josh bush played corner in college and still played in the slot a bunch when he moved to safety ... in the short term, i think he'll get more dime snaps than mcknight i dont see the big deal
Question, so who's matched up against whom? Cro on Crabtree and KW on Moss? Or does Rex play a lot of zone? 49ers look like they haven't really taken many deep shots downfield looking at their yards per completion numbers. All that aside, while I hope the DB situation pans out as best as can be expected minus Revis, I think this really all begins with getting a handle on Frank Gore as a lot of Alex Smith's "keep it simple" passing game's built off the run.
Yes of course, which could easily include a #1. I'm just responding to the thought that Joe will never come face to face with a #1 receiver.
That's fine but it's nothing like being locked up with a #1 in man coverage which I assumed was the point.
Coverage is coverage at the moment of truth whether man or zone. McKnight gets burned by a #1 man to man or gets burned by a #1 in a zone, what's the difference?
I know it's not vintage Moss, but the guy would still eat KW's lunch and Rex knows it. I'd assume it's the opposite, with safety help for Wilson.
dude seriously.... you have no idea what type of coverages the jets are going to run and have no idea what type of offensive gameplan the texans are going to put together. I hope you are right but don't profess to know this as fact, because you don't.
I would put Cro on Moss due to the physical matchup and KW on Crabtree. But really I wouldn't lock either one on to those guys and would play it situationally. I also doubt the Jets continue to put their CB's on an island as much so the answer may not be as clear cut.
Getting burned is getting burned. This really shouldn't need to be said but it's much easier to play zone coverage than man coverage. That's why most teams don't play man coverage nearly as much as the Jets did with Revis.
What? That's kind of your point? People saying "it's not like he's going to be asked to cover the #1" are referring to the type of coverage that Revis is typically put in. Now you're saying "but he could face a #1 in zone coverage" as if it's the same type of coverage. It's not even close. I guess I just don't understand what you're freaking out about. McKnight might see the field as a 4th or 5th corner and yes, he might have a #1 WR come into his zone if they're in zone coverage. It's not a huge deal because the difficulty level in zone coverage is far less than the difficulty level in man coverage. If he's in man coverage it would be against a schmuck of a WR.
Not sure why I'm being singled out as the only person who finds this puzzling, but so be it. Saying he won't be matched up against a #1 is incorrect and false, since he could go against top receivers while playing in zone coverage. This is a simple fact and a very real possibility. You then saying "getting burned in getting burned" is exactly what I'm saying!!!
Because in zone coverage there is usually help from nearby d-backs leaning into the areas the #1 & #2 WRs are heading into.
Getting burned is much less likely to happen in zone coverage than in man coverage. You're the one that started this thread saying this move could be the nail in the coffin for Tanny, right? Forgive me if you think I'm "singling you out". I'm responding to what I see as a massive overreaction to a minor roster move that is unlikely to impact the season one way or another.
Fair enough. Regarding Tanny, yes his questionable move after questionable move or non moves up to this point specifically heading into last year and into this one, puts him on thin ice IMO. If they don't sign Carr for financial reasons and McKnight duds here then it could be the nail in the coffin for Tanny. That wasn't nor is it an illogical statement.
Was there some news I missed that the reason Carr wasn't signed was financial? Maybe they were just doing research in case they decided they need to sign a corner?
