- Messages
- 61,988
- Reaction score
- 63,120
Initially, I agreed because my first viewing of the video was at the recommended starting point. However, Warner spoke in depth about his expectations and play scenarios leading up to the 2:20 mark. For that reason, I reviewed what he said before that point in connection with his observations. Here is the transcript from 0:21 forward:
_____________________________
...but one of my biggest arguments was when you have both slants break at the same depth. It's really hard for a quarterback because it's hard to get a read when the timing
of both plays is exactly the same or when the inside slant that's supposed to influence somebody is running in the same timing that you have to throw the next slant it's really hard to read.
So, the first thing, I want you guys to see, is right here both guys are breaking at exactly the same depth once again. To me, doesn't make sense. I want my inside slant always going quicker than my next slant so I get a chance as a quarterback to actually read what this guy does.
If I have to throw both of these in the same timing, they're both happening at the same time, I'm inevitably going to be late to the outside slant if I'm reading it. So, right here, you see it boom both of them are breaking inside at the exact same depth. So now timing inside, timing outside are exactly the same and look how many steps CeeDee Lamb gets into his slant--ONE TWO THREE FOUR--before the ball is going to get to him. Can't happen.
To me, on a slant, it's got to be out as they're breaking so the ball's in his hands before he's taken three or four steps out of it. Okay, So, to me, it's not even as much about CD lamb here, as it is Brandon Cooks. So what I would want is, I would want Brandon Cooks to take one step and then come inside right now, get inside this defender.
So Packers are dropping this defender down, Savage down, into a Zone dog. And so we need to cross his face as fast as possible. So when we cross his face, now he's got to make a decision. So when he makes that decision, now, as a quarterback, I can throw it.
Now, the first thing I'm always thinking here because they bring pressure, and they drop this guy down, is there's a soft window in there almost like a hot situation. So
even though it's not hot, I have everything protected uh that's the soft part of the zone so I want to almost treat it like a hot. I I'm probably going to throw this inside slant this guy dropping down that's the gimme throw...
_____________________________
I could be incorrect but I believe Warner's context about throwing the pass to Cooks' was dependent completely on his route. Both Lamb and Cooks ran slants but Warner's expectation was for Cooks to run a QUICK slant. Plant his second foot, cut hard to the middle, and right into the soft zone. That did not happen. Warner explained further that Lamb became the primary receiver since Cooks did not run the quick slant because both receivers ran identical patterns taking nearly five steps.
The DB did cross Cooks' face but should not have interfered with Cooks running a quick slant, which would have been: a) inside foot step, b) outside foot plant and c) route. The DB was side-by-side with Cooks when his second foot planted (see #2 below). Cooks and Prescott both should have known the DB may be a blitzer pre-snap. This is why Warner discusses the quick slant option. All doubt is removed when the DB is blitzed. Both Cooks plus Prescott should have seen see where the void in the defense automatically appeared. Cooks could have made his cut for the quick slant practically in stride.
Notice how the soft zone is completely unchallenged when Cooks should have made his cut? Cooks took extra steps and invited the safety to challenge that void.
Granted, the DB may have thrown off Cooks' timing. Then again, Cooks did not hesitate. Both he and the DB did not run into each other. He ran his route hard. In my opinion, the route was good but too deep. Why Cooks took the extra steps is my question. To me, it appears he ran the slant pattern (see #3 below) he thought met the defensive scheme for that down.
I agree that Prescott held onto the ball too long as well--just for different reasons akin to what I believe Warner was illustrating. It was a timing pattern. I think his eyes were completely on the safety when Cooks extended his pattern. He did not pull the trigger because Cooks was not where he should have been. Lamb was his number two go-to. Prescott held onto the ball a split-second too long in order to fit his pass into that window that had already disappeared at that point.
