Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Im sorry, but putting Jason Taylor in coverage

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Tutor

unread,
Dec 26, 2010, 2:17:28 PM12/26/10
to
is just moronic. #99 drops back into coverage about 50% of the time.
Thats ridiculous

Tutor

unread,
Dec 26, 2010, 2:19:49 PM12/26/10
to
On Dec 26, 2:17 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> is just moronic.  #99 drops back into coverage about 50% of the time.
> Thats ridiculous

to add to that... I've had just about enough of Bryan Thomas.

papa.carl44

unread,
Dec 26, 2010, 3:02:10 PM12/26/10
to

"Tutor" <dcat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f2d6e161-0d08-4f4e...@32g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...

> is just moronic. #99 drops back into coverage about 50% of the time.
> Thats ridiculous

What is happening in those situations is a product of all the guessing Rex's
D scheme does....the plan is not to have Taylor in coverage it is to have
him rushing...but if you counter that with a particular offensive formation
or allignment you force him into coverage, and that is what the Bears are
doing...it doesn't necessarily need to be an audible either, you can pretty
much guess what Rex will do in a given situation and scheme to deal with
it....and they never want to attack the corners...so you need coverage type
LB's if the safeties are involved with a deeper threat. Urlacher is so good
at that.


Harlan Lachman

unread,
Dec 26, 2010, 6:09:18 PM12/26/10
to
In article
<47b4e3ae-14b4-4ccc...@n29g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
Tutor <dcat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Papa, you coached and designed D. Isn't it possible to have one
passrushing and run stopping LB by design? Isn't this just a product of
Rex' refusal to tailor his system to his personnel.?

I cannot imagine a single reason that JT would be out in coverage on any
play unless Cro, Revis, Dig, Lowery and Quice were injured and he were
lined up at CB or S.

harlan

papa.carl44

unread,
Dec 26, 2010, 7:26:14 PM12/26/10
to

"Harlan Lachman" <har...@eeivt.com> wrote in message
news:harlan-A474CF....@news60.forteinc.com...

Yes...it is also part of his belief he can out think the offensive
coordinator by who he puts in at various times, then if the O is wise to his
personell schemes they do something way different. Still....I was always
used to using a "designated" pass rusher, and some great players, guys who
always looked good just couldn't do both deals from OLB especially or even
dropping a D end into coverage. I saw some kids who could play D end and
also drop to limited coverage and look great...some just can't...so use them
the way they can be most effective. I don't ever remember JT being a
coverage guy....Urlacher, Lawrence Taylor in hiis day....they are a rare
breed....Farrior is really good at it.
....I hear what you are saying...I don't know the answer..but it looks like
they still have Revis and Cro committed outside and are having confusion
issues inside...at any rate, O coordinators have figured out Rex's D and
taken Revis and Cro out of the game...IF....a huge IF he had any decent
outside coverage LB's on short outside stuff...he could put them in limited
schemes and stack the inside with D linemen....to me, it looks like the huge
gap is in the D line...they still need help on run and Rex can't move LB's
out to support stuff and let the safeties take over primary inside coverage,
OR outside coverage and let Revis and Cro play inside...it's called a type
of invert...I don't think they can do it because they can be soft up front
without LB's right there. I would love to see good film...not TV type
coverage, but really get to see the whole thing and study the scheme....but,
he just doesn't seem to have an answer to things that happen. Hope that
makes sense.


0 new messages