
|
01-01-2007
|
#1
|
|
Banned
Joined: | Oct 2005 |
Posts: | 2,384 |
|
Bad Defense. Does this make sense to you?
Can anyone explain to me why A Glenn is matched up against Roy Williams in this play?
The resulting play is a TD.
A Glenn can't cover Roy Williams.
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#2
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Location: | Denver, CO |
Posts: | 1,594 |
|
Pretty creepy.
And Glenn should've just molested him once RY got to the spot. Even with the PI call and the ball at the 1 there would've only been 2 or 3 seconds left forcing then to kick the FG afterall.. or go for it.
Course I'm sure they would've went for it and prolly just called the same play again anyhow. 
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#3
|
|
Banned
Joined: | Oct 2005 |
Posts: | 2,384 |
|
The resulting TD...
Get rid of Glenn.
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#4
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Jun 2005 |
Location: | Dallas |
Posts: | 485 |
|
Why was Williams not double teamed there? Meaning the safety shown on the same side of the field, where did he go because he certainly did not roll the way of Williams? Did he go to double team the TE with the LB?
Playmaker!
2007 HOF Class
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#5
|
|
Banned
Joined: | Oct 2005 |
Posts: | 2,384 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deputy493
Why was Williams not double teamed there? Meaning the safety shown on the same side of the field, where did he go because he certainly did not roll the way of Williams? Did he go to double team the TE with the LB?
|
Its a fade route the corner.
Difficult to get safety help on that play.
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#6
|
|
Right Kind of Guy
Years Donated 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 117,252 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deputy493
Why was Williams not double teamed there? Meaning the safety shown on the same side of the field, where did he go because he certainly did not roll the way of Williams? Did he go to double team the TE with the LB?
|
Coaching ineptness.
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#7
|
|
The Funcooker
Joined: | Jul 2005 |
Location: | El Paso, Tx |
Posts: | 4,437 |
|
B/c Newman was on Furrey... he's the REAL threat apparently
CowboysL0c0
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#8
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 8,939 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by eduncan22
Can anyone explain to me why A Glenn is matched up against Roy Williams in this play?
The resulting play is a TD.
A Glenn can't cover Roy Williams.
|
Coaches Zimmer and Parcells: "Because that's how we do it...we always line up that way...he plays that side...we don't flip-flop guys...it's never been a problem till now...don't know what the problem was...we'll have to watch the tape and look at that...I'm focused on this week, I don't have time to dwell on last week's game...please don't ask such specific questions when I'm so depressed and upset, can't you see I'm an old man and pity me?"
I'll add that A.Glenn played the fade route perfectly, but that's why Kitna lobbed the ball inside and let Roy come back and get it with Glenn trapped behind him looking for the fade. To be honest, I'm not sure anyone, including TNew could have covered the expected fade and still stopped the Kitna throw...Newman couldn't even cover the basic corner route to Mike Williams yesterday.
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#9
|
|
Return to Dominance
Joined: | Mar 2005 |
Location: | Formerly YoMick |
Posts: | 21,416 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by eduncan22
Can anyone explain to me why A Glenn is matched up against Roy Williams in this play?
The resulting play is a TD.
A Glenn can't cover Roy Williams.
|
I have 2 questions about this...
1. Why wasnt TNEW on him?
2. Why dont we see this play setup for TO?
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#10
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Mar 2005 |
Location: | Houston, TX |
Posts: | 1,227 |
|
Actually there are several teams that do this in nickel situations. The theory is that you take your best cb and put him in single coverage vs the slot receiver, thereby freeing up the safeties to either blitz or double cover the outside guys.
I agree, however, that leaving Glenn in single coverage in that situation probably wasn't a good idea. 
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#11
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Location: | Denver, CO |
Posts: | 1,594 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wayne_motley
I'll add that A.Glenn played the fade route perfectly, but that's why Kitna lobbed the ball inside and let Roy come back and get it with Glenn trapped behind him looking for the fade. To be honest, I'm not sure anyone, including TNew could have covered the expected fade and still stopped the Kitna throw...Newman couldn't even cover the basic corner route to Mike Williams yesterday.
|
Well I think a person has to give Kitna a lil credit on 3 of those TD passes actually.
Yeah I know he's a pro QB yada yada, but those were perfectly placed balls. It's not like we dont see other QB's under throw, over throw, put them out too wide.. whatever, fairly often.
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#12
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Nov 2004 |
Posts: | 579 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoMick
...2. Why dont we see this play setup for TO?
|
my sentiments exactly
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#13
|
|
Banned
Joined: | Oct 2005 |
Posts: | 2,384 |
|
Do they really think A Glenn can cover Roy Williams?
Really?
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#14
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 8,939 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoMick
2. Why dont we see this play setup for TO?
|
On our last series of 4 plays I would have been happy to see a single play or pass that at least had a chance.
No one's talking about it because our defense was so bad, but we ran 4 plays down there and never even gave anyone a single chance to make a play...we never threw a pass that was touched by an offensive or defensive player...it was a horrible and embarrassing series.
|
|
|
01-01-2007
|
#15
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 2,171 |
|
does anyone think we have a corner that could have covered that play?
i don't.
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:23 PM.
|