+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    I'd rather get killed playing man

    Then that soft zone Perry FOOL implements with this D. Can someone with x.o football knowledge explain to me why we play zone and not man? I know our secondary cannot really cover, but if we're not getting pressure, receivers tend to find holes regardless. What's the deal/

  2. #2

    Re: I'd rather get killed playing man

    [quote user="Pop it Ahmad"]Then that soft zone Perry FOOL implements with this D. Can someone with x.o football knowledge explain to me why we play zone and not man? I know our secondary cannot really cover, but if we're not getting pressure, receivers tend to find holes regardless. What's the deal/[/quote]

    Nice thread..we WERE playing man on that last drive. -face palm-

  3. #3
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,980

    Re: I'd rather get killed playing man

    [quote user="Idkaname"][quote user="Pop it Ahmad"]Then that soft zone Perry FOOL implements with this D. Can someone with x.o football knowledge explain to me why we play zone and not man? I know our secondary cannot really cover, but if we're not getting pressure, receivers tend to find holes regardless. What's the deal/[/quote]

    Nice thread..we WERE playing man on that last drive. -face palm-[/quote]

    Yeah we were. It's just we put the wrong "man" out there in Will Blackmon.

  4. #4

    Re: I'd rather get killed playing man

    We're playing zone (predominantly) because we can't match up man to man, with the exception of Webby nobody gets blanket coverage. Unfortunately, if we don't blitz (which leaves even bigger holes in the zone) our 4 man rush doesn't get there, then the receivers just find a soft spot in the zone and any good QB has time to find them or let their routes develop. A guy like Rodgers can easily catch his man as he's going from one defender's zone to the next.

    I'd like to see us mix it up with man underneath and 2-deep (even 3 deep on deep plays like 3rd and 20) zones at safety, and today somebody should have been shadowing Rodgers and/or playing zone in the middle IMO because he was a running threat.

    Personally I'd rather die man to man (because you have to jam these receivers) with safety zone help.

    Or mix it up and play zone on one side and man on the other. The boiler-plate rush 3 drop 8 in zone sucks.
    8-Time NFL Champions - 1927 1934 1938 1956 1986 1990 2007 2011

    "You win close games because you're prepared to do it. It doesn't just come down to luck." -- Bill Parcells

  5. #5

    Re: I'd rather get killed playing man

    [quote user="SweetZombieJesus"]We're playing zone (predominantly) because we can't match up man to man.* Unfortunately, if we don't blitz (which leaves even bigger holes in the zone) then the players just find a soft spot in the zone and any good QB has time to find them or let their routes develop.* A guy like Rodgers can catch his man as he's going from one defender's zone to the next.

    I'd like to see us mix it up with man underneath and 2-deep (even 3 deep on deep plays like 3rd and 20) zones at safety, and today somebody should have been shadowing Rodgers and/or playing zone in the middle IMO because he was a running threat.

    Personally I'd rather die man to man (because you have to jam these receivers) with safety zone help.
    [/quote]

    We didnt blitz while in zone because I think its better to drop 8 guys in coverage when we have a depleted secondary and linebacker core..which smart. Because Kiwi, and JPP will eventually get through. Now if we had Revis and Cromartie it would be a bad strategy but we dont have pure cover guys in this secondary.

  6. #6

    Re: I'd rather get killed playing man

    [quote user="T-Murda84"][quote user="SweetZombieJesus"]We're playing zone (predominantly) because we can't match up man to man. Unfortunately, if we don't blitz (which leaves even bigger holes in the zone) then the players just find a soft spot in the zone and any good QB has time to find them or let their routes develop. A guy like Rodgers can catch his man as he's going from one defender's zone to the next.

    I'd like to see us mix it up with man underneath and 2-deep (even 3 deep on deep plays like 3rd and 20) zones at safety, and today somebody should have been shadowing Rodgers and/or playing zone in the middle IMO because he was a running threat.

    Personally I'd rather die man to man (because you have to jam these receivers) with safety zone help.
    [/quote]

    We didnt blitz while in zone because I think its better to drop 8 guys in coverage when we have a depleted secondary and linebacker core..which smart. Because Kiwi, and JPP will eventually get through. Now if we had Revis and Cromartie it would be a bad strategy but we dont have pure cover guys in this secondary.[/quote]

    Cromartie?..............Dude is waaaaaaaaaay overrated.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts