Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Just re-watched the game and these plays/penalties cost us the game


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
52 replies to this topic

#46 RoaringRiot

RoaringRiot

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 04-March 13
  • posts: 5,158
  • Reputation: 5,120
SUPPORTER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 09:36 AM

 On the TD catch if they hadn't run the same play over again you could perhaps give him some slack but they did.  He got burned both times.  If you know you don't have good man skills and aren't that fast then you have to start pedalling backwards faster and not let the guy get behind him.  He isn't taller, doesn't have great recovery speed so he needs to compensate and he didn't.  He made multiple errors that cost us 9 points.

 

I can agree with this.  It was obvious that the Seahawks knew they could beat him since they ran it twice in a row.  That part is hard to swallow for sure.  It also looked like he didn't get too much of a jam at the line of scrimmage either.  



#47 Peppers90 NC

Peppers90 NC

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 03-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 10,498
  • Reputation: 1,727
HUDDLER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 09:59 AM

Armond Smiths first unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on a punt. Ended up allowing Seattle to kick a 40 yard field goal, without the penalty it would have been a 55 yard attempt or punt.



Josh Thomas getting beat of course on the TD Bomb to Kearse. Godfrey was late getting there but he was also trying to keep his eyes on Tate and Sidney rice on the opposite side of the field. Would have been an amazing play had he got there to break it up, but not one to pin on him.

I think the first penalty on Smith was completely wrong, he was forced out and came back in at a reasonable angle.  Second penalty was correct.

 

 

I'm glad you acknowledged the fact Godfrey had more than just one duty on that TD play, he was the one deep saftety covering the middle of the field, thats why the sideline play worked well for them as they attempted it two plays in a row because they assumed we would be playing cover 3 again.



#48 LA_Panther

LA_Panther

    Member

  • Joined: 10-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,094
  • Reputation: 596
HUDDLER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 10:32 AM

We lost, because we couldn't get to Russel Wilson. We don't have the secondary to cover without front 7 help.  If we at least hit Wilson a few times, he would have started to be hesitant everytime he scrambled. When he started to complete some deep passes, I knew we were in trouble. I didn't expect poo from our offense



#49 Navy_football

Navy_football

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 19-April 12
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 912
  • Reputation: 364
HUDDLER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 11:18 AM

Sorry, but you are wrong.  Rivera even said that wasn't Godfrey's assignment.  It was 100% on Thomas.

 

The coverage didn't look like 3-deep (cover 3) to me. It looked like cover 1 with man coverage underneath. Every CB appeared to be playing man to man - you can tell by the direction they turn, towards their man and not towards the QB. The LBs were also in man - I think they should have been blitzing. TD looks like he's spying RW, Beason looks like he has the TE (who successfully blocks CJ with no help - how does that happen?), and Keek has Lynch on the fake handoff.

 

Thomas took away inside leverage, essentially leaving himself on an island on the sideline. No way a FS can get to a deep sideline throw in cover 1. It was just a great play call for the defense, and great execution by RW and Kearse.

 

Thomas killed himself when he got too far behind in the trail. Have to be closer to the WR in man. See how Norman does the same technique but stays even with his man because he knows there's no help on the sideline. Munnerlyn loses inside leverage to the slot but he knows he has help in the middle.

 

If you are a CB, you don't complain about help over the top when you're in man. You blanket your man and don't allow him an opportunity to make a play. Though, I really think CJ should have put more pressure on RW with only a TE blocking him.



#50 PantherGuy

PantherGuy

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 16-September 12
  • posts: 820
  • Reputation: 178
SUPPORTER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 12:57 PM

Thanks for the write-up. I decided not to get Game Rewind again this year, so it's nice to hear what others think of the game after rewatching.



#51 Woodie

Woodie

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 29-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,223
  • Reputation: 154
HUDDLER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:40 PM

Agree that mistakes happen and Thomas tried to get out of the way of the punt. Still if he keeps his feet he could have recovered it. As for the TD he doesn't have good man skills and let himself get beat deep which is a problem. Norman has closing speed and a long reach and Thomas doesn't. It was not Godfrey's mistake. With a single high safety the corner has primary responsibility. If we were playing cover 2 then he could expect help deep.

The reason I think Thomas was starting over Norman is that he's better at zone.  Norman is the better man defender, but can get out of position in zone...and since much of what we run is zone, they probably see Thomas as the better option right now. 

 

But I do think they really want Norman as a starter.  As you said, he has better length, and can match up with some of the bigger receivers we will face this year.  But until they feel more confident in his zone defense, I don't think he will supplant Thomas (or more likely, move Captain back to nickel).



#52 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,642
  • Reputation: 2,291
HUDDLER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 03:36 PM

The reason I think Thomas was starting over Norman is that he's better at zone.  Norman is the better man defender, but can get out of position in zone...and since much of what we run is zone, they probably see Thomas as the better option right now. 

 

But I do think they really want Norman as a starter.  As you said, he has better length, and can match up with some of the bigger receivers we will face this year.  But until they feel more confident in his zone defense, I don't think he will supplant Thomas (or more likely, move Captain back to nickel).

Agree with you on Thomas in zone.  I also agree that Norman needs to get better with zone if he wants to start.



#53 pantherj

pantherj

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 09-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,190
  • Reputation: 587
HUDDLER

Posted 10 September 2013 - 06:07 PM

Agree that mistakes happen and Thomas tried to get out of the way of the punt. Still if he keeps his feet he could have recovered it. As for the TD he doesn't have good man skills and let himself get beat deep which is a problem. Norman has closing speed and a long reach and Thomas doesn't. It was not Godfrey's mistake. With a single high safety the corner has primary responsibility. If we were playing cover 2 then he could expect help deep.

 

Yes Thomas was on his own and Godfrey was not to blame for the TD pass. What RR wanted was for Thomas to get physical with the WR and try to reroute him toward the middle of the field, closer to Godfrey. Thomas is not the guy I expected to start, but I think RR might see Josh Norman as a liability against the run. The sad thing is that everyone could see Thomas was gassed after being beaten the play before, and it would have been plain stupid not to attack him again.