Car@NE - Rewatch Thread

[luuked]

I'm not sure if this is man or zone.

Amazing post Tony. Lots to digest..

Not sure if you listened to Mayo on QuickSlants yet but I wouldnt even differentiate between pure man or zone anymore. As he said there are man concepts in zone and zone concepts in man depending on the situation.

 

[Tony2046]

Amazing post Tony. Lots to digest..

Not sure if you listened to Mayo on QuickSlants yet but I wouldnt even differentiate between pure man or zone anymore. As he said there are man concepts in zone and zone concepts in man depending on the situation.

I'm listening to it now. That was a great link to post. Thanks.

 

[NE-VT]

Amazing post Tony. Lots to digest..

Not sure if you listened to Mayo on QuickSlants yet but I wouldnt even differentiate between pure man or zone anymore. As he said there are man concepts in zone and zone concepts in man depending on the situation.

How I listened to that QuickSlants as well. It was an awesome link. Here is how I interpreted that comment from Mayo:

Even when in a M2M coverage, the passing off of M2M responsibilities can be zone like at times. Here is an example from Bowen again:



The CB with outside leverage takes the receiver in the bunch that ends up on the outside, not the one they are lined up against.



ITP Glossary: Banjo Coverage - Inside The Pylon

Similarly, the outside LBs in that cover 1 play were responsible for the first back out of the backfield to the weak or strong side (for weak or strong LB respectively).

Yet in all of these cases, we are still fundamentally talking about a man coverage. I still think the distinction holds up.

 

[luuked]

Yet in all of these cases, we are still fundamentally talking about a man coverage. I still think the distinction holds up.

Yes definitely.

I think what I was trying to say is that if you look for motions or other simplistic pre-snap signs to diagnose if the D is in zone or man then you will be as confused post snap as the QB who is facing them when they mix it up.

With some of the plays and how they change often on a dime due to just a single player winning their 1v1 (or falling down ect.) it is sometimes damn difficult to guess the correct coverage even post snap from all22.

 

[NE-VT]

I thought play 7 was an interesting because it might be an example of Mayo's "Zone with Man concepts.


I am pretty sure we are in cover 3 on this one: you can see it based on the 4 underneath defenders back-peddling and the underneath receiver, as well as how the slot DB passes off the slot receiver running the go route to Butler's deep third.

Yet as the play continues on you can start to see some more man concepts: Butler locks onto the slot receiver running the seam route. Gilmore does the same to the deepest threat to his side. Both slot DBs and the LBs eventually start to play close to the receiver in their zone.

It is too bad we gave so many yards on this, I thought the coverage was decent.

 

[luuked]

I thought play 7 was an interesting because it might be an example of Mayo's "Zone with Man concepts.


I am pretty sure we are in cover 3 on this one: you can see it based on the 4 underneath defenders back-peddling and the underneath receiver, as well as how the slot DB passes off the slot receiver running the go route to Butler's deep third.

Yet as the play continues on you can start to see some more man concepts: Butler locks onto the slot receiver running the seam route. Gilmore does the same to the deepest threat to his side. Both slot DBs and the LBs eventually start to play close to the receiver in their zone.

It is too bad we gave so many yards on this, I thought the coverage was decent.

Is DMac supposed to keep his eyes on the QB that long even after Roberts hands off ****son to him ? Him keeping his eyes downfield is the only reason ****son beat him out on that seam target.

 

[Tony2046]

I thought play 7 was an interesting because it might be an example of Mayo's "Zone with Man concepts.


I am pretty sure we are in cover 3 on this one: you can see it based on the 4 underneath defenders back-peddling and the underneath receiver, as well as how the slot DB passes off the slot receiver running the go route to Butler's deep third.

Yet as the play continues on you can start to see some more man concepts: Butler locks onto the slot receiver running the seam route. Gilmore does the same to the deepest threat to his side. Both slot DBs and the LBs eventually start to play close to the receiver in their zone.

It is too bad we gave so many yards on this, I thought the coverage was decent.

But the occasional big play is going to happen. I personally don't worry about those. If they had only gave up one less TD and not committed one dumb penalty this game is won by a TD. If they had fixed all of their major gaffs maybe it's a two TD win.

 

[Tony2046]

Is DMac supposed to keep his eyes on the QB that long even after Roberts hands off ****son to him ? Him keeping his eyes downfield is the only reason ****son beat him out on that seam target.

That's a great question. I kind of refer to it in my post but I saw a lot of staring at the QB when I think they would have been better suited staring at the receiver in their zone or vicinity.

 

[NE-VT]

Is DMac supposed to keep his eyes on the QB that long even after Roberts hands off ****son to him ? Him keeping his eyes downfield is the only reason ****son beat him out on that seam target.

If we are correct that he should have gone from zone into man, then yes I agree: he kept his eyes on the QB as if in remaining in zone for too long.

Another way to think about it is like this. It took him a bit too long to realize that letting ****son get behind him was going to overload Gilmore's zone. He needed to track the receiver out of his strict zone responsibility because Gilmore was occupied.

I know last week we started putting DMac in underneath coverage or TE M2M with Harmon as single high FS. I don't remember us doing that much last year, although I could be way off. IIRC, Harmon and DMac payed together more in cover 2 looks previously. DMac might feel more comfortable watching the QB in zone as a FS.

 

[NE-VT]

If they had only gave up one less TD

This is why I hope they just keep playing soft cover 3 zone in the short term. Accept that the opposing team is going to be able to get yards and try to stop them in the red zone.

I think we are hypothetically better in man coverage, but only once we figure out passing off of man responsibilities. We can't afford to give up TD's where a receiver is completely uncovered like we did vs. CAR. In a zone coverage someone will at least be in the area after the catch.