Thoughts on OSU game

[SeattleHawkeye]

Cover 3, cover 2, quarters, does it really matter? It looks like mass confusion at times back there, and I'm certain all DBs and LBs have been responsible at one point or another. It makes me wonder how truly valuable guys like Edds and Angerer were in keeping the D organized and motivated???

Sat. it repeatedly looked like a clusterF back there, in particular on the numerous deep throws. What sucks is the only reason it really matters is assigning blame, but that's part of the game. When there's a breakdown you need to know who screwed up, and theoretically see if changes need to be made.

 

[sergeanthulka]

Sorry, but you're just wrong. I'm almost 100% certain they play cover 2 more than any other scheme. And there's an easy way to settle it - watch the games and pay attention to DB play. If the CB's are in the flats (under ~15 yds) it's cover 2, and if Sash is in a flat it's most often cover 3 (Hyde and Prater outside 1/3's and Greenwood middle 1/3). Greenwood is pretty much always either deep 1/2 or deep middle 1/3, which is why you don't hear much about him making many tackles. (The other reason you hear so little about Greenwood is b/c he's almost always in his proper zone and doesn't blow coverages.) IA almost always plays 2 deep, 5 under or 3 deep, 4 under. The thing is the CB's often play deeper in their flat coverages, so they give up the under stuff much of the game.

Think about it schematically - if they were always in quarters coverage, that would be only the 3 LB's underneath. Any pass D scheme designed in that manner is destined to fail (unless it's a Hail Mary situation). And in cover 2 the CB's may run deeper w/ WR's, but that's just dropping into coverage in their deeper flat zones (up to ~15 yds), not playing a deep 1/4. DB's are also trained to react and run to the ball as soon as it's in the air, so on any deep throws they'll be moving and if the ball hangs up long enough they'll chase it to make it look like they're in different coverages - think the late dropped OSU deep ball Sat. Greenwood and Prater end up about as close to Posey as Sash did, who should've been in that coverage.

And I'm equally certain that you're wrong.

And you're easy way to settle it analogy is 100% wrong, imo. If we were in cover 2, there would be virtually no reason for the to play so deep in their flat coverages. The reason they play so 'deep in their flat coverages' is because they have primary over-the-top responsibility for their quarter of the field. Which, incidentally, is why Northwestern throws 8 yard sideline routes on us all day. If we were in cover 2 those routes wouldn't be so readily available because the corners could play more aggressively - knowing that they have help over the top.

And playing so much cover 2 wouldn't explain why Sash is getting beat, at times, on play action. Cover 3 would explain it...because he has 'in the box' responsibilties there...

 

[HawkDad]

Having said that, I would like to see the Hawks play to win rather than not to lose, especially in these big games. Last year in Columbus we had tOSU on their heels and we chose to take a knee and let them regroup for OT. It was the same with Wiscy and tOSU this year. Just don't lose on a mistake because we were "going fot it."

Go for it already!! Take the beat down to them them instead of waiting for them to serve it up to us!

Magic, you nailed it on the head!! In fact, I started yelling for them to "quit trying not to lose and go for the win" about the end of the 3rd quarter/4th quarter.

 

[tubahawk]

I thought I saw Prater get beat deep three times against OSU. (One of them being the dropped TD pass in the 4th quarter.

Regardless, here is my frustration. If we are playing a defensive style that sacrafices giving up the short gains (and at some other time I'll get into how 7-10 yrds is not short gains) in order to make sure we avoid the big play deep, how in the world are other teams WRs getting behind our coverage that often?

 

[SeattleHawkeye]

And I'm equally certain that you're wrong.

And you're easy way to settle it analogy is 100% wrong, imo. If we were in cover 2, there would be virtually no reason for the to play so deep in their flat coverages. The reason they play so 'deep in their flat coverages' is because they have primary over-the-top responsibility for their quarter of the field. Which, incidentally, is why Northwestern throws 8 yard sideline routes on us all day. If we were in cover 2 those routes wouldn't be so readily available because the corners could play more aggressively - knowing that they have help over the top.

And playing so much cover 2 wouldn't explain why Sash is getting beat, at times, on play action. Cover 3 would explain it...because he has 'in the box' responsibilties there...

You don't know your elbow from your ******* when it comes to pass defense, namely DB play. NW throws short routes b/c that is what this D is schemed to give up. The CB's can start a play off ~5-8 yds and take 2-3 steps up and bump or sit and wait for the outside WR's, bumping them inside, then drop, sinking into their zones, usually 10-15 yds deep. In playing zone coverages there are natural gaps between the various levels, namely the flat / underneath zones and the deeper 1/2 or 1/3 zones, and specifically on the outside just beyond the CB's / flat zones in front of the deep 1/2 zones. You may think the CB's are in deep 1/4's, but they're just sinking into their flat zones w/ WR's b/c that is the natural gap a 2-deep zone creates. And FYI, it makes sense for IA to play cover 2 b/c theoretically this DL is supposed to be able to get QB pressure faster. (The correlation is that if your DL is going to get to the QB faster, offenses will scheme to throw shorter, quicker routes...so you should put 5 under instead of playing 3 deep and 4 under. This is why after the IU game and wk of the NW game some of us commented on moving the CB's to shorten their cushions to not give up the underneath stuff as much.)

And Sash gets beat in cover 2 b/c he sucks up on PA fakes or jumps shorter routes. It's very, very simple. He did exactly that on Sat. on the deep ball that was dropped - I'm almost certain it was Sanzenbacher that ran a shorter route right in front of him and he jumped it, not recognizing Posey was heading up the sidelines wide open. And Sash very seldom plays "in the box" in cover 3, which that comment makes zero sense. "In the box" refers to the LB to tackle area ~3-5 on both sides of the LoS. There isn't an "in the box" zone in cover 3. Sash almost always has flat responsibility in cover 3. If you mean Sash has more of a LB underneath zone, that means 2 LB's are in the flats, which I've never seen IA run. If you knew as much as you thought you did about DB play this would be elementary, but b/c you don't, you're talking out your ***, arguing something that you don't know what you're talking about. I'm guessing you're also the type of fan that sees a WR running open and assumes the closest DB is the one that was beaten on the coverage, when many times that isn't the case. (And FYI, I know this from playing DB in college, 2 at CB and 2 at FS. That by no means makes me an expert, but I'm guessing it's more experience than you. That said, what is your experience level, b/c I'd love to know where you're getting this genius you're spewing?)

 

[SeattleHawkeye]

I thought I saw Prater get beat deep three times against OSU. (One of them being the dropped TD pass in the 4th quarter.

Regardless, here is my frustration. If we are playing a defensive style that sacrafices giving up the short gains (and at some other time I'll get into how 7-10 yrds is not short gains) in order to make sure we avoid the big play deep, how in the world are other teams WRs getting behind our coverage that often?

Prater looked like he was beat deep b/c he likely saw Sash jump the shorter route Sanzenbacher (I think) ran. Prater then instinctively takes off running trying to chase Posey down, making it look as though he blew the coverage...when it was actually Sash.

How these DB's consistently give the deep throws up is honestly a bit dumbfounding - not always, but at times. You've likely noticed it's seldom Greenwood, b/c he's almost always in his deep 1/2 or deep 1/3, but the other 3 DB's have all had issues this season jumping shorter routes or biting on PA and sucking up. The other thing to keep in mind is teams design pass plays to challenge DB's - the IU dropped TD is a perfect example when IU ran a guy deep down the middle and deep up the sideline. IA was in cover 2 and Greenwood played it how he was supposed to - split the 2 WR's and move to where Chappell is looking and/or break when the ball is thrown. Theoretically he should be fast enough to get to either WR, but it's really tough to do if a QB moves the FS and throws it w/ short trajectory and accurately. Sometimes the offense wins.