Today's post by NEInsider on ESPN board

[unoriginal]

Since I'm loathe to let an X and O's discussion die, and TripleOption is a little slow responding, I'll put down what I understand to be the theory about the sound way to play Cover 1/Man Free:

(1) All players have to play honest coverage and should not cheat/assume deep help, as that puts too much pressure on the deep help to "save" the whole field if multiple people break coverage. Even if only one coverage player jumps a certain route, asking the free safety to read defense coverage instead of/including QB eyes and WR route combos is suboptimal.

(2) The free safety needs to be stationed in the center of the field on pocket passes, and even with the QB if the pocket moves. CBs on the outside have more time to react to deep sideline passes, and are better pass defenders than the linebackers covering the middle of the field.

(3) The FS should be the deepest man on the field, and should not break until the ball is thrown. The FS is not there to help the CBs maintain coverage on the outside, the field is too wide. The FS is there to keep busted coverage on the outside from resulting in a TD, and to save linebackers from having to get over top of tight ends in the middle all the way down the field. Hence he should position himself conservatively, play downhill on the receiver in position to tackle. If he can separate the receiver from the ball, that's gravy.

At the NFL level especially I would expect a FS running sideline to sideline looking at QB eyes would not get much done; QBs could just look him away from a more desirable area to pass into. Most FS's - and this even includes Ed Reed - make their picks reading and jumping middle of field routes. In a playoff game against the Colts two years or so back, he picked off Manning twice on the deep sideline, but that was because Manning was getting hit and throwing up floaters. The CBs were in pretty close coverage there regardless.

 

[TripleOption]

Yeah , they don't just run out there and tell them what they are doing, but as this zone principle defense unfolds the FS has a choice to make which corner to help if the ball goes deep....... That's alright I'm just full of sh*T.... Your'e right about the whole defense thing and Hobbs is good, heck I like him either way. I'm going to go read my daughter a bedtime story she has'nt learned how to be defensive yet .

You're absolutely right. The CB knows he has help but if the FS screws up, he doesn't.

 

[TripleOption]

Teach her defensive back strategies instead. It'll pay off in the long run.

Perhaps tales of the mythical "Cover One where the FS isn't quite sure where he is going pre-snap..."

 

[TripleOption]

Since I'm loathe to let an X and O's discussion die, and TripleOption is a little slow responding, I'll put down what I understand to be the theory about the sound way to play Cover 1/Man Free:

(1) All players have to play honest coverage and should not cheat/assume deep help, as that puts too much pressure on the deep help to "save" the whole field if multiple people break coverage. Even if only one coverage player jumps a certain route, asking the free safety to read defense coverage instead of/including QB eyes and WR route combos is suboptimal.

(2) The free safety needs to be stationed in the center of the field on pocket passes, and even with the QB if the pocket moves. CBs on the outside have more time to react to deep sideline passes, and are better pass defenders than the linebackers covering the middle of the field.

(3) The FS should be the deepest man on the field, and should not break until the ball is thrown. The FS is not there to help the CBs maintain coverage on the outside, the field is too wide. The FS is there to keep busted coverage on the outside from resulting in a TD, and to save linebackers from having to get over top of tight ends in the middle all the way down the field. Hence he should position himself conservatively, play downhill on the receiver in position to tackle. If he can separate the receiver from the ball, that's gravy.

At the NFL level especially I would expect a FS running sideline to sideline looking at QB eyes would not get much done; QBs could just look him away from a more desirable area to pass into. Most FS's - and this even includes Ed Reed - make their picks reading and jumping middle of field routes. In a playoff game against the Colts two years or so back, he picked off Manning twice on the deep sideline, but that was because Manning was getting hit and throwing up floaters. The CBs were in pretty close coverage there regardless.

You've never heard of an NFL QB "looking off the Safety"?

Think the pass against the Steelers in the playoffs, Brady looked off Polumalu, drawing him to the Dig route and then threw Branch on the Post.

The biggest thing in Qb coaching these days is "MOFO/MOFC" replaing the old "Single high/Two high" read. If the MOFC then throw outside or look off the FS.

I would not be shocked if the Pats allow their CB's the freedom to gamble and expect the FS to pick up the slack.

 

[unoriginal]

Well, it's semantics but when in Cover 1 the FS should play the QB and flow where he thinks the QB is looking...but if a CB is beat deep it wouldn't be a bad idea to get over the top.

I agree with you, in that the "NEInsider"s post was semantically poor. Leaving other people to suss out just what the hell he's talking about, if anything. Also that if a FS notices a busted coverage he's never wrong to attend to it.

But if you were to take 4 members of a secondary, and explain the general scheme to them as the OP did, you'd have anarchy on the field. A free safety reading the corners and running from the middle of the field or his zone based primarily on that, a strong safety - possibly on a slot receiver - with no help whatsoever, linebackers covering tight ends all the way down the seams, and corners who (though you'd secretly like them to play the coverage called) have carte blanche to jump whatever they feel like, whenever, and let the problems trickle downfield.

The last one really doesn't ring true for me regarding the Pats, because I've always observed this to be a defensive that likes to keep stuff in front of them, and make the offense work it slowly into the red zone, then clamp them down.

 

[PYPER]

That sounds like High school... I am sure who gets doubled has alot more to do with what defense is called, strong side and motion responsibilities.....WAY too simple.

I disagree. Much of our offensive and defensive philosopohy entails a read & react component.

As fans we don't know which defense is called or what any one specific player's responsibilities are on each specific play.

The deciding TD in the SB is a prime example. Many fans criticized Hobbs on that play for getting beat when in reality he did exactly what he was supposed to do but another player missed on his assignment.

It's easy to blame a CB when he gets beaten but as the poster was attempting to point out, it's not always the corner's fault.

I think arguing the specifics of where the safeties lines up misses the point he was trying to make. Also keep in mind, BB likes to move players around pre-snap so that the QB thinks the coverage is doing one thing, when in fact they're doing something completely different.

 

[unoriginal]

You've never heard of an NFL QB "looking off the Safety"?

Think the pass against the Steelers in the playoffs, Brady looked off Polumalu, drawing him to the Dig route and then threw Branch on the Post.

The biggest thing in Qb coaching these days is "MOFO/MOFC" replaing the old "Single high/Two high" read. If the MOFC then throw outside or look off the FS.

I would not be shocked if the Pats allow their CB's the freedom to gamble and expect the FS to pick up the slack.

The "looking off of the safety" is exactly why I expect FS's to be taught to stay in the center of the field in vanilla Man. The outside passes to receivers covered by corners is harder than when the deep middle is open.

The rule I've most often heard was to follow the QB's eyes, but don't follow too far.

 

[alvinnf]

The deciding TD in the SB is a prime example. Many fans criticized Hobbs on that play for getting beat when in reality he did exactly what he was supposed to do but another player missed on his assignment.

Hobbs had no safety help, it worked the play before so they ran it again. I'm sure they figured the Giants would assume we would'nt leave him on an island two plays in a row, they did'nt make that assumption. Rest is history. Hobbs can play.... Who cares whether he's a one or a two or whatever, he's what we got so he's who I'll root for. Until he joins the Jest that is.

 

[ALP]

its obviously a fake....


but that doesnt mean its not interesting to read...

 

[Keegs]

Stop giving this fake the credit he needs to continue on. Enough is enough. Stop treating whatever he says as gospel.

why do you have such an issue with NEInsider?

I find his posts interesting but i'm not a huge fan, and I find this most recent post to be the worst one i've seen.

I just know that a ton of people on this board analyze things just like NEInsider and people are constantly posting links to other writers/fans talking about football.

What's wrong with one thread about NEInsider? i don't get it.

 

[Rob0729]

why do you have such an issue with NEInsider?

I find his posts interesting but i'm not a huge fan, and I find this most recent post to be the worst one i've seen.

I just know that a ton of people on this board analyze things just like NEInsider and people are constantly posting links to other writers/fans talking about football.

What's wrong with one thread about NEInsider? i don't get it.

I agree. I think NEInsider is bogus, but he/she does spur a lot of great discussions in the threads about him or her. Sometimes the most complete and utter BS is a great catalyst for good debates.

 

[Frezo]

The reason Ty Law was the best corner in the NFL for years is simple. He played the defense called perfectly and never guessed when it would affect the other corner despite the fact he was not that fast. He got his interceptions playing the defense correctly.

I always thought Law was a bit of a renegade that did not always play the defense as it was called. Am I misremembering?

 

[patchick]

I agree. I think NEInsider is bogus, but he/she does spur a lot of great discussions in the threads about him or her. Sometimes the most complete and utter BS is a great catalyst for good debates.

I'm with you. I just ignore the "insider" shtick; his posts are always on topic and generally spawn good discussions (like this thread!)

 

[TripleOption]

The deciding TD in the SB is a prime example. Many fans criticized Hobbs on that play for getting beat when in reality he did exactly what he was supposed to do but another player missed on his assignment.

Not exactly true. The DC blew his assignment. Pees sent heavy heat, and gambled that it would get there. Hobbs was covering a wide X, and especially on the goal line he had to honor an inside (Slant) fake. Adalius should have been splittling the difference between the EMOL and Plax. That would take away the inside move and allow Hobbs to play the Fade. As it was, Pees sent the house and stunted AD leaving a huge inside area for Hobbs to cover. Hobbs bit the Slant and Plax ran the easy fade for 6.

 

[JoePats]

Not exactly true. The DC blew his assignment. Pees sent heavy heat, and gambled that it would get there. Hobbs was covering a wide X, and especially on the goal line he had to honor an inside (Slant) fake. Adalius should have been splittling the difference between the EMOL and Plax. That would take away the inside move and allow Hobbs to play the Fade. As it was, Hobbs bit the Slant and Plax ran the easy fade for 6.

Right. It was basically a one on one situation against a top WR. He had to guess, he guessed wrong. It happens. I probably would have jumped the slant too, since even if he played back and it was a jump ball, he probably would have lost anyway, so might as well go for broke.

 

[TripleOption]

But if you were to take 4 members of a secondary, and explain the general scheme to them as the OP did, you'd have anarchy on the field. A free safety reading the corners and running from the middle of the field or his zone based primarily on that, a strong safety - possibly on a slot receiver - with no help whatsoever, linebackers covering tight ends all the way down the seams, and corners who (though you'd secretly like them to play the coverage called) have carte blanche to jump whatever they feel like, whenever, and let the problems trickle downfield.

Oh, I'd imagine it's a bit more defined than that. I KNOW the Pats run a "Trap" coverage, where the CB runs with the X like it's Man and then jumps the Quick Out while the Safety comes over the top to cover the deep receiver. I believe in the NFL it's called the "Tooke" Route, but basically it's Out/Streak. Everyone runs it, and if a team is a "heavy Tooke" team, they will use it. It was the route combo Asante got most of his Pick 6's on, including the Jags in the Playoffs 2 years ago. Watch it again, you can see Asante running with the #1 receiver, then planting and driving the Out as the Safety arrives. The QB gets a deep read and throws the under (Out) as the CB arrives to pick it. I'm not 100% certain of the "Tooke" tag, we just call it "Out" and the #1 knows to run a Streak.

 

[TripleOption]

Right. It was basically a one on one situation against a top WR. He had to guess, he guessed wrong. It happens. I probably would have jumped the slant too, since even if he played back and it was a jump ball, he probably would have lost anyway, so might as well go for broke.

He was in coachspeak "hosed." If the pressure didn't do the job, he was hung out to dry.

 

[arrellbee]

I'm not going to contribute much to this discussion - there are too many assertions and counter-assertions to try to sort out.

But I am considerably puzzled by comments from folks I know to be very astute and knowledgable that seem to be saying that the safeties are not reading keys after the ball is snapped and the receivers have started their routes. All kinds of discussions by such folks on this board deal with the complex read and react option defense schemes that the Patriots run. Read and react means after the action starts. I won't argue where the safety stands while he reads his keys. But I know for sure that the safeties don't have a rigidly fixed cover scheme - and that they ARE making choices AND one safety can't be in two places at the same time. I also know from countless personal observations that the safeties arrive many many times a step or two late - which means they had over the top coverage but must have been held up by some process of making a read of some key and got a late start. And I've certainly seen, Hobbs for example, play pretty decent man on man coverage and where he positions himself with the receiver during this type of coverage. So, since he obviously knows how to play this type of coverage, I can't see him 'forgetting' what he's supposed to do when he positions himself underneath the receiver - it sure seems like that is what he's supposed to be doing. So when a safety doesn't even show up at all in one of those cases, what was the safety doing other than 'deciding' that he was needed more supporting some other DB or LB (which obviously was the 'wrong' choice) ?? ?? ??

 

[emoney_33]

We need more threads that talk about the X's and O's. Techniques, schemes, strategies, responsibilities, in-depth football analysis.

I enjoy these type of talks far more than the usual stuff we get around here these days.

 

[Bill 4 Prez]

Yes, that was a horrible description of our defense, starting with the fact that it has been discussed for years that we do not play a strong safety and free safety but a left safety and right safety.
It is ludicrous to even beign to suggest that our defense requires a safety to stand in the middle of the field,and watch how both corners are aligned and covering their man before chossing which side to give help on.
That is simply impossible, because by the time he could make that decision, even assuming he COULD make that decision, the play would have developed so far that he would have no chance of getting to either side of the field.
Plus, it goes against every concept of defensive football in the world, to suggest that a corner may or may not have deep help, so he has to cover as if he does, but also as if he doesnt in case the safety decides he doesnt need it? How do you decide whether a corner who is expecting deep help needs it or not from the first 5-10 yards of coverage? By definition, the tighter his coverage the more he is expecting it.
Or a different way to read this is that the safety sits back and decides which corner is deciding to play his own defense instead of the one that is called, implying our corners just do what they want and our defensive calls are chaos.

This is one of the most obtuse posts I have ever read. The person writing either is goofing with people or can't even understand why what he made up is impossible to be accurate.

Have you not been watching the Pats or do you just not understand football, because everything he said of our system is 100% true. He may not be a true insider, but he knows about their system, which you can see from watching their games if you know the game.