Thoughts about Mayo's reduced role in coverage

[BradyManny]

Through the first 3 weeks, Mayo had been in on nearly every snap. When Bruschi was taken off the field in coverage situations, Mayo remained on.

This changed for week 4. We saw a new dime package where Guyton was the only ILB on the field, not Mayo. I'll have to go back and look, but I also think that Guyton was the lone ILB on the field in the nickel package, 3-3-5, which had previously been the role of Mayo.

Just wanted to get some thoughts on that...is that due to Mayo's [undiscolsed] injury? Mayo's subpar play in coverage against Miami? Or was it just specific game planning, Belichick implementing a new package to confuse O'Sullivan and counteract Martz's pass happy offense? If it is that, does it still reflect on Mayo?

I'd like to hear what others think - personally, I thought Mayo was fine in coverage in the first two weeks, like other members of the middle of that defense, he had issues in the Miami game, but I'd be surprised if that was the reason for his reduced PT against San Fran.

 

[ScottieC]

Through the first 3 weeks, Mayo had been in on nearly every snap. When Bruschi was taken off the field in coverage situations, Mayo remained on.

This changed for week 4. We saw a new dime package where Guyton was the only ILB on the field, not Mayo. I'll have to go back and look, but I also think that Guyton was the lone ILB on the field in the nickel package, 3-3-5, which had previously been the role of Mayo.

Just wanted to get some thoughts on that...is that due to Mayo's [undiscolsed] injury? Mayo's subpar play in coverage against Miami? Or was it just specific game planning, Belichick implementing a new package to confuse O'Sullivan and counteract Martz's pass happy offense? If it is that, does it still reflect on Mayo?

I'd like to hear what others think - personally, I thought Mayo was fine in coverage in the first two weeks, like other members of the middle of that defense, he had issues in the Miami game, but I'd be surprised if that was the reason for his reduced PT against San Fran.

I think it was part of Bill's game plan - Multiple looks on defense. I don't think it had to do with the Miami game and his performance in that contest - If that was the case we would have gave the entire defense a reduced roll.

 

[BradyManny]

I think it was part of Bill's game plan - Multiple looks on defense. I don't think it had to do with the Miami game and his performance in that contest - If that was the case we would have gave the entire defense a reduced roll.

True, I'd tend to agree.

I also think that the injury to Tank has changed BB's plans a little and we saw that come out in Week 3. AD is good in coverage, but can't be asked to cover TEs in man all day. When Tank was part of the plans, I'm guessing AD was going to be asked to run around the field chasing TEs less. That injury had a ripple effect on the D, and everything they'd been working on since the start of camp had to adapt, and it's still a work in progess.

 

[Gwedd]

I am certain it was just part of the plan for the 49ers game. Coach has said on numerous times that packages and player's roles are adjusted based upon the game plan, and it makes perfect sense.

Respects,

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I didn't see both games. However, a rookie being on the field for every snap is not a real good idea.

The defense needs to be ready for Nov/Dec/Jan/Feb. We don't want Mayo exhausted when the "rookie wall" starts to kick in.

Besides, one would expect the younger guys to start to fit in.

 

[DefenseRules]

Keep in mind that Mayo was wearing a cast on his wrist/arm during the bye-week. That might have had something to do with it too.

 

[Kontradiction]

Keep in mind that Mayo was wearing a cast on his wrist/arm during the bye-week. That might have had something to do with it too.

I'd think that if that were truly the case, they would have taken Mayo out altogether instead of giving him reduced coverage responsibilities.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think it had more to do with Martz's refusal to run the ball when he doesn't want to, regardless of what package you have out there. I doubt that we'll continue to see a lot of that against other teams.

 

[DefenseRules]

I'd think that if that were truly the case, they would have taken Mayo out altogether instead of giving him reduced coverage responsibilities.

True. Like everyone has said, it was probably game plan related. I'm just thinking that they might have wanted to also be careful with him and limit his snaps. They've done that before.

 

[Rob0729]

Maybe Belichick is thinking he is overlaoding Mayo. He was on the field for virtually every snap during the first three games. He is going to burn out and hit the rookie wall if he continues to play that much.

It may not be a damnation of Mayo, but more of a testiment of how Guyton is coming along. Belichick likes to rotate players in and out to keep them fresh anyway.

I wouldn't read too much into it just yet. Wait a few games and see if it is a trend.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Through the first 3 weeks, Mayo had been in on nearly every snap. When Bruschi was taken off the field in coverage situations, Mayo remained on.

This changed for week 4. We saw a new dime package where Guyton was the only ILB on the field, not Mayo. I'll have to go back and look, but I also think that Guyton was the lone ILB on the field in the nickel package, 3-3-5, which had previously been the role of Mayo.

Just wanted to get some thoughts on that...is that due to Mayo's [undiscolsed] injury? Mayo's subpar play in coverage against Miami? Or was it just specific game planning, Belichick implementing a new package to confuse O'Sullivan and counteract Martz's pass happy offense? If it is that, does it still reflect on Mayo?

I'd like to hear what others think - personally, I thought Mayo was fine in coverage in the first two weeks, like other members of the middle of that defense, he had issues in the Miami game, but I'd be surprised if that was the reason for his reduced PT against San Fran.

I heard BB talking about Guyton in pretty glowing terms about how much he's learned and how hard he's worked... so I tend to look at this as Guyton earning the time rather than Mayo doing anything to lose a job

It's a long season and rookies are going to hit a wall at some point - best not to overuse Mayo strategically for that reason alone, especially if BB feels he's well versed as an all around LB already, no reason to tire him further.

 

[DefenseRules]

This is a nice problem to have, IMO. It's about time we had some young linebackers in our rotation. Now, if only we could add Crable to the mix.

 

[ALP]

damn guys...Mayo needs some rest at times too ya know

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Injuries aside, Mayo's game against Miami was horrible. I think BB sees an area that Guyton is clearly superior to Mayo and is using him in it.

I don't think has or will give up on Mayo, but at the same time, he has to get playmakers on the field and Guyton has abviously proven in practice that he can handle the complex coverage schemes.

 

[slash83]

Reiss brings up an excallent point here in his weekly mailbag in relation to this threads question...

Gary Guyton - and I think Guyton's combination of speed (he's the fastest linebacker) and sturdiness (he's a downhill MIKE linebacker) was the best fit to protect against potential running plays. I'd point out a second-and-8 play early in the fourth quarter when Guyton squared up and tackled dangerous 49ers running back Frank Gore on a 3-yard gain as a good example as to why he was in there with that mix of players.