There are 328 users in the forums
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by thl408:
This is an example of what I meant from Fangio's safeties compressing the area that is behind the LBs and in front of the safeties. I have it handy because I've shown this play before.
Notice the depth that the safeties are aligned, about 10-12 yards. Reid is on the 35 yard line.
I'll try to show more examples of how the safeties played to help drive home the point (Fangio vs Mangini). Mangini's safeties are too far back and that's why we see the current defense get gashed over the middle to WRs that seem to be wide open.
Thl--can you comment on the safety depth in the Pittsburgh game versus the NYGs? Seemed to be getting beaten deep against the Steelers.My memory is fuzzy though. I'll check on NFL replay later if you don't have it on the tip of your mind.
Originally posted by thl408:
When I refer to safety depth, I mean when they are aligned in their natural spot in a cover 2 shell. What they did versus PIT is not what I mean as they were at the LoS doing some unorthodox stuff pretending to blitz. We know how that turned out. I am referring to when they are at their assigned deep cover 2 spot. Versus ARI they gave up a lot of room underneath and Fitz killed it. In the play versus NYG that was shown when they played Tampa2 is another example of what I mean.
Originally posted by thl408:
Zone coverage works when there is a ferocious 4 man rush, think SEA in 2013-14. For this 49er team, if it isn't Lynch it isn't anyone applying pressure. +24 yards.
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by thl408:
When I refer to safety depth, I mean when they are aligned in their natural spot in a cover 2 shell. What they did versus PIT is not what I mean as they were at the LoS doing some unorthodox stuff pretending to blitz. We know how that turned out. I am referring to when they are at their assigned deep cover 2 spot. Versus ARI they gave up a lot of room underneath and Fitz killed it. In the play versus NYG that was shown when they played Tampa2 is another example of what I mean.
Thanks! Wonder if their depth was a reaction to the mess against the Steelers? Seem to be casting about trying to find things that work, while working toward a multi-scheme defense. Still...too early for me to denounce Mangini...or the players.
Originally posted by thl408:Not to mention the bucs had heavy hitters on the back end so even if they did catch a pass they got laid out.
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by thl408:
When I refer to safety depth, I mean when they are aligned in their natural spot in a cover 2 shell. What they did versus PIT is not what I mean as they were at the LoS doing some unorthodox stuff pretending to blitz. We know how that turned out. I am referring to when they are at their assigned deep cover 2 spot. Versus ARI they gave up a lot of room underneath and Fitz killed it. In the play versus NYG that was shown when they played Tampa2 is another example of what I mean.
Thanks! Wonder if their depth was a reaction to the mess against the Steelers? Seem to be casting about trying to find things that work, while working toward a multi-scheme defense. Still...too early for me to denounce Mangini...or the players.
Fangio never called this coverage. Mangini likes it. Without a legit 4 man rush, I hate it. The SB winning Bucs made it work because they had Simeon Rice and Warren Sapp.
Originally posted by thl408:Cover 6
Strongside safety in Quarters (Bethea)
QB completes dropback, the Quarters safety has gained 0 depth from when the ball was snapped.
The In route from the inline TE is supposed to attack the zone area behind the LBs and in front of the safety. That area doesn't exist due to the Quarters safety pattern matching.
Originally posted by Luckycharms:
To me I just can't understand how Mangini or any DC for that matter can look at the film of our defense the past few years and want to change it, especially with the personnel we lost. If you want to tweak it and blitz a little more and add a few wrinkles then fine, but to not utilize the pattern matching scheme that most of these players have learned is just crazy to me. The coverages on the back end when we pattern matched is just a thing of beauty. To me, unless you have shut down CB's or a crazy good pass rush, Fangio's pattern match scheme is the best way to neutralize these really good QB's and high powered offenses. And we don't have shut down cb's or a really good pass rush so it should be a no brainer....
Originally posted by NCommand:b***h, er, preach on thl408!
The masses need to know.
Originally posted by Niners816:Originally posted by NCommand:b***h, er, preach on thl408!
The masses need to know.
We have a historical habit of shelving stuff that becomes our blueprint during periods of success. The biggest blunder was straying from the WCO and Walsh's ways after the 2002 season. It was an idiotic decision and we haven't had an explosive offenses sence (lone exception being the 10 games when kap took over in 2012).
Looks like we just had our defensive version of this.
Originally posted by Niners816:
We have a historical habit of shelving stuff that becomes our blueprint during periods of success. The biggest blunder was straying from the WCO and Walsh's ways after the 2002 season. It was an idiotic decision and we haven't had an explosive offenses sence (lone exception being the 10 games when kap took over in 2012).
Looks like we just had our defensive version of this.
Originally posted by thl408:
Completely agree. There was a good structure in place and it should have been continued - team coverage. That's why average CBs looked good in Fangio's scheme. With the loss of Aldon and Justin, two good pass rushers, a good coverage scheme should have been emphasized, not simplified.
Also gone from Mangini's scheme are split coverages where one side of the field is doing one thing, and the other side is doing another. The examples shown above of Cover6 are split coverages. With split coverages, the QB can look to one of the safeties and make a determination as to what coverage he's facing, then when he looks to the other side, he will see the other safety doing something else. I've seen Brees/Rodgers be hesitant too many times to rule out that these split coverages weren't making them think more than they are accustomed to.
Just one more example before I stop b***hing about this, for today.
2013 - Notice Reid is not aligned as a Cover1 safety. He's not in the middle of the field. TB will run a Mesh concept (man buster) and also get a High-Low read (zone buster) over the middle of the field.
When the WRs criss cross (mesh concept) the 49ers are in zone coverage so there's no pick/rub. Then when the High-Low read develops over the middle, the 49ers have morphed to man coverage so there's no stretching of zones. All this done from a split safety look. It's just a thing of beauty to watch. QB has time and doesn't know what to do with it.
