DMN Burnett Blog: Bigger, Stronger, Faster

[khiladi]

Parcells explained exactly how we played quarters coverage in his press conference on Sept. 26, 2005 (one week after the Moss touchdowns), when he was talking about a play in our game against the 49ers. { If it was archived, I'd provide a link to the audio of that, too. } EDIT: Never mind, I found the link. I'll post the link, a recap and photos in a few minutes.

How does he explain quarters coverage? He simply states that Dallas was playing quarters coverage and then goes on about how Keith should have doubled the outside receiver because there was no inside vertical threat for Keith to defend. One will double the outside receiver in cover-2 as well, provided the safety has no inside threat....

That was an example of a horrible play by Keith, where he didn't react to what was obvious, per the words of Parcells, when he stated that the 49ers were in I-formation and Keith had no threat from the slot-receiver on the other side.

 

[AdamJT13]

Say they did a play-action against a cover-2 in the same offensive formation... I would think doubling the outside receiver would be the safeties responsibility as well if he has no threat from a vertical receiver from the inside.

In Cover 2, the safeties play a deep half and are responsible for anyone who comes into that zone (even if it's two different receivers). So, for example, if Lloyd was running deep behind Henry and the slot receiver on the other side was running a post all the way into Davis' deep zone, he would have to maintain his zone integrity in order to get to either receiver.

Can you post what was said in respect to the (...). I can't play the clip at work, so I'm just curious, was Bill actually saying that Keith Davis primary responsibility, in deep coverage, was to pay attention to a RB, thinking he's going to run a 20+ yard vertical route or was he simply saying that Keith should recognized the formation immediately and doubled the outside receiver...

The "..." is just Parcells pausing and starting to say something else. I left out one word ("he"), but it was too late to edit my post by the time I listened to it again and realized it.

And yes, in quarters coverage against that formation, Davis' primary responsibility is to cover a running back running a vertical route. If the running back doesn't come vertical, he doubles the outside receiver.

Bob Davie (the former Notre Dame coach) explained this concept in a breakdown that Dallas East posted last week. His description of quarters coverage is slightly different from how we played it, but it shows that the safety is keying on the running back if that's the inside receiver --

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2094997&postcount=388

Davie says, "The safeties, aligned at eight yards deep, read the intention of the No. 2 receiver to their side. In this case, the strong safety reads the tight end and the free safety reads through to the running back."

On the Lloyd play, the only difference is that there's a slot receiver on Roy's side instead of a tight end. From Davis' standpoint, it's the same. His read is in the backfield.

By the way, I downloaded the audio file, cut out everything but the part when Parcells was talking about that play and uploaded it to the site theebs uses. Unless your employer blocks this Web site, I would think you can listen to it now (there's also a link to download it) --

http://www.4shared.com/file/49859144/7b50e0e1/Parcells_explains_quarters_9-26-05.html

This quote has Bill admitting that Keith could have peaked at the slot-receiver, and the only slot receiver was the one on the side of Roy. I am assuming that the reported was pointing to the fact that the slot receiver could run a patter into the direction of Keith Davis, which means that the idea of the vertical receiver being a running back is quite a stretch.

Parcells said Davis might have peeked at the slot receiver. But that wasn't his responsibility. Parcells made it clear that Davis should have known to double Lloyd a tenth of a second after the snap -- as soon as he saw the play-action fake. There's no way he could have known where the slot receiver was going that soon after the snap, so if Davis had any responsibility for him, Parcells wouldn't have said Davis should have doubled Lloyd within a tenth of a second.

If anything, this is just proof that we should be glad Keith Davis is gone...

Except on special teams.

 

[AdamJT13]

How does he explain quarters coverage? He simply states that Dallas was playing quarters coverage and then goes on about how Keith should have doubled the outside receiver because there was no inside vertical threat for Keith to defend. One will double the outside receiver in cover-2 as well, provided the safety has no inside threat....

In quarters coverage, when Davis is keying on the running back, he would know to go to his secondary responsibility (doubling Lloyd) immediately after the fake (within a tenth of a second after the snap, Parcells said).

In Cover 2, there's no way for him to know that he had no other vertical threat that soon after the snap. He'd have to maintain zone integrity for much longer to see where each receiver is running, because he'd be responsible for a zone instead of a man.

When you understand what quarters coverage is and how we played it, you can see how Parcells' description of that play explains everything.

 

[khiladi]

In Cover 2, the safeties play a deep half and are responsible for anyone who comes into that zone (even if it's two different receivers). So, for example, if Lloyd was running deep behind Henry and the slot receiver on the other side was running a post all the way into Davis' deep zone, he would have to maintain his zone integrity in order to get to either receiver.

I am talking about this particular situation. In this case, there was only one receiver that could have possible threatened the situation and that was Brandon Lloyd. If the Cowboys ran a cover-2 in this particular situation, the responsibility on Keith Davis would have essentially been the same.

Davie says, "The safeties, aligned at eight yards deep, read the intention of the No. 2 receiver to their side. In this case, the strong safety reads the tight end and the free safety reads through to the running back."

On the Lloyd play, the only difference is that there's a slot receiver on Roy's side instead of a tight end. From Davis' standpoint, it's the same. His read is in the backfield.

Thanks for the information. I had actually read the referenced link, but would like to add:

The safeties, aligned at eight yards deep, read the intention of the No. 2 receiver to their side. In this case, the strong safety reads the tight end and the free safety reads through to the running back. The great advantage of quarters coverage is that you have immediate run support if a run develops. If it is a run, the safeties support immediately, providing a 9-man front.

This leads to the following comment:

In Cover 2, there's no way for him to know that he had no other vertical threat that soon after the snap. He'd have to maintain zone integrity for much longer to see where each receiver is running, because he'd be responsible for a zone instead of a man.

The reason the free safety is reading the running back is to provide additional run-support. This is why I alluded to Parcells statement regarding the play-action being run opposite the field of Keith. According to Parcells, he should have recognized that there was no run and he should have shot staright to the X-receiver to provide additional help to Henry because there was nobody in his vicinity for Keith to cover. The cover-2 wouldn't have changed the situation at all, because there was only one receiver in that area.

The only possible exception to the situation is the slot-receiver. And Parcells said that recognition should have taken a tenth of a second.

Except on special teams.

He does devastate the wedge...

 

[AdamJT13]

I am talking about this particular situation. In this case, there was only one receiver that could have possible threatened the situation and that was Brandon Lloyd. If the Cowboys ran a cover-2 in this particular situation, the responsibility on Keith Davis would have essentially been the same.

No, it would not.

The reason the free safety is reading the running back is to provide additional run-support.

No, it's because THAT is the inside receiver on his side. The very next thing Davie said was, "If the No. 2 receivers show pass, the safeties then play zone in their quarters. If the No. 2 receiver threatens their quarter, they play a man-to-man technique as long as the receiver is in their zone. If the No. 2 receiver runs a route that immediately takes him out of the strong safety's zone, he simply zones his quarter."

That's a little more of a zone coverage than the way we played it, or the way a lot of NFL teams play it, but it's clear that the safety on that side is keying on the running back (the No. 2 receiver, in this case) as a RECEIVER.

Here's that diagram again showing the tailback as the No. 2 receiver --

And here's another one showing a split backfield, with the back running a vertical route --

Also, in that Davie quote you posted, he said the SAFETIES (plural) can provide run support, not just the safety who is keying on the running back.

This is why I alluded to Parcells statement regarding the play-action being run opposite the field of Keith. According to Parcells, he should have recognized that there was no run and he should have shot staright to the X-receiver to provide additional help to Henry because there was nobody in his vicinity for Keith to cover.

He was talking about the running back not being a vertical threat.

The cover-2 wouldn't have changed the situation at all, because there was only one receiver in that area.

The only possible exception to the situation is the slot-receiver. And Parcells said that recognition should have taken a tenth of a second.

No, no, no. There's NO WAY to know where the slot receiver is going that soon after the snap.

Let's look at it again. Here's the fake --

You can't tell where any of the receivers are going yet. Lloyd could be running a sideline hook, and the slot could be running a post right toward Davis. In Cover 2, he'd have to focus on his zone, not Lloyd. But Parcells makes it clear that he can focus on Lloyd. Why? Because we were in quarters, not Cover 2. His responsibility is different.




And the next photo --

Nope, still can't tell where all of the receivers will end up going.

 

[Hostile]

Tap out man. Tap out.

 

[zrinkill]

Man


Adam goes Conan on these trolls ...... seems like they would learn not to poke that bear.

 

[BigDFan5]

Holy hell someone call mercy Adam is punishing this guy

 

[TheCount]

Dude, you are so contentious just for the sake of it...

Yes, sometimes.

Yes, it makes a difference if a guy previously viewed as an average athlete has much better speed than anyone expected. And what a teammate sees on the field every day in terms of playing speed means much more than some 40 time published by a Kiper wannabe living in his mom's basement.

I don't disagree, but him being faster doesn't mean he's better. Him being smarter, would be preferable, but there's no number you can point to for football smarts.

 

[Clove]

Holy hell someone call mercy Adam is punishing this guy

The only problem is, Roy still sucks in coverage and Offensive coordinators know this, so they are targeting Roy.

I don't care if you show me all the tapes between the time Roy was Born up until now, Roy is a nice LB, an okay Safety. He needs to be paid like an OK safety, not a top one.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

why is this guy getting labeled a troll? hes discussing the issue and not flaming.

i dont really care about the argument in and of itself. its just missing the forest for the sake of the trees but calling him a troll is baseless nonsense.

 

[WoodysGirl]

http://img.***BLOCKED***/albums/v628/cowboyszone/thread_stuff/BangHeadHere.gif

 

[DallasFanSince86]

http://img.***BLOCKED***/albums/v628/cowboyszone/thread_stuff/BangHeadHere.gif

:laugh2:

 

[khiladi]

No, it would not.

You can't be serious. Your telling me that Keith Davis, in cover-2, would not double a receiver when no additional receiver is anywhere in his zone? ARe you saying he is just suppose to sit there and wait for the other eligible receivers that are nowhere to be found to maybe enter his zone? Are receivers 'jumpers' now, where they can vanish in and out of paricular zones?

Please...

No, it's because THAT is the inside receiver on his side. The very next thing Davie said was, "If the No. 2 receivers show pass, the safeties then play zone in their quarters. If the No. 2 receiver threatens their quarter, they play a man-to-man technique as long as the receiver is in their zone. If the No. 2 receiver runs a route that immediately takes him out of the strong safety's zone, he simply zones his quarter."

So the safety is suppose to simply zone his quarter if there is no threat of a No. 2 receiver, which was the case with Davis on Lloyd. How is that any different than cover-2? Who is Davis suppose to cover in that situation, if there is only one receiver on his side and the play-action went to his opposite side.

No, no, no. There's NO WAY to know where the slot receiver is going that soon after the snap.

The question was posed by the reporter, not me. The reported was saying that Keith was trying to help, but not 'take up space' be peeking at the slot receiver.

Isn't that what he did, though? Didn't he peek inside on the slot receiver?

The only slot receiver was the one to the left. Parcells admits that it could have been a possibility, but he should have pretty much been smarter than that.

Well, yeah, he might have, but a tenth of a second after the ball was snapped, he should have looked for the X (receiver). A tenth of a second. Because both backs ... had no vertical threat. It was just a split end on his side. They were in I formation. Simple.

Parcells admitted that was a possibility. But he should have reacted a tenth of a second after the ball was snapped straight to the outside receiver. Parcells was essentially stating that there is no well in hell Keith Davis shouldn't have double-teamed Lloyd, because nobody was in his vicinity at all. He brought the point that they were in I-formation as well, which precluded the possibility that receiver could have been a number 2 threat.

I see no difference if this was a cover-2 situation...

You can't tell where any of the receivers are going yet. Lloyd could be running a sideline hook, and the slot could be running a post right toward Davis. In Cover 2, he'd have to focus on his zone, not Lloyd. But Parcells makes it clear that he can focus on Lloyd. Why? Because we were in quarters, not Cover 2. His responsibility is different.

1.

The post you just quoted said that in qaurters coverage, they are to focus on zone, unless the No. 2 receiver threatens their quarter. Then they switch to man.

If the No. 2 receiver threatens their quarter, they play a man-to-man technique as long as the receiver is in their zone.

2.

No, that is not what he said. What he said was that they were in I-formation. The RB went to the opposite side, so Keith Davis should have reacted to double, because nobody was in his vicinity to cover.

It was a play-action pass away from him, so he basically was free of any responsibility. Well, the only responsibility, the only receiver left on his side was the guy that caught the ball. So why wouldn't you turn, with no other threat, wouldn't you turn that way to help? That's what you should do, and he didn't do it. So he's just back in there doing nothing. OK?

Is Keith Davis allowed to do nothing when in cover-2?

As Parcells says before:

Well, he's taking up his space, OK, when he should be realizing that he wasn't threatened. OK, now, 'where can I help?' You're certainly not going to help the other corner. He's way over there, two positions over. So. that's part of those growing pains I'm telling you about. That's part of the growing pain, right there. Not enough experience.

The whole point is that your a football player and you react to plays. It isn't simply about your 'responsibility', especially when your in a position to make a play.

 

[bbgun]

why is this guy getting labeled a troll?

Because the shills stick together (safety in numbers) and, paraphrasing Ali McGraw, loving Roy means never having to say you're sorry.

 

[BigDFan5]

The only problem is, Roy still sucks in coverage and Offensive coordinators know this, so they are targeting Roy.

I don't care if you show me all the tapes between the time Roy was Born up until now, Roy is a nice LB, an okay Safety. He needs to be paid like an OK safety, not a top one.

Just so I know that you are legit and know your facts can you name the top 10 paid safeties based on yearly salary and where Roy ranks on it

 

[AsthmaField]

Just so I know that you are legit and know your facts can you name the top 10 paid safeties based on yearly salary and where Roy ranks on it

I bet Google hits just went through the roof.

 

[BigDFan5]

I bet Google hits just went through the roof.

:laugh2:

 

[AdamJT13]

You can't be serious. Your telling me that Keith Davis, in cover-2, would not double a receiver when no additional receiver is anywhere in his zone? ARe you saying he is just suppose to sit there and wait for the other eligible receivers that are nowhere to be found to maybe enter his zone?

In Cover 2, if the slot receiver on the other side had run a crossing pattern into Davis' deep zone while Lloyd had run a deep comeback route on the sideline, Davis would be responsible for that slot receiver in his zone, NOT Lloyd.

So the safety is suppose to simply zone his quarter if there is no threat of a No. 2 receiver, which was the case with Davis on Lloyd. How is that any different than cover-2? Who is Davis suppose to cover in that situation, if there is only one receiver on his side and the play-action went to his opposite side.

Like I said, Davie's description is a little more of a zone on the secondary responsibility than what we (and a lot of NFL teams) played. Instead of the secondary responsibility being a quarter zone, it's doubling the outside receiver. Notice how Parcells said Davis should have helped out on Lloyd, even though Lloyd wasn't in Davis' quarter zone? That's because he's not playing a zone.

The question was posed by the reporter, not me. The reported was saying that Keith was trying to help, but not 'take up space' be peeking at the slot receiver.

The only slot receiver was the one to the left. Parcells admits that it could have been a possibility, but he should have pretty much been smarter than that.

Exactly -- because he's not playing Cover 2 or a zone. He's playing quarters coverage, and his responsibility (when his key, the back, doesn't run a vertical route) is to double the outside receiver on his side.

I see no difference if this was a cover-2 situation...

Then you've got a problem.

If you're playing safety in Cover 2, you can't immediately leave your zone a tenth of a second after the ball is snapped. In quarters, you can go double the outside receiver that soon if you know that your primary responsibility isn't running a vertical route.

The whole point is that your a football player and you react to plays. It isn't simply about your 'responsibility', especially when your in a position to make a play.

Your responsibility is to do what you're supposed to do. You can't have people abandoning their responsibility right after the snap. Otherwise, the whole scheme falls apart.

You've never been a coach, have you?

 

[zrinkill]

Because the shills stick together

Apparently so do the trolls.