Conversely, I would say the opposite. I question whether anyone believing teams focused on stopping the run actually watched the games.
No, I'm smart enough to realize what defenses were trying to do. They weren't focusing on stopping the run. They wanted to read the QBs eyes and jump on the in-routes.
There were 16 games, choose one. Preferably the one(s) where the defense wasn't focused on stopping the run and the short pass, the ones Todd and I didnt actually watch.
Colts game. You literally just posted a picture illustrating exactly my point. We can't even establish that their defense wasn't focused on stopping the run, how could we go any further
Yes technically Burnett would've been called the SAM with the TE lined up on our left, however Misi's job description was more that of the SAM despite being on the right side and Burnett's duties were more that of the WILL, regardless of where the TE lined up IIRC. To me it seemed like Burnett was the left linebacker with WILL responsibilities while Misi was the right linebacker with SAM responsibilities b/c of how our alignment was flipped due to Wake's strength on the left side, and we balanced the flip-flop by using a lot of Over fronts.
No, you can't establish it. It seems pretty clear to me that their primary concern was defending the run. No worries, I've been watching all of the Colts games during the past week or so, I'm in OT of the Tennessee game right now. Next up: you know who.
And it seems pretty clear to me their primary concern are the in-routes. See how this song and dance goes?
In routes? Ah, the devils's advocate routine. Yes, I am quite familiar with it. But the thread was going well I don't think it needs to be jump started by you or anyone else. I actually would like to hear your thoughts on the discussion Todd, Ronin and I were having about Jordan, the front's Coyle might use, the overall look of the defense etc.
Safeties cheating, it's what happens when you don't have threats on the outside, and you only need 1 player to cover a tight end.
The moral of your argument SEEMS to be teams were only concerned with Miami offensively from 10 yards in. I agree with you both. And I also agree that makes Mike Wallace worth the $$.
If I bring a defender into the box because you can't throw deep on me, it's because I know it kills your quick inside routes AND your running game at the same time. 2-for-1 benefit. Why WOULDN'T defenses do it. Only way to stop that is by throwing deep. Throwing outside on outs and comebacks was something we could already do but still didn;t solve the problem of the D being able to compress the middle on us, because those sideline comebacks and outs were predictable due to zero deep speed, it got increasingly dangerous for Tanny to throw that predictable comeback to Hartline on the intermediate sideline. Thus, the CB could squat on that, and the safety could compress the middle of the field, letting defenders in the box squat on short routes and the run. Domino effect. All starting with an offense that only threatened 20 yds from the LOS and no further, on most plays.
Exactly. don;t judge Wallace by his oen yards and TDs alone. Judge him by the increased TDs and yds we see from our TE position and WR's #2 and 3 this year.
Precisely. And Ryan may shnit his pants at all the new intermediate throwing lanes. This offense is going to take a huge step IMO...save LT I'm very very confident in this core for the first time since the mid 90's.
That's bologna. You don't have to nor should have to look at in the most granular context possible. The only reason you're trying to make it seem black or white is b/c you sorely want to make it seem as though defenses were equally if not more concerned about Hartline than the ground game. If a defense is cheating to stop the run, they're cheating to stop the run, period, regardless of whether or not they have 8 in the box and regardless of how black or white you try to make it. Obviously. And if a defense has one or both safeties playing shallow looking run, then that obviously factors into the numbers game. Otherwise what's the point? Why would a DC weaken his coverage and leave his corners on an island if the safeties creeping up or playing shallow have no bearing on run prevention like you're falsely intimating? Must be some dumb DCs I guess. That's equally as absurd. Like I already mentioned, they played their safeties out of the box as a direct result of being in Cover 2, which doesn't mean they can't focus on the run like I previously demonstrated. A defender doesn't have to be parallel to or shallower than the linebackers to aid run support. Seriously, how long do you think it takes a shallow playing 4.5 speed NFL safety who's prefocused on stopping the run to cover 10 or less yards in order to reach the back for minimal gain? Get real. The FS in the Indy clip isn't "in the box" but he's at a shallow enough depth to reach the LOS before our back does.
Seems to me that if the safeties were playing shallow and hugging the hashes in order to help out on our WRs they'd be ignoring that our WR group was one of if not the worst unit in the league. Secondly, look at the DBs, inside leverage. Why would they not be outside, funneling the WRs to their "help"? What's next, corners who back off when they have safety help over the top and press when they have safety help buzzing underneath?
Single coverage on Bess on a passing down vs a marginal CB. Yep, we were dumb to trade him to Cleveland.
Ahhhh, finally admitting the Hitman wasn't a priority even though he was a 1000 yard Pro Bowl Alternate receiver, eh? That aside, I don't follow the logic of your post. Let's run down some of the known variables here: a) Hartline & Bess were our primary receivers and accounted for 50% of our offense's targets. b) Hartline & Bess primarily played on the perimeter. c) Hartline & Bess primarily run sideline routes and seem better at such. d) We had a known rookie QB who was better and more comfortable with perimeter and out-breaking throws. e) 423 of our 484 pass attempts were to the left & right, with a whopping 257 (53%) to the sideline. f) only 61 pass attempts to the middle g) slot receiver position a non factor and rarely targeted h) TEs not heavily utilized in the passing game So, now why the heck would defenses be more concerned with jumping in-routes? That's garbage, man. Who were defenses supposed to be jumping in-routes on?- Slot receivers we rarely targeted? Tight ends who weren't heavily utilized in the passing game? An abundance of slants to Hartline & Bess that rarely occurred? Just how ill-prepared do you think defensive coordinators are? I'm smart enough to realize that jumping the in-routes came secondarily to aiding run support.
Except they're not cheating to stop the run. The FS is the force player. There are enough Miami blockers to put a hat on every Indy defender inside the box. The FS should be in the box. He is standing on the outside of the box. Miami had an advantage blocking if they chose to run. But they didn't run. Why? Probably because Reggie Bush consistently missed holes. The Colts would take their chances with the run and make sure tannehill couldn't throw in-routes. He's the force. He should be focused on the run. There is a full back and an inline TE. Its essentially the FS vs a RB. How in the world is a FS 10 yds off the LOS one on one vs. a RB considered a defense geared to stop the run? Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Hey now, let's be fair here; the safeties were up to shut down the hurricane of deadly slants that Hartline & Bess were about to unleash.
Defenses are geared toward stopping quarterbacks first. Ryan Tannehill was much better when defenders couldn't see his eyes. The good defenses knew this. Reggie Bush wasn't an efficient RB. Its why Lamar Miller was so successful. He'd come into the game and he'd see numbers advantages. Defenses wanted Miami to run if it gave them the opportunity to read tannehills eyes. That's why you saw cover 2. Let Reggie Bush break his one big run per day, but don't let the QB get comfortable throws. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
No, he shouldn't be standing in the box. What don't you understand about Cover 2? Because it's 2nd & 9, a known passing down, regardless of our offensive alignment. 10 yards off the LOS? Gimme a break. He's 7 yards and leaning forward. Indy gets the best of both worlds on this play b/c they get to remain in the coverage scheme they want while also playing the safeties up to aid in run support despite it being 2nd & long.
Every QB is better when defenders can't see his eyes but we don't see the safeties creeping up on Josh Freeman to see what he's doing. That's b/c Vincent Jackson & Mike Williams don't allow defenses to cheat like that. So you're saying Philbin & Sherman were cool with having defenses playing us exactly how they wanted rather than countering it and forcing them out of Cover 2? That's right, I almost forgot, you can't beat Cover 2 without the personnel at WR capable of doing so. Again, what do the safeties cheating up "reading Tannehill's" eyes as you put it have to do with a passing game that sends most of its targets wide of the hashmarks? They gonna get on their walkie-talkies and radio in to the corners? "Breaker breaker, we got a 10-9 on a 43 to Hartline, out". Maybe they need glasses if they can't read his eyes from normal depth. Totally not to be racist but it's not like we're talking about an Asian QB here.
Thr purpose of cover 2 is to make sure the WRs dont get the ball. You force teams out of cover 2 by running the ball. Again, the FS is the force player on this play. That pretty much precludes the defense from being geared to stop the run. Not to mention that the force player on the play isn't even in the box. Based on the defense Miami pretty much has an open hole for a 5 yd gain before the ball even snaps. This isn't a defense trying to stop the run. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
And there are plenty of QBs that don't let you read their eyes. There are even some that manipulate defenders with their eyes. You don't want defenders watching their eyes. Ryan Tannehills eye discipline is one of the few areas he can improve. But until he CCC move guys with his eyes, teams will prefer to play zone against him. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
I think it's funny anyone thinks THAT defensive alignment is set specifically to stop the run. I'm still not sure who is arguing what, but that is a defense cheating the safeties (obviously) to take away anything underneath wich naturally assists in stopping the run. The SS is giving BH a smidgen of deep respect while Bess is on an island. Our lack of a deep threat has handicapped this team the past few years. That's why for all his shortcomings trading Ted Ginn for a 5th was a bad move. Either way we have #11 now, so formations like that on 2nd and 9 will be awfully scarce.
LMAO. And that was on a on obvious passing down. Here's what it looked like on 1st and 10. And after Bess hit them up for a 1st down the safety is flying to the LOS pre snap... Is Zbikowski comin down to play the pass? And look at Bethea, not exactly in a position to play the "in routes" is he? And the next play Zbikowski's in the box again, manned up with Lane. Ah, now on 3rd and Long, Zbikowski is in fact cheating up to play the middle, while his DBs play man and Bethea plays over the top. But it doesn't work. Tanne hits Hartline on the shallow cross for the first. Notice how Long has gotten destroyed on the play. That's him next to JMart, still falling backwards. Freeney bulldozed Jake so fast that his momentum carried him past the QB and he missed out on the sack. That's either piss poor blocking or ingenious strategy by Jake. Now the Colts switch it up, they Show Zbikowksi as the box safety but Bethea creeps down late. Bush runs right for no gain. After an offsides penalty, Zbokowski is back in the box, Thomas runs left for 7. Now it really get's interesting. Miami goes 3 wide and Indy sends in their nickel back, but instead of taking out a DL or LB they take Zbikowski out of the game and keep their front 7 in tact. I think most people would interpret that as a tactic designed to better defend the run. Anyhow, JMart gets destroyed by Mathis, Tanne has room to step up but he doesn't and he pays for it. 2nd and 19. Zbikowski is back now, bailing late as the Colts play man across with a robber and a Safety deep middle. Fasano is semi open vs Bethea on the corner but Tanne leads him a little to far up field and towards the sideline, bringing up 3rd and 19. We didn't convert, obviously, and ended up with a FG.
hahaha, yeah that's really their purpose here. Look at it below. It's 2nd & long, the corners are in press leaving the defense vulnerable over the top, yet the safeties are only 7 and 10 yards deep. At least play us off-man if you're gonna have the safeties shallow, but no, Indy goes into full-on disrespect mode. What makes that even possible? A mediocre pair of receivers that don't scare anyone deep, that's what. yeah, it's 2nd & long and the TE is on the strong safety's side. That leaves the FS as the force player, and at 7 yards deep he's pretty much in the box. It's 2nd & long man, not 2nd & 1, and it was no secret that Miami only had 2 receivers all season so it wouldn't be a surprise in the least to see us pass from this formation on 2ND AND LONG. Question: what safety depth in Cover 2 is better for aiding the run? Normal depth?... or creeping up shallow?
What exactly are you arguing, the intention of one play, or that you actually don't believe safeties cheated on the run against us?
2nd series, Colts with a lead now but Zbikowski still in the box. Even deeper now. Aannnd, Tanne throws a laser guided bomb to Hartline for 35 yards. That'll show them not to cheat their safeties up!!! Or not. Zbikowski is right back in the box again on the next play. This time Hartline darts inside on a quick slant for another first down. On the next play, Zbikowski is in the box again. Bush runs for 3, and after a false start on Long it's 2nd and 12. Miami goes 3 wide and Indy goes...base defense. Tanne throws deep outside to Gaffney who draws a flag and at last Indy decides to play an honest defense. Zbikowski is out again, replaced by a CB. Miller runs right for 7. After a procedure penalty, it's 2nd and 8. Miami goes 3 wide again, Indy counters with a base defense again. Notice clay has a 1 on 1 with Pat Angerer. Tannehill hits Clay for a 31 yard TD.
FYI they're showing Cover 2 pre snap but it was actually Cover 3 or or Cover 1. 41 flies to the LOS and 28 bails to the deep middle. Either way they are making no effort to play these mysterious in breaking routes Stringer's talking about.
The Colts, the team you chose to look at, are a predominantly Cover 2 team, same as the Rams. And just like the Rams did, they broke tendency and went to a more aggressive, 8 in the box style defense. Only the Colts didn't have Finnegan and Jenkins, they had Vaughn and Powers who are inferior players. But they did it anyway. And even after they were burned repeatedly they continued to do it. This talk about continuing to play zone is nonsense, the exact opposite of what they were doing. Give it up already.
I don't see how you can say that without tracking snaps, when safeties in the box don't correlate that strictly with run defense measures. A safety closer to the line of scrimmage against Vikings is more significant in the context you're applying than it would be if Arizona was doing it. It's what some teams do, for others it's an adjustment.
The Colts aren't a cover-2 team anymore and the Rams had Quintin Mikell near the LOS more often than most(PFF has him 2nd highest percentage in the NFL)
I agree with you, and I consider the other factors, down-distance-score-tendency etc. The Rams and Colts were two teams that clearly broke tendency in order to play more aggressively. Houston began the game in a passive defense and quickly started dropping safeties after Bush gashed them repeatedly in the first quarter. Oakland tried to play it conservative and they gave up 263 yards rushing and Bush was well on his way to 100+ yds vs NY, with 61 in the first half. As a team Miami finished with 185 yds on the ground. So it's no surprise that Arizona, Cincy, STL, Indy, Buffalo etc all used an extra safety more often than not. And I don't think it was b/c they were overly concerned with in routes.
I've watched 8 Colts games in the last week or so and they're still primarily a 2 deep zone team. They got out of it vs run heavy teams, Miami, Cleveland, Tennessee, Minneosta, Jacksonville, they're not a team who can consistently hold up vs physical run games with 7 in the box and they seem to know it. If you want to believe PFF that's cool, I'm just telling you what I saw. Edit: Aside from putting a safety in the box, watch some Indy games and see how seldom they play press man with single high safety. Then watch the Miami game and see how they were playing us like they had Deion Sanders, Charles Woodson and Mel Blount at CB. Plus Ronnie Lott over the top.
