Jump to content

Pettine Strikes Back [So much off coverage]


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

I knew it was King

Fire King

Extend Pettine

Certainly solidifies King as a talented but flawed CB (i.e. eminently upgradeable unless he can fix his flaws) while making the argument that it's the young secondary rather than Pettine who's responsible for the soft coverages.  Ultimately, it's Pettine's responsibility, then Gray's, then the players, but at some point, someone is responsible for it not being fixed.  Let's see if they hone in on this during the playoffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the one 3rd-down play, maybe 3rd-and-5 or so, King began with a big cushion, ~10-yards off.   Robinson took 1-2 quick steps as if planning to fly deep, and King immediately backed off and amplified his cushion to 15 yards off the line.  Outstanding receivers have a way of deceiving even excellent corners, and on that one King just got faked and made a mistake.  Good learning opportunity.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2021 at 11:00 AM, deltarich87 said:

Jaire can get away with playing off because of his makeup speed/quick twitch ability. King...not so much.

While I think we all know Jaire is the much better player, as he's one of the best in the NFL. Let's not forget King's Athleticism. Everything in his measurables puts him pretty on par with Jaire athletically speaking ( and ahead in a few drills) and at a much larger size. 

Jaire Alexander | Combine Results | CB - Louisville (nflcombineresults.com)

Kevin King | Combine Results | CB - Washington (nflcombineresults.com)

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Smidgeon said:

Certainly solidifies King as a talented but flawed CB (i.e. eminently upgradeable unless he can fix his flaws) while making the argument that it's the young secondary rather than Pettine who's responsible for the soft coverages.  Ultimately, it's Pettine's responsibility, then Gray's, then the players, but at some point, someone is responsible for it not being fixed.  Let's see if they hone in on this during the playoffs.

We don't even know what play he was talking about. This doesn't solidify anything.

And even if we do conclude for some reason that King made a poor choice, were going to call him eminently upgradeable because of a coverage misread? Are we going to kill Jaire for every reception caught underneath? 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

While I think we all know Jaire is the much better player, as he's one of the best in the NFL. Let's not forget King's Athleticism. Everything in his measurables puts him pretty on par with Jaire athletically speaking ( and ahead in a few drills) and at a much larger size. 

Jaire Alexander | Combine Results | CB - Louisville (nflcombineresults.com)

Kevin King | Combine Results | CB - Washington (nflcombineresults.com)

This is why there was some sort of pre-season measurable testing, with numbers available to the public. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

We don't even know what play he was talking about. This doesn't solidify anything.

And even if we do conclude for some reason that King made a poor choice, were going to call him eminently upgradeable because of a coverage misread? Are we going to kill Jaire for every reception caught underneath? 

Working on the assumption that the soft coverages throughout the year are all on the DB instead of the coach (again, it's an assumption), it's just a different category of flaw; that's not a single play.  It's an assumption of course, but I'm commenting based on that baseline assumption.  Moving on, eminently upgradeable doesn't mean "incapable".  It means he  has a flaw that if another Jaire came along, they'd be happy to take him.  That's all.  It's the same thing with MVS.  Because of his drops, he's eminently upgradeable, but it doesn't mean he isn't valuable and doesn't have a role.  It just means in the right circumstances, he's replaceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Smidgeon said:

Working on the assumption that the soft coverages throughout the year are all on the DB instead of the coach (again, it's an assumption), it's just a different category of flaw; that's not a single play.  It's an assumption of course, but I'm commenting based on that baseline assumption.  Moving on, eminently upgradeable doesn't mean "incapable".  It means he  has a flaw that if another Jaire came along, they'd be happy to take him.  That's all.  It's the same thing with MVS.  Because of his drops, he's eminently upgradeable, but it doesn't mean he isn't valuable and doesn't have a role.  It just means in the right circumstances, he's replaceable.

You need to look up the definition of eminently. 

Making the bolded assumption is eminently idiotic.

If Corners were repeatedly lining up in positions that the coaches didn't like, the coaches need to be correcting it, and they clearly haven't been. Thus the logical conclusion is that the players are doing what the coaches want.

Eminently replaceable means very replaceable. Obviously if another Jaire Alexander comes around, you would jump, but realistically there's only one other CB playing at Jaire's level, and the Dolphins paid him 77 million dollars a year and a half ago.

 Neither guy you mentioned is eminently replaceable. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You need to look up the definition of eminently. 

Making the bolded assumption is eminently idiotic.

If Corners were repeatedly lining up in positions that the coaches didn't like, the coaches need to be correcting it, and they clearly haven't been. Thus the logical conclusion is that the players are doing what the coaches want.

Eminently replaceable means very replaceable. Obviously if another Jaire Alexander comes around, you would jump, but realistically there's only one other CB playing at Jaire's level, and the Dolphins paid him 77 million dollars a year and a half ago.

 Neither guy you mentioned is eminently replaceable. 

I remember people blaming the DB's when Capers' scheme wasn't working. What was so funny is that two of the players, Hayward and Hyde, went on to play better for other teams...

 

Edited by Joe
Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost positive @AlexGreen#20 is right on that play; when they play C1 they stagger the corners away from the safety with the weakside corner playing with a cushion.  Technically it's just the most outside defender; 12:12 left in the 1st, they play C1 man with King and Jaire both to the strength on the defensive left, resulting in first Amos then Sullivan (due to motion) being furthest outside, and they both move to depth and play with a cushion.  Bears had the strength to offensive right, so King is drawing the cushion.  What's more, it's almost a certainty that Nagy called this play to specifically get this match-up/situation, because he did it literally all game.  Just watch the TV copy of the Bears game, and you can call with about 90% certainty if it's C1/C2/C3-4 based on the corners being staggered/pressed/off.  They disguise occasionally, or possibly it's a pattern match or something I'm too lazy to figure out, but usually they play it straight.  Which means, if you want to dink and dunk forever, you just play 12 personnel and keep the strength of the formation right any time you want King on a cushion.  If they don't play C1, then just audible to a run into the light box.  Repeat for as many 10+ play drives as you want.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

I think it's 3rd and med/short where the GB defense is not so good. Seems like I saw something a couple weeks back where the GB defense was near top of the league on 3rd and long.

I'm thinking 3rd and 5-7 yards.  I mistyped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been very vocal about criticizing Uncle Fester, sometime in jest but for the most part because I mean it.

That being said I think he's actually been doing a good job of trying to cover our weaknesses while playing to areas of strength.  The front 7 being a concern with rookie ILB's (who are doing a good job but still rookies) and a front line manned by stud Clark and some guys.  What I don't understand is how playing our excellent corners as far off the line he is at times figures into that.  **Especially so when we do it against QB's like the one we saw last week who do not excel at throwing the deep ball let me add. 

Edited by 15412
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You need to look up the definition of eminently. 

Making the bolded assumption is eminently idiotic.

If Corners were repeatedly lining up in positions that the coaches didn't like, the coaches need to be correcting it, and they clearly haven't been. Thus the logical conclusion is that the players are doing what the coaches want.

Eminently replaceable means very replaceable. Obviously if another Jaire Alexander comes around, you would jump, but realistically there's only one other CB playing at Jaire's level, and the Dolphins paid him 77 million dollars a year and a half ago.

 Neither guy you mentioned is eminently replaceable. 

You're pedantic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, MrBobGray said:

Almost positive @AlexGreen#20 is right on that play; when they play C1 they stagger the corners away from the safety with the weakside corner playing with a cushion.  Technically it's just the most outside defender; 12:12 left in the 1st, they play C1 man with King and Jaire both to the strength on the defensive left, resulting in first Amos then Sullivan (due to motion) being furthest outside, and they both move to depth and play with a cushion.  Bears had the strength to offensive right, so King is drawing the cushion.  What's more, it's almost a certainty that Nagy called this play to specifically get this match-up/situation, because he did it literally all game.  Just watch the TV copy of the Bears game, and you can call with about 90% certainty if it's C1/C2/C3-4 based on the corners being staggered/pressed/off.  They disguise occasionally, or possibly it's a pattern match or something I'm too lazy to figure out, but usually they play it straight.  Which means, if you want to dink and dunk forever, you just play 12 personnel and keep the strength of the formation right any time you want King on a cushion.  If they don't play C1, then just audible to a run into the light box.  Repeat for as many 10+ play drives as you want.

Just don't tell this to Brady if we play the Bucs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, MrBobGray said:

Almost positive @AlexGreen#20 is right on that play; when they play C1 they stagger the corners away from the safety with the weakside corner playing with a cushion.  ...

That's helpful and seems both true and rational.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a realization yesterday about why I get so frustrated watching Pettine's defense this year.  To illustrate my point, let's turn to the magical world of competitive Street Fighter:

Pettine's defense is the football equivalent of Guile.  For those of you who grew up in loving homes, Guile sucks and is played primarily by sociopaths with a deep hunger for human misery.  He's a human wall of fireballs, just endlessly walking back and being a ****, over and over until the joy of the game is sucked from both of you, which is of course the only thing that brings Guile players the twisted emotion that to them resembles happiness.  Closing the gap on Guile is a long, awful test of patience, finding the spacing to jump in and move through, but not too close because otherwise you get Flash Kicked or crouching fierced and then YOU GET TO DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN WHICH IS JUST THE BEST.

**** Guile, is my point here.

But it's effective, because it puts all the stress on the other player.  They need to maintain their cool and not mess up over and over and over while you just need to remember how to charge a Sonic Boom.  It's a mental stress test, and it's surprisingly tough to pass, especially if you're playing a character built off momentum and emotion.  The Zangief/Guile match-up in most Street Fighters is generally sadder to watch than the opening ten minutes of Up, with the role of cancer here played by whichever human sack of misery picked Guile.  This is what Pettine wants to do.  He wants to force the other team to pick the sad, boring option (5 yard out ad infinitum) over and over and over, betting that their humanity will crack before their will.  And it works!  The Bears stuck to it with almost ridiculous patience and it barely paid off, if at all.  It helps that once you're in the red zone, there's not even a sad boring option because the field is too compressed to really get guys in space.  But really it's just about making the other team make mistakes.

Here's the thing though.  This is fine if you're playing Guile, because you picked Guile specifically to relish in this particular brand of ghoulish torment.  But the Packers defense, personnel-wise, isn't Guile.  It's Akuma, and we're talking SFIV Vortex Akuma too.  Since I know we're too deep into the nerdery now and I've lost most of you, I'll explain.  Akuma is just a big ole' bag jam-packed full of mechanics.  Pretty much nothing he can't do.  He can play keepaway for days, and almost as effectively as Guile.  The fireball spam can be as real as you can dream it.  But unlike Guile, because despite his appearance he has more of a soul than the void inside Guile and those who play him, Akuma can go in as hard as anyone in the game.  His aggressive pressure is crazy, and if he knocks you down once things can go very wrong very quick.  Man has about 14000 options for you on wake-up, and good luck guessing which one it's gonna be without mind reading.  Akuma's best play style is playing just defensive enough that there's no openings, and then obliterating you when you mess up because you tried to press a button because you thought video games were about fun, your first mistake.  

This particular brand of play is what we call "the Belichick method of defense", and it certainly requires either a genius defensive mind or a massive amount of talent.  The Packers sure don't have a genius defensive mind, but boy howdy look at this talent.  Top to bottom, this is probably the most talented Packers defense of Aaron Rodgers' career.  2010 had absolute monsters, but if we're talking overall depth and the full roster I'll give 2020 the edge.  Even more, there's a ton of interesting possibilities that the personnel bring to mind, because you have corners who can play on an island, safeties that can play basically any DB position, three edge who can play anywhere on the line for pressure, a top 5 defensive lineman in football who is dominant in both phases, etc.  This defense could be so many things, and watching Pettine force them to just back up and throw fireballs over, and over, and over, and over, and over, because "hey they'll mess up eventually probably!" is infuriating.  Gutekunst has given Pettine absolutely every tool he could possibly want, and in return Pettine built a defense that uses none of them at all.  

And all around the world Guile players bay and chitter in their nightmare voices in recognition of one of their own.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...