Jets @ Pats all-22 rewatch thread

[PP2]

 

[Mike the Brit]

"Jets ran a lot of inverted cover-2. Looks like post safety but becomes two-high after the snap."

Could anyone explain what "inverted cover-2" is, please?

 

[PP2]

"Jets ran a lot of inverted cover-2. Looks like post safety but becomes two-high after the snap."

Could anyone explain what "inverted cover-2" is, please?

As opposed to a regular cover 2, you're dropping the FS (often into the robber role), rather than backing up the MLB. Against the run, he becomes the 9th man in the box.

So the two CBs actually drop back to cover the deep part of the field, not the safeties, hence the "inverted" aspect of the cover 2.

 

[slam]

"Jets ran a lot of inverted cover-2. Looks like post safety but becomes two-high after the snap."

Could anyone explain what "inverted cover-2" is, please?

From context it seems like a play in which they line up and show a single high safety but after the snap another DP drops deep and it's a Cover-2.

 

[captain stone]

Izzo's a penalty waiting to happen whenever he's on the field...he should've been flagged for grabbing the facemask at the end of his run...dumbass.

 

[p8ryts]

Saw this as well. Don't know why they keep having him going IZ unless they're setting it up for a key game, i.e., selling a fake tendency.

IZ?

 

[p8ryts]

at least not without Develin as a lead block

Yes, I thought last year's success was in part due to heavy use of the FB. Didn't use it at all. If Jakob isn't going to play why is he on the roster. Pound the rock=FB.

 

[p8ryts]

Are we telegraphing our run plays? Plays with motion tend to follow the motion man?

yes but mostly because we never throw the ball to Michel.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

"Jets ran a lot of inverted cover-2. Looks like post safety but becomes two-high after the snap."

Could anyone explain what "inverted cover-2" is, please?

C2 Invert is a good way to combat 21 (us in video) 12 & 22. In the simplest terms S & CB are switching tasks.
One way you can attack traditional C2 is along the sidelines & seemingly this helps take that away bc CBS usually play w outside leverage. Again a DC wants to get his S involved/helping in the running game, we're in 21.
You can kinda see him creeping down a little, very subtle but another giveaway is the cushion our outside man is getting. Most likely the defender would be a lot closer in press. NYJ have used this a bunch in the past w variations of C2 on back side, C3 play side.

It basically highlights Adams & his role. You need/want a guy like him, just really good all around (box) defender that can play both run/pass.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

IZ?

Inside Zone

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Are we telegraphing our run plays? Plays with motion tend to follow the motion man?

Usually it's an indicater for the defense

 

[PP2]

IZ?

Inside Zone runs. In contrast to outside zone, the linemen block inside-out to try and create a path in the middle of the defense, presumably because the defense is going sideline to sideline to stop outside plays.

 

[Tunescribe]

@KontradictioN, the below clip is what you were referencing:

I wish Izzo had done more to avoid that open-field tackle; at least try making a move on the guy. Gronk likely would've scored on that play.

 

[Sicilian]

I wish Izzo had done more to avoid that open-field tackle; at least try making a move on the guy. Gronk likely would've scored on that play.

Not that I disagree that Izzo could have done more, but we really should be careful when evaluating tight ends by comparing them to what Gronk would have done. If it were that easy to be Gronk, we never would have noticed him.

 

[Tunescribe]

Not that I disagree that Izzo could have done more, but we really should be careful when evaluating tight ends by comparing them to what Gronk would have done. If it were that easy to be Gronk, we never would have noticed him.

I'm not expecting Izzo or any other tight end to "be" Gronk-like, just reminiscing a bit.

 

[PP2]

Not that I disagree that Izzo could have done more, but we really should be careful when evaluating tight ends by comparing them to what Gronk would have done. If it were that easy to be Gronk, we never would have noticed him.

Gronk leaves behind huge shoes to fill- probably too big, so any player who is seen as taking his place is never going to be good enough, and will get roasted.

But that's nothing compared to what's going to happen to the poor soul that's going to replace Brady.

 

[captain stone]

C2 Invert is a good way to combat 21 (us in video) 12 & 22. In the simplest terms S & CB are switching tasks.
One way you can attack traditional C2 is along the sidelines & seemingly this helps take that away bc CBS usually play w outside leverage. Again a DC wants to get his S involved/helping in the running game, we're in 21.
You can kinda see him creeping down a little, very subtle but another giveaway is the cushion our outside man is getting. Most likely the defender would be a lot closer in press. NYJ have used this a bunch in the past w variations of C2 on back side, C3 play side.

It basically highlights Adams & his role. You need/want a guy like him, just really good all around (box) defender that can play both run/pass.

Is that kinda what Bill used in the 2003 AFCC vs Dungheap & Horse-Face, when Rodney played closer to the LOS while Law played further back to get a better look at PayaTon's eyes?

 

[mgteich]

For passing plays that are the most "Gronk-like", look to Gordon.

For running plays that are the most "Gronk-like", there is no one, and will likely never be anyone that compares.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Is that kinda what Bill used in the 2003 AFCC vs Dungheap & Horse-Face, when Rodney played closer to the LOS while Law played further back to get a better look at PayaTon's eyes?

Sorry was at work.
If I remember correctly thats the game Bill moved the DL around a lil bit to having only 2 DL w 2 LBs standing up beside them? Heavy press/nickel.

I was one of those weirdos calling Gillette asking for A22 before it became popular unfortunately they dont go that far back to go through it.

 

[patfanken]

Looking at the screen shot of the Gordon catch over the middle, the first thing I thought about was the 3 deep, "moster" coverage I ran 40 odd years ago, though I did it from a 5-2 front (3-4 in today's lingo ) Very effective if you have a good Monster and single high S. Back then we mostly saw QB's setting up behind one OT or another which allowed you to do a lot of rotation calls in the secondary to either the formation, motion or QB set up. Hard to do that with today's offenses.

Mostly we see safeties "invert" either before or after the snap to move to a team's strength or to try and fool them.

General point. The real key to playing secondary is having everyone working smoothly together. (on the same page in today's lingo ) I'd bet if you took the best 5 DB's at their positions and put them on the field together, they wouldn't be as effective as the Pats secondary for THAT reason, and it would STAY that way for at least several games. What we have here has taken a couple of years to develop' Just sayin'