Punt coverage screw-up

[fgoodwin]

This is the second game in a row where the punt coverage team leaves a gunner uncovered.

Against Philly, Harris came out of punt coverage to cover the wide-out. Against the Colts, nobody covered the gunner, hence the 4th down pass attempt.

Yes, it failed, but the question is: why are we making the same mistake? Who is forgetting their assignment?

 

[TrailBlazer]

This is the second game in a row where the punt coverage team leaves a gunner uncovered.

Against Philly, Harris came out of punt coverage to cover the wide-out. Against the Colts, nobody covered the gunner, hence the 4th down pass attempt.

Yes, it failed, but the question is: why are we making the same mistake? Who is forgetting their assignment?

It is designed and called by bissacia. Oscan was just late to get there.

 

[The Natural]

It's a boneheaded play and should be scrapped. Horrible design

 

[dcjules]

A

It's a boneheaded play and should be scrapped. Horrible design

Agree with horrible in design.....two good offensive teams willing to punt! Let them....

 

[fgoodwin]

So, leaving the gunner uncovered is deliberate? Can somebody explain to me why you would intentionally leave the gunner uncovered?

I hope they shelve this goofy play before the playoffs.

 

[The Natural]

So, leaving the gunner uncovered is deliberate? Can somebody explain to me why you would intentionally leave the gunner uncovered?

I hope they shelve this goofy play before the playoffs.

If the guy caught the ball that play could've dramatically changed the complexion of the game. I know its hard to believe after drilling them the way we did but its all about momentum, give a team a score on that type of play and the energy would be contagious.

 

[TonyRomo17]

So, leaving the gunner uncovered is deliberate? Can somebody explain to me why you would intentionally leave the gunner uncovered?

I hope they shelve this goofy play before the playoffs.

So they can block the punt by having more rushers than blockers, it has to be timed correctly though, Thats how the Seahawks blocked a punt vs us.

 

[gimmesix]

So, leaving the gunner uncovered is deliberate? Can somebody explain to me why you would intentionally leave the gunner uncovered?

I hope they shelve this goofy play before the playoffs.

I'm not sure about the one where Harris came up. Either that was an error or Harris didn't know the play.

Against the Colts, it was obvious that we were trying to get Patmon to the punter unblocked by pulling him off the gunner and having Scandrick drop back and cover the gunner. It was a tough assignment that failed and we were lucky the gunner dropped the pass.

Let me add that if we are going to come off the gunner like that we need to wait until the last moment so the other team doesn't have time to think about faking it.

 

[Avery]

Take that iPad and break it against the wall. I never want a gunner uncovered again.

That was a buzz kill for the Colts and really the play of the game.

 

[windjc]

I'm not sure about the one where Harris came up. Either that was an error or Harris didn't know the play.

Against the Colts, it was obvious that we were trying to get Patmon to the punter unblocked by pulling him off the gunner and having Scandrick drop back and cover the gunner. It was a tough assignment that failed and we were lucky the gunner dropped the pass.

Let me add that if we are going to come off the gunner like that we need to wait until the last moment so the other team doesn't have time to think about faking it.

Exactly. Its all about timing Patmon came off his guy WAY too quickly and they Colts were looking for it and already planned to call out of the punt to pass.

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

Im not buying it that was by design. MAybe in a high school game, but not in the Pros.

 

[Picksix]

It happens more often than you think, actually. The receiving team tries to time it just right by bringing the edge guy in just as the ball is about to be snapped, hoping he can get a straight unblocked shot at the punter. One of the guys in the middle then runs to the sideline to try to cover the gunner. The thinking is that the gunner is a backup WR or DB, who doesn't catch many passes, and the punter doesn't throw very well. If its timed right, it can work, just like Seattle did to us. If you go too early, like we did against Indy, you leave yourself vulnerable.

That said, I don't know what happened against Philly.

 

[gimmesix]

It happens more often than you think, actually. The receiving team tries to time it just right by bringing the edge guy in just as the ball is about to be snapped, hoping he can get a straight unblocked shot at the punter. One of the guys in the middle then runs to the sideline to try to cover the gunner. The thinking is that the gunner is a backup WR or DB, who doesn't catch many passes, and the punter doesn't throw very well. If its timed right, it can work, just like Seattle did to us. If you go too early, like we did against Indy, you leave yourself vulnerable.

That said, I don't know what happened against Philly.

I don't know why some think it wasn't by design. The only alternative is that Patmon went braindead and decided to rush the punter on his own despite being the only player covering the gunner then Scandrick somehow noticed Patmon's lapse and tried to cover for it.

I could believe it wasn't by design if no one had covered the gunner in the first place, which appeared to be what took place in Philly. Even in that game, though, I wouldn't be surprised if we did the same thing, but moved even earlier. If we're going to coach that, we need to make sure the cover man knows not to move until the ball is snapped, or better yet, slide him down the line like Patmon did, but have Scandrick bail to the outside at the same time, so the gunner is covered. That allows Patmon to put himself in position to go for the block, puts strain on the punt team to get someone out to block him AND makes sure the gunner is still covered.

 

[Reality]

I believe the strategy they used had two goals, not one. The first one was obvious which was to put Patmon in a position to potentially block the punt. The other was to have Scandrick in a position to defend the fake punt/pass play. Now the latter has been mentioned, but the hidden goal with that second part was to bait the kicking team into trying a fake punt/pass. If Scandrick was already lined up helping Patmon double-cover the gunner, the kicking team would not have tried to fake punt/pass the ball which would have eliminated the second goal. The other downside to this is that to trick the team into doing it, Scandrick would have to time it perfectly before breaking toward the gunner after the snap or else he would have tipped their hand. He was a little slow to react which is why he was late reaching the gunner/receiver.

Now, that said, I would have done exactly what they did, but have Scandrick immediately take off right at the snap so the kicker would see Scandrick running to cover the receiver. The best case scenario in that situation would be a punter who hesitates, thinking before the snap he was going to fake punt/pass the ball, but realizing right at the snap that the pass receiver was no longer going to be wide open so he would need to kick it instead. That slight hesitation might be enough for Patmon or Carter to get in and block the kick. The next best scenario with that tactic would be a defended pass because Scandrick would have been right on the receiver by the time the ball got there. However, the downside would be if Scandrick drew a pass interference penalty, which would be quite possible given the distance Scandrick would be covering at a full sprint to reach the receiver.

Personally, I don't think this team's offense needs to take risks like that unless its late in the game and they are behind by more than 8 points. I'm glad it worked out, but I'd write that off as going 1 for 1 and calling it a season on any more attempts.

 

[gimmesix]

Personally, I don't think this team's offense needs to take risks like that unless its late in the game and they are behind by more than 8 points. I'm glad it worked out, but I'd write that off as going 1 for 1 and calling it a season on any more attempts.

I applaud coaches for doing a creative job to try to make game-changing plays. But if you are going to do it, you better make sure your players have it down or it could be game-changing the other way.

 

[romothesavior]

I would be happy to never see that playcall again.