IsntLifeFunny

Good points. I don't think you constantly use a LB in that type of coverage. But the threat of AJ has to be accounted for, and Verner is very unlikely to pose a challenge to AJ. If he did, I would be very impressed, and if he can keep him from beating him deep then I'll think it's a success. On obvious run downs or if we're getting gashed then we can't use the LB to cover short flats against AJ. There isn't any one answer to stopping AJ, but I could see us having some success and maybe getting a pic underneath because of their reliance on him from 20-20.

Great article Cyrus! I know we don't like to flip sides with Jmac, but I really think we should consider doing so this week. Our play calling could really be affected if they start constantly lining up Johnson on Verner's side. If they don't move them, then I guess the best we can do on blitzes is to constantly shade Griffin over the top in cover 1/3 and leave Hopkins on an island with our CB. When AJ is matched up on Verner, if it were me calling plays, I would have whichever LB on that side bracket him underneath with Griff over the top, essentially triple teaming him when he's on Verner. It leaves some ugly matches with the MLB on Foster, but I'll take my chances with Fokou on Foster over Verner in single coverage against AJ.

In the presser Munchak noted that the heavy reliance on the run was not the game plan, but he adjusted as the game unfolded. The game plan was more balanced, but when it became obvious they were getting pressure, leaving Jake a little rattled, while our defense was dominating that the right play was to go ultra conservative. If the Steelers O showed any signs of life then the game would have unfolded differently. I'm not sure you can actually say their defense did enough to win, because they only had one sack, no turnovers, and allowed several long drives where they couldn't get off the field or switch field position. Even though they played well, they didn't do enough to turn the tide and didn't make one game changing play, which is what they obviously needed.

And it's a good strategy, especially on third and long. If you give the top tier guys enough time, they'll absolutely pick you apart. Look at the Chargers Texans game. 3rd and 18 and the Chargers give Shaub all day to find AJ for 20. They blitz right there then it's probably a dump off that goes for 10, they punt, and the Chargers win. It's all about timing your blitzes properly and dropping back once you've got the QB seeing ghosts (Jake really does need to work on this). I actually think Gray's conservative nature might just be the perfect blend with Williams insanity for blitzing the entire defense.

If CJ had half of those holes, he would have busted one and easily went over 100 yards.

More hyperbole. McCoy is the better RB in my opinion, but you are being ridiculous, as usual. Did you not see the gaping holes there for him the whole night? Direct question: Did the Eagles provide better blocking and larger holes against an inferior defense (compared to the Steelers) compared to what the line gave CJ? Exactly.

@OILERMAN LOL. What a joke. Show me one, just one, hole CJ had that was the size of at least 10 holes McCoy had on Monday. Did you actually watch that game? There were at least five holes that you could drive a dump truck through. The ZR has that effect on defenses, and the threat of the pass made the defense honest. CJ had none of those benefits. Once again, as I've said, CJ wasn't great, but comparing CJ's game to McCoy's game is disingenuous at best.

Amen

The one play that really gave me hope was when Jake stared down a free blitzer on 3rd and long, stayed calm, threw a strike and got hammered. His immediate reaction was to roll and see if he completed the pass. He has tremendous upside if he can just calm down a little. He seems so amped in the first quarter that he loses his cool. There's no doubt he looked shaky, but there were several very impressive throws. The comeback to Nate on third and long, the play where he climbed the pocket and took a small step left to avoid the blitz (untouched until Leviter cleans him up) and throws a strike to Nate, and the aforementioned play were all plays that many QBs have problems making, especially all three in one game. Btw: Nate Washington is by far the best WR on this team.

Yep. This year will be the true measure of the staff. There are no more excuses or variables outside of their control barring injury.

Tom Gower posted it in a article a while back: The Titans gave up the most points in the first quarter in NFL history.

Ha! Good catch.

Great article Oman. I was noticing some of the same things. Loggains admitted he was a little too conservative to start the game. Once he opened up, our offense really took shape. It seems like we aren't going to see many 3 wide sets, which even with our top flight group, is fine by me if we can keep up this level of execution. Barring one bad run from Jake, I thought he had a hell of a night. The strike to Washington was a real beauty. You can't ask for better execution against cover 2. For the first time in years, we looked like we belong on the same field with some top-tier teams. To hell with the record, I just want to see us compete with the good teams again.

I don't understand these things being presented to my eyes. These stats of atrociousness must somehow all be lies. Peyton Manning most assuredly took his team to the Super Bowl through Hall of Fame highs. Peyton Manning is the greatest; say it with me, just try it on for size. /ME

I did. You are talking about variants. You were the one that made an entire argument about cover 3 man existing and never actually clarified what you meant. I don't think they are the same as your previous examples and believe that you are bullshitting. My personal opinion is that cover 3 man doesn't exist as an actual play. Do you dispute this or agree?

You couldn't even answer the simplest of questions. Are you talking about a concept or a play-call?

Welp, until you prove it, it is bullshit. You are correct that you don't have to prove anything. But, until you prove it, you don't really have a leg to stand on in terms of the veracity of your statements. We are rehashing. Once again, I've seen a lot of playbooks and am yet to see a 'cover 3 man'. I'll just drop it and hope you prove me wrong. I said it in the other thread that I really was interested to see an actual play with that designation. I'll ask one question and drop it: Are you saying cover 3 man exists as a concept or actual play-call, or both? In terms of concept, yes it exists in terms of underneath coverage (definitely not outside coverage in terms of an actual play-call, even if pattern reading), but I've never seen a play with that designation.

I didn't say it was a good pass rush. I merely pointed out that we were 9th in the league and had 2 DEs with good pressure numbers. Every team's numbers are inflated over a few games. It doesn't mean they have a terrible rush. That's all I'm saying: The Tennessee Titans did not have a terrible pass rush in 2012. In fact, they were above average.

Meh, like you said "semantics". I don't believe 3 deep man* is a variant of cover 3. That's where we disagree. ETA: I also don't believe cover 3 man exists, as that is not its name. You are yet to show it does.

Isntlifefunny=N00b

I disagree, but I can understand the sentiment. They are all question marks for sure. I think the upgrades throughout the roster will make us much more competitive than we were last year.

I didn't say anything about their coverage. The fact they were 9th in sacks is enough to disregard any sentiment that they were terrible in the pass-rush category. The fact that Morgan and Wimbley (especially Morgan) were very good at getting pressures when they had a terrible secondary furthers my point.

HA! Indeed I do. Okay, I was just fucking with you, but you know I'm right that you said 3 deep man and cover 3 were both cover 3, which would only be true if my earlier post was correct.

Most teams accumulate their sacks over a few games. This is the way of the NFL. Very few teams are consistent the whole way through.

Don't act like you didn't say that 3deep man and cover three are the same *in terms of their designation as cover 3. They are only the same because three defenders end up deep, which is the same as a Tampa 2.