Search titles only

Posted by Member:

Separate names with a comma.

Newer Than:

Search this thread only

Search this forum only

Display results as threads

More...

Useful Searches

Recent Posts

I just dont understand

Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by SupDawg, Nov 7, 2006.

Thread Status:: Not open for further replies.

Page 7 of 9

Vigsted Starter

5,774

702

479

TitanJeff said:

Help me with my history here but didn't Rolle always cover the opponent's #1 when he was with the Titans? I seem to remember that. So it isn't beyond Schwartz's reasoning to do this. Why isn't he doing it now? We can only speculate but I bet it has to do with the inexperience/skill of his CBs.

What is your solution if Schwartz thinks the corners don't have the experience/skill to line up other than one side or the other?
Click to expand...

If you could point to a single factor that would indicate a difference between playing left and right cornerback, sure I'd agree with you. But from what I'm seeing there's little to no difference as to what the left cornerback does as opposed to the right cornerback. There must be some other reason for not locking Pac on the best receiver.
And inexperience/skill doesn't fly either, I mean if your best corner isn't good enough to cover the receiver, what good does it do to let your second best corner cover him?

Space for rent...

#61 Vigsted, Nov 8, 2006
Sledge Guest

Gut said:

How come other teams stop the run with 'normal' size DT's in the 300lb range?

You contradict yourself by saying they are too small but then saying Jesse is a big dude but can't play.

So what IS the problem in your eyes?

Gut
Click to expand...

I'm not contradicting myself, Jesse is a big dude (as opposed to me) but not big enough for the DT position, or at least he doesn't have the necessary strength. Fact is he usually gets shoved aside and can only depend on arm tackling to try and stop the run. Not always, but usually. John Thornton, Fat Albert, Jamaal Williams, the guys I meantioned in my reply, guys like that are very good run stuffers. Robaire is one but is too inconsistent. We'll see what happens next week when Albert returns.

#62 Sledge, Nov 8, 2006
TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

30,461

11,489

1,769

Vigsted said:

Talent, especially on a football field, is not measureable as such, you can just see it, it's almost a gut feeling.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from but respectfully disagree. Gut feelings (sorry, Gut) only go so far in a sport where the goal is to win. At some point, you have to look at results. I think those that produce are more talented than those who don't if you look at talent as I do.

I actually have the perfect example from my own league where a guy came in off the streets (former soccer player) and immediately became a beast at runningback. He didn't have a clue about football, didn't know the rules, but he was just naturally gifted running with the football (tackling was not his strong suit though).
Click to expand...

Which you saw when he PERFORMED, right? Would you have thought him talented if he fell over his feet, hit the wrong holes, fumbled the ball?

By your definition, wouldn't LT be as talented as anyone on the team?

#63 TitanJeff, Nov 8, 2006
TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

30,461

11,489

1,769

Vigsted said:

If you could point to a single factor that would indicate a difference between playing left and right cornerback, sure I'd agree with you.
Click to expand...

I ran across this doing a search. It is from the Jags official site:

"What's the difference between right and left corner? The right corner is the 'squat' corner, which means he is often involved in zone coverage and will fall off into underneath coverage. The left corner must have greater man-to-man coverage skills. He has to be able to run all over the field with the receiver he's covering."

I hear DEs talking about playing one side or the other. You get used to moving in a certain motion and direction and it takes some adjustment to go to the other side as it did Roos moving from RT to LT.

When we are looking at CB, besides the above, it may also have to do with the support given by the FS. LT may slide over more to help out a struggling Hill which can put them in the position for double coverage where Pac, on the left side, has to handle whoever he covers on his own.

#64 TitanJeff, Nov 8, 2006
Vigsted Starter

5,774

702

479

TitanJeff said:

hit the wrong holes, fumbled the ball
Click to expand...

He did fumble and he did miss the holes he was supposed to run through, but his running, cutting, breaking tackles, etc. was already there, he only needed to learn to read the game properly and secure the football with both hands when in traffic.

#65 Vigsted, Nov 8, 2006
TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

30,461

11,489

1,769

Vigsted said:

He did fumble and he did miss the holes he was supposed to run through, but his running, cutting, breaking tackles, etc. was already there, he only needed to learn to read the game properly and secure the football with both hands when in traffic.
Click to expand...

And once he learned to do those things, would you say is was more, less or the same talent he was before he learned those thing?

#66 TitanJeff, Nov 8, 2006
bongo59 Starter

1,182

8

354

TitanJeff said:

Then tell me. How do you measure talent?
Click to expand...

talent is measured in the NFL by offseason workouts in college and the draft....................they are largely based upon numbers..................great football players are measured by one thing ................production married to outcome..................if they are not married the player is generally called talented but not elite............best example I can think of is Marino..................individual talent great but his outcomes were terrible over his career.................and then there are guys like Brady who had no measurables..............fell to the 6th round but his production to outcome is unparelleled for a 6th rounder...................there in lies the difference...............Scouts will tell you that is the reason Brady fell.............his individual talent measured the way we currently do..............was ordinary.........................few scouts are able to see a players worth in the right system...............some do...............best example of that...............Chrebet and Colston...................its anothe rreason you should value low round picks..................because when they hit your team gets a double dip of production for low cap value..................that usually leads to a long run................

Watch CJ........................and don't forget to get your Popcorn

#67 bongo59, Nov 8, 2006
Gunny Shoutbox Fuhrer

51,445

8,160

1,359

Gut said:

Commence Munching...

If you're nearly leading the league in tackles at your position, you have to be at least decent and more likely good. I feel KVB is a little less effective than last year for 2 reasons. First, people know him and will scheme that into their offense...chipping him with backs or double teaming him more. Secondly, with teams running so much against us he'll be playing more run first on the first 2 downs...meaning his pass rush will be less effective vs passes on first down especially. But that is a byproduct of how the d is playing.

I wasn't gonna go there though that is certainly a valid argument...but it's worse than that. First, we are playing TOO MUCH zone and giving an easy zone read pre-snap to the QB. When we're playing Dallas and it's 3rd and 5 and TO goes in motion...if no CB goes with him, you've just told the offense that the D is in zone...allowing the offense to dictate the matchup. Not only that, but the QB and WR both now know it's zone. Result...TO runs a crossing pattern and is wide open for a first down. Against most zones, LB's cover the middle of the short field so they've dictated that TO is working against our LB's...a big mismatch FOR them. An excellent DC would use a match up zone a lot..especially on key plays...which would see a CB run with TO in motion giving the QB a man to man read. However, at the snap, the CB now plays the zone position of his area on the field and the other players adjust accordingly. While the CB is not technically covering TO, the QB already has gotten a false pre-snap read and won't be able to tell the difference for the first .5-1.0 seconds. This is an obvious advantage to the D since the QB has a false read, may decide to look at a different WR as his primary because it's a man cover D (or so he thinks) and TO and other WR's may adjust their patterns because their reading man coverage initially. See how this helps the D?

We're not doing this or do it VERY infrequently. Also, when you're in a cover 2 D and they put 3 WR's to one side, you need to have a change built into the scheme because the 3 WR's can stretch the zone with 1 WR in the flat (draws up the CB), one WR breaking a short post to draw over the deep outside safety while the last WR breaks a deeper croner route which is successful because the deep safety has already been lured inside and is now out of position. Most good defenses adjust the defensive play when the offense tries to overload one side of the field. In response they overload the zone to that side of the field to take away this easy exploit. Not the Titans. Bad enough we allow this to happen in one game...worse is having the exact same thing done in the next game.

Of course, we can also point out the most obvious thing you alluded to. Since the Titans don't man up their corners, the Cowboys get to decide when they want Hill covering TO. Needless to say that either gives them a HUGE advantage or it forces the defense to adjust it's scheme to try and help Hill (put a S over top). In response, they overload the other side of the field. Now what do you do if you're Schwartz? Either remove the help from Hill to overload the strong side...or you allow the strong side zones to be stretched easily for big damage. The third alternative is to skew the LB coverage to that side and drop both the CB and S to that side deep (half field deep Quarters). But then you allow the TE, RB and TO to tear up the backside underneath areas. Schwartz tried several of these things and we got burned on a lot of them because he allows the offense to dictate the matchup and from that...they go to work. If instead, you matchup Pac on TO, they don't know if it's man or zone or blitz or what the D is doing because they can't dictate the worst matchup on the field and force the defense to protect it. Now, with Pac on TO, Hill on Glenn, ect., you don't know who's getting help, who isn't, when and everything is harder to read.

Remember when I said Schwartz was too predictable? This is what I'm talking about. Also, this is painfully obvious near the goal line where the O can put their biggest guy on Pac or matchup their best WR on Hill.

As mentioned above, placing them is part of coordinating a defense. If you're misaligned, it's hard to stop certain things. But formationally, there are strengths and weakness to each formation. When you look at your own player's strengths and weaknesses, you want to protect your weaknesses and force the offense into your strengths. We don't do this much. For example, if Starks can't handle a double team block, he should be lined up between the OC and OG where he's MOST LIKELY to get a double team block which will result in him being blown off the ball and the OG or OC (depending on the play) getting out to take out our MLB and poof...successful running play. If Starks is a good one gap DT, he should be playing a 3 technique (outside shoulder of the OG where he controls that gap). This is how you play players to their strengths and not place them in positions to fail. Similarly, if Sirmon is not great at taking on blockers, you need to try and protect him more by NOT penetrating the OL with your DT's...but rather have them control the 3 interior OL. I hope this is a simple enough example.

2 points here. The Colts are rather unique in that they don't really try to stop the run with their basic scheme. Instead, they try for maximum QB pressure. What this means is that their DE's rush straight up the field to put max pressure on playaction passes and any 5/7 step drops. This means that OT's can push the DE's by and then attack the OLB's (including Thornton). Thornton played very well in this D so obviously he must be able to shed blockers to some decent degree of skill or he would have been obliterated in that D. That's my point about Thornton. The second point is that the Scheme of that isn't to stop the run...but ours is and we're getting the same result...a terrible run D. But we're not having our DE's rush right up field to attack all passers on every play. If we did, we'd expect to have a decent pass D. To put that into context, the Colts are worst against the run, but 3rd in passing yards allowed and have given up about a 1:1 ratio of passing TD's to INT's. We are 14th in passing yards but have given up about a 3:1 ratio of TD's to INT's which translate to a huge difference in QB rating against us.

Point is...our scheme is not getting it done....either vs the pass or run.

But this IS the point. We have players gaining experience but they're not getting better. We have 3 options. First, the player is terrible and will never be decent. Second, the scheme is preventing the players from playing to their strengths. Third, the coaching is not teaching these players how to play. I can already here the argument that LT will never 'get it.' But what about Starks, LaBoy, Odom, Mahelona, Waddell, Woolfolk, Gardner, Lowry, Fuller, Reynolds, and Hill (to name a few)? Are all of these guys terrible players (if yes, Reese should have been fired long before this and if no, then you have to take a harsh look at the coaching and the scheme). I find it extremely unlikely that all the above players are busts! And at least 4 of those players were taken on the first day of the draft.

And one other thing. Ever notice how good defenses seem to have good role players and they are put in positions to play their roles...like a good pass rusher coming in and rushing the passer instead of having to take on a pulling OG to stop a running play? Outside of some creativity with our nickel back, we don't do this. And again, this harkens back to putting players into a position to utilize their strengths. If Bulluck has difficulty taking on blockers, how come we don't scheme around that?

The point is not who would take and start one of those players, but which of these teams already HAS one or more of these players but succeeds by keeping that weakness hidden as much as possible.

I'd say that Chicago has a couple of guys...Hillenmayer doesn't exactly scare me nor do either of their safeties Manning and Johnson. But they play good TEAM defense so these weaker players are not overly exposed. And that's not a middle of the pack D, but arguably the best D in the NFL. How about Leber and Smoot on Minnesota (top 7 in points allowed)? Or perhaps a better example are Bruschi and Junior Seau. Neither of those guys can really cover anymore...but you don't see that aspect of thier game being exposed.

I wouldn't fire Washburn over the contain thing because I don't know the exact defense called and whether to blame the scheme, the coaching, the players, or some combo. However, we do know the scheme against Denver was not designed to specifically stop the bootleg cause then LaBoy or whomever would be in Plummer's face all day. That didn't happen nor was LaBoy benched for not containing the bootleg. And we saw the same thing repeatedly in pre-season.

There were 3 things going for the Titans when Schwartz took over. First, we were maxed out on talent. Second, teams were afraid of our pass rush. Third, we had a culture on D of being excellent run stoppers. Over time, a few things changed. First, we lost accountability. Second, we moved to a more zone based scheme and lastly, we had a large personel turnover. The major players on D outside of Bulluck all left and with it...our dominance against the run. In the last couple of years, we had 2 more issues. First, Reese dumped salary...bye bye Rolle and Kevin Carter. Secondly, Schwartz is too predictable and people have caught on to what he likes to do and know they can outcoach him down the stretch. Also, without a dominant run D, the D is doubly exposed to the run and the pass. No one fears our run D nor our pass rush. No one fears our hardhitting because we don't hit that hard anymore. No one fears our 46 D because our scheme is more simple and easy to read than it is complex. And the guy calling the shots both is predictable and doesn't demand accountability.

I think that about covers it.

Gut
Click to expand...

You might wanna put in chapters.

Check out my photos

#68 Gunny, Nov 8, 2006
TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

30,461

11,489

1,769

bongo59 said:

talent is measured in the NFL by offseason workouts in college and the draft....................they are largely based upon numbers..................great football players are measured by one thing ................production married to outcome..................if they are not married the player is generally called talented but not elite............
Click to expand...

Would you call Brady talented? Would you call him more talented than David Carr or Joey Harrington?

#69 TitanJeff, Nov 8, 2006
avvie It's another cold day in Hell Tip Jar Donor

11,458

1,658

879

So long and thanks for all the fish

#70 avvie, Nov 8, 2006

Page 7 of 9

Thread Status:: Not open for further replies.

Search titles only

Posted by Member:

Separate names with a comma.

Newer Than:

Search this thread only

Search this forum only

Display results as threads

More...

Useful Searches

Recent Posts