HoofHearted

I'm at a total loss for why people thought this would be his week. Equally at a loss as to why people can't grasp that he is a boundary corner who doesn't play special teams. It's a numbers thing with him.

This is why most fan takes on Dorsey are garbage (this is a general statement, not an attack on you). Understanding the game is crucial. It's scramble drill my guy - it's not designed to do that. By design if the QB leaves the pocket receivers are taught to 1) abandon their route and work to the side of the field the QB escaped to and 2) if running something short - take it deep | if running something deep - come back to the ball. It was just lack of field awareness on Gabe's part - not an indictment on Dorsey.

Micah Hyde

What makes it super impressive to you? I’m just curious.

Sure. I've specifically been comparing last year to this year with the Edmunds/Bernard comparisons.

When they ran quarters, sure. They played far more 2/Tampa than anything else though.

Cover 1 does a good job of regurgitating football terms - not sure how much football they actually know though. 😉

His height was his biggest disadvantage in those situations. Those backs won the leverage battle more often than not because he had no bend and consistently played high.

You're taught to compress the back into the QB, if you get stalemated you're taught to be a low box player and essentially maintain the LoS so that if the QB steps up into the pocket you can work an escape to compress it at that point. Again, everything to do with the motion and where the bubble was.

Again it's like comparing apples to oranges. Edmunds did a lot of really good things vs the run that go unnoticed. Basically every big run was blamed on him by people who don't know what they're looking at. As far as pass game is concerned, he was never asked to be as active as Bernard is being asked to be because it wasn't his skill set, but his impact in coverage was definitely felt. It just didn't put him in positions to make those impact plays as often. Tremaine wasn't a dud like many here think he was, but certainly isn't worth the contract he got.

@JayBaller10 read this regarding Edmunds taking on backs in his blitz path.

Has nothing to do with them calling out Milano as the Mike and everything to do with the motion and recognizing where the bubble is. Still impressive - shows he's locked in on film study and tendencies based on formations. Tremaine wasn't good at it. The vast majority of times Edmunds blitzed was because we were in man coverage and the back stayed in the protection which adds him into the rush. Additionally, it forces his rush path to be through the back (to protect vs screens) which made it look like he was just running into blockers to people who didn't understand the situation.

I don't think it implies Edmunds was misused. The two players are not the same. They each have different skill sets. Neither would have much success in the others roles because they lack the ability to be great at that specific scheme. If anything I think it speaks volumes of our defensive scheme and coaching staff to recognize what their players can and can't do well and put them in positions to be successful.

Elam is a boundary corner who doesn't play special teams - our current boundary corner? Tre White. I think it's more a numbers deal than anything else at this point.

Partly, yes. They are two completely different players. For as athletic as everyone touts Edmunds to be - he wasn't very twitchy and couldn't play man coverage. He was big and fast running in a straight line and they used him that way. He was essentially a MoF Safety when we played 2 and played everything underneath top/down. Bernard is more in line with Milano as far as twitch and bend - being able to get around blocks without having to engage and still being able to re-stack the gap - and being able to play man coverage or man principles in zone match coverages. Its comparing apples to oranges really.

I mean they are being used differently. We played a way more 2 under Frazier where Edmunds was a true zone Tampa 2 dropper. This year under McDermott we're primarily playing 1 and 3 with a little 6 rolled in and we're pattern matching more than we ever have in the past (playing more man principles out of our zone coverages).

I still don't know what you mean by this. Corners won't chase crossers in 2. I assume we'll likely Cloud whichever side Tyreek is on and play Quarters to the other when we want to sit in coverage. If they get into 3x1 sets with Tyreek at 2 or 3 we'll likely lock our Corner on #1 and play Cloud to the interior two receivers. This guarantees we always have help over the top on him. If we want to bring 5 man pressures we'll roll 3. I don't see us playing much man outside of the redzone unless we're in 2 Man.

Speaking to your specific scenario of running something similar to the box and 1 concept - it's not something that can be done all game long. Generally speaking in regards to football coverages there are multiple ways to be able to man a receiver out of zone coverages that don't involve pulling a player out of the front. Hope that clears things up for you.

It is specifically cover 4. We've also run variations of match 3 quite a bit.

No doubt. You'd be playing with a light box and would have to completely change the way we fit things to accommodate the missing body. You'd basically have to end up playing it like a 3-3 stack. Not just palms, there's pattern match variations of every coverage.

The top quote is referring to the OPs box and 1 comment. That is not done all the time. The second quote is referring to being able to play man in zone concepts other than the two man situation which you suggested. It's done all the time.

It's done all the time.

Yes, basically every zone concept has scenarios where you will end up being man on a receiver. None of these situations are anything like what you are trying to compare to the box and 1 in basketball. It is possible to replicate the concept though, but you have to lose a guy somewhere else (defensive line) in order to do it.

The mesh still holds the backers - it's the same concept.

You can do all of the bolded out of gun.