New Staff, New Players, 9 Chunk Plays (more than 20 yards allowed)

[TheRainMaker]

Hawkins had a really bad week 1. Scorekeepers have him down for giving up 92 yards and a 1 TD.

My whipping boy Carlton Davis did fine until the final drive where he gave up most of his yards.

With that said, the offense was once again good for a drive and then Maye forgets how to play QB. Defense can't hold down teams forever.

 

[stephens44]

Every play call works if it’s properly executed.
There are no play calls that say if we do everything right we will still fail.

Oh boy....

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Hawkins had a really bad week 1. Scorekeepers have him down for giving up 92 yards and a 1 TD.

My whipping boy Carlton Davis did fine until the final drive where he gave up most of his yards.

I agree, Hawkins was awful. Can't imagine Duggar or Mapu would be worse. Anyone would be better. Davis has to be better, and I think he will be, but I have no idea what Vrabel sees in Hawkins. Bad player evals are very worrying.

 

[Thelonious]

As with other positions, this is team rather early in a rebuild. Neither the schemes, nor the "culture," nor the necessary level of roster talent are in place. We seem to have a promising qb prospect. We seem to have a decent HC. We have a promising cb who might be unable to withstand the rigors of the pro game. We have a RB who caught our interest in camp. We have a LT who looks promisingly competent. That's about it. This is an improving team, but it is still not a very good one. I frankly don't know why anyone would expect it to be. This rebuild began at a very low point, after having been ill-lead by two failed head coaches, a failed GM, and a very sub-par front office generally. That's where we are.

 

[PatsFan2]

I agree, Hawkins was awful. Can't imagine Duggar or Mapu would be worse. Anyone would be better. Davis has to be better, and I think he will be, but I have no idea what Vrabel sees in Hawkins. Bad player evals are very worrying.

Any mistake against Hill or Waddle in that Gonzo less Secondary will lead to Six: plus Tua is flawless against us. Vrabel has his work cut out.

 

[Ring 6]

Can we compare Vrabel's defense to the one that gave up 41 points to a career back up in the Super Bowl? That bar is too high? Bill is gone. Stop wishing he was still here. This team will smash that bar.

Smash the bar of the greatest defensive mind of our generation? The bar of the team that win more than any other has?
Are you expecting that Vrabel or any other coach for that matter will never coach a team that plays poorly? Can we see Vrabel get to one SB before we compare him to one of the 9 that Belichick got to?

 

[Ring 6]

Oh boy....

Sorry if that’s over your head.

 

[PatsFan2]

The staff is all new. We know little about the secondary staff.

Davis-Austin-Jones-Hawkins- Woodson is certainly a new look secondary.
========
Was there miscommunication by staff? Were the players always sure where to be?
========
I don't expect this to be a continuing situation. Even a modest improvement would be important, noting, of course, that the Defense only gave up 20 points.

Other than Jones and Woodson it's not very good.

 

[stephens44]

Sorry if that’s over your head.

A wrong and simpleton remark didn't go over anyone's head. If you call the wrong play on defense and the players execute it flawlessly, they are most likely out of position. Understand? It's beyond me how you don't get that.
Cheers...

 

[Ring 6]

A wrong and simpleton remark didn't go over anyone's head. If you call the wrong play on defense and the players execute it flawlessly, they are most likely out of position. Understand? It's beyond me how you don't get that.
Cheers...

That’s just not true. There is no defensive call that is doomed if properly executed. Every defensive call involves every offensive player accounted for and every part of the field covered. That’s what play design is about.
But you have to call plays that can be executed. If you blitz and leave Jaylin Hawkins in man coverage you better have a blitzed that can execute the pressure and Hawkins better be able to cover the receiver. If they can the call works, if they can’t it does not.
The job of a coordinator isn’t to “call good plays” a play doesn’t exist if it isn’t good if executed properly. The job is to call plays that his players can execute. If they don’t it’s not the play it’s the execution.

Hopefully that explanation helps you overcome your simpleton outlook.

 

[PowerRunRevival]

That’s just not true. There is no defensive call that is doomed if properly executed. Every defensive call involves every offensive player accounted for and every part of the field covered. That’s what play design is about.
But you have to call plays that can be executed. If you blitz and leave Jaylin Hawkins in man coverage you better have a blitzed that can execute the pressure and Hawkins better be able to cover the receiver. If they can the call works, if they can’t it does not.
The job of a coordinator isn’t to “call good plays” a play doesn’t exist if it isn’t good if executed properly. The job is to call plays that his players can execute. If they don’t it’s not the play it’s the execution.

Hopefully that explanation helps you overcome your simpleton outlook.

If a team is in cover two Tampa zone and the offense calls a zone beater and the qb reads it correctly the defense won’t be able to execute because the offensive play is made to beat the defense you are in.

We can use a more obvious example. If a defense comes out in goaline and the the offense comes out in spread five wide. There are going to be open receivers regardless of how the defense execute.

“You have to call plays that can be executed” is the exact opposite of the argument you are making. If a defensive play can’t be executed against a certain offensive play it can’t be executed, so you are admitting in that sentence that every defensive play cannot be executed and thus won’t work if executed properly because it can’t be executed properly in every situation.

Football has always had counters to every play on offense or defense. Saying that a defense will work regardless of the offensive call if executed seems like something you would hear from a dc that consistently calls the wrong plays and won’t take responsibility…

 

[Ring 6]

If a team is in cover two Tampa zone and the offense calls a zone beater and the qb reads it correctly the defense won’t be able to execute because the offensive play is made to beat the defense you are in.

We can use a more obvious example. If a defense comes out in goaline and the the offense comes out in spread five wide. There are going to be open receivers regardless of how the defense execute.

“You have to call plays that can be executed” is the exact opposite of the argument you are making. If a defensive play can’t be executed against a certain offensive play it can’t be executed, so you are admitting in that sentence that every defensive play cannot be executed and thus won’t work if executed properly because it can’t be executed properly in every situation.

Football has always had counters to every play on offense or defense. Saying that a defense will work regardless of the offensive call if executed seems like something you would hear from a dc that consistently calls the wrong plays and won’t take responsibility…

That’s not correct. Sure every defense is more susceptible or less susceptible to some plays but a properly executed call will be successful.
What exactly are you saying a “zone beater” is? Which zone is it impossible to defend in cover2? If that were true, many defenses play cover2 all the time. Why doesn’t the offense just always call this magical play that can’t be stopped?

Have you ever seen a defense go in goal line against 5 wide? When the offense changes personnel the defense does too.

You have to call plays that you have players to execute.

If your corners are poor in man coverage and you run zero blitzes with rushers who aren’t good enough to get there, that’s a bad call. If you run zero blitzes with blitzes who execute and corners who cover it’s a good call. It’s he execution not the call, but the call needs to take into account whether you have the players to execute it.

When a defensive play is drawn up covering anything the offense does is part of the design. But if players don’t execute it won’t work. Just like offensively, if every block is made and every route run properly and the qb does the right thing the play will work.

 

[stephens44]

That’s not correct. Sure every defense is more susceptible or less susceptible to some plays but a properly executed call will be successful.
What exactly are you saying a “zone beater” is? Which zone is it impossible to defend in cover2? If that were true, many defenses play cover2 all the time. Why doesn’t the offense just always call this magical play that can’t be stopped?

Have you ever seen a defense go in goal line against 5 wide? When the offense changes personnel the defense does too.

You have to call plays that you have players to execute.

If your corners are poor in man coverage and you run zero blitzes with rushers who aren’t good enough to get there, that’s a bad call. If you run zero blitzes with blitzes who execute and corners who cover it’s a good call. It’s he execution not the call, but the call needs to take into account whether you have the players to execute it.

When a defensive play is drawn up covering anything the offense does is part of the design. But if players don’t execute it won’t work. Just like offensively, if every block is made and every route run properly and the qb does the right thing the play will work.

So what is the point of making pre-snap adjustments based on what the offense does? It's basically an audible to adjust because the play that was called would put players out of position to make a play. No?
Otherwise, if this is how you see thing, ok. I just can't get on the same page with you, where I come from if you call the wrong play you get burned. That's the chess match aspect of football and the coaches own it, not the players.
Cheers

 

[Ring 6]

So what is the point of making pre-snap adjustments based on what the offense does? It's basically an audible to adjust because the play that was called would put players out of position to make a play. No?
Otherwise, if this is how you see thing, ok. I just can't get on the same page with you, where I come from if you call the wrong play you get burned. That's the chess match aspect of football and the coaches own it, not the players.
Cheers

Audibles are part of a play call.
You are missing the point.