It don't matter what you call them the fact is we have a really good secondary right now.
JACK Boyz
Collapse
X
-
The thing I would like to see them do is start to make the transition from a cover 3 team to a cover 3 team that mixes in a lot of cover 1 with the single high S. NE had our guys turned around and confused when we played man against them. Vs the Ravens, we played almost exclusively cover 3. Cover 3 is a great coverage and we play it really well, but a mixture of cover 1 and cover 3 is very hard to match, if you play man well, and we don't cover that well in man. For our D to make the next step, I think we need to be able to play man, even if just as a change of pace.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Steve View PostThe thing I would like to see them do is start to make the transition from a cover 3 team to a cover 3 team that mixes in a lot of cover 1 with the single high S. NE had our guys turned around and confused when we played man against them. Vs the Ravens, we played almost exclusively cover 3. Cover 3 is a great coverage and we play it really well, but a mixture of cover 1 and cover 3 is very hard to match, if you play man well, and we don't cover that well in man. For our D to make the next step, I think we need to be able to play man, even if just as a change of pace.
But it yeah having the ability to disguise coverage and keep the web guessing is very important.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
-
I don't think we need to mix in a big variety of coverages. Seattle basically used 2 coverage back in their SB days. A lot of the cover 2 teams only used a couple of coverages. Wade used a ton of straight man coverage with the #1 D he had in Denver. None of those defenses tried to get overly tricky. Mostly it was be very basic and not make mistakes. So many of the long TD you see on highlight films, someone makes a mistake and it is a blown coverage that leads to a long TD. PLay a couple of basic coverages, do them really, really well, and you cut down on that. Every team in the NFL knows how to attack almost every given coverage, it is a matter of the D knowing how teams want to attack them, and being ready for the offense when they try.
The secondary we have assembled is a really good group. We play almost all cover 3, but they do it exceedingly well. I cannot recall seeing a zone D that breaks on passes so well, and breaks up so many just as the ball arrives. We will still be mainly a cover 3 team, no matter what.
I just look and every year for as long as i have been looking, most of the really dominant defenses tend to play a lot of bump and run, man coverage come playoff time. If you want a coverage that simply shuts down an offense, like you have to do in the playoffs some times, it is bump and run. I just don't see us with that capability yet. Hopefully, we will see that start to change, even if it is just a change of pace thing.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by blueman View PostWe did not matchup against NE well at all, regardless of scheme. Hopefully new additions plus health plus scheme tweaks helps with that.
That could not have been more obvious. I fervently hope that we meet them again this year -- with a more complete D roster.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Steve View PostThe thing I would like to see them do is start to make the transition from a cover 3 team to a cover 3 team that mixes in a lot of cover 1 with the single high S. NE had our guys turned around and confused when we played man against them. Vs the Ravens, we played almost exclusively cover 3. Cover 3 is a great coverage and we play it really well, but a mixture of cover 1 and cover 3 is very hard to match, if you play man well, and we don't cover that well in man. For our D to make the next step, I think we need to be able to play man, even if just as a change of pace.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Gus Bradley D in Seattle did a lot of the cover 1 with 1 Fs and a lot of man to man underneath. I think it is just something that the D is going to have to start mixing in. It is sort of a self perpetuating thing if we never play man coverage, when will the players learn to do it well. I am all for letting players do what they do well, but you do need to force players (people) out of their comfort zone and force them to develop. From a speed and athletic ability standpoint, it shouldn't be an issue. It is just a matter of whether or not we can pick it up. IMHO,< that is what preseason is for, letting the starters try stuff like that out.
Adderley or whoever is the FS is the guy that you typically think would be the guy playing over the top, as the single high S, so his ability in man to man is not so important. A nice perk if you have it, but not a necessity.
Usually, the guy playing SS is the guy who is the weak link in a D playing a lot of man under coverage. But since Derwin is almost like a CB in terms of his man to man ability (in a much larger, longer body), he gives us great ability to matchup to teams. He has the coverage skills to man up vs most WR (by himself that is), the size and tackling to take on bigger RB and TE. He is not a good matchup for offenses, and by putting him at SS we can easily move him around in terms of alignment to either disguise him, or to gain a mismatch of our choice.
The only thing that might hold Derwin back as a man coverage guy this year, is I could see us playing him in a lot of robber positions. That is where we line him up and give a presnap tell to the offense, but that is only a disguise and he then drops somewhere else to jump routes. That only works well if you have fast, athletic guys around the robber, because they have to be able to adjust and disguise tehir drops too. We have a group of very fast and athletic LB and DB, so that shouldn't be a problem. It probably doesn't get Derwin too many picks, but it could lead to a lot of sacks and int for other players. Every QB we play will be looking for James and where he aligns, and if Derwin is the disguise, it is going to mess with them getting the ball out quick if he isn't doing his pre-snap tell. QB will stop trusting their presnap reads as much, and waiting to see plays develop, which is not going to work well against our front 4. Then they will just try throwing away from James, which means the players around James need to be ready for some poorly thrown passes.
-
👍 1
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sgt. Pepper View PostJason Verrett looking good up the coast. He signed for so cheap, I'm surprised Telesco didn't want to bring him back.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/49ers/am...h-14189626.php
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
Comment