Gilmore!!!

[P51]

I just have trouble believing his job was to cover an empty zone with no players within 10 yards while the burner WR runs right past him.

 

His job in that coverage is to watch for certain routes (out and rb flat mostly), which he does on the Hill quick out and up, and release Hill into the Safeties coverage (deep cover 2). If no one comes into his zone (which Gilmores head clearly indicates he does check) on such a play, he should drift back and help the safety underneath from a trail type concept, which he is in the process of doing as the Safety blows his coverage and Hill, one of the fastest humans on the planet (Olympic class speed) goes deep on the double move (the 1st move Gilmore covered correctly, then passed on correctly).

 

This is Gilmore's fault in man coverage potentially or cover 3, 4, etc. 100% not in C2, even if his zone is empty, where Hill goes and makes the play is in a area where McCourty is supposed to be, McCourty in a Tampa 2, or plain old cover 2 is the deep cover guy (Period). His eyes are forward, he is playing the outside technique correctly, he is the trail guy if McCourty misses the tackle or the ball is underthrown in this situation.

 

This is almost identical to the play in the 9ers (??) game last year where everyone blamed him and despite his shortcoming in coverage at times, it was not his fault then either if you look at the coverage. Sometimes it has been his fault, this is not an example of that.

 

The outcome here is a negative on McCourty's sheet, not Gilmores. Its really that simple.

[Wayne Cubed]

Says the rube

Good one, I love how you ignored everything I asked and instead suggested I refer to your own misinformed post.

[P51]

Seriously, it's not hard for those that don't understand Cover 2, google it. There are plenty of pictures that show how this scheme is played and where there zones are defined.

 

And to those saying he should have just carried on covering Hill:

 

First, is he just suppose to ignore a coaches call and cover man/man? Second, what happens if the LB passes his player, the slot receiver in this instance, off into Gilmores zone and he's off trying to cover Hill? Is Gilmore suppose to just assume the LB keeps covering someone in Gilmores zone? Is Gilmore suppose to know what's going in everyone else's zones while watching the QB, which is what you do in zone?

 

Watch Butler, he does the same exact thing Gilmore does and his vertical route is wide open too. Both Safety's bit on the vert middle route instead of getting deep.

 

B-I-N-G-O....

[GoBills808]

 

His job in that coverage is to watch for certain routes (out and rb flat mostly), which he does on the Hill quick out and up, and release Hill into the Safeties coverage (deep cover 2). If no one comes into his zone (which Gilmores head clearly indicates he does check) on such a play, he should drift back and help the safety underneath from a trail type concept, which he is in the process of doing as the Safety blows his coverage and Hill, one of the fastest humans on the planet (Olympic class speed) goes deep on the double move (the 1st move Gilmore covered correctly, then passed on correctly).

 

This is Gilmore's fault in man coverage potentially or cover 3, 4, etc. 100% not in C2, even if his zone is empty, where Hill goes and makes the play is in a area where McCourty is supposed to be, McCourty in a Tampa 2, or plain old cover 2 is the deep cover guy (Period). His eyes are forward, he is playing the outside technique correctly, he is the trail guy if McCourty misses the tackle or the ball is underthrown in this situation.

 

This is almost identical to the play in the 9ers (??) game last year where everyone blamed him and despite his shortcoming in coverage at times, it was not his fault then either if you look at the coverage. Sometimes it has been his fault, this is not an example of that.

 

The outcome here is a negative on McCourty's sheet, not Gilmores. Its really that simple.

Well put.

[P51]

I'd be interested in hearing his opinion on Gilmore's positioning on that play, specifically his weird first step (at least to me) and how upright he was on the swivel, if he's still reading this thread...

 

Thats a good question, and it comes down to coaching and player preference IMO, his first step (hop in this situation) keeps his head on the QB, WR's and play infront of him, which IMO is fine, only the sideline is behind him. His body being parallel to the sideline is wierd and that hop step (?) is unorthodox but keeps his head and body in position to see and move accordingly as I see it. Ive never taught it that way, but it is similar to body positioning I do/have, the feet being parallel to the sideline is strange but allows him to play the outside route - in (the other CB is doing the same technique just from a different starting stance. It does allow him to break quickly from off outside coverage on any pass inside the shell they are playing.

[Bookie Man]

That play looks like a cover 2 buster! Is it even possible to stop that play if you don't get pressure on the QB there?

[Magox]

Good one, I love how you ignored everything I asked and instead suggested I refer to your own misinformed post.

 

Rather than just saying, I disagree for so and so reasons you had to be snarky, right? With the "You don't understand schemes or calls?" Don't act all surprised that I responded in kind, I have said on this thread that it was the safety's responsibility and not Gilmore's primary one. However, the case I'm making is one of awareness. He was at a near 90 degree angle and could see everything that was in front of him and there wasn't a player in site coming anywhere near his area. My argument is someone with more awareness would have realized there was nothing coming in his area and would have made his upward trek to follow his man in coverage. Would he have been able to make a play on the ball as perfectly thrown as it was? No, but he possibly could have made the tackle or it is possible that if the ball had been under thrown he could have made a play on the ball.

 

I've played plenty of organized sports and I understand responsibility and I understand that what makes some players special is that sixth sense we call awareness. The case that I'm making is just that. Awareness is a trait that not everyone has and sometimes understanding the situation in front of you sometimes gives special players the flexibility to go outside of their called duties to make plays.

 

You can disagree with that and that is fine, that is your opinion and we could simply part ways disagreeing, but that isn't what you decided to do. You disagreed with my comment and you immediately went to the vapid "you don't understand schemes".

[yungmack]

It's ok to sneer at Gilmore, to laugh at him, even to hate on him (although that's insane, hating a guy for his play or his team). But what you can't do is make false claims to buttress your criticism. Then you're just an "agenda whore." It was MCCOURTY who blew the coverage on that big TD. He bit on Kelce and stayed with him too long. That left Gilmore in the " uh oh" situation, chasing a world class runner who was already way past him.

 

BTW, McCourty took responsibility for the play. Classy.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

His job in that coverage is to watch for certain routes (out and rb flat mostly), which he does on the Hill quick out and up, and release Hill into the Safeties coverage (deep cover 2). If no one comes into his zone (which Gilmores head clearly indicates he does check) on such a play, he should drift back and help the safety underneath from a trail type concept, which he is in the process of doing as the Safety blows his coverage and Hill, one of the fastest humans on the planet (Olympic class speed) goes deep on the double move (the 1st move Gilmore covered correctly, then passed on correctly).

 

This is Gilmore's fault in man coverage potentially or cover 3, 4, etc. 100% not in C2, even if his zone is empty, where Hill goes and makes the play is in a area where McCourty is supposed to be, McCourty in a Tampa 2, or plain old cover 2 is the deep cover guy (Period). His eyes are forward, he is playing the outside technique correctly, he is the trail guy if McCourty misses the tackle or the ball is underthrown in this situation.

 

This is almost identical to the play in the 9ers (??) game last year where everyone blamed him and despite his shortcoming in coverage at times, it was not his fault then either if you look at the coverage. Sometimes it has been his fault, this is not an example of that.

 

The outcome here is a negative on McCourty's sheet, not Gilmores. Its really that simple.

Great stuff p51!!

[Wayne Cubed]

 

Rather than just saying, I disagree for so and so reasons you had to be snarky, right? With the "You don't understand schemes or calls?" Don't act all surprised that I responded in kind, I have said on this thread that it was the safety's responsibility and not Gilmore's primary one. However, the case I'm making is one of awareness. He was at a near 90 degree angle and could see everything that was in front of him and there wasn't a player in site coming anywhere near his area. My argument is someone with more awareness would have realized there was nothing coming in his area and would have made his upward trek to follow his man in coverage. Would he have been able to make a play on the ball as perfectly thrown as it was? No, but he possibly could have made the tackle or it is possible that if the ball had been under thrown he could have made a play on the ball.

 

I've played plenty of organized sports and I understand responsibility and I understand that what makes some players special is that sixth sense we call awareness. The case that I'm making is just that. Awareness is a trait that not everyone has and sometimes understanding the situation in front of you sometimes gives special players the flexibility to go outside of their called duties to make plays.

 

You can disagree with that and that is fine, that is your opinion and we could simply part ways disagreeing, but that isn't what you decided to do. You disagreed with my comment and you immediately went to the vapid "you don't understand schemes".

Excuse me but I said why I disagreed with your post, you are the one who replied with "my post speaks for itself."

 

And I pointed out to you, and others have said the same, Gilmores responsibility/awareness whatever you want to call it, is for what's in front of him and that's how zone works. His asked to be responsible for or be aware of the players in front of him. That's the scheme, thats how it works, that's how it's coached.

 

What you are suggesting is that he should freelance. Players need to do their job, a famous Pats saying. He can't possibly know if another player will come into his zone if he turns and runs to stay with Hill.

 

But as I said before, carry on and I'll leave you to your opinion.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Wayne Cubed

[Kirby Jackson]

It's ok to sneer at Gilmore, to laugh at him, even to hate on him (although that's insane, hating a guy for his play or his team). But what you can't do is make false claims to buttress your criticism. Then you're just an "agenda whore." It was MCCOURTY who blew the coverage on that big TD. He bit on Kelce and stayed with him too long. That left Gilmore in the " uh oh" situation, chasing a world class runner who was already way past him.

 

BTW, McCourty took responsibility for the play. Classy.

This too ^^

 

If you don't like Gilmore that's fine but this play can only be blamed on him for 2 reasons. You hate the guy and have an agenda or you lack understanding of extremely basic football concepts. I tend to think that this thread is mostly the latter with some agendas sprinkled in.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Kirby Jackson

[Magox]

Excuse me but I said why I disagreed with your post, you are the one who replied with "my post speaks for itself."

 

And I pointed out to you, and others have said the same, Gilmores responsibility/awareness whatever you want to call it, is for what's in front of him and that's how zone works. His asked to be responsible for or be aware of the players in front of him. That's the scheme, thats how it works, that's how it's coached.

 

What you are suggesting is that he should freelance. Players need to do their job, a famous Pats saying. He can't possibly know if another player will come into his zone if he turns and runs to stay with Hill.

 

Exactly, I made the case in the original post and I didn't want to have to repeat myself because that is all I would have done. And you and others are making the case you did and it makes sense, however my case is that if he had more awareness he would have made his upward trek sooner than when he did which could have put him in a better position.

[GoBills808]

 

Thats a good question, and it comes down to coaching and player preference IMO, his first step (hop in this situation) keeps his head on the QB, WR's and play infront of him, which IMO is fine, only the sideline is behind him. His body being parallel to the sideline is wierd and that hop step (?) is unorthodox but keeps his head and body in position to see and move accordingly as I see it. Ive never taught it that way, but it is similar to body positioning I do/have, the feet being parallel to the sideline is strange but allows him to play the outside route - in (the other CB is doing the same technique just from a different starting stance. It does allow him to break quickly from off outside coverage on any pass inside the shell they are playing.

I think if I'm playing Hill there I start out much lower and my first move is a slide downfield rather than that hitch which gets him too upright...I made a comment earlier that once he gets too straight up and down he's lost the ability to pivot to the flat effectively (his job in the first place)...I think Gilmore may have actually diagnosed it but with a guy as fast as Hill you can't really keep up playing off outside leverage, you just need to pray your safety help is there and it wasn't. The secondary looked really out of sorts on that play. MLB53 (Van Noy maybe) didn't have a great game but he did a good job getting into the hole, SS and FS have to live with the completion to Kelce over the LB instead of the homerun to the WR. Pretty poor safety play IMO.

[stevewin]

For honesty's sake, anytime I see Gilmore chasing after a WR i'm going to blame him.

 

A. Because he is soft

B. Because he always looks disinterested

C. Because he can't tackle and I hate guys who can't tackle

It's funny, after the game I think it was Harrison talking about how the Pats** D looked disinterested, lacked aggression etc. and I immediately thought of Gilmore

[dave mcbride]

 

His job in that coverage is to watch for certain routes (out and rb flat mostly), which he does on the Hill quick out and up, and release Hill into the Safeties coverage (deep cover 2). If no one comes into his zone (which Gilmores head clearly indicates he does check) on such a play, he should drift back and help the safety underneath from a trail type concept, which he is in the process of doing as the Safety blows his coverage and Hill, one of the fastest humans on the planet (Olympic class speed) goes deep on the double move (the 1st move Gilmore covered correctly, then passed on correctly).

 

This is Gilmore's fault in man coverage potentially or cover 3, 4, etc. 100% not in C2, even if his zone is empty, where Hill goes and makes the play is in a area where McCourty is supposed to be, McCourty in a Tampa 2, or plain old cover 2 is the deep cover guy (Period). His eyes are forward, he is playing the outside technique correctly, he is the trail guy if McCourty misses the tackle or the ball is underthrown in this situation.

 

This is almost identical to the play in the 9ers (??) game last year where everyone blamed him and despite his shortcoming in coverage at times, it was not his fault then either if you look at the coverage. Sometimes it has been his fault, this is not an example of that.

 

The outcome here is a negative on McCourty's sheet, not Gilmores. Its really that simple.

Here, here. Great post.

[bigduke6]

as much fun as it was to watch the Pats fail on D last night, that long td to Hicks wasnt Gilmores fault. As stated above (very well i might add), that was on the safety

 

Not shy about stating how much i could care less about Gilmore leaving. Not worth overpaying for a soft tackling CB. IMO he didnt want to be here, got the same vibe as when Byrd bolted. Getting same vibe from Dareus presently.

 

Not a big surprise, guys want to win. Something we dont do. Till we do, guys like Gilmore will come and go. Better off letting them walk than overpaying while they phone it in.

 

Wish him no luck, but no harm either. Hes just a guy that we knew for a while. Now he barely exists to me.

[CommonCents]

FWIW Chris Gasper who covers the Patriots for the Boston Globe says he thinks Dmac made the right adjustment and Gilmore did not. Said the way they practice it is different than Gilmore would have don't previously and it's hard to blame him in his first game. I'm not sure how some posters are so sure of exactly how the Pats adjust in their coverages but it's sure entertaining.

[Capco]

To me, Gilmore's most memorable moment was a pass breakup where he stuck his arm underneath the receiver's arm and swatted the ball away.

 

I remember thinking that was a damn good play.

[Chuck Schick]

This too ^^

If you don't like Gilmore that's fine but this play can only be blamed on him for 2 reasons. You hate the guy and have an agenda or you lack understanding of extremely basic football concepts. I tend to think that this thread is mostly the latter with some agendas sprinkled in.

I think people get it. Gilmore is not to blame for the coverage.

But it's also a bit bullheaded to essentially declare that no CB in the history of football has successfully made a mid-play adjustment when he sees that the deep zone has been flooded with more than one WR. I think it could be argued that Gilmore didn't exactly show great instincts once the ball was in the air.

Is it also unreasonable to hope that an RB makes an in-play decision to bounce outside when the designed inside lane isn't open?

[Kirby Jackson]

I think people get it. Gilmore is not to blame for the coverage.

But it's also a bit bullheaded to essentially declare that no CB in the history of football has successfully made a mid-play adjustment when he sees that the deep zone has been flooded with more than one WR. I think it could be argued that Gilmore didn't exactly show great instincts once the ball was in the air.

Is it also unreasonable to hope that an RB makes an in-play decision to bounce outside when the designed inside lane isn't open?

Totally different scenarios, guys with the ball or trying to get the ball can go off script. The defense has to maintain their assignments especially in zone!!!

 

Think about it like basketball because there are less guys on the court. The guy with the ball or trying to get the ball can penetrate, shoot, pass, cut, etc... They have options. If the defense is Syracuse's 2-3 defense and the guy in the middle decides that he wants to chase a guy to the wing it leaves an area exposed. You are linked together in a zone. Everyone has an area that they are responsible for. You don't just do something different. That play was won pre-snap. They put McCourty in a tough situation. He had to make a choice. That's why scheme and coaching are important (and why Rex was horrible).