The 2024 Analysis thread - Dawn of The 9
-
well, I was an English major in college before I went into the Air Force. Never had an xbox. And, lol, I actually did take a college phys ed class on "coaching football", had to have a different elective after getting my WSI in swimming.....but that was back in the day, without all the extemporary and exhaustive detail that gets you lost in showing your extremely bloated ego, but not really effectively communicating to others. And you should get some coaching on how to refrain from bragging blah blah blah, you start alienating your audience, you have to grow up enough, junior shirley, to understand your audience.
BTW, I was also a speech minor. I don't know enough "Xs" and "Os" etc to show up on your show, like you would not know squat about being on a computer programming/business analyst podcast with me. When I would run meetings, I would not throw around acronyms that other people wouldn't know. You do that to show off, I think. Not good.
Oh, and STFU once in a while, don't be like Troy Aikman or Chris Collingsworth, they love to hear their own voice so much they rarely STFU.
I was an English major too. You want fries with that? Lol
Tia has been transparent that much of his work is for a more advanced audience, not us run of the mill football fans. Plenty of it is above my head too, but l’ve found if l reread and rewatch l’ll pick up plenty, and you have the same opportunity provided you have a willingness and mental faculties to allow it. I’ve learned a lot about the game through his work and l’m thankful for that.
If it’s over your head then it’s over your head and there’s no shame in that. Fwiw l would be interested in hearing you break down the X’s and O’s to the best of your ability. I doubt there would be restrictions on what acronyms you had to use, you would just be breaking down what you see and using whatever terminology suits you.
Tia has been transparent that much of his work is for a more advanced audience, not us run of the mill football fans.
Yes and no. I don't want to "talk down" to people in the sense that I have to use language so general or vague that it's inaccurate. I want people to not have to "work" to understand my messsage. But at the same time, I want to use football language, along with slides and videos, where you can follow along and pick things up as we go. Almost like dropping someone in another country and them learning the language through immersion. I'll take peoples hands and jump in the water with them, but at the same time wanting them to learn along side of me.
Plenty of it is above my head too, but l’ve found if l reread and rewatch l’ll pick up plenty, and you have the same opportunity provided you have a willingness and mental faculties to allow it. I’ve learned a lot about the game through his work and l’m thankful for that.
Thank you, that means a lot to me. It's also damn near exactly what I'm looking for. I can't produce content for those with no -or- short attention spans. I'm not looking to get into the entertainment or used car sales type of delivery. I want to enjoy what I do and, like you'll see in my upcoming first live session, basically inviting people into my home office, my workroom, and treating it like it's just have a 1 on 1 session talking shop with X's and O's.
What I've always done and will continue to do, is deliver straight-forward content, honestly, dispassionately, in-depth without overwhelming people by taking up too much time or all the extra bullshit and hyped nonsense that others seem to thrive producing.
So much so that I've actually shot down two podcast requests because their creators have asked me to tone down my critiques and give positive reviews only otherwise it may, as one said, "hurt the business". That's verbatim.
Fuck every last bit of that. I'm not going to sell half-truths or outright lies because it may hurt the hype of your following and their flavor of the week.
As always, trying to find that balance in my work. Appreciate any and everyone of you who have followed along for 11+ years now.
-
This is similar to something that I'm going to be doing, starting tomorrow night, for The Browns.
The Browns Tuesday Night Talk will be weekly.
The idea is to get as much detail to people as easily as possible. Going to shoot for episodes that are 15-30m segments. Although the 101 episode will be longer to get everyone up to speed.
- dispassionate, honest, fair evaluations.
Basically explaining what you're seeing on the field week to week, but also highlighting trends over the course of that time, connecting past games to present outcomes, and how it will effect the Brownies against future opponents.
So tag along, have coffee with me. Please give the show a like, share and follow.
-
I got a sneak peak of this folks, it’s very well done and informative. Give it a watch!
-
This is a more involved and detailed post. It's going to be heavily incorporated into my Browns Tuesday Night Talk, Halloween Special, this weekend. (Friday night) I'll post here when it's ready.
This is me, giving you guys a glimpse into what I do. Not just what I do, but what I confidently do, very, very well.
go check every film review this week.
I've been apart of this board for over 10 years now. I would hope that you guys would be familiar with my work. I've put hundreds of pieces on this board since 2014 and I'd encourage you to review them.
But while I'm here, let me give you a great example of 75% of "film reviewers". This was sent to me by a former Co-worker. His son, who I believe is in the video... decided to do a podcast (go fucking figure). They do a daily show/review. They pump out a lot of content, like so many other film reviewers, but leave out SO much detail that it's an inaccurate assessment. That detail is left out either by design, or because they don't have the ability to interpret what they're seeing further. Basically, talking a lot, but says very little.
I want you, MD, and anyone else following, to go to @2:16 and watch them review the first play.
These two, talking back and forth, don't know the concept OR the coverage, by their own admission. However they are confident and bold in questioning Stefankski's "scheme". You'll have to excuse my exhaustion with this topic, because it's something I've been mentioning lately. Asking questions is one thing. Attempting to express disgust or questioning of things, being absolute in that critique, yet not understanding what you're critiquing in great detail, is wildly arrogant. Not only that, it's also a disservice to fans.
This is where I come in.
- This is a high percentage passing concept called "hank". It's horizontal defensive stressor that can be read in to out, or out to in. The idea to put the flat and/or curl to flat defender in conflict and read off his leverage. See Below
- Dillon fails to get his eyes to the proper side of the field post snap. In this image above. that would be the passing strength, the right side. Pre-snap he is shown 3 over 3 (3 defender over 3 eligible receivers) to that side of the field. The 4th defender would be the weakside backer, over his left shoulder, who would have to cover a ton of ground to create a 4 over 3, a '+1' ratio, that defenses want to maintain. The single high safety favoring the weakside hash. Meaning to double Njoku on the hitch, that would take both strongside 2nd level defenders. Either way, you're starting your eyes out to in on this read 1 to 2 to the passing strength.
-This pre-snap tip should have been where Dillion put his eyes initially. Doing so, he could have found the deeper curl and could have made this a 1 of 1 read and thrown off timing.
- He didn't. He instead put his eyes to the field, probably not wanting to work strength (numbers, our 3 receivers) to the boundary, because it's the short side of the field and less space. By doing this he's working a side of the field that is 4 defenders over 2 receivers, even if there's more space. By the numbers it's effectively a double team, the only caveat is that space helps limit that danger just a touch. But not as much as you'd think with an average arm and average delivery speed.
- The curl/flat DB turns the outside receiver over to the safety and looks back inward and drives on the throw. This throw was late, and with average ball velocity. So that curl/flat DB was able to get a lick on the receiver. Fortunate that this was a completion because, later on during the 3rd drive, the Browns dial up this same concept and Dillon fails to read is correctly then as well.
- Defensively, this was "country" cover 3. 3 deep, 4 under. Just run from an alignment where the corners were already in bail and the shift from the high safety closed the weakside (fewer receivers, but more space to work with) but not the strength. That's why the corner strongside has hips open inside, he has to build his 1/3 integrity and watch against vertical breaks from #2.
- The idea with Hank is to attack 4 under coverage by using 5 receivers at short and intermediate areas of the field. Using numbers and short space to stress defenses to recover horizontally when they are -1 in coverage, because the +1 defender that "would" be underneath, is removed in their deep 1/3 responsibility.
- Gabriel choose to work space over concept and coverage. Not something I agree with, especially in this case. It doesn't maximize your possibility of YAC and doesn't punish 1 on 1's (by the numbers)
Why did I do this?
- Not to brag
- Not to show off
These guys questioned the scheme, but they either failed or were unable to consider why the coaches would call this concept. It's because the Patriots run 3 and 4 under coverages, between cover 3 and cover 4, at above league average rates. So it would make perfect sense to structure a lot of what your early down calls would be, against coverages you expect to face.
I think it's important to give fans, especially Browns fans, the very best you can give. I'm passionate about it and I want to educate fans along the way. And I did it to also show you just how bad the bulk of these shows, these "film reviewers" are. People think they can get a camera, a mic, a logo, a podcast and *POOF* make money, that what they say has value. It's over-saturated, under-performing, under-detailed... but holy fuck, do they talk a lot.For those that follow along, thank you. For those who don't care to, then I don't know what to say. My work isn't for you, and that's alright too. But as someone who has put thousands upon thousands of hours into this game, and possibly even more with the advent of growing into a film analyst; when I read "go check the film reviews"... I do this shit myself, and I'm pretty damn good at it. At the very least, better than the two guys I just linked.
-
This is a more involved and detailed post. It's going to be heavily incorporated into my Browns Tuesday Night Talk, Halloween Special, this weekend. (Friday night) I'll post here when it's ready.
This is me, giving you guys a glimpse into what I do. Not just what I do, but what I confidently do, very, very well.
go check every film review this week.
I've been apart of this board for over 10 years now. I would hope that you guys would be familiar with my work. I've put hundreds of pieces on this board since 2014 and I'd encourage you to review them.
But while I'm here, let me give you a great example of 75% of "film reviewers". This was sent to me by a former Co-worker. His son, who I believe is in the video... decided to do a podcast (go fucking figure). They do a daily show/review. They pump out a lot of content, like so many other film reviewers, but leave out SO much detail that it's an inaccurate assessment. That detail is left out either by design, or because they don't have the ability to interpret what they're seeing further. Basically, talking a lot, but says very little.
I want you, MD, and anyone else following, to go to @2:16 and watch them review the first play.
These two, talking back and forth, don't know the concept OR the coverage, by their own admission. However they are confident and bold in questioning Stefankski's "scheme". You'll have to excuse my exhaustion with this topic, because it's something I've been mentioning lately. Asking questions is one thing. Attempting to express disgust or questioning of things, being absolute in that critique, yet not understanding what you're critiquing in great detail, is wildly arrogant. Not only that, it's also a disservice to fans.
This is where I come in.
- This is a high percentage passing concept called "hank". It's horizontal defensive stressor that can be read in to out, or out to in. The idea to put the flat and/or curl to flat defender in conflict and read off his leverage. See Below
- Dillon fails to get his eyes to the proper side of the field post snap. In this image above. that would be the passing strength, the right side. Pre-snap he is shown 3 over 3 (3 defender over 3 eligible receivers) to that side of the field. The 4th defender would be the weakside backer, over his left shoulder, who would have to cover a ton of ground to create a 4 over 3, a '+1' ratio, that defenses want to maintain. The single high safety favoring the weakside hash. Meaning to double Njoku on the hitch, that would take both strongside 2nd level defenders. Either way, you're starting your eyes out to in on this read 1 to 2 to the passing strength.
-This pre-snap tip should have been where Dillion put his eyes initially. Doing so, he could have found the deeper curl and could have made this a 1 of 1 read and thrown off timing.
- He didn't. He instead put his eyes to the field, probably not wanting to work strength (numbers, our 3 receivers) to the boundary, because it's the short side of the field and less space. By doing this he's working a side of the field that is 4 defenders over 2 receivers, even if there's more space. By the numbers it's effectively a double team, the only caveat is that space helps limit that danger just a touch. But not as much as you'd think with an average arm and average delivery speed.
- The curl/flat DB turns the outside receiver over to the safety and looks back inward and drives on the throw. This throw was late, and with average ball velocity. So that curl/flat DB was able to get a lick on the receiver. Fortunate that this was a completion because, later on during the 3rd drive, the Browns dial up this same concept and Dillon fails to read is correctly then as well.
- Defensively, this was "country" cover 3. 3 deep, 4 under. Just run from an alignment where the corners were already in bail and the shift from the high safety closed the weakside (fewer receivers, but more space to work with) but not the strength. That's why the corner strongside has hips open inside, he has to build his 1/3 integrity and watch against vertical breaks from #2.
- The idea with Hank is to attack 4 under coverage by using 5 receivers at short and intermediate areas of the field. Using numbers and short space to stress defenses to recover horizontally when they are -1 in coverage, because the +1 defender that "would" be underneath, is removed in their deep 1/3 responsibility.
- Gabriel choose to work space over concept and coverage. Not something I agree with, especially in this case. It doesn't maximize your possibility of YAC and doesn't punish 1 on 1's (by the numbers)
Why did I do this?
- Not to brag
- Not to show off
These guys questioned the scheme, but they either failed or were unable to consider why the coaches would call this concept. It's because the Patriots run 3 and 4 under coverages, between cover 3 and cover 4, at above league average rates. So it would make perfect sense to structure a lot of what your early down calls would be, against coverages you expect to face.
I think it's important to give fans, especially Browns fans, the very best you can give. I'm passionate about it and I want to educate fans along the way. And I did it to also show you just how bad the bulk of these shows, these "film reviewers" are. People think they can get a camera, a mic, a logo, a podcast and *POOF* make money, that what they say has value. It's over-saturated, under-performing, under-detailed... but holy fuck, do they talk a lot.For those that follow along, thank you. For those who don't care to, then I don't know what to say. My work isn't for you, and that's alright too. But as someone who has put thousands upon thousands of hours into this game, and possibly even more with the advent of growing into a film analyst; when I read "go check the film reviews"... I do this shit myself, and I'm pretty damn good at it. At the very least, better than the two guys I just linked.
This is a more involved and detailed post. It's going to be heavily incorporated into my Browns Tuesday Night Talk, Halloween Special, this weekend. (Friday night) I'll post here when it's ready.
This is me, giving you guys a glimpse into what I do. Not just what I do, but what I confidently do, very, very well.
I've been apart of this board for over 10 years now. I would hope that you guys would be familiar with my work. I've put hundreds of pieces on this board since 2014 and I'd encourage you to review them.
But while I'm here, let me give you a great example of 75% of "film reviewers". This was sent to me by a former Co-worker. His son, who I believe is in the video... decided to do a podcast (go fucking figure). They do a daily show/review. They pump out a lot of content, like so many other film reviewers, but leave out SO much detail that it's an inaccurate assessment. That detail is left out either by design, or because they don't have the ability to interpret what they're seeing further. Basically, talking a lot, but says very little.
I want you, MD, and anyone else following, to go to @2:16 and watch them review the first play.
These two, talking back and forth, don't know the concept OR the coverage, by their own admission. However they are confident and bold in questioning Stefankski's "scheme". You'll have to excuse my exhaustion with this topic, because it's something I've been mentioning lately. Asking questions is one thing. Attempting to express disgust or questioning of things, being absolute in that critique, yet not understanding what you're critiquing in great detail, is wildly arrogant. Not only that, it's also a disservice to fans.
This is where I come in.
- This is a high percentage passing concept called "hank". It's horizontal defensive stressor that can be read in to out, or out to in. The idea to put the flat and/or curl to flat defender in conflict and read off his leverage. See Below
- Dillon fails to get his eyes to the proper side of the field post snap. In this image above. that would be the passing strength, the right side. Pre-snap he is shown 3 over 3 (3 defender over 3 eligible receivers) to that side of the field. The 4th defender would be the weakside backer, over his left shoulder, who would have to cover a ton of ground to create a 4 over 3, a '+1' ratio, that defenses want to maintain. The single high safety favoring the weakside hash. Meaning to double Njoku on the hitch, that would take both strongside 2nd level defenders. Either way, you're starting your eyes out to in on this read 1 to 2 to the passing strength.
-This pre-snap tip should have been where Dillion put his eyes initially. Doing so, he could have found the deeper curl and could have made this a 1 of 1 read and thrown off timing.
- He didn't. He instead put his eyes to the field, probably not wanting to work strength (numbers, our 3 receivers) to the boundary, because it's the short side of the field and less space. By doing this he's working a side of the field that is 4 defenders over 2 receivers, even if there's more space. By the numbers it's effectively a double team, the only caveat is that space helps limit that danger just a touch. But not as much as you'd think with an average arm and average delivery speed.
- The curl/flat DB turns the outside receiver over to the safety and looks back inward and drives on the throw. This throw was late, and with average ball velocity. So that curl/flat DB was able to get a lick on the receiver. Fortunate that this was a completion because, later on during the 3rd drive, the Browns dial up this same concept and Dillon fails to read is correctly then as well.
- Defensively, this was "country" cover 3. 3 deep, 4 under. Just run from an alignment where the corners were already in bail and the shift from the high safety closed the weakside (fewer receivers, but more space to work with) but not the strength. That's why the corner strongside has hips open inside, he has to build his 1/3 integrity and watch against vertical breaks from #2.
- The idea with Hank is to attack 4 under coverage by using 5 receivers at short and intermediate areas of the field. Using numbers and short space to stress defenses to recover horizontally when they are -1 in coverage, because the +1 defender that "would" be underneath, is removed in their deep 1/3 responsibility.
- Gabriel choose to work space over concept and coverage. Not something I agree with, especially in this case. It doesn't maximize your possibility of YAC and doesn't punish 1 on 1's (by the numbers)
Why did I do this?
- Not to brag
- Not to show off
These guys questioned the scheme, but they either failed or were unable to consider why the coaches would call this concept. It's because the Patriots run 3 and 4 under coverages, between cover 3 and cover 4, at above league average rates. So it would make perfect sense to structure a lot of what your early down calls would be, against coverages you expect to face.
I think it's important to give fans, especially Browns fans, the very best you can give. I'm passionate about it and I want to educate fans along the way. And I did it to also show you just how bad the bulk of these shows, these "film reviewers" are. People think they can get a camera, a mic, a logo, a podcast and *POOF* make money, that what they say has value. It's over-saturated, under-performing, under-detailed... but holy fuck, do they talk a lot.For those that follow along, thank you. For those who don't care to, then I don't know what to say. My work isn't for you, and that's alright too. But as someone who has put thousands upon thousands of hours into this game, and possibly even more with the advent of growing into a film analyst; when I read "go check the film reviews"... I do this shit myself, and I'm pretty damn good at it. At the very least, better than the two guys I just linked.
Good breakdown. I hung with about 5 min of the young dudes’ video before l’d had enough. I agree, too much talking and not enough substance. They started arguing about the play after that. It was weird.
I wonder how much being a lefty plays in to Gabriel’s decision making? It would seem his more comfortable side of the field would be the left side to throw to.
-
This is a more involved and detailed post. It's going to be heavily incorporated into my Browns Tuesday Night Talk, Halloween Special, this weekend. (Friday night) I'll post here when it's ready.
This is me, giving you guys a glimpse into what I do. Not just what I do, but what I confidently do, very, very well.
I've been apart of this board for over 10 years now. I would hope that you guys would be familiar with my work. I've put hundreds of pieces on this board since 2014 and I'd encourage you to review them.
But while I'm here, let me give you a great example of 75% of "film reviewers". This was sent to me by a former Co-worker. His son, who I believe is in the video... decided to do a podcast (go fucking figure). They do a daily show/review. They pump out a lot of content, like so many other film reviewers, but leave out SO much detail that it's an inaccurate assessment. That detail is left out either by design, or because they don't have the ability to interpret what they're seeing further. Basically, talking a lot, but says very little.
I want you, MD, and anyone else following, to go to @2:16 and watch them review the first play.
These two, talking back and forth, don't know the concept OR the coverage, by their own admission. However they are confident and bold in questioning Stefankski's "scheme". You'll have to excuse my exhaustion with this topic, because it's something I've been mentioning lately. Asking questions is one thing. Attempting to express disgust or questioning of things, being absolute in that critique, yet not understanding what you're critiquing in great detail, is wildly arrogant. Not only that, it's also a disservice to fans.
This is where I come in.
- This is a high percentage passing concept called "hank". It's horizontal defensive stressor that can be read in to out, or out to in. The idea to put the flat and/or curl to flat defender in conflict and read off his leverage. See Below
- Dillon fails to get his eyes to the proper side of the field post snap. In this image above. that would be the passing strength, the right side. Pre-snap he is shown 3 over 3 (3 defender over 3 eligible receivers) to that side of the field. The 4th defender would be the weakside backer, over his left shoulder, who would have to cover a ton of ground to create a 4 over 3, a '+1' ratio, that defenses want to maintain. The single high safety favoring the weakside hash. Meaning to double Njoku on the hitch, that would take both strongside 2nd level defenders. Either way, you're starting your eyes out to in on this read 1 to 2 to the passing strength.
-This pre-snap tip should have been where Dillion put his eyes initially. Doing so, he could have found the deeper curl and could have made this a 1 of 1 read and thrown off timing.
- He didn't. He instead put his eyes to the field, probably not wanting to work strength (numbers, our 3 receivers) to the boundary, because it's the short side of the field and less space. By doing this he's working a side of the field that is 4 defenders over 2 receivers, even if there's more space. By the numbers it's effectively a double team, the only caveat is that space helps limit that danger just a touch. But not as much as you'd think with an average arm and average delivery speed.
- The curl/flat DB turns the outside receiver over to the safety and looks back inward and drives on the throw. This throw was late, and with average ball velocity. So that curl/flat DB was able to get a lick on the receiver. Fortunate that this was a completion because, later on during the 3rd drive, the Browns dial up this same concept and Dillon fails to read is correctly then as well.
- Defensively, this was "country" cover 3. 3 deep, 4 under. Just run from an alignment where the corners were already in bail and the shift from the high safety closed the weakside (fewer receivers, but more space to work with) but not the strength. That's why the corner strongside has hips open inside, he has to build his 1/3 integrity and watch against vertical breaks from #2.
- The idea with Hank is to attack 4 under coverage by using 5 receivers at short and intermediate areas of the field. Using numbers and short space to stress defenses to recover horizontally when they are -1 in coverage, because the +1 defender that "would" be underneath, is removed in their deep 1/3 responsibility.
- Gabriel choose to work space over concept and coverage. Not something I agree with, especially in this case. It doesn't maximize your possibility of YAC and doesn't punish 1 on 1's (by the numbers)
Why did I do this?
- Not to brag
- Not to show off
These guys questioned the scheme, but they either failed or were unable to consider why the coaches would call this concept. It's because the Patriots run 3 and 4 under coverages, between cover 3 and cover 4, at above league average rates. So it would make perfect sense to structure a lot of what your early down calls would be, against coverages you expect to face.
I think it's important to give fans, especially Browns fans, the very best you can give. I'm passionate about it and I want to educate fans along the way. And I did it to also show you just how bad the bulk of these shows, these "film reviewers" are. People think they can get a camera, a mic, a logo, a podcast and *POOF* make money, that what they say has value. It's over-saturated, under-performing, under-detailed... but holy fuck, do they talk a lot.For those that follow along, thank you. For those who don't care to, then I don't know what to say. My work isn't for you, and that's alright too. But as someone who has put thousands upon thousands of hours into this game, and possibly even more with the advent of growing into a film analyst; when I read "go check the film reviews"... I do this shit myself, and I'm pretty damn good at it. At the very least, better than the two guys I just linked.
Good breakdown. I hung with about 5 min of the young dudes’ video before l’d had enough. I agree, too much talking and not enough substance. They started arguing about the play after that. It was weird.
I wonder how much being a lefty plays in to Gabriel’s decision making? It would seem his more comfortable side of the field would be the left side to throw to.
I wonder how much being a lefty plays in to Gabriel’s decision making? It would seem his more comfortable side of the field would be the left side to throw to.
Well at least he can better see his LTurnstile being beat like a drum a lot quicker.?
-
This is a more involved and detailed post. It's going to be heavily incorporated into my Browns Tuesday Night Talk, Halloween Special, this weekend. (Friday night) I'll post here when it's ready.
This is me, giving you guys a glimpse into what I do. Not just what I do, but what I confidently do, very, very well.
I've been apart of this board for over 10 years now. I would hope that you guys would be familiar with my work. I've put hundreds of pieces on this board since 2014 and I'd encourage you to review them.
But while I'm here, let me give you a great example of 75% of "film reviewers". This was sent to me by a former Co-worker. His son, who I believe is in the video... decided to do a podcast (go fucking figure). They do a daily show/review. They pump out a lot of content, like so many other film reviewers, but leave out SO much detail that it's an inaccurate assessment. That detail is left out either by design, or because they don't have the ability to interpret what they're seeing further. Basically, talking a lot, but says very little.
I want you, MD, and anyone else following, to go to @2:16 and watch them review the first play.
These two, talking back and forth, don't know the concept OR the coverage, by their own admission. However they are confident and bold in questioning Stefankski's "scheme". You'll have to excuse my exhaustion with this topic, because it's something I've been mentioning lately. Asking questions is one thing. Attempting to express disgust or questioning of things, being absolute in that critique, yet not understanding what you're critiquing in great detail, is wildly arrogant. Not only that, it's also a disservice to fans.
This is where I come in.
- This is a high percentage passing concept called "hank". It's horizontal defensive stressor that can be read in to out, or out to in. The idea to put the flat and/or curl to flat defender in conflict and read off his leverage. See Below
- Dillon fails to get his eyes to the proper side of the field post snap. In this image above. that would be the passing strength, the right side. Pre-snap he is shown 3 over 3 (3 defender over 3 eligible receivers) to that side of the field. The 4th defender would be the weakside backer, over his left shoulder, who would have to cover a ton of ground to create a 4 over 3, a '+1' ratio, that defenses want to maintain. The single high safety favoring the weakside hash. Meaning to double Njoku on the hitch, that would take both strongside 2nd level defenders. Either way, you're starting your eyes out to in on this read 1 to 2 to the passing strength.
-This pre-snap tip should have been where Dillion put his eyes initially. Doing so, he could have found the deeper curl and could have made this a 1 of 1 read and thrown off timing.
- He didn't. He instead put his eyes to the field, probably not wanting to work strength (numbers, our 3 receivers) to the boundary, because it's the short side of the field and less space. By doing this he's working a side of the field that is 4 defenders over 2 receivers, even if there's more space. By the numbers it's effectively a double team, the only caveat is that space helps limit that danger just a touch. But not as much as you'd think with an average arm and average delivery speed.
- The curl/flat DB turns the outside receiver over to the safety and looks back inward and drives on the throw. This throw was late, and with average ball velocity. So that curl/flat DB was able to get a lick on the receiver. Fortunate that this was a completion because, later on during the 3rd drive, the Browns dial up this same concept and Dillon fails to read is correctly then as well.
- Defensively, this was "country" cover 3. 3 deep, 4 under. Just run from an alignment where the corners were already in bail and the shift from the high safety closed the weakside (fewer receivers, but more space to work with) but not the strength. That's why the corner strongside has hips open inside, he has to build his 1/3 integrity and watch against vertical breaks from #2.
- The idea with Hank is to attack 4 under coverage by using 5 receivers at short and intermediate areas of the field. Using numbers and short space to stress defenses to recover horizontally when they are -1 in coverage, because the +1 defender that "would" be underneath, is removed in their deep 1/3 responsibility.
- Gabriel choose to work space over concept and coverage. Not something I agree with, especially in this case. It doesn't maximize your possibility of YAC and doesn't punish 1 on 1's (by the numbers)
Why did I do this?
- Not to brag
- Not to show off
These guys questioned the scheme, but they either failed or were unable to consider why the coaches would call this concept. It's because the Patriots run 3 and 4 under coverages, between cover 3 and cover 4, at above league average rates. So it would make perfect sense to structure a lot of what your early down calls would be, against coverages you expect to face.
I think it's important to give fans, especially Browns fans, the very best you can give. I'm passionate about it and I want to educate fans along the way. And I did it to also show you just how bad the bulk of these shows, these "film reviewers" are. People think they can get a camera, a mic, a logo, a podcast and *POOF* make money, that what they say has value. It's over-saturated, under-performing, under-detailed... but holy fuck, do they talk a lot.For those that follow along, thank you. For those who don't care to, then I don't know what to say. My work isn't for you, and that's alright too. But as someone who has put thousands upon thousands of hours into this game, and possibly even more with the advent of growing into a film analyst; when I read "go check the film reviews"... I do this shit myself, and I'm pretty damn good at it. At the very least, better than the two guys I just linked.
Good breakdown. I hung with about 5 min of the young dudes’ video before l’d had enough. I agree, too much talking and not enough substance. They started arguing about the play after that. It was weird.
I wonder how much being a lefty plays in to Gabriel’s decision making? It would seem his more comfortable side of the field would be the left side to throw to.
I wonder how much being a lefty plays in to Gabriel’s decision making?
I would suspect that being left handed does not affect one's ability to think.
-
This is similar to something that I'm going to be doing, starting tomorrow night, for The Browns.
The Browns Tuesday Night Talk will be weekly.
The idea is to get as much detail to people as easily as possible. Going to shoot for episodes that are 15-30m segments. Although the 101 episode will be longer to get everyone up to speed.
- dispassionate, honest, fair evaluations.
Basically explaining what you're seeing on the field week to week, but also highlighting trends over the course of that time, connecting past games to present outcomes, and how it will effect the Brownies against future opponents.
So tag along, have coffee with me. Please give the show a like, share and follow.
This is similar to something that I'm going to be doing, starting tomorrow night, for The Browns.
The Browns Tuesday Night Talk will be weekly.
The idea is to get as much detail to people as easily as possible. Going to shoot for episodes that are 15-30m segments. Although the 101 episode will be longer to get everyone up to speed.
- dispassionate, honest, fair evaluations.
Basically explaining what you're seeing on the field week to week, but also highlighting trends over the course of that time, connecting past games to present outcomes, and how it will effect the Brownies against future opponents.
So tag along, have coffee with me. Please give the show a like, share and follow.
Glad you shared this with the group and thanks for sending it to me last week to review.
Anyway, TJ (Tia) does a great job explaining what the QB sees from the pre-snap view of the defensive alignment matching up with personnel groupings factoring into the rookie QB's decision making on the plays unfolding in the video. This should also show you the mindset of Dart's offensive coaching staff and HC Brian Daboll (who previously developed Josh Allen in Buffalo) as to how they're trying to train their young QB for the matchups he saw in the video and more to come in the near future.
I'm not gonna give any spoiler alerts - but you'll learn pretty quick why he deserves to be paid for his football IQ and ensuing opinions. FWIW, he isn't one to brag about his football background - but the guy has extensive football experience playing the game as well as coaching it at the high school level.
To anyone that wants to take their knowledge beyond trusting Bleacher Report video narratives from kids reaching puberty to a more in-depth video analysis and summary - "This is how we do it..."
-
This is a more involved and detailed post. It's going to be heavily incorporated into my Browns Tuesday Night Talk, Halloween Special, this weekend. (Friday night) I'll post here when it's ready.
This is me, giving you guys a glimpse into what I do. Not just what I do, but what I confidently do, very, very well.
I've been apart of this board for over 10 years now. I would hope that you guys would be familiar with my work. I've put hundreds of pieces on this board since 2014 and I'd encourage you to review them.
But while I'm here, let me give you a great example of 75% of "film reviewers". This was sent to me by a former Co-worker. His son, who I believe is in the video... decided to do a podcast (go fucking figure). They do a daily show/review. They pump out a lot of content, like so many other film reviewers, but leave out SO much detail that it's an inaccurate assessment. That detail is left out either by design, or because they don't have the ability to interpret what they're seeing further. Basically, talking a lot, but says very little.
I want you, MD, and anyone else following, to go to @2:16 and watch them review the first play.
These two, talking back and forth, don't know the concept OR the coverage, by their own admission. However they are confident and bold in questioning Stefankski's "scheme". You'll have to excuse my exhaustion with this topic, because it's something I've been mentioning lately. Asking questions is one thing. Attempting to express disgust or questioning of things, being absolute in that critique, yet not understanding what you're critiquing in great detail, is wildly arrogant. Not only that, it's also a disservice to fans.
This is where I come in.
- This is a high percentage passing concept called "hank". It's horizontal defensive stressor that can be read in to out, or out to in. The idea to put the flat and/or curl to flat defender in conflict and read off his leverage. See Below
- Dillon fails to get his eyes to the proper side of the field post snap. In this image above. that would be the passing strength, the right side. Pre-snap he is shown 3 over 3 (3 defender over 3 eligible receivers) to that side of the field. The 4th defender would be the weakside backer, over his left shoulder, who would have to cover a ton of ground to create a 4 over 3, a '+1' ratio, that defenses want to maintain. The single high safety favoring the weakside hash. Meaning to double Njoku on the hitch, that would take both strongside 2nd level defenders. Either way, you're starting your eyes out to in on this read 1 to 2 to the passing strength.
-This pre-snap tip should have been where Dillion put his eyes initially. Doing so, he could have found the deeper curl and could have made this a 1 of 1 read and thrown off timing.
- He didn't. He instead put his eyes to the field, probably not wanting to work strength (numbers, our 3 receivers) to the boundary, because it's the short side of the field and less space. By doing this he's working a side of the field that is 4 defenders over 2 receivers, even if there's more space. By the numbers it's effectively a double team, the only caveat is that space helps limit that danger just a touch. But not as much as you'd think with an average arm and average delivery speed.
- The curl/flat DB turns the outside receiver over to the safety and looks back inward and drives on the throw. This throw was late, and with average ball velocity. So that curl/flat DB was able to get a lick on the receiver. Fortunate that this was a completion because, later on during the 3rd drive, the Browns dial up this same concept and Dillon fails to read is correctly then as well.
- Defensively, this was "country" cover 3. 3 deep, 4 under. Just run from an alignment where the corners were already in bail and the shift from the high safety closed the weakside (fewer receivers, but more space to work with) but not the strength. That's why the corner strongside has hips open inside, he has to build his 1/3 integrity and watch against vertical breaks from #2.
- The idea with Hank is to attack 4 under coverage by using 5 receivers at short and intermediate areas of the field. Using numbers and short space to stress defenses to recover horizontally when they are -1 in coverage, because the +1 defender that "would" be underneath, is removed in their deep 1/3 responsibility.
- Gabriel choose to work space over concept and coverage. Not something I agree with, especially in this case. It doesn't maximize your possibility of YAC and doesn't punish 1 on 1's (by the numbers)
Why did I do this?
- Not to brag
- Not to show off
These guys questioned the scheme, but they either failed or were unable to consider why the coaches would call this concept. It's because the Patriots run 3 and 4 under coverages, between cover 3 and cover 4, at above league average rates. So it would make perfect sense to structure a lot of what your early down calls would be, against coverages you expect to face.
I think it's important to give fans, especially Browns fans, the very best you can give. I'm passionate about it and I want to educate fans along the way. And I did it to also show you just how bad the bulk of these shows, these "film reviewers" are. People think they can get a camera, a mic, a logo, a podcast and *POOF* make money, that what they say has value. It's over-saturated, under-performing, under-detailed... but holy fuck, do they talk a lot.For those that follow along, thank you. For those who don't care to, then I don't know what to say. My work isn't for you, and that's alright too. But as someone who has put thousands upon thousands of hours into this game, and possibly even more with the advent of growing into a film analyst; when I read "go check the film reviews"... I do this shit myself, and I'm pretty damn good at it. At the very least, better than the two guys I just linked.
Good breakdown. I hung with about 5 min of the young dudes’ video before l’d had enough. I agree, too much talking and not enough substance. They started arguing about the play after that. It was weird.
I wonder how much being a lefty plays in to Gabriel’s decision making? It would seem his more comfortable side of the field would be the left side to throw to.
Good breakdown. I hung with about 5 min of the young dudes’ video before l’d had enough. I agree, too much talking and not enough substance. They started arguing about the play after that. It was weird.
I wonder how much being a lefty plays in to Gabriel’s decision making? It would seem his more comfortable side of the field would be the left side to throw to.
Thank you, I appreciate all the support.
Being a lefty means your shoulders do naturally "open" to that side. But this was a failure of his eyes and mind pre-snap, that lead to his eyes not starting in the best possible place post-snap.
Funny part is, just a few more minutes into that clip I linked. Those same two guys are arguing about another play and how Dillon missed the read. Completely ignoring that is was the exact same offensive concept, nearly the exact same defensive concept, but just flipped to the other hash.
I'm not gonna give any spoiler alerts - but you'll learn pretty quick why he deserves to be paid for his football IQ and ensuing opinions. FWIW, he isn't one to brag about his football background - but the guy has extensive football experience playing the game as well as coaching it at the high school level.
To anyone that wants to take their knowledge beyond trusting Bleacher Report video narratives from kids reaching puberty to a more in-depth video analysis and summary - "This is how we do it..."
This is incredibly high praise, thank you. At the same time, it's not like anybody is going to brag having a background as a D3 football player ?
-
I've decided to refocus my efforts after an incredibly busy month where I got little to nothing done football wise. Sadly I'm also becoming a bit too scattered with the application of my time as it relates to the RT9 project. Moving forward, this will be the master thread with all my work because, well, it mostly all started on this board 12 years ago. Always have to tend to the roots. I welcome all, yes, ALL of you, to partake and enjoy. Any questions, comments, critiques, etc etc, please make sure to use the @ function on TBB because, with this refocus, means I'm going to just use this thread to link/dump content and then head right back to my own space and continue working. I won't be spending much time here, or anywhere elsewhere for that matter, now that the holidays are about over and I'm back to working 50+ hours a week.
So any of you that are not the twitter type to ask on that platform (can't blame you, it's a cesspool) remember - ask or comment here on TBB and please tag me in the post. No tag in this thread means I'm 99.9% likely not going to see something. Appreciate it.
This thread is strictly for X's and O's. I'm not going to entertain anything beyond the on-field product and how it relates to the players and/or coaches. Keep it classy, Clevelandiego.
️
-
Sans Collins, Schwartz has been falling back into his late 2023 self these last couple weeks.
Not a fan of how many pressures and single high defenses being called.
RunThe9@tjRT9sBrowns DEF sends a CB blitz from the field out of a 2 hi shell on 2nd & 8, expecting CHI putting it in the air.
Bears motion to YY, wider splits to the field, and run weakside. As a defense, you have to check out of this call.
- Myles slanting inside yields immediate need for Show more -
Cool design on the misdirection passing game.
-
RunThe9@tjRT9sCook created his own yards a handful of times Sunday. This was probably his best work. Excellent jump cut and lateral movement. Even when the #Browns LBs were clear, he forced missed tackles. Diabate had some rough play, this was his worst for the #DawgPound defense. Show more
Diabate (Predictably) struggled quite a bit at times. This cutback and homerun was only possible because of his bad fundamentals and overpursuit.
-
Cool design on the misdirection passing game.
Cool design on the misdirection passing game.
-
There's really no excuse for this. You were supposed to be a 1st round talent.
RunThe9@tjRT9sIt's a hi-lo on the flat defender. This is, at the NFL level, football 101 stuff. You can't miss on these throws and handicap your offense when the protection holds up.
I've seen this quite a bit these last few games.
I torched Dillon Gabriel for the same here. Show more
RunThe9@tjRT9sYou can lead a horse to water....
#DawgPound #Browns #Cleveland #CLE #NFL -
Ok, I've some questions for Rees.
RunThe9@tjRT9sThe #Browns
- Bad pass pro
- Inconsistent QB play (at best)
- Role players WRs and no elite vertical threat to take the top off.
- Questionable route structures vs 2 hi, split field coverages.
A switch to vertical handled great by the #BuffaloBills DEF
#DawgPound Show more -
Good stuff my man. I like it when I come here, or any site and feel like I learned a little bit more than what I knew before opening the site.
-
RunThe9@tjRT9sThe #Browns call, what amounts to 'Lion' & Sanders makes the correct 1 -->2 decision. The footwork & ball patting still need cleaned up. Mentally, this was a solid, quick passing game rep using C2 & C4 beaters.
#Dawgpound
#SS12
#ShedeurSandersFootball is cyclical.... what was old will be new again.
Ducks with a throw back to a Cleveland legend on the 20th anniversary of the season.
RunThe9@tjRT9sYo, @oregonfootball ... I thought this #DanteMoore play structure looked familiar. Another one of Cleveland's own, @yn_TroySmith 20 years before. 2005-->2025 👀
#THE
#tOSU
#OhioStateFootball
#DawgPound
#Browns -
RunThe9@tjRT9sThe #Browns call, what amounts to 'Lion' & Sanders makes the correct 1 -->2 decision. The footwork & ball patting still need cleaned up. Mentally, this was a solid, quick passing game rep using C2 & C4 beaters.
#Dawgpound
#SS12
#ShedeurSandersFootball is cyclical.... what was old will be new again.
Ducks with a throw back to a Cleveland legend on the 20th anniversary of the season.
RunThe9@tjRT9sYo, @oregonfootball ... I thought this #DanteMoore play structure looked familiar. Another one of Cleveland's own, @yn_TroySmith 20 years before. 2005-->2025 👀
#THE
#tOSU
#OhioStateFootball
#DawgPound
#BrownsFootball is cyclical.... what was old will be new again.
Ducks with a throw back to a Cleveland legend on the 20th anniversary of the season.
Thanks for all the time you put into this between the Holidays! Well done TJ!
-
https://www.espn.com/nfl/player/_/id/5083076/harold-fannin-jr
Fannin is now 9th overall in rookie TE yardage ever.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login