3rdand12 Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Thanks for the props, fellas. I'd be happy to start more threads like this if people are interested. I usually don't use the All-22 service unless a particular play comes to mind I want to rewatch, so this helps me feel like I'm getting my money's worth. Let me know if you guys have any requests in the weeks going forward. Even when we disagree, I truly enjoy these discussions. The board gets hard to read sometimes, and I'm glad there are those that are interested in having a conversation rather than an argument. What's funny to me is that I see I was guilty of a kind of confirmation bias. I used the same evidence to back up my gut, when that evidence actually isn't as convincing as it would seem. Bouncing my thoughts off of you guys helps us all see things in a broader perspective. Like I said upthread, I didn't want to beat this to death. It wasn't like that single play cost the Bills the game, and the Saints are really the ones who deserve credit, rather than the Bills failing to field a perfect defense. Looking forward to doing this again soon- let me know if I can be of service! Very good post and excellent dialogue. I bet Mr Hughes learned something Sunday against one of the best coach QB duos in the game . He sure ran like on fire when he realized his error ! Go Bills ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 by moving stills in motion the saints forced him to cover a WR and our defense to have to adjust on the fly. the play design was such that hopefully your LB can hang with anyone as long as the blitz worked, but hughes killed it biting on the play action destroying any of the layers built in to minimize damage. if he wouldve stayed with his man, worst (and short of an offensive mistake, probably also our best) case scenario shouldve been a nice first down play. If Hughes does not bite, he still gets beat down field. Byrd nor Gilmore recognized the play development. Hughes would pass off the WR to the deep patrol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 If Hughes does not bite, he still gets beat down field. Byrd nor Gilmore recognized the play development. Hughes would pass off the WR to the deep patrol. Looks like you "STILL" didn't get the memo: @ChrisBrownBills @_HATERNATION Afraid you're mistaken. Marrone & Hughes confirmed Hughes was to carry Stills all the way downfield. Got caught in bad call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Looks like you "STILL" didn't get the memo: @ChrisBrownBills @_HATERNATION Afraid you're mistaken. Marrone & Hughes confirmed Hughes was to carry Stills all the way downfield. Got caught in bad call. We've seen Manny Lawson do it in the same defense. There's no mystery. And I'm not convinced Hughes would have been smoked that badly, either. He gave Stills a running head start after making two misteps towards the backfield and was gaining ground. Like NoSaint said, Hughes probably would have limited him to a long gain for a first down and we could have lived to fight another day. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 We've seen Manny Lawson do it in the same defense. There's no mystery. And I'm not convinced Hughes would have been smoked that badly, either. He gave Stills a running head start after making two misteps towards the backfield and was gaining ground. Like NoSaint said, Hughes probably would have limited him to a long gain for a first down and we could have lived to fight another day. GO BILLS!!! As I said before, Hughes exacerbated an already flawed coverage concept with him isolated on a WR by peeking into the backfield. Hughes is not at all a cover LB and the Bills really missed Lawson in the Saints game not only because of this play, but also the next Brees TD to Graham where Hughes was beaten for the TD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 As I said before, Hughes exacerbated an already flawed coverage concept with him isolated on a WR by peeking into the backfield. Hughes is not at all a cover LB and the Bills really missed Lawson in the Saints game not only because of this play, but also the next Brees TD to Graham where Hughes was beaten for the TD. Yup - it became clear before even halftime how valuable Lawson is to pettine. Hopefully with a season and then full offseason in the system that Hughes can become a bit more reliable dropping back. Being a one dimensional player in a scheme that's looking for exotic packages doesn't work. Especially as a perimeter player. It'll be an interesting spot to keep an eye on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 This is Pettine defense. Coverages are mixed up with versatile players. It's exploited if you can't get to the QB. Saints clearly forced and capitalized on a match up, Byrd was late, rush was slow and Brees was great. There might be 3 QBs in the league that can make that throw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) This is Pettine defense. Coverages are mixed up with versatile players. It's exploited if you can't get to the QB. Saints clearly forced and capitalized on a match up, Byrd was late, rush was slow and Brees was great. There might be 3 QBs in the league that can make that throw. Wrong! Byrd wasn't responsible for Stills on that play. Stop making things up. Edited October 31, 2013 by 26CornerBlitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enlightener Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) it doesn't matter what hughes thought, knew , or did. Stills runs a 4.3, he would have beat him deep no matter what on that play. my only question...why did we draft Goodwin when stills is a foot taller and almost as fast. Edited October 31, 2013 by enlightener Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 it doesn't matter what hughes thought, knew , or did. Stills runs a 4.3, he would have beat him deep no matter what on that play. my only question...why did we draft Goodwin when stills is a foot taller and almost as fast. Wait.... What? You do realize stills is 6ft flat.... No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellDopeland Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 True story. When a coach makes a bad call, they deserve to lose their job. Never might the 90% of the time blitz are called with the same coverage that never give up a big play. For some reason, you probably were a person who would complain about the cover 2 and how it was not aggressive. Hindsight is the best. And props to the OP for a well thought out and designed thread. We need more of these. This is far from a "well thought out and designed thread". It's called beating a dead horse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Looks like you "STILL" didn't get the memo: @ChrisBrownBills @_HATERNATION Afraid you're mistaken. Marrone & Hughes confirmed Hughes was to carry Stills all the way downfield. Got caught in bad call. Ok...playing defense, you learn to adapt to a situation. There are times a DB breaks off his coverage to make an INT of a pass thrown to another receiver. Byrd, with the play in front of him, in still pic #3 sees there 2 WRs going deep. Gilmore takes his man that is cutting to the middle. Byrd, who has the deep patrol, elects to take the man coming to the middle. Thus, Stills is running free with a big cushion. As I said in my original post, it is a bad scheme to have a DE/LB cover a speedster WR. Hughes is not Lawson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Ok...playing defense, you learn to adapt to a situation. There are times a DB breaks off his coverage to make an INT of a pass thrown to another receiver. Byrd, with the play in front of him, in still pic #3 sees there 2 WRs going deep. Gilmore takes his man that is cutting to the middle. Byrd, who has the deep patrol, elects to take the man coming to the middle. Thus, Stills is running free with a big cushion. As I said in my original post, it is a bad scheme to have a DE/LB cover a speedster WR. Hughes is not Lawson. We certainly agree on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 why did the defense not adjust for the two receivers set to the left? McKelvin watched the whole play from the other side of the field zone or not there should have been an adjustment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 why did the defense not adjust for the two receivers set to the left? McKelvin watched the whole play from the other side of the field zone or not there should have been an adjustment. Because he was in a zone defense and if he completely abandoned that side of the field similarly awful things could've happened. The play wasn't designed to have him play man and follow the guy. In fact by not following they were likely hoping to disguise that Hughes was in man, causing a split second delay or bad throw treating it as gilmores zone instead of man coverage. Couple that with the pass rush and you start to see the ways that pettine was actually designing a play as opposed to everyone just blowing coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts