1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Good Breakdown of the Two Point Conversion Play

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by KB21, Oct 24, 2011.

  1. BigDogsHunt

    BigDogsHunt Enough talk...prove it!

    22,422
    9,819
    0
    Nov 27, 2007
    DC Metro Area
    Whatever personnel or package we would have been in with our 11, Denver would have audibled to the advantage - just like they did.

    At the end of the day this is all that matters:

    They got beat like a drum, or better yet, beat themselves, and now pointing fingers about how it would be different is just a last act of desperation by a beaten man. Sad!

    Pointing fingers by these fools is par for the course.
     
  2. Hellion

    Hellion Crash Club Member

    1,800
    798
    113
    Dec 4, 2007
    Here and there
    I agree but I'd rather have Tebow throwing the ball than running it.
     
  3. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Why don't you think they knew it was a run?

    It's not really more DBs than nessecary. As far as I know, they matched WRs with corners, which is normally what's done.
     
  4. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    "More DBs than necessary" is a pretty subjective term. They matched personnel. Its pretty standard for the situation.

    Given the circumstances surrounding the Broncos, should they have maybe devised a package for that scenario? One would like to see that. But by no means was the personnel on the field some sort of egregious gaffe. Surely if we brought in an extra LB, and Tebow checked to a pass, and one of our LBs got beat by a WR, everyone would be asking why is a LB covering a WR.
     
  5. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Pate did you watch that video I posted, it shows an endzone angle of the whole defensive formation? curious to hear what you might think, Alen as well?..I mean they spread us out big time.
     
  6. maynard

    maynard Who, whom?

    18,425
    6,346
    113
    Dec 5, 2007
    clearwater, fl
    i would have to go back and look, but it seems like the look the Broncos gave us both times were pretty similar. we call TO and have time to think about it

    its almost like we realized that we got caught with the wrong personnel the first time and then allowed ourselves to be caught with the wrong personnel the second time the same way
     
  7. maynard

    maynard Who, whom?

    18,425
    6,346
    113
    Dec 5, 2007
    clearwater, fl
    the blocking basically becomes their 6 against our 4 pass defense DLs as Bell does nothing but flow inside and Allen just runs by him. to say that our defense got manhandled on that play is inaccurate, imo. i thought we were in a nickel, but that actually might be a dime defense. i count 6 DBs.
     
  8. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    I watched it once but am not in a position to watch it again. I sit in that end-zone, so I saw the full package/personnel. It was 4-wide shotgun(Not sure the package # for that) and the back motioned out to the left. The Dolphins were in their dime package I believe with the safeties in the box.

    I don't think it was the best package, and they could have used something more creative to handle the situation, but I don't believe it was a totally inappropriate formation match-up or defense.

    I don't think it was the personnel, it was the back motioning out wide. The Broncos did the same thing leading up to the snap, and the linebacker followed the back out, but there was almost certainly some sort of other pre-snap defensive adjustment made.
     
    maynard likes this.
  9. mbmonk

    mbmonk I have no clue

    1,333
    457
    0
    Aug 4, 2008
    I am wondering if the coaching staff was really expecting a Tebow run like they claim. You see the personnel they put on the field in terms of pass rush Dline. It was not a run stopping Dline. You have Bell playing the run as a second priority. He is really passive on coming up and hitting the TE ( the offense only needs 2 yards - Tebow can fall forward and gain that).

    I don't have any clue what Dansby was doing. He wasn't blitzing and he was really slow to read the pulling guard.

    It's all just some weird cluster of ****tiness that is the Dolphins of 2011. :lol:
     
  10. maynard

    maynard Who, whom?

    18,425
    6,346
    113
    Dec 5, 2007
    clearwater, fl
    that's what i don't understand. our run stopping package on the goal line is 6 DBs, 1 LB and our pass rush DL?

    thats the difference maybe between the players and coaches. has sparano or nolan said they were expecting a run? the only ones i heard say they expected the run were players.
     
  11. mbmonk

    mbmonk I have no clue

    1,333
    457
    0
    Aug 4, 2008
    Yea. Sparano mentioned in his post game press conference.
    and here is a link: http://www.miamidolphins.com/news/a...e-Quotes/929c2218-e241-4412-95fa-7038752b09f2

    There must have been a serious breakdown in communicating that to the players. Either the wrong personnel got sent out or they were told to look for a pass. It didn't seem like anyone was really playing the run first out of Dansby, Bell, or Allen.
     
    maynard likes this.
  12. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Teams typically match their defensive package to offensive personnel. If there is two wide receivers you run your base 3-4 or 4-3, if there are 3 wide receivers a Nickel package, 4 wide receivers a Dime package, etc. Sometimes it doesn't happen, but it's an exception, not a rule. Sometimes teams will have different Nickel personnel formations for run downs(Miami maddeningly has Jared Odrick playing in a wide technique at RDE in their normal Nickel, sometimes you see that and Paul Soliai at DT), but generally you don't see run personnel in Dime packages.

    The Broncos lined up with 4-wide(One could have been a TE) and a back, generally you match that with a dime formation(four corners two safeties), which they did. I think they could have had a better personnel package out there(That's when you arguably SHOULD have Odrick and Soliai in a passing formation), but I don't think it would have changed anything.
     
  13. The G Man

    The G Man Git 'r doooonnne!!!

    7,480
    5,637
    113
    Mar 18, 2009
    If you would've suggested this after the first 2-3 games (and someone did IIRC), I would've said it was a preposterous notion. Anymore though, I'm not sure. Anything is possible IMHO.
     
  14. maynard

    maynard Who, whom?

    18,425
    6,346
    113
    Dec 5, 2007
    clearwater, fl
    i appreciate all that, but it almost sounds like you are saying that there is little defense for what the Broncos were doing. I understand that a spread with a talented running QB is very tough to defend for just a couple of yards.

    even if we had LBs out there instead of CBs covering 2 WRs it wouldn't have mattered. but i would prefer the beefier DL, with Misi instead or Bell or something like that or possibly a 5 man line.

    your logic is completely sound, but imo it changes based on the ball being on the 2 yard line
     
  15. Disgustipate

    Disgustipate Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    31,608
    55,634
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Then you're in danger of a pass play. A wide receiver on a linebacker is problematic, and if your package doesn't match it isn't just someone cutting across a linebackers zone underneath kinda thing. Tebow isn't a great passer but a big mismatch is a problem, along with jump-pass kinda stuff.

    I think its certainly defensible, and what they did could have been successful if it were better executed. People want to turn it into a simple microcosm for the season or go on about how their dead dog knew it was a run and the coaches didn't, and it ain't that simple
     
  16. mbmonk

    mbmonk I have no clue

    1,333
    457
    0
    Aug 4, 2008
    I don't have a problem with the number of DB's. I think the Dline should have been beefier if it was an expected run, and obviously the execution of gap control by the defense was HORRIBLE.
     
  17. Eop05

    Eop05 Junior Member Club Member

    5,659
    5,268
    113
    Dec 8, 2007
    NJ
    Normally, the whole: Match up your defensive personnel to the offensive personnel makes complete sense.

    Against the Packers, Patriots, Saints, heck against most teams it makes sense.

    But you and I watched the same game. Tebow couldn't hit the side of a barn. Matching up our defense, making it dime, just because they had 4 WRs is simply playing by the book and bad coaching IMO.

    Point being: Let Tebow beat you through the air. Put in your base 3-4 and make him go through his progressions and/or make an accurate pass to his primary read. He couldn't do for the entire game. He constantly panicked if his first read wasn't open and looked to tuck the ball and run almost every drop back.
     
  18. maynard

    maynard Who, whom?

    18,425
    6,346
    113
    Dec 5, 2007
    clearwater, fl
    agreed. but I also think that, no matter your opponent you have to have some semblance of a goal-line defense. I wouldn't play that defense inside the 5 or 10 yard line. We have to have Paul out there at the very least. Why not stand up JT in the that spot? he can defend the pass or the run well in that small area
     
    Eop05 likes this.
  19. unifiedtheory

    unifiedtheory Sub Pending Luxury Box

    12,363
    7,091
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Burnaby, BC, Canada
    Our coaching staff is garbage. Can't wait until they are all fired.
     
  20. siciliansith

    siciliansith Resident Deviant

    4,937
    922
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Rochester NY
    Now im not saying you exactly but where all the people that get pissed at fist pump 3's on this? This yr ive seen it all on the boards lol. We should have kicked a pat not go for 2. we should have tryed for the endzone with 17 seconds left when we've already been picked, why not more checkdowns to bess or bush. I guess times change fast. just yesterday was open it up more?

    Not saying these wouldnt be the right move, but monday quarterbacking sucks
     

Share This Page