HoofHearted

It is specifically cover 4. We've also run variations of match 3 quite a bit.

No doubt. You'd be playing with a light box and would have to completely change the way we fit things to accommodate the missing body. You'd basically have to end up playing it like a 3-3 stack. Not just palms, there's pattern match variations of every coverage.

The top quote is referring to the OPs box and 1 comment. That is not done all the time. The second quote is referring to being able to play man in zone concepts other than the two man situation which you suggested. It's done all the time.

It's done all the time.

Yes, basically every zone concept has scenarios where you will end up being man on a receiver. None of these situations are anything like what you are trying to compare to the box and 1 in basketball. It is possible to replicate the concept though, but you have to lose a guy somewhere else (defensive line) in order to do it.

The mesh still holds the backers - it's the same concept.

You can do all of the bolded out of gun.

No, not every mesh is an RPO out of gun. This trend should be true for most QBs.

Why do you think shotgun eliminates play action and bootlegs?

We've hardly played straight Cover 2 this year. We've played Cover 3 and Cover 1 more than any other coverage by quite a significant margin.

What is the logic here?

Don't know if it's been mentioned yet in this thread or not, but we better have a plan for motions. So much of what Miami does is getting number advantages/getting leverage on your force defender through motioning. McDaniel is the best in the league at taking advantage of teams using motion right now. Going to be a lot on Bernard and/or the Secondary (depending on call) this week to make pre-snap adjustments to get us lined up correctly and in the correct coverage calls based off those motions.

*basic fans* Every run out of shotgun is a draw 😏 (I kid, I kid)

Why do you say that? I think Bernard is every bit as athletic as Edmunds is - he's just half the size. The size/speed combination is what made Edmunds a first rounder and Bernard a third. To be honest the way Bernard is flying around it reminds of a young Milano. Guy plays with relentless effort, is not afraid to throw his body around, and plays fast (which screams instincts and confidence). He can get bullied when OL are able to climb to the second level - just like any other linebacker would. Good thing is we can scheme to allow him to be a free flower in most situations.

There are no snap counts on FG. Holders usually flash a hand to signify they are ready to receive the snap, but then the snapper has free reign to snap whenever he wants. This is to ensure no one can time up the snap. This is taught at every level. How Miami got away with having the same operation before someone got them on it is baffling.

I'm here for you big fella! Let me know what's confusing and I can clarify!

All FG blocks are taught that way. There's always a block guy to one side and a scoop and score guy to the other. This is nothing new. EDIT: @QCity - not sure what you're disagreeing with. Do some research about FG Block Schemes if you don't believe me. The information is out there lol.

The major adjustment is to vary the snap like it's coached to be. This is what happens when there's poor coaching of special teams.

Looked like Bernard was trying to bump the front and they didn't move. Ideally you'd want a 3 and 6 to the tight end/wing after that motion. The biggest issue was Poyer getting sucked in. Good play design by the Raiders though showing the down/down from the tackle guard up top before releasing to block the tunnel screen.

We’ve done this before. I see no reason why we wouldn’t do it again.

This notion that we have to do things wildly different in order to get our 12 personnel on the field is baffling to me. We can run the same exact stuff we run out of 11 or 10 with our 12 personnel. It's simply just putting our best 11 players on the field at the same time. That's it. You must not have watched last week.

To both of your points. Dorsey is absolutely a more aggressive play caller than Daboll is. That being said there are very few times where I see a concept called that is just plain bad to what the defense is giving them coverage-wise. I think we saw Dorsey take another step this past week in his use of personnel. We played a ton of 12 personnel, but not in conventional 12 personnel sets. There's a lot of really good things we can do out of those sets, and a lot of really good things we did do out of those sets that make things extremely hard on a defense and the personnel they choose to put out on the field. The advantages that can be gained in match-ups are endless so I'm encouraged to see that continue to grow throughout the season. I do think that a big thing that isn't really being talked about is the fact that Dorsey calls it from the box unlike Daboll who was on the field for a large portion of his time here (I feel like there was a time he called from the box as well? Can't remember). Josh needs someone to reel him in when he starts getting wild. Daboll was not afraid to do that. I remember multiple times seeing Josh getting his butt ripped by Daboll on the sideline. I don't recall ever seeing Brady do this, but I do think Dorsey would if he were on the field. I wonder if having that OC presence on the field would help reel Josh in a little more. On the flip side - how much does that impact Dorsey's ability to call a game though.

This isn't new. The QB run game has been drastically reduced for some time now.

Yeah, more often than not when formations are condensed your corner will be primary force. The issue on that play was no one had the first gap inside the widest tight end.

This isn't true. There's plenty of scenarios where the corner can and will be the force player.