Erik Frenz: Tannehill emerging from '12 rookie pack

You read my mind, I'm embarrassed to even be responding to some of this biased and slanted stupidity.

 

So you are seriously suggesting that the deep safety aligned 20 yards downfield is playing man coverage? Seriously? Which man is he covering?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

I think they should keep going at it until someone actually changes their opinion on the matter.

Should be the point of debate, right? I mean, its gone this far already, can't all be for naught. It'd be a new level of thephins absurd.

 

that made me laugh..

 

Dude- do you actually watch football? The Cornerback (that would be the guy on defense right in front of Hartline, at the top of the screen) is covering Hartline one on one as the Safety, the defender that we're focusing on here, is running away from Hartline and towards Wallace's side of the field. Notice his back turned to Hartline, his numbers staring you in the face, as he leaves the Cornerback to cover Hartline one on one. We'd all like to see video of the play, but that's what the still photo is showing. And you appear to be more than a little confused.

So to recap- CB on Hartline- man coverage. Safety that we're talking about- rotating to Wallace and I think Clay's side of the field. I hope that helps, try to watch some of the games this week.

 

plus the guys at the bottom are in tight, whereas Tannehill is the widest on the field.

 

We aren't talking about the guy on Hartline. We are talking about the deep safety. The deep safety is responsible for the deep zone. That is, he is playing zone. So his movement at the snap is not dictated by any particular player it is dictated by the contours of his zone.

Your snarkiness is unnecessary and, given the absurdity of your comments, laughable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

I think that you mean Hartline, who was left with a CB isolated in him at the top of the screen, everyone else cleared out as per this still shot. The bottom line is that Hartline was left 1 on 1 with the Safety running over to Wallace and I think Clay, 3 on 2 soon to be 4 on 2. If that isn't creating an opportunity for Hartline, I don't know what is. The question is, WHY is the Safety clearing out of the upper zone and leaving Hartline 1 on 1? Hmmm...

 

So I ask again, if you think the deep safety is covering a man as opposed to a zone, which man is it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

What's laughable is post #204, your words:

"So you are seriously suggesting that the deep safety aligned 20 yards downfield is playing man coverage? Seriously? Which man is he covering?"

The CB is playing man on Hartline, iso'd with no over the top Safety help, the Safety in question is vacating Hartline's zone and headed toward the zone where the real action is with Wallace and Clay- his movement certainly does seem to be dictated and headed towards where Wallace and Clay are- he's ignoring Hartline.

 

Found the play. Watching it in motion confirms that you are 100% wrong. That safety had the deep zone. Wallace started out wide on the right and then went in motion in tight. As he went in motion the safety slowly walked a few steps to his left, which is what the still pic we are talking about depicts. That safety then squared up with the LOS but never moved to the other side of that left hash. He stayed in that deep zone as Wallace slanted across the middle to catch a short pass and then came up to touch Wallace after he fell down.

In no way, shape or form did that safety leave Hartline's guy with no safety help nor was he man covering Wallace.

Truly laughable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

Here's the still pic from a second or two after the other showing the deep safety squared up to the LOS right at the left hash.



Clearly he is not running toward Wallace or away from Hartline. He is manning the deep zone and watching the QB and the field in front of him. Wallace is slanting across the middle but that safety is not charging after him. When the ball is thrown, of course, he moves up in support. But the notion that he was abandoning Hartline or running over to cover Wallace is an absolute joke.

 

Brilliant- Hartline is at the top left and the Safety is near the left hash mark with his back turned to Hartline- we've been going by what this still photo shows- if you have the video of the play, post it. Because in that still [hoto, what we've been discussing, not a whole lot of attention is being paid by that Safety to Hartline. So go ahead, post video of that play.

 

I can't post video from NFL Rewind. If it can be done (and I doubt it can) I don't know how. But I posted the still from a second or two later (i do know how to do a screen shot) and he is playing just as you would expect a safety covering the deep zone to play -- squared up the the LOS and watching the QB and the play unfold in front of him. He's certainly not running away from Hartline or abandoning his zone.

 

The still photo showed that the Safety was moving away from the area that Hartline was in and played deep middle- who was closer, that Safety to Hartline or the other Safety to Wallace? If Wallace was being double covered and the other Safety in question was playing deep middle, in that still sliding his coverage away from Hartline, when there was already a Safety in the vicinity of Wallace, it's pretty clear who was commanding more attention. The Safety was moving away from Hartline, not sure what your point is.

 

Please stop. The safety slowly walked three steps and then settled into his deep zone still closer to Hartline's side than Wallace's. He never went past that left hash. There was just one deep safety. The up guys were playing the short zones in the middle. Both Hartline and Wallace slanted across the middle and the defender in the middle moved up to pick up Hartline, which enabled Wallace to break open behind him. So if anything, Hartline drew more attention.

 

So that Safety was at midfield with Hartline out wide at the top of the screen, and the other Safety was a few yards away from Wallace. And the coverage was slanted to whom the time of the first photo? That's right, Wallace. If the deep Safety is just about equidistant to Wallace and Hartline and the up Safety is a few yards from Wallace- there you go.

 

Huh? The coverage wasn't slanted to anybody. And the up safety is just covering the short right zone. Doesn't matter if it's Wallace or anyone else. And the deep safety isn't quite at midfield he is at the left hash with Hartline on the left and makes no move to Wallace until after the ball is thrown to him. Nothing about that play shows any unusual respect for or attention to Wallace.

 

You done?

 

I think so. Unless you've got any other still photos that you want to suggest show defenders running away from other receivers to flock to Wallace.

 

Try calculating the average distance of the Safeties to both Hartline and Wallace and see what you get.

You've finished here about as well as you did when you said that Joe Haden is one of the NFL's slower Cornerbacks. Good one.

 

I have NONE. I think it's obvious that defenses look at Mike Wallace and Davone Bess the same from a game planning standpoint. I mean, there really isn't much difference in their game.

And all that coach speak just trying to apologize for Wallace...it's a damn shame, flat out lying to protect his ego. And how about those opposing CB's?? Boy do they think they are smart, talking Wallace up when it's obvious he isn't discussed in the game plan anymore than our other WRs, just trying to bait Tannehill into going to Wallace instead of Rishard Matthews.

I've seen the light, you have been spot on this whole time.

 

It's about the same distance from the safeties to Wallace and Hartline.

Not sure why people are so offended by the fact that Joe Haden isn't very fast for an NFL cornerback. He's a very good player, just not super fast.

 

If you've got something to show me to indicate that defenses are actually playing so differently, I'd love to see it.

 

Everything I have is either speculative or coach speak.

No concrete facts like you.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Ed Reed about Wallace:

more of that damn player speak eh Fineas?

 

Mike Mayock on Miami's 2012 offense:

All of that but it doesn't affect the coverage, improve QB production, or help create opportunities for others. You know more than Mayock, Fineas.

 

Haden plays whatever side the opponent's most dangerous WR lines up on. Once you acknowledge that we can move on.

 

better chance getting the govt to admit to UFOs, pappy.

 

Wrong, try again. The Safeties are closer to Wallace than they are to Hartline.

As to Joe Haden, the relevance, quite frankly, is that you don't know what you're talking about. You see a combine 40 of 4.52 and peg Haden as slow because you don't know any better (btw he ran a 4.42 at his pro day). Watch him play and you'll see why he covers the opponents' best receivers- he plays strikingly fast and dynamic. He's one of the best CBs in the game, and if you actually watched him play instead of spouting off some combine 40 stat you'd have a much better idea of what Joe Haden is all ab out as a football player. This is what happens when someone relies on stats and has no idea what they're talking about. Watch Haden play football, educate yourself before you spout off nonsense.

 

No that quote is more or less true. But that doesn't mean he is opening up anything for the other receivers. The defense has to keeps its eye on every receiver.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

Yes, we all know people say that. The question is whether it is really true or just conventional wisdom/old wives tale. I say it's the latter. I don't see anyone showing any real evidence to the contrary. Been liking at coaches tape of how defenses played us last year as compared to this year. There's no big difference. Safeties aren't playing deeper. Cushions aren't any bigger overall. And the numbers show no big effect. The modest improvement in the passing offense seems to be coming from Tannehill's development and Clay's development.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

I have watched Joe Haden play and have said repeatedly that he is a good corner. And yrs, I am aware that he ran faster at his Pro Day. I am also aware that Pro Day speeds are not truly comparable to Combine speeds, they are usually about a tenth of a second faster. That's why a lot of guys don't like to run at the Combine. So a 4.42 at a Pro Day is not especially fast for a CB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

Haden plays very fast- for anyone to watch him play and then say that he's one of the slower CBs in the game tells me that that person doesn't know what he's talking about, bottom line.

If you actually had some ideas or new ways of looking at things that made sense, that would be great. But what you're doing on this thread is spouting off idiocy. Watch Joe Haden play, he plays very fast. Watch a WR demand double coverage, it opens up opportunities for other offensive players.

At the end of the day, I think that you referring to Joe Haden as a "slower" Cornerback defines you- Stat happy, little common sense in terms of watching and understanding the game. Who deceived you, your eyes in watching Haden play or a stat line showing that Haden ran a 4.52 at the combine? Hmmm. Joe Haden ran a 4.55 at the combine and he was a heck of a lot faster than that. Sometimes players run slow combine 40 numbers, it happens. But if you've watched haden play and you still think that he's one of the league's "slower" Cornerbacks- you don't know what you're talking about.

ps First it was that Haden is a "slower" CB, now he's "not especially fast". Nice goal post moving.

 

Stay on point MrClean. This isn't about Joe Haden. It's about Wallace. The only reason Haden even came up was because the argument was being made that defenses always give Wallace giant cushions and have their safeties deep out of fear of Wallace's speed. I just got NFL Game Rewind and posted some screenshots to show it wasn't true. I started with the first few series of the first game of the year. Back when teams likely would have been most fearful of our going deep to our shiny new toy a lot (and before they would have realized we don't even do it all that much). I happened to be at that game and knew they gave no big cushion, often had no deep safety help and did nothing special to deal with Wallace. But confronted with that evidence the Wallace apologists argued that it doesn't count because they have Joe Haden. I said Haden is good but not super fast for a CB. He's certainly much slower than Mike Wallace. And lots of teams flip their CBs based on match ups, so even if Cleveland would have done that if we had ever moved Wallace to the other side, that is hardly some big Wallace Effect.

But if you think Haden or Cleveland is some kind of exception, I'll post pics of how other defenses have played up. What team would you like to see? What team isn't going to be declared an exception and cause this thread to be further derailed by discussion of how fast a particular CB is?

So


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

You said that Haden wasn't "super fast"? Wrong. You said that he was one of the slower CBs in the league. Want me to look it up for you, provide the exact post #?

The subject of Joe haden is particularly relevant to this thread for three reasons:

1. It shows that you don't really know what you're talking about.

2. It shows that you rely too much on stats like Joe Haden's combine 40 time because you don't really know what you're talking about.

3. It shows how you really like to move the goal posts on a discussion, shouright style. Haden is one of the league's slower Cornerbacks. Haden isn't super fast. Make up your mind and stop sliding and back tracking already.

 

40 times are the only objective measure of speed we have. We can all sit around and use different adjectives to describe various players' speed but use of 40 times is hardly unique or controversial. Nor is using Combine times because that is the only common track we have for comparing players. There are dozens of CBs who ran faster on that track than Haden did.

I am not the one moving the goalposts at at. I am trying to keep them on the subject -- Mike Wallace. I understand that you are probably a little embarrassed because you jumped to conclusions (and then kept beating that drum) based on that still photo from the Indy game that were easily proven to be completely wrong. Ridiculously wrong even. But let's keep the discussion about Mike Wallace and whether he causes defenses to contort their coverage schemes. So since Joe Haden is apparently so blindingly fast that the Browns are such a unique exception, what defense should we talk about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

I don't know why I keep coming back to this thread thinking when there are new posts they'll actually be about Tannehill.

 

Emabarrassed? You must be kidding. Again, see if you can calculate the Safeties' average distance to Wallace and compare that to their average distance to Hartline. It's clear as to which receiver was getting more attention.

As to Wallace- I've been at games in the Bess/Hartline years and seen opposing defenses creep in closer and closer. It was a given- Mike Mayock and others have pointed this out, but you choose to ignore that. Lack of offensive speed constricted everything on the field, if you had a clue as to what you're attempting to talk about you'd realize this.

The point is that you don't know what you're talking about. And it also looks like you can't help yourself from moving the goal posts- the latest example being your comment that "since "Joe Haden is apparently so blindingly fast"... No Fineas, no one is saying that but you. What you did say is that Joe Haden is one of the slower Cornerbacks in the league. And you said that because you rely on a combine 40 yard time stat and you don't really know what you're talking about. And as you said that you have actually watched him play, then you don't know what you're talking about or even looking at when you see it. And that's probably worse. Go back to your stat book, you're better off there.

 

Lol. You are talking about the distance of both safeties on that single play? I was talking about generally after looking at hundreds of coaches tape plays this year. On that play, the deep safety is the only relevant one. The one on the right side is covering a short zone. His position has nothing to do with any particular receiver it has to do with the location of his zone. The deep safety is equidistant from Wallace and Hartline.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free