HoofHearted
-
Posts
983 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by HoofHearted
-
-
2 minutes ago, balln said:
in general you are right. But we have major season ending injuries at all 3 levels. OUR depth arguable is DL and secondary. So we need to play , god forbid, SOME of our rookies - slow development be damned. You cant tell me dorian who balled out vs usc (spread O) in a bowl game cant be COACHED up by our COACHES. AND as an off ball LB if that is the critical achilles heel of this D to give up the big play that loses us games - then our problem is the COACHES and player evaluators
Dorian will be fine - there's no reason to rush him into action though just because he was a 3rd round pick - especially when he's been out-performed by Dodson. He's a rookie! Learning an entirely new scheme, as complex as nfl defenses are, it's tough for anyone let alone a guy straight out of college. You can see he's being coached, he's just a step slow right now and that's mostly because he's still thinking within the scheme. As far as the importance of an off ball LB in our defense - it's freaking defense dude - you can't hide anyone. Eventually a weakness will be exposed. Coaches have all the time in the world to scheme up ways to attack individual players - and if you think they're not you're kidding yourself.
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, finn said:
I'm thinking that the Bills need to surprise the Bengals on both sides of the ball to avoid a blowout. The hurry-up pace Dorsey tried last week is encouraging. I hope they add more wrinkles. It's time to play loose, take some risks. Fake punts, QB runs, going on fourth down, power running, end arounds... This offense is thinking too much. They need to have fun--and stay one step ahead of the Bengals' excellent DC.
On defense, maybe replace Dodson with Rapp or Hamlin. Put Rousseau at tackle. Activate the physically talented Elam to erase Chase. Something to flumox an increasingly confident team with momentum.
But it's more likely that McDermott will want to stay conservative, kick field goals, play bend-don't-break ball, and hope for a close win. If he does, I predict a Bengals blowout.
Add more wrinkles to an offense that is already thinking too much?
McDermott has already shown his answer to Dodson's lack of athleticism - it's Poyer.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, balln said:
right - notice i said THEY cant even play him. I think Dorian can play and youll have to live and die by his play. But instead true to form these coaches and player evaluators ahve decided to play it safe and die a slow death w dodson. OR poyer at LB!
its crazy
So you want to keep playing the kid even if it's to the detriment of the team, and likely the kid as well? This is the NFL - one big play can lose you a game. Always play the more consistent player regardless of potential.
-
2 minutes ago, Big Turk said:
It looks like McD runs a lot of simulated pressures where you don't always know which 4 guys are coming and sometimes it's overloaded to one side and guys drop out from the other, or some combination of twists/stunts to confuse the OLine. You see a lot of guys at the line, but most times guys drop and only 4 actually rush.
Yeah, and it's stupid simple to get to. You can do this out of essentially any call by just making a "show" call. You want to be calculated in who shows though in order to take advantage of it (i.e. show overload pressure to one side - have the offense slide to it - then bring pressure from the opposite). Easier to do out of zones than man.
-
6 minutes ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:
Do you think it’s possible to do this and still bring unique pressures? From what I’ve seen and read, that Bengals OL has struggled not only in picking up pressures in pass pro, but has had difficult times blocking up front in the run game. Maybe we could see more simulated pressure looks that I initially thought? I would also be curious to see how we’d fair with some run stunts/blitzes to try and shake them up. I feel like it could play well for 91 and 97 if we get agressive at the DT position.
You can still run 5 man pressures and do it. Anything more you'd have to change coverages. As far as run stunts the goal is always to be able to just handle the run out of base to allow your backers to not be tied to gaps and flow. What'll change that philosophy for us is if we allow their OL to start working up to our second level - that's when you'll see us start to incorporate some run stunts.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:
What is the plan against Chase?
I'd imagine a very similar game plan as we had against Miami. Cloud him wherever he goes.
-
1
-
-
@Einstein Here's your 3x1 adjustments in Saban's Rip/Liz coverages straight from the playbook so you'll believe me. Against 3x1 the overhang to the single side has 4 out (the RB) to 1st crosser. So in the case of the play we saw from the Bills game Cook would have been the overhang's 4 out. The inside backer would have been the final three player and would have carried Diggs and the boundary corner would have punched high when 1 ran mesh because he is playing MOD. The corner would have picked up Shakir if it was in fact Cover 3. Since the overhang didn't pick up Cook and the backside inside backer didn't pick up the final 3 (plus all of the stuff I covered to the trips side in regards to them playing Special) we know they were not in a Cover 3 call.
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, HappyDays said:
What would you call that play with Dawkins moving to block to the right?
Dart
-
2 hours ago, Einstein said:
They’re already playing Cover 3 when rip/liz is called. It’s a call for pattern match. Pattern match often has the deep third boundary player coming down to cover an area for the sole reason that the pattern matched sky safety will take the man coverage into the now deserted area. If the pattern match safety takes the man crosser, and no one comes down, that entire area of the field is left open. They essentially switch. It’s nothing unique - it happens all the time. But I don’t want to continue arguing, since I doubt it’s interesting to anyone except the two of us and I think we would just go in circles. All I will say is that I agree to disagree with your interpretation.
.
I run the coverage you’re referring to and it’s not played the way you think it’s played. If you’d like we can go to PMs and I can teach it to you. Like I said I think you’re reading stuff and getting confused because everything that gets talked about in those aren’t diagramed.
-
57 minutes ago, Einstein said:
Well that’s definitely not true. It’s how pattern matching with Cover 3 works. It wouldn’t be possible if the boundary didn’t move to cover the flat, since the SS is moving to cover the boundaries original deep 3rd he abandoned on the man route. It becomes Mable with the SS. Saban defenses do this all the time.
Agree to disagree I guess. I don’t see any banjo here at all.
Think you’re getting confused by what you’re reading about Sabans Mable coverage. The backside overhang (the Safety in our scenario) would have back out to the flat if they were playing Cover 3 which is what I’ve been trying to get across to you. His rules are back out to first crosser if he doesn’t get anything coming out from the backfield.
@Einstein that highlighted part of the diagram you posted is referring to how they’d play stacked receivers and isn’t saying the Safety would be vertical it’s saying they’d play a true 3 zone coverage to it.
-
1
-
-
“Tackle Wrap” - lol cmon Joe!
-
4 minutes ago, Einstein said:
You’re right, but here is my hypothesis on why that is happening.
When the play first develops. He IS watching Cook and maintaining responsibility for the flat. If Allen throws it right now (pic below) to Cook, it’s the SS who is taking the flat tackle.
But as the play developers and Diggs crosses the field, the SS pattern matches and takes Diggs, while the weak side third comes down to cover the flat.
Which would basically be a Cover 3 Sky/Buzz with a pattern match, right?
No, if it's 3 the boundary corner would never come down to cover the flat. He'd be punching high and looking for the first deep crosser which he never even looks for. Based on everything I'm seeing - alignment, footwork, drops, etc. it's Special to the field and man backside and they're just playing banjo backside because of the condensed split by 1. Field Safety is responsible for the deep over by Shakir.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Just now, Einstein said:
Correct.
The strong safety comes down to cover the flat. Which is exactly what we are seeing in the Tampa scheme.
Except the strong side is flipped.
He's not covering the flat though - otherwise he'd be working out with cook. Instead he squares up to the field playing a Final 3 technique.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Einstein said:
I agree, this is not a banjo call.
Im sticking with my original assessment that this is some subtype of Cover 3, with my best guess being Sky (just look at the down safety).
Not sure what you're referring to by saying Cover 3 Sky - Sky is just a term used to say you're playing with Safety force. Can't be Cover 3 though unless field Safety, field overhang, Boundary Safety, and Boundary Corner were all wrong which I'd find incredibly hard to believe.
-
1 minute ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:
Any chance this shell is cover 6 and the boundary CB never gets back to his deep half? As @HoofHearted suggests the safety’s bail technique and the bailing field CB looks a bit like quarter quarter half
It’s a good initial assumption. The reason it can’t be 6 is because Winfield isn’t playing as a flat defender (which he’d have to be if it were 6). He doesn’t care about Cook working outside at all and instead only cares about the in-cut of 1 and getting his eyes across to the zone side to pick up the final 3.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Buffalo716 said:
Banjo usually has a soft and tight coverage to help pass the responsibility pre snap tho
Respectfully disagree.
-
2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
Without the pre snap look you can't 100% call it a banjo concept because the screenshot isn't showing a boundary corner pressed and one off
I haven't watched the game back but it's not showing pre snap looks but banjo would have one off and one press pre snap
These are all 3 seconds post snap
You don’t have to have anyone pressed to play banjo, however in this particular instance they do.
-
9 minutes ago, Beck Water said:
Who should have picked up Shakir?
Based on their alignments and footwork they're playing, what I call, Special to the field (Trips Concept where you man 1 and play Quarters between the overhang and safety), but the field Safety is working skate footwork (he thinks he's playing 2). The boundary is playing a banjo (man concept). Safety has first in and corner has first out from 1 & 2 weak. Since first in went shallow Safety drops it off to the zone side and takes eyes across the field and picks up the final 3 player man to man (Diggs). Corner has first out which ends up being Cook on this play. Long-winded explanation to say the Field Safety is the one who should have been covering Shakir.
-
1
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Beck Water said:
I think this is one of those plays where Allen was able to leverage the defense's awareness of his tendencies.
Here's the routes in progress. You're thinking one of the linebackers should pick up Shakir, who in this photo is almost to the 30 yd line on the far hashes. Diggs is running the crosser, on the 45 yd line hashes.
I don't know what to call the defense (where's @HoofHearted or @Buffalo716 to put me straight?), but it seems to me that the 4 defenders on or about the 30 yd line are some flavor of zone and 100% focused on Davis and Diggs, because 1) typically Shakir and Sherfield are just running clearing routes 2) Allen's tendencies are 100% to go to Diggs if he can, and Davis if he can't. I think the design of the defense here is to leave Shakir to the single deep safety, but maybe I'm wrong and the safety expects one of the backers to pick him up. This seems to me the sort of thing teams have been doing to choke off the middle of the field and take it away. I think the safety expects Shakir to continue upfield and not head for the far sideline and has an "awshit!" moment when he sees Shakir cut.
I could be wrong of course.
But the safety falls down and goes "boom", and Shakir (on the hashmarks near the 20) is so open that Allen just can't pass him up.
What's actually pretty cool about this play design is when both Davis and Diggs extend their crossing routes vertically, Diggs has both his guys beat AND the guy who is supposed to be containing Cook takes off after Diggs. So Allen has many targets, and just takes the deepest (and most open)
TB just blew the coverage on this.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, BillsUberAlles said:
I thought the breakdown of the RPO stuff was pretty fantastic and him showing the player being "read" or "put in conflict" so that he is always wrong because they just choose the other option based on what he does is kind of fascinating.
Yep. This is the whole premise behind the RPO and Option run game (which is almost every QB run scheme we have). It’s also why we have to run Gun.
-
2
-
-
If you haven’t watched this you need to (especially if you’re a “Dorsey sucks at play design” guy). He breaks down the RPO game I’ve been referencing all year as well as the mesh concept that everyone is complaining about spacing on. One thing I’d like to clarify from the video. What JT is calling “Access” on the RPO game is really just your man coverage beater. You see this a ton at the college and high school level where you essentially have three options based on what you’re seeing - the run, the pass option off of the run, or abort the whole thing and throw the man beater.
-
3
-
1
-
2
-
6
-
-
2 minutes ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:
For real.. I can see the criticism though because there’s no way for a viewer to know what benefit came from taking the timeout. But we’re def goin overboard with the pitchforks on this one. I’d kindly request people to turn them on not sneaking on short yardage situations/the goal line lol
This probably deserves its own thread too. There’s a big difference between the sneak in the open field and the sneak at the 1 yard line.
-
23 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:
Why don't you tell us? What is the % of successful defensive plays following a defensive timeout versus the normal non-timeout called play in that situation. There are situations where I think you call a timeout on defense but I think McDermott has turned this into a net negative with his over-use.
Tyrod Taylor and Baker Mayfield aren't Tom Brady. I want to keep the pressure on them with this defensive system that has been in place since 2017, not give them time to get composed and make the smart play to Mike Evans for a TD.
I don’t know. That’s why I was asking.
-
1 hour ago, boyst said:
exactly. anyone watching this and not realizing 13 seconds was a thing, the giants game was a thing, the hopkins pass was a thing... this team is prone exactly to this. it's an Achilles heel
13 seconds happened because we played the sidelines aggressively - did everyone forget that?
-
1
-
Week 9 thread - We’re on to Cincinnati
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Fixed it for you 😉