Week 13 vs Miami Dolphins Coaches Film Analysis

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
You stated that it was a coaching point to have the safety cover the dig on the play where Hill scored a TD. It looked like from the film that there were two defenders covering the dig route. What advantage is there to have two defenders cover the dig and have only the corner with outside leverage cover the post?

Thats just how Saban notates how to cover "houston" which is what he calls a Mills concept, in cover 7 - which is a palms.

The idea is that it frees up the Mike to cover anything in and short from the #3.

I wish I had a little better detailed explanation but that's what is in his playbook. I'm sure there's a more detailed explanation in meetings but I had to find the written out matching responsibilities for that concept was on page like 258 of 548 pages.

The vast majority of defensive playbooks spend time on run fits for every coverage and offensive formation and blitzes. Of dabans playbook it's probably 250 pages of fits, 100-150 pages of terms and random section breaks or headers, then 100-150 of coverages.

Same thing with Pete Carrols playbooknin Seattle. Similar breakdown, just smaller. 258 pages I think.

Thank you for the explanation. It just seems like an impossible task for a corner to cover that post route with outside leverage. Should Ward not have taken the outside leverage or was he correct in doing so?

So I reached out to a former NFL QB who came up under Reid. He stays pretty anonymous, but I asked him about this play and he said the same thing I did. They matched it correctly just got beat by Hill on a well executed play.

Tua's ball placement on that throw was perfect. Way inside, and even had Mooney been side by side with Hill, it'd be tough to contest that throw.

Should the backside corner keep climbing there? That's how the Patriots famously defended that route from Goff and Cooks in the Superbowl.

Originally posted by All22:
Should the backside corner keep climbing there? That's how the Patriots famously defended that route from Goff and Cooks in the Superbowl.

That would be a great play but it's not common for the rules. That was a gameplan specific adjustment.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by All22:
Should the backside corner keep climbing there? That's how the Patriots famously defended that route from Goff and Cooks in the Superbowl.

That would be a great play but it's not common for the rules. That was a gameplan specific adjustment.

The #1 WR on the backside ran a Corner-stop route (idk what it's called) that held Lenior. Usually in Cover3, the backside CB will be asked to help on a Post route if he isn't threatened, but this was Quarters so it would have taken some freelancing for Lenoir to see Tyreek's Post and to go help.

Originally posted by thl408:
The #1 WR on the backside ran a Corner-stop route (idk what it's called) that held Lenior. Usually in Cover3, the backside CB will be asked to help on a Post route if he isn't threatened, but this was Quarters so it would have taken some freelancing for Lenoir to see Tyreek's Post and to go help.

These are 2 teams that knew each other so well. You knew there would be plays perfectly designed to mess up the assignments.

I am surprised there were not more huge plays.

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Hey y'all, so I didn't get to much Purdy film on this breakdown I covered a handful of plays. There were a TON of plays to cover with both QB's having a number of incompletions. I think that was the most plays I've seen in a game this year so there was a massive amount of film to work through.

I wanted to touch on the defense, run game and Purdy so it's all there. I'm going to get a special video on out Purdy specifically at the end of the week so I will get a more comprehensive look at the guy. I watched all his plays twice so I have a real good feel for how he played though.

Great job

Originally posted by jdt84_2:

Originally posted by thl408:
The #1 WR on the backside ran a Corner-stop route (idk what it's called) that held Lenior. Usually in Cover3, the backside CB will be asked to help on a Post route if he isn't threatened, but this was Quarters so it would have taken some freelancing for Lenoir to see Tyreek's Post and to go help.

These are 2 teams that knew each other so well. You knew there would be plays perfectly designed to mess up the assignments.

I am surprised there were not more huge plays.

jd showed one instance of this, when MIA played man all around, faked the blitz, but dropped two DL into the short area to take away the quick slant (hot read). MIA did this exact thing twice, that I saw, jd showed one of them. This is McDaniel understanding Kyle's hot routes and taking it away. Credit Brock for not falling for it. I gotta think there were more instances of one coach knowing the other. What I mentioned is just one example that I saw.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by All22:
Should the backside corner keep climbing there? That's how the Patriots famously defended that route from Goff and Cooks in the Superbowl.

That would be a great play but it's not common for the rules. That was a gameplan specific adjustment.

The #1 WR on the backside ran a Corner-stop route (idk what it's called) that held Lenior. Usually in Cover3, the backside CB will be asked to help on a Post route if he isn't threatened, but this was Quarters so it would have taken some freelancing for Lenoir to see Tyreek's Post and to go help.

Yeach, the guy I reached out to gave me a little more detailed response a few minutes ago, here's it verbatim:

"I got a better look at this and their Quarters package this morning and see what happened now if you want a bit more detail. Hufanga has to nail down, which does leave the Corner isolated. It's a tough Quarters beater. The minus split inside the top CB's divider forces him to play outside leverage down bottom. Slight spray release by Hill to shave his outside shoulder, then he breaks back to the Post, away from the leverage that he dictated by the split, while the Huf is occupied by #2. That little Swirl route by #1 up top and its initial outbreak hold the bottom CB just long enough before he delivers that to the Weak Safety, builds high and looks for the Post from the back side. Too late though. Good play design by the offense to occupy the weak side of the defense and bring that Post all the way across country, away from the leverage of the Corner."

Now, the monkey wrench is Hufanga took the blame on Sherms pod. Could be covering though.

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Yeach, the guy I reached out to gave me a little more detailed response a few minutes ago, here's it verbatim:

"I got a better look at this and their Quarters package this morning and see what happened now if you want a bit more detail. Hufanga has to nail down, which does leave the Corner isolated. It's a tough Quarters beater. The minus split inside the top CB's divider forces him to play outside leverage down bottom. Slight spray release by Hill to shave his outside shoulder, then he breaks back to the Post, away from the leverage that he dictated by the split, while the Huf is occupied by #2. That little Swirl route by #1 up top and its initial outbreak hold the bottom CB just long enough before he delivers that to the Weak Safety, builds high and looks for the Post from the back side. Too late though. Good play design by the offense to occupy the weak side of the defense and bring that Post all the way across country, away from the leverage of the Corner."

Now, the monkey wrench is Hufanga took the blame on Sherms pod. Could be covering though.

Maybe he bit too hard?
But not very many teams have Hill.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by All22:
Should the backside corner keep climbing there? That's how the Patriots famously defended that route from Goff and Cooks in the Superbowl.

That would be a great play but it's not common for the rules. That was a gameplan specific adjustment.

The #1 WR on the backside ran a Corner-stop route (idk what it's called) that held Lenior. Usually in Cover3, the backside CB will be asked to help on a Post route if he isn't threatened, but this was Quarters so it would have taken some freelancing for Lenoir to see Tyreek's Post and to go help.

Yeach, the guy I reached out to gave me a little more detailed response a few minutes ago, here's it verbatim:

"I got a better look at this and their Quarters package this morning and see what happened now if you want a bit more detail. Hufanga has to nail down, which does leave the Corner isolated. It's a tough Quarters beater. The minus split inside the top CB's divider forces him to play outside leverage down bottom. Slight spray release by Hill to shave his outside shoulder, then he breaks back to the Post, away from the leverage that he dictated by the split, while the Huf is occupied by #2. That little Swirl route by #1 up top and its initial outbreak hold the bottom CB just long enough before he delivers that to the Weak Safety, builds high and looks for the Post from the back side. Too late though. Good play design by the offense to occupy the weak side of the defense and bring that Post all the way across country, away from the leverage of the Corner."

Now, the monkey wrench is Hufanga took the blame on Sherms pod. Could be covering though.

Hufanga has to honor the #2 to his side. Not Huf's fault imo. Just a good playcall versus that coverage with one of the best WRs catching a well located pass. Tip your cap and move on. Perhaps Mooney can stick a little tighter but the good ball location probably would have resulted in the same outcome.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
You stated that it was a coaching point to have the safety cover the dig on the play where Hill scored a TD. It looked like from the film that there were two defenders covering the dig route. What advantage is there to have two defenders cover the dig and have only the corner with outside leverage cover the post?

Thats just how Saban notates how to cover "houston" which is what he calls a Mills concept, in cover 7 - which is a palms.

The idea is that it frees up the Mike to cover anything in and short from the #3.

I wish I had a little better detailed explanation but that's what is in his playbook. I'm sure there's a more detailed explanation in meetings but I had to find the written out matching responsibilities for that concept was on page like 258 of 548 pages.

The vast majority of defensive playbooks spend time on run fits for every coverage and offensive formation and blitzes. Of dabans playbook it's probably 250 pages of fits, 100-150 pages of terms and random section breaks or headers, then 100-150 of coverages.

Same thing with Pete Carrols playbooknin Seattle. Similar breakdown, just smaller. 258 pages I think.

Thank you for the explanation. It just seems like an impossible task for a corner to cover that post route with outside leverage. Should Ward not have taken the outside leverage or was he correct in doing so?

So I reached out to a former NFL QB who came up under Reid. He stays pretty anonymous, but I asked him about this play and he said the same thing I did. They matched it correctly just got beat by Hill on a well executed play.

So directly from the horses mouth, Hufanga took responsibility for that play. I watched the interview on the Richard Sherman podcast.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
You stated that it was a coaching point to have the safety cover the dig on the play where Hill scored a TD. It looked like from the film that there were two defenders covering the dig route. What advantage is there to have two defenders cover the dig and have only the corner with outside leverage cover the post?

Thats just how Saban notates how to cover "houston" which is what he calls a Mills concept, in cover 7 - which is a palms.

The idea is that it frees up the Mike to cover anything in and short from the #3.

I wish I had a little better detailed explanation but that's what is in his playbook. I'm sure there's a more detailed explanation in meetings but I had to find the written out matching responsibilities for that concept was on page like 258 of 548 pages.

The vast majority of defensive playbooks spend time on run fits for every coverage and offensive formation and blitzes. Of dabans playbook it's probably 250 pages of fits, 100-150 pages of terms and random section breaks or headers, then 100-150 of coverages.

Same thing with Pete Carrols playbooknin Seattle. Similar breakdown, just smaller. 258 pages I think.

Thank you for the explanation. It just seems like an impossible task for a corner to cover that post route with outside leverage. Should Ward not have taken the outside leverage or was he correct in doing so?

So I reached out to a former NFL QB who came up under Reid. He stays pretty anonymous, but I asked him about this play and he said the same thing I did. They matched it correctly just got beat by Hill on a well executed play.

So directly from the horses mouth, Hufanga took responsibility for that play. I watched the interview on the Richard Sherman podcast.

I think Huf is being nice. But I won't argue with him.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
You stated that it was a coaching point to have the safety cover the dig on the play where Hill scored a TD. It looked like from the film that there were two defenders covering the dig route. What advantage is there to have two defenders cover the dig and have only the corner with outside leverage cover the post?

Thats just how Saban notates how to cover "houston" which is what he calls a Mills concept, in cover 7 - which is a palms.

The idea is that it frees up the Mike to cover anything in and short from the #3.

I wish I had a little better detailed explanation but that's what is in his playbook. I'm sure there's a more detailed explanation in meetings but I had to find the written out matching responsibilities for that concept was on page like 258 of 548 pages.

The vast majority of defensive playbooks spend time on run fits for every coverage and offensive formation and blitzes. Of dabans playbook it's probably 250 pages of fits, 100-150 pages of terms and random section breaks or headers, then 100-150 of coverages.

Same thing with Pete Carrols playbooknin Seattle. Similar breakdown, just smaller. 258 pages I think.

Thank you for the explanation. It just seems like an impossible task for a corner to cover that post route with outside leverage. Should Ward not have taken the outside leverage or was he correct in doing so?

So I reached out to a former NFL QB who came up under Reid. He stays pretty anonymous, but I asked him about this play and he said the same thing I did. They matched it correctly just got beat by Hill on a well executed play.

So directly from the horses mouth, Hufanga took responsibility for that play. I watched the interview on the Richard Sherman podcast.

I think Huf is being nice. But I won't argue with him.

Its possible they had a clamp call on Hill and if so Hufanga has to play inside and under Hill so they clamp him

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
You stated that it was a coaching point to have the safety cover the dig on the play where Hill scored a TD. It looked like from the film that there were two defenders covering the dig route. What advantage is there to have two defenders cover the dig and have only the corner with outside leverage cover the post?

Thats just how Saban notates how to cover "houston" which is what he calls a Mills concept, in cover 7 - which is a palms.

The idea is that it frees up the Mike to cover anything in and short from the #3.

I wish I had a little better detailed explanation but that's what is in his playbook. I'm sure there's a more detailed explanation in meetings but I had to find the written out matching responsibilities for that concept was on page like 258 of 548 pages.

The vast majority of defensive playbooks spend time on run fits for every coverage and offensive formation and blitzes. Of dabans playbook it's probably 250 pages of fits, 100-150 pages of terms and random section breaks or headers, then 100-150 of coverages.

Same thing with Pete Carrols playbooknin Seattle. Similar breakdown, just smaller. 258 pages I think.

Thank you for the explanation. It just seems like an impossible task for a corner to cover that post route with outside leverage. Should Ward not have taken the outside leverage or was he correct in doing so?

So I reached out to a former NFL QB who came up under Reid. He stays pretty anonymous, but I asked him about this play and he said the same thing I did. They matched it correctly just got beat by Hill on a well executed play.

So directly from the horses mouth, Hufanga took responsibility for that play. I watched the interview on the Richard Sherman podcast.

I think Huf is being nice. But I won't argue with him.

Its possible they had a clamp call on Hill and if so Hufanga has to play inside and under Hill so they clamp him

So most likely something opponent specific?

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
You stated that it was a coaching point to have the safety cover the dig on the play where Hill scored a TD. It looked like from the film that there were two defenders covering the dig route. What advantage is there to have two defenders cover the dig and have only the corner with outside leverage cover the post?

Thats just how Saban notates how to cover "houston" which is what he calls a Mills concept, in cover 7 - which is a palms.

The idea is that it frees up the Mike to cover anything in and short from the #3.

I wish I had a little better detailed explanation but that's what is in his playbook. I'm sure there's a more detailed explanation in meetings but I had to find the written out matching responsibilities for that concept was on page like 258 of 548 pages.

The vast majority of defensive playbooks spend time on run fits for every coverage and offensive formation and blitzes. Of dabans playbook it's probably 250 pages of fits, 100-150 pages of terms and random section breaks or headers, then 100-150 of coverages.

Same thing with Pete Carrols playbooknin Seattle. Similar breakdown, just smaller. 258 pages I think.

Thank you for the explanation. It just seems like an impossible task for a corner to cover that post route with outside leverage. Should Ward not have taken the outside leverage or was he correct in doing so?

So I reached out to a former NFL QB who came up under Reid. He stays pretty anonymous, but I asked him about this play and he said the same thing I did. They matched it correctly just got beat by Hill on a well executed play.

So directly from the horses mouth, Hufanga took responsibility for that play. I watched the interview on the Richard Sherman podcast.

I think Huf is being nice. But I won't argue with him.

Its possible they had a clamp call on Hill and if so Hufanga has to play inside and under Hill so they clamp him

So most likely something opponent specific?

Quarters is a very flexible coverage call. It can be ran with different rules to each side of the field. What jd mentioned about "clamp" is a way to execute Quarters.

jd, did you mean "bracket"? That's the call that doubles the #1. Who knows what terminology is used, but that's what I think it is if Huf was supposed to double the #1 (THill).
If what Huf says is true, that the touchdown is on him, then the call was 'bracket' and he didn't obey his assignment. In the pic below, Mooney is C and Huf is SS. Except on the actual play, Huf matched the Dig from the #2.