I actually could not watch the rams game cause I hate the Niners and knew Schotty's mind numbingly stupid play calling would frustrate me. I was done after that 3rd and 1 deep route for an INT. I knew how the rest of the night would unfold.
Shouldn't you be grateful that Nacho didn't throw an INT? Seriously, if McKnight (#25) ran OUT route, he had a real good chance to get past the 1st down marker - it would have had to be 3 quick step drop for that. [The DB was giving him just that.] As it turned out, ALL FIVE were on hook pattern. Patriots had one high safety [not visible on screen - body count says there had to be one.] then they basically flooded the short zone. This means Belicheat knew what he was going to see. If Sanchez went outside with Plax [up top] or McKnight [bottom] it is very likely that the ball was intercepted. [Bracket coverage on McKnight is as clear as day - I assume similar measure was in place for Plax.] P.S. And this was what I bashing Brian for. By concept, it's a very solid play. Jets are attacking the short zone with all five. It has a real chance of success if the defense has less than 4 defenders covering the short zone. This is how Coryell offense attacks a specific area. [short zone/intermediate zone/sideline] They achieve their superiority by outnumbering a specific zone - so, when the defense brings up 2 high safety shell in cover 2, the offense calls flood on the weak side. With a receiver crossing the middle from the other side, you'd get 3 receivers attacking two defenders along the sideline [one short, one intermediate, one deep]. This is but one example, but that's the concept. Now... the Schottenheimer problem. The play could work if Pats defense had to worry about defending the entire pitch. Yes. That is where the problem comes. Schottenheimer's designs NEVER stretch the defender NOR the field. He just follows what he was taught to do. It doesn't seem like he understands why certain things are done in certain manner. In that given play, Pats had one high safety, and it was three men rush. 5 DBs were on man-to-man coverage with 2 roaming in zone. As such, the correct way to defeat such coverage was to 1. motion McKnight into the backfield 2. create 3x1 unbalanced formation and 3. run right at them. With 3x1 formation, zone defender WILL be rolling to the overloaded side, so if the guard pulls, he can take out the zone defender on the play side. In short, whoever is running will be looking at a lot of green grass on that play. How could Sanchez see that? He could 1. see only 3 men on the line, with everybody else at least 5 yards off the LoS - so that means Pats are anticipating pass. [You don't line up 3 men against a rush down.] 2. So if Sanchez motions his receivers, he WILL see something. But then, Schottenheimer usually sits on his ass when it comes to relaying the play. Maybe there wasn't much time for Sanchez to do that.
It was surreal watching that game. The gal picked St. Louis to win. I laughed and for grins and giggles I was calling out the plays before the snap and 2/3 to 3/4 of the time I was correct. I roared when my gal said "They keep doing what you say they are going to do and it never works. You wouldn't be a very good coach". :rofl::rofl: That graphic stating the FG was the Rams first 1st QTR points in 10 games or something to that effect just said it all. How did Fischer give this guy a job?? 3rd straight blowout loss for the Rams. If Fisher isn't astute enough to pull the plug on Schotty in the off season if not before then you have to question his judgement.
Come-on it is all on Sanchez. If it is not perfectly clear that Schotty and Sparano have ruined Sanchez's career to this point they have blinders on. I can't say with certainty that Sanchez would have been great but I can say with a lot of confidence if MM was our OC from day 1 Geno would not have been drafted. With that being said although the Jets offense has not been stellar it sure is refreshing to see a competent OC and that should bode well for the development of Geno.
Except to Br4dway's point McKnight is open with the corner playing off him and Sanchez still threw it to the receiver right beside him with double coverage. Coaching has not helped Sanchez but that type of inability to read coverages and identify where to throw the ball quickly is all about Sanchez and is a deficiency that likely can't be solved with coaching.
In that case it was a crappy throw that would have been picked off by a defender and taken back for a score if the guy who caught it was not there.
Even though it has been rehashed over and over you and Bradway are just wrong. The Db was baiting Sanchez to throw to McKnight and more than likely a pick six. To extrapolate anything about Sanchez based on that play is ignorant. The only thing you can say about that play is WTF because it really is that bad.
I also explained why that was a bad idea. I specifically said if McKnight was running OUT route, that play had a real chance of success. And McKnight was on hook route, just like any other receiver was. Lastly, Sanchez didn't THROW to a double coverage. All receivers had one DB on them, with two zone defenders roaming on both sides. If Sanchez threw to McKnight, HE would have been bracketed as well.
Schotty so far in his career has not been able to succeed with 1. Brees 2. Pennington 3. Favre 4. Clemens 5. Sanchez 6. Bradford Two HOFers one very good Qb in Chad and he was unable to develop Sanchez and Clemens and now Bradford. How does this guy still have a job? Bradford and Sanchez will be proven to be at least competent QBs on a team with a good OC. What a bad track record he has.
The point is that from the moment the ball left Sanchez hands there were two possible outcomes on the play: a completed pass well short of the 1st down marker or an interception. He threw the ball into an area with 2 defenders tight in coverage and a third over the top. This in a play in which 5 receivers were trying to spread the coverage out to give him an easy throw somewhere. If that ball is tipped the defender over the top is the most likely person to come down with it. With two defenders on the receiver there's a real chance they'll come away with the ball even if he catches it. You cannot throw that ball. The mandate to protect the football in that situation has a higher priority than the need to make a high risk/low reward throw. This is a concept that Mark Sanchez has never gotten down since coming into the NFL despite the 62 starts the Jets gave him. I used to think that Sanchez had potential somewhere else under another offensive system when the Jets instability on offense was removed. I no longer believe that to be the case. He might well get another gig as a backup QB and even perform well for a limited period of time if the main guy goes down. His potential however is well below that. He just has not learned how to be an NFL QB yet and many of the mistakes that he makes are rudimentary errors that most rookies have out of their systems after a season at the outside.
No, you explained how it could have been a better play had he run a different route, but Sanchez still wouldn't have thrown to him; he clearly had his min made up where he was going with the ball because he hadn't identified the coverage. But it still would have been a better idea to throw to McKnight who was open and would gave had a decent shot at getting the first than throwing into double coverage.
i dont understand the dudes on this board that simultaneously hate on tone and schotty tone blew up that day against mia cause he couldnt take anymore of these mind numbingly dumb play calls and he let schotty know about himself if it wasnt for tone, we still might have this sad excuse of an OC
The thing is, the play design didn't allow the offense to stretch the field horizontally. All five were on short hook. And you just don't throw hook if the receiver is lining up wide, with defenders staying in the flight trajectory - the ball has to fly too far to make minimal gain. If it is intercepted [like I expected it to] then it's a pick-6 in the waiting. Usually, you have to employ something like smash combination [slot receiver clearing the top with corner route, and split end sitting in short zone with hook] to make use of hook route as the safety valve. If the defender is playing man-to-man, then all these bullshit is all off. You have to call a pattern where your WR can beat the DB man-to-man and get open. Thus, McKnight and Plax should have been on other route. Ok - clearly Plax's DB and McKnight's DB were off. [This was why I said they should have run OUT route] That said, there was a zone DB roaming behind, and the slot WR had a DB on himself as well - and HE can see the ball if Sanchez throws to McKnight. In other words, the offense had overflooded the short zone, and so did the defense. End of the story. This is not how you design a play.
God. You are like a broken record. Look at the play clip again. The zone defender [#40] is not visible at the start of the clip, but he comes into the screen as Sanchez throws the ball to the slot receiver. He is reading Sanchez all the time, and when Sanchez cocks the arm, he dashes to the slot receiver. He got to the ball before the receiver even turned to look for the ball - that pass didn't have a prayer. Yes. He was doing all that. The only reason the ball wasn't intercepted there was because there was no physical route to undercut the slot receiver - which resulted in pass break up. In case of McKnight, there was a clear path to undercut. Ok? If Sanchez threw to McKnight, HE WILL UNDERCUT. Jesus.
everyone blaming mark for not passing to mcknight is just wrong here. like zach keeps saying, a throw to mcknight gives the defender enough time to break on the ball and get himself a pick six. weve seen those kind of ints with mark a lot under schotty. its just really stupid play design that basically allows the zone db to cover two players at once just by being in the right position. its mindnumbingly bad seriously though, if you look at bradford right now and dont think he looks just like sanchez did, i dont know what to tell you. schotty really sucks
no, you are repeating yourself which is how the phrase a broken record is used. I have made two different arguments. and just as you are wrong about the correct use of the phrase, you are wrong about your interpretation of the play. the only way that pass is intercepted by 40 on a throw to McKnight would be because it is either a horribly thrown pass, which would be Sanchez's fault, or thrown to the inside, which would be Sanchez's fault. but there is another option -- a throw to the outside of McKnight, which again falls on Sanchez for not identifying because he never looked at McKnight to begin with. with that, 40 never has a chance at the ball, so your argument, which is dependent on there being only one possible throw to McKnight and could only lead to a pick, is ridiculous. Jesus indeed.
