personal guardian.

What I'M saying is that in this coverage, the corner is playing the outside of the receiver and expecting the safety to cover the inside IF the ball is thrown to the receiver there. It's not a pure man to man coverage for the corner.

The safety is supposed to be sitting back there and:
1) be aware of the receivers in his zone
2) be aware of where the QB is going with the ball.

When the ball leaves the QBs hands, that safety has to judge where it's going and if it's going to someone in his zone, he needs to get there. This is why QBs like to look the safeties off -- so they're out of position to provide help.

If the pass is going to a receiver running down the hash marks, it's his job to take away the inside passing lane. If it's going to a receiver over the middle, it's his job to converge there. If it's going to a receiver underneath, it's his job to come up.

But his responsibility vis-a-vis that seam is to take away the inside while the CB takes away the area OUTSIDE the hash-marks.

You can tell if the CB is playing this sort of coverage by how he plays the receiver and how he tries to direct the receiver. And in a lot of these instances where KJ is getting blamed for bad man-to-man coverage, he was playing it expecting inside help and not getting it.

Now.

It could be that this is a miscommunication between him and the safety. Or it could be that the safety was screwing up. Or it could be a mistake on his part.

The reason 76 Texan posted so many of these videos was to show OTHER corner backs in the same type of coverage, shading the receiver on one side and more or less pushing the receiver to the safety help.

So it's not a pure man-to-man situation. And it's not a pure double team situation. It's a HELP situation.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

The only play that I can think of is the 28-yd TD by Arijotutu.

So far, the plays I've been talking about in this thread all belong to the category of safety help was expected!

Edit: The only plays that I can think of are the 28-yd TD by Arijotutu and the 6-yd TD on a back shoulder fade to Hakeem Nicks.
(And of course, if you want to add the catch by S. Smith, you can.)

[76Texan]

Thanks, TPN.

Here's the Jennings TD against te Dolphins.
This one is interesting, so I will post the whole sequence here:







The play-side CB is V. Davis, a first rounder from 2009.
You will see how far off he was from the receiver late in the route (like Aso.)
Jackson was never that far off.

The off-side CB is Allen; and I maintain that Allen didn't play it right.
This is cover 3, not cover 1 and man-under.
Even if it was cover 1, Allen didn't play it right either, because he was very far from his man (just like Quin in the play I posted previously.)