Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48
  1. #11
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096294
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096292
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096289
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096288
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096286
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096282
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096279
    has nothing to do with why our DB's suck, Our safeties suck for reasons that include, but are not limited to INT's.

    Tackling, Angles, sticking in their zone (kinda important for a zone team), winning one on one matchups,(yes, those still happen even though you play zone) CATCHING interceptions, knocking balls down, forcing fumbles, forcing turnovers, playing man coverage, disguising coverage, closing on the ball.
    Look, I agree we need improvement at the S position, atleast one of them. What I don't agree with you on is that our S's are solely to blame for that perception.
    I never said it's solely on them. Getting a new S won't make our defense #1 all of a sudden. However, DB's shoulder alot of blame. in 2009, our defense led the league in sacks, and although I don't have a number, I suspect they were pretty high up there with pressures too. Strangely enough, Strangly enough, we only finished 19th in passing D Yards, 23rd in TD"s allowed, we had the 6th worst passer rating allowed, at 92.5 (equivalent of letting a guy like Brady pass on us all season long, and trust me, we didn't play 16 Brady's), all while recording only 11 interceptions, ranking #26.

    So what more do you want? We got pressure, but still couldn't stop the pass. THis season we struggled at pressure, still couldn't stop the pass. DL needs to step it up, yes, but so does our secondary.
    Take a close look at when those sacks came.

    Truth of the matter is, the first 2/3rds (estimate based on my memory) of the season our DL was pretty much a non factor both against the run and against the pass.

    Our DL didn't wake up until late in the season. Until that happened, a bunch of the load was carried by those DB's you are hacking on.
    Week 1: 4 sacks, one pick, Brady QUinn, 204 yards, 1TD, 1INT
    Week 2: 2 sacks, two picks, Stafford, 152 yards 2TD, 2 int
    Week 3: 1 sack, one pick, Hill 195 yards, 2 Td 1 int
    Week 4: 8 sack, one pick, Rodgers 384 yards, 2td 1 int
    Wek 5: 1 sack, one pick, Bulger, 100%, 88 yards, td, Boller 209 yards, 1int
    Week 6: 3 sacks, Flacco, 386 yards, 2TD

    I can go on. There wasn't much load being carried, even when the defense got to the QB.
    No no, keep going. Quinn and Stafford. LOL.

    JA and Ray accounted for 19 of our sacks. They got them on the following weeks

    JA wk 2/1, 9/2.5, 10/2, 11-14/1 each week, 16/1, 17/1
    Ray wk 5/1.5, 9/2, 11/2, 15/1, 16/1, 17/.5

    Pretty shitty if you ask me.
    oh, so now you want 6 sacks a game from each of them?
    Your expectations are so unrealistically lofty it's rediculous. in 2009, our line played some very good ball. They had poor games, yes. All teams have poor games. I don't know what more you want. We had 48 sacks.

    This year the #1 team had 48, in 08 it was 59, but that was an outrageous year, next best ws 51 then 48, 07 was 53, 06 was 61, 60 then 47.

    Point is our totals ranked pretty well vs. leading teams from other years. We didn't have a record-setting year, but we had a very good year.

    But you'll probably dismiss it, anything to take the blame of your boys in the backfield.
    Nope, never said that. What I want is what we got from weeks 9ish on. Pressure/sack production from both sides consistently.

    When they do that, QB's can't do anything but wonder were its coming from.

    On a side note, don't take that as I'm hacking on our DE's cause I'm not. Most of the issues related to pressure come from our inability to collapse a pocket.

    To many times we watched our DE's getting to the spot only to see the QB take a step or two forward, wait for a fraction of a second and then throw the ball the the WR or back.

    Put Phat Pat or K-dubb in the middle of a few of those and you have INT's from bad throws, stripped balls from DE's, Sacks for loss or just a QB scrambling and throwing it away.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  2. #12
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,776
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096299
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096294
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096292
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096289
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096288
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096286
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096282
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096279
    has nothing to do with why our DB's suck, Our safeties suck for reasons that include, but are not limited to INT's.

    Tackling, Angles, sticking in their zone (kinda important for a zone team), winning one on one matchups,(yes, those still happen even though you play zone) CATCHING interceptions, knocking balls down, forcing fumbles, forcing turnovers, playing man coverage, disguising coverage, closing on the ball.
    Look, I agree we need improvement at the S position, atleast one of them. What I don't agree with you on is that our S's are solely to blame for that perception.
    I never said it's solely on them. Getting a new S won't make our defense #1 all of a sudden. However, DB's shoulder alot of blame. in 2009, our defense led the league in sacks, and although I don't have a number, I suspect they were pretty high up there with pressures too. Strangely enough, Strangly enough, we only finished 19th in passing D Yards, 23rd in TD"s allowed, we had the 6th worst passer rating allowed, at 92.5 (equivalent of letting a guy like Brady pass on us all season long, and trust me, we didn't play 16 Brady's), all while recording only 11 interceptions, ranking #26.

    So what more do you want? We got pressure, but still couldn't stop the pass. THis season we struggled at pressure, still couldn't stop the pass. DL needs to step it up, yes, but so does our secondary.
    Take a close look at when those sacks came.

    Truth of the matter is, the first 2/3rds (estimate based on my memory) of the season our DL was pretty much a non factor both against the run and against the pass.

    Our DL didn't wake up until late in the season. Until that happened, a bunch of the load was carried by those DB's you are hacking on.
    Week 1: 4 sacks, one pick, Brady QUinn, 204 yards, 1TD, 1INT
    Week 2: 2 sacks, two picks, Stafford, 152 yards 2TD, 2 int
    Week 3: 1 sack, one pick, Hill 195 yards, 2 Td 1 int
    Week 4: 8 sack, one pick, Rodgers 384 yards, 2td 1 int
    Wek 5: 1 sack, one pick, Bulger, 100%, 88 yards, td, Boller 209 yards, 1int
    Week 6: 3 sacks, Flacco, 386 yards, 2TD

    I can go on. There wasn't much load being carried, even when the defense got to the QB.
    No no, keep going. Quinn and Stafford. LOL.

    JA and Ray accounted for 19 of our sacks. They got them on the following weeks

    JA wk 2/1, 9/2.5, 10/2, 11-14/1 each week, 16/1, 17/1
    Ray wk 5/1.5, 9/2, 11/2, 15/1, 16/1, 17/.5

    Pretty shitty if you ask me.
    oh, so now you want 6 sacks a game from each of them?
    Your expectations are so unrealistically lofty it's rediculous. in 2009, our line played some very good ball. They had poor games, yes. All teams have poor games. I don't know what more you want. We had 48 sacks.

    This year the #1 team had 48, in 08 it was 59, but that was an outrageous year, next best ws 51 then 48, 07 was 53, 06 was 61, 60 then 47.

    Point is our totals ranked pretty well vs. leading teams from other years. We didn't have a record-setting year, but we had a very good year.

    But you'll probably dismiss it, anything to take the blame of your boys in the backfield.
    Nope, never said that. What I want is what we got from weeks 9ish on. Pressure/sack production from both sides consistently.

    When they do that, QB's can't do anything but wonder were its coming from.

    On a side note, don't take that as I'm hacking on our DE's cause I'm not. Most of the issues related to pressure come from our inability to collapse a pocket.

    To many times we watched our DE's getting to the spot only to see the QB take a step or two forward, wait for a fraction of a second and then throw the ball the the WR or back.

    Put Phat Pat or K-dubb in the middle of a few of those and you have INT's from bad throws, stripped balls from DE's, Sacks for loss or just a QB scrambling and throwing it away.
    Except they were doubling KW or Pat alot of the time, so that slowed them down.

    We saw alot of Allen and Edwards working one man, that's why they were as successful as they were. It's a tall ordr to expect a big, slow DT to collapse a pocket through a double team. Sometimes the OL just played us well. OThertimes, KW woudl bust through for a 3+ sack game (it happens)

  3. #13
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

    I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

    Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

    I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.


    BTW

    Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

    Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.

  4. #14
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,776
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309
    Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

    I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

    Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

    I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.
    Because Marrdro says so, and he has an extensive collection of books



    Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?
    Everyone has their own variation, TOmlin, Fraizer, Dungy, etc. all tweak what they do where they go. If I'm not mistaken, Fraizer worked under Dungy, so I'd imagine the scheme will be pretty damn close to what Dungy ran.

    Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.
    Bingo. We don't have the right players. Winfield and Griffen can be good physical cover 2 corners, since they're not asked to cover much ground, they're physical at the line. However, we play them off more than at the line, our safeties aren't overly quick, and since they're the last man standing, they need to be.

    our LB's are quite frankly awful cover 2 linebackers. EJ is a great run supporter, and great blitzer. His ability to get back and cover the middle third leaves alot to be desired. Leber isn't very quick, his pass coverage isn't bad though, because his technique is solid. Greenway is really the only one suited for this, with speed, strength, the complete package.

    Our front 4 is getting smaller and quicker, a sign they're focusing on the pass rush rather than stuffing the run. I suspect in the next few years, or even in FA, we'll be targeting some quicker cover LB's. EJ won't be aroudn too much longer, and when it comes time to replace him, look for a faster player to come in, that is if they do intend to keep the Tampa-2

  5. #15
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,853

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Sorry Marr,
    I cosign a lot of the things you say but you are up shit's creek on this one.

    Taking a bad angle has nothing to do with the scheme you run. In fact, the cover 2 and the Tampa doesn't really change the safeties responsibility. It has a bigger impact on the depth the MLB must get. However, even with the changes in play calling, taking a bad angle is never part of a defense, it is a mistake and not doing your job.

    http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81ce293c/Jacobs-goes-on-73-yard-jaunt

    What part of scheme is the angle the safety took? I don't believe that this was even cover two...looks like cover 3 or man.
    As a FS in HS, I got beat deep looking in the back field lots of times but...when the ball crossed the line, my angles were always spot on.

  6. #16
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,776
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    In that clip I see two things, aside from a meltdown in the front 7.

    Madieu Williams takes a terrible angle. Maybe he thought BJ would get tripped up, maybe he underestimated his speed.

    Secondly, I see MW getting outran in a straight line by a 270 lb powerback. Jacobs isn't an exceptionally fast dude. Most DB"s in the league should be able to hang with him.

    Hell, Winfield caught him from the opposite end of the field, Williams had a straight up line on him and got smoked.

  7. #17
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,853

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096326
    In that clip I see two things, aside from a meltdown in the front 7.

    Madieu Williams takes a terrible angle. Maybe he thought BJ would get tripped up, maybe he underestimated his speed.

    Secondly, I see MW getting outran in a straight line by a 270 lb powerback. Jacobs isn't an exceptionally fast dude. Most DB"s in the league should be able to hang with him.

    Hell, Winfield caught him from the opposite end of the field, Williams had a straight up line on him and got smoked.
    Marr knows. I think he is just striking up a discussion. Our safety play is horrendous. Look at pass breakups not Ints. With 48 sacks...we should have had a fair number of pass breakups. We didn't.

  8. #18
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,686

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    I'd say we were in cover 1 with man underneath or Cover 3 on the Jacobs run.

    We blitzed a Sanford and Greenway, EJ and Leber are reading and reacting, probably in zone, and the corners start to drop.

    Check it out:
    Alignment:


    Watch Greenway and Sanford. They're moving on the ball, not reacting to anything in the play - blitz.
    Snap:



    I'm pretty sure Madieu Williams just sucks and EJ played it too far inside, Diehl got a hand on him and that's that.

  9. #19
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096300
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096299
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096294
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096292
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096289
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096288
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096286
    Quote Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096282
    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096279
    has nothing to do with why our DB's suck, Our safeties suck for reasons that include, but are not limited to INT's.

    Tackling, Angles, sticking in their zone (kinda important for a zone team), winning one on one matchups,(yes, those still happen even though you play zone) CATCHING interceptions, knocking balls down, forcing fumbles, forcing turnovers, playing man coverage, disguising coverage, closing on the ball.
    Look, I agree we need improvement at the S position, atleast one of them. What I don't agree with you on is that our S's are solely to blame for that perception.
    I never said it's solely on them. Getting a new S won't make our defense #1 all of a sudden. However, DB's shoulder alot of blame. in 2009, our defense led the league in sacks, and although I don't have a number, I suspect they were pretty high up there with pressures too. Strangely enough, Strangly enough, we only finished 19th in passing D Yards, 23rd in TD"s allowed, we had the 6th worst passer rating allowed, at 92.5 (equivalent of letting a guy like Brady pass on us all season long, and trust me, we didn't play 16 Brady's), all while recording only 11 interceptions, ranking #26.

    So what more do you want? We got pressure, but still couldn't stop the pass. THis season we struggled at pressure, still couldn't stop the pass. DL needs to step it up, yes, but so does our secondary.
    Take a close look at when those sacks came.

    Truth of the matter is, the first 2/3rds (estimate based on my memory) of the season our DL was pretty much a non factor both against the run and against the pass.

    Our DL didn't wake up until late in the season. Until that happened, a bunch of the load was carried by those DB's you are hacking on.
    Week 1: 4 sacks, one pick, Brady QUinn, 204 yards, 1TD, 1INT
    Week 2: 2 sacks, two picks, Stafford, 152 yards 2TD, 2 int
    Week 3: 1 sack, one pick, Hill 195 yards, 2 Td 1 int
    Week 4: 8 sack, one pick, Rodgers 384 yards, 2td 1 int
    Wek 5: 1 sack, one pick, Bulger, 100%, 88 yards, td, Boller 209 yards, 1int
    Week 6: 3 sacks, Flacco, 386 yards, 2TD

    I can go on. There wasn't much load being carried, even when the defense got to the QB.
    No no, keep going. Quinn and Stafford. LOL.

    JA and Ray accounted for 19 of our sacks. They got them on the following weeks

    JA wk 2/1, 9/2.5, 10/2, 11-14/1 each week, 16/1, 17/1
    Ray wk 5/1.5, 9/2, 11/2, 15/1, 16/1, 17/.5

    Pretty shitty if you ask me.
    oh, so now you want 6 sacks a game from each of them?
    Your expectations are so unrealistically lofty it's rediculous. in 2009, our line played some very good ball. They had poor games, yes. All teams have poor games. I don't know what more you want. We had 48 sacks.

    This year the #1 team had 48, in 08 it was 59, but that was an outrageous year, next best ws 51 then 48, 07 was 53, 06 was 61, 60 then 47.

    Point is our totals ranked pretty well vs. leading teams from other years. We didn't have a record-setting year, but we had a very good year.

    But you'll probably dismiss it, anything to take the blame of your boys in the backfield.
    Nope, never said that. What I want is what we got from weeks 9ish on. Pressure/sack production from both sides consistently.

    When they do that, QB's can't do anything but wonder were its coming from.

    On a side note, don't take that as I'm hacking on our DE's cause I'm not. Most of the issues related to pressure come from our inability to collapse a pocket.

    To many times we watched our DE's getting to the spot only to see the QB take a step or two forward, wait for a fraction of a second and then throw the ball the the WR or back.

    Put Phat Pat or K-dubb in the middle of a few of those and you have INT's from bad throws, stripped balls from DE's, Sacks for loss or just a QB scrambling and throwing it away.
    Except they were doubling KW or Pat alot of the time, so that slowed them down.

    We saw alot of Allen and Edwards working one man, that's why they were as successful as they were. It's a tall ordr to expect a big, slow DT to collapse a pocket through a double team. Sometimes the OL just played us well. OThertimes, KW woudl bust through for a 3+ sack game (it happens)
    But it isn't a tall order. Ole Phat Pat was damn good at it. Still is to a point, but he can't do it often enough anymore.

    Thats why we should have addressed this a couple of years ago, or even last year, or possibly this year.

    But we didn't.

    Again, I hope the staff has Guion ready to go in that role.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  10. #20
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309
    Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

    I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

    Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

    I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.


    BTW

    Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

    Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.
    No one has said anything of the sort. What has been said is that in most cases, to limit the big play, the defense will be patient and let the team move it down the field in small chunks (much like you see in a prevent defense) not take risks attempting to intercept the ball.

    What that means is they don't go for the INT and risk letting the reciever get behind.

    You might not have missed that if you would have opened the urls or even read just the snippets that were provided.

    Thats OK though, they haven't gone away. You just need to go back and read them instead of making shit up. :P
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Traditional molting season is here again in Oregon
    By Garland Greene in forum College Ball
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-24-2009, 09:49 AM
  2. Traditional epitaphs rest in peace
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-11-2007, 08:46 PM
  3. The difference between O'Leary and I
    By in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-07-2007, 11:25 AM
  4. The Biggest Difference
    By LosAngelis in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-23-2004, 11:31 AM
  5. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN
    By purplehorn in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-14-2004, 05:26 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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