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

Does the 3rd & 20 Blitz Demonstrate an Intentional Tank?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Galant, Oct 29, 2019.

  1. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,058
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
  2. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    It's either intentional or just a really dumb call.
     
  3. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,058
    113
    Apr 22, 2014


     
    Fin-O likes this.
  4. mlb1399

    mlb1399 Well-Known Member

    3,893
    3,087
    113
    Mar 6, 2010
    People are going to find reasons to reinforce their believes regardless of the call. If we blitz and they score a TD, it’s a tank and bad coaching. If we don’t blitz, it’s a tank and bad coaching.

    I’ve pretty much tuned out everyone and waiting to see what happens in year 2 after FA and draft talent infusion. No matter the play calling, this team doesn’t have enough talent to win more than 1-2 games if we get incredibly lucky.
     
    resnor likes this.
  5. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,881
    4,834
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    I almost hope it was because that was an atrocious playcall. You simply cannot give up an easy touchdown like that if you want to win. Force Mason Rudolph to beat you instead of letting him hit a wide open receiver, let that receiver get a head of steam and then just give him one overmatched DB to beat.

    Lots of questionable calls, and our utter failure to come out of the second half with anything resembling a valid gameplan is distressing.
     
  6. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    12,162
    5,057
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Theres lots of reasons to question that playcall.. and theres too many examples so far this season of calls like that, that has costed us the game...

    that was an all time dumb play call period..
     
  7. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    No I disagree.

    If we play coverage there, maybe send a guy or two, that isnt dumb.

    An all out blitz on that down is basically the dumbest call a coach can make.
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  8. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    12,162
    5,057
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    I rather believe that it was an intentional tank playcall than an actual playcall. Thats how bad it is.. because if it was an actual game plan playcall behind it, then i question whether this coaching staff has what it takes to ever win a game.
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  9. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I'm torn on this one. On one hand, if you're going to all-out blitz, then your safety shouldn't be 15 yards down-field...he should have been playing man and it would have been a good call. So maybe the safety just screwed up. There's zero excuse for leaving a receiver uncovered though- that's where the "tanky" part comes in for me. Man coverage would have made that a successful play call.
     
  10. Tin Indian

    Tin Indian Rockin' The Bottom End Club Member

    7,929
    4,404
    113
    Feb 10, 2010
    Palm Bay Florida
    No. Not buying that at all. I am buying it was a rookie headcoach mistake. Everyone needs to remember that Flores is learning still just like any other young head coach does.
     
    invid, jdallen1222 and mlb1399 like this.
  11. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,325
    1,380
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    I think it was just a bad call. Everything about Flo tells me that he is trying to win. If the Bengals and the Dolphins are winless, I fully expect that Flores will be doing his best to win that game just like every other game he coaches.
     
    jdallen1222 and Tin Indian like this.
  12. Tin Indian

    Tin Indian Rockin' The Bottom End Club Member

    7,929
    4,404
    113
    Feb 10, 2010
    Palm Bay Florida
    Everyone talks about the tank. The only group I see tanking is the front office. There doesn't seem to be anyone on the field, coaches or players that are trying to intentionally loose. No way. Not buying any of it.
     
    resnor likes this.
  13. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I do agree they are trying to win. It was just a really, really awful play call.

    If we were in a division race he would be raked over the coals for it.
     
    invid and resnor like this.
  14. keypusher

    keypusher Well-Known Member

    1,351
    448
    83
    Nov 29, 2007
    Sort of OT, but when we were getting blown out in early games I could more or less shrug it off, but last night I got so mad after that blitz I had to turn off the TV. Now that the team is (sort of) competitive I just can't stand stuff like that.

    No, I don't really think it was a tank. But what a crazy, terrible call, made worse by horrible execution.
     
  15. keypusher

    keypusher Well-Known Member

    1,351
    448
    83
    Nov 29, 2007
    This was pretty funny though. Apologies if it has been posted.

     
  16. Deus ex dolphin

    Deus ex dolphin Well-Known Member

    4,142
    2,339
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    No way I agree with this. The same coach who owned the Rams in the Super Bowl? Unless it really was all Bellicheat? In which case, Flores is stumbling around on the sideline learning the game as he goes. Not a good look.

    So, epic level failure coaching OR deliberate tank job? Either way, not a coach I want to see around in 2020.
     
  17. Phin McCool

    Phin McCool Well-Known Member

    713
    735
    93
    Jan 29, 2017
    United Kingdom
    Oh well, never mind....
     
  18. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,325
    1,380
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    This won't be his last bad call. I am willing to bet that most HC would like a few calls back at the end of the game where they could have put their teams in better position to win. I agree that this is a particularly bad call, and although Flo has had a brief tenure with the Dolphins, I have seen him grow and adjust. That being said, if Gase were still here, I think we would still be running bubble screens, and he would still be doodling on the bench by himself trying to figure out why his perfect plays are not working.

    I think a bigger, more warranted concern of Flores is that he keeps getting beaten at the halftime break. The last few weeks, we have entered the game with a solid game plan, but we have been unable to counterpunch on adjustments.
     
    Tin Indian and jdallen1222 like this.
  19. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I defended his hire but I'm really not a Flores fan so far. I think his coaching style works with scrubs, but I really dont think his personality type can handle a star player. People will point out how NE wins despite those star players...but we dont have Brady and Flores isnt Bill B.

    I think hes going to need extremely talented coordinators to find success as a HC and good luck keeping them when coaching offers come in.

    I just watched the play again, I'd only seen it once as I missed the game.

    The worst part isnt even the call itself. There was no attempt to disguise it. I can almost guarantee this is the thought process Flores went through.

    "If we show an all out blitz they will assume we are dropping some guys back and disguising coverage. When the blitz comes the QB will be surprised for a split moment and unable to deliver a catchable ball due to the pressure. If they make the catch short, our two deep corners can converge for a tackle short of the sticks"

    It's just such basic and flawed logic.
     
  20. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,422
    5,732
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    The 3rd & 20 defensive call was NOT a bad playcall, nor was it done intentionally for what ill-informed fans & media refer to as tanking. It was simply a gutsy playcall that didn't work at that time. We've done it before, and the Patriots call Cover 0 blitzes frequently as such a call was exactly what had Darnold "seeing ghosts" last Monday night as it's typically done vs inexperienced QB's which was also the Dolphins situation Monday night. Nothing more, nothing less.
     
    Fin-O, LI phinfan, invid and 7 others like this.
  21. Tin Indian

    Tin Indian Rockin' The Bottom End Club Member

    7,929
    4,404
    113
    Feb 10, 2010
    Palm Bay Florida
    Every rookie head coach has made some boneheaded mistakes and it doesn't matter what their pedigree is. Most often you see them struggling with clock management. Being a Head coach over a coordinator is a different animal, so yes there is a learning curve and mistakes will be made. It's inevitable.
     
    resnor likes this.
  22. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Bout the most ridiculous insinuation I’ve ever heard..

    Geez...some fans I tell ya.
     
    LI phinfan, RGF, Fin D and 1 other person like this.
  23. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,422
    5,732
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    You're clueless with a vendetta. The greatest coach in NFL history made the same call on multiple 3rd down occasions just a few Monday nights ago. The result of those Cover 0 calls on 3rd down: 2 Int's, 1 strip sack and fumble recovery, and 2 punts.
     
    Zigs, LI phinfan and cuchulainn like this.
  24. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Just to be pedantic, that’s a casemated assault gun (the gun is mounted in the enclosed hull of the vehicle), not a tank (the gun is mounted in an enclosed turret).
     
    jdallen1222 and Tin Indian like this.
  25. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    The circumstances of a game dictate a call. It was an idotic call given the circumstances. I dont care what any other team did, you have to know the situation in a game and your personnel. He failed in both areas.
     
    texanphinatic likes this.
  26. gilv13

    gilv13 Well-Known Member

    2,540
    1,327
    113
    Aug 23, 2009
    If we weren't stuck in an extended preseason, i might be more upset over it. I give the coaching staff props for being aggressive.

    I personally am not calling a cover 0 and having the corners play that far off the receivers in that situation though, but that's just me.

    While we are talking about this play, i can't wait to see more of this amoeba defense with the right personnel. Could be fun to watch.
     
    Tin Indian and resnor like this.
  27. Patster1969

    Patster1969 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    679
    788
    93
    Nov 8, 2017
    Gutsy play call, bad execution - as has been said, X and the safety are playing too far off and then X doesn't follow his man (or do a lot) & just let him catch & run. It may have been the safety's responsibility to go to the inside receiver & X have the out but blown coverage either way. As CC said, this play is a NE staple and they have had much success with it but the coverage guys need to be much closer to the receivers to give it a chance
     
    resnor likes this.
  28. mlb1399

    mlb1399 Well-Known Member

    3,893
    3,087
    113
    Mar 6, 2010
    Please don’t try and use logic here. We’ve got our pitchforks out and we need blood!

    Joking aside, I’m surprised to see some people’s reactions. We could have sat back in prevent defense like the Wannstedt days when we had an elite defense and still given up the yards. I’ll take a guy who goes down swinging vs playing scared any day. He gambled and lost. That’s football.

    And anyone expecting him to be gone this year is going to be sorely disappointed next year.
     
    Carmen Cygni and resnor like this.
  29. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    12,162
    5,057
    113
    Nov 25, 2007


    Watch what ESPN had to say about the playcall yesterday. Even former players are saying that the coaches and players are in on the tank.
     
  30. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,422
    5,732
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    Nope. :up:
     
    jegol71, evz, resnor and 1 other person like this.
  31. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    We aren't tanking. I've said this before. Every move we've made that people say proves tanking also proves we are rebuilding. When a team rebuilds, they aren't worried one way or the other about the W/L record during the rebuild.

    Now, the call on 3rd and 20.

    As has been pointed out numerous times now, simply making the play call we did does not in anyway signal tanking. The call in and of itself is perfectly fine. The potential problem with he call is that our staff knows we don't have the personnel for that specific play call to work in that situation. So if that was the argument that we're tanking it would be SLIGHTLY more acceptable. It isn't acceptable at all, but that is slightly better than acting like you don't call that play in that situation period.

    What this play call more likely shows is that Flores and the coaching staff are seeing who can do what in a given situation going forward, because they are going to call the game how they call it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2019
    Tin Indian, resnor and VManis like this.
  32. Carmen Cygni

    Carmen Cygni Well-Known Member

    2,422
    5,732
    113
    Dec 30, 2017
    JFC. Did everyone miss the 1st & 20 Cover 0 call just literally seconds before?!?!

    If you did miss it, it worked and worked well in forcing Rudolph to get the ball out quickly which resulted in an incompletion. Then on the subsequent 3rd & 20 we showed umbrella zone look called a timeout, and then came with another Cover 0 call (which worked exactly how it's supposed to just moments earlier. ****ing garbage to conclude Flores and the staff would make such calls to put our players in bad positions on purpose; complete and utter nonsense.
     
    resnor and RGF like this.
  33. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    JFC did you read my post at all.
     
  34. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    Completely understandable. However the coach your referencing here has actual NFL caliber talent on his defense that can get the to the QB, cover and tackle. We have a bunch of bodies and that's putting it nicely. I get it though, this is the roster we have, this is the scheme we're running, and we're trying to find the right players to fit it moving forward.

    It sure as hell creates the optics that it was part of the "tank job" though. I just believe it wasn't a good call in that situation at the time. We'd shown that look multiple times already in the game up to that point for all the reason's you've pointed out. It had success earlier in the game as well, so I get it. However, you had to know though that Pitt was going to adjust at some point. They did, then we completely blew it on the backend.

    It sure looked and felt like part of the tank job at the time. It looks like a bad call given the outcome. During the game, I know I sure felt it was deliberate. Looking back on it though I doubt it. They just got burned. It shouldn't have resulted in a TD though with better execution.
     
  35. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I’ve avoided this thread but now it’s time to speak my piece and do so quite simply.

    It was a calculated risk that didn’t pan out. Had Pittsburgh’s offensive line folded like a cheap suit and resulted in a 10+ yard sack, everyone would have been praising Flores for such an aggressive unexpected call.

    Dolphins fans are about as bi-polar as my ex-wife
     
  36. RGF

    RGF THE FINSTER Club Member

    6,066
    3,436
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    NY
    Originally your post said we are tanking. He responded to that.
     
  37. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    It did, but that’s not what he responded too. He bolded the part he referred to.
     
  38. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    "The intention of this “amoeba” defense was to confuse and fluster the Vikings’ offense, which boasts arguably the NFL’s best receiving duo in Adam Thielen and Stefon Diggs and a smart, savvy signal-caller in Cousins. It had its desired effect.

    The Patriots employed this look 10 times during Sunday’s 24-10 victory at Gillette Stadium, trotting out primarily on third-and-5 or more. The Vikings moved the chains on just two of those plays as part of a 3-for-12 showing in third-down situations.

    “You could tell (Cousins) was having a tough time reading what we were doing,” Van Noy said after the game. “We executed really well as a defense.”

    The unsettled nature of New England’s amoeba D allowed de facto defensive coordinator Brian Flores to dial up some creative blitz schemes. Flowers, Van Noy, Simon and Hightower were the Patriots’ primary pass rushers out of that look, but Melifonwu, Chung, Harmon and cornerback Jason McCourty all took their turns rushing Cousins, as well.


    On fourth-and-11 late in the game, Flores brought the house, sending defensive tackle Adam Butler (who lined up in the Flowers spot), all three linebackers and three safeties after the Vikings QB. Cousins fired a quick slant to wideout Laquon Treadwell, who immediately was smothered by cornerback Stephon Gilmore well short of the first down.

    “I thought our defensive players, starting with the defensive coaches … those guys did a real good job this week of disguising our packages on defense and with various personnel groups,” Patriots coach Bill Belichick said.

    “The safeties are always a big key to that, because traditionally they play deep (and) they were up. Sometimes they stayed up, sometimes they went back. And the linebackers, we moved around some up front. The defensive line and linebackers did a nice job of coordinating that, organizing it, and then we got some good pressure, especially early in the game and then late in the game. It was just a real good team defensive effort.”

    The Patriots also utilized a two-down-lineman look at times that produced a Butler sack and a bone-crushing QB hit by Van Noy. And even when they used a more conventional front, they disguised the coverage behind it, with Harmon and Devin McCourty aligning near the line of scrimmage before sprinting back to cover deep.

    Harmon used this tactic on a first down during the fourth quarter, and he came away with an interception 40 yards downfield off a J.C. Jackson pass breakup.

    “(We were) just trying to give him different looks,” Harmon said. “He’s a good quarterback. If you just sit there in the same coverage and just sit back and let him know what you’re in, he’s going to kill you. He can make all the throws. He’s shown that all year. But if you just make it a little difficult on him, show from some place that you don’t usually blitz off of, then get to the middle of the field — just keep switching it up — it makes him a little cautious of where he can throw the football.”

    https://nesn.com/2018/12/how-patriots-amoeba-defense-stymied-kirk-cousins-in-win-over-vikings/






    ---- This is why I liked the play call. Had X covered his man correctly, my guess is we stopped them short...and given Rudolph is a inexperienced..could have resulted in a pick. Its aggressive and puts the onus on the D backs. Flores' defense is going to be like that.

    I am sure it is not lost on Flores what we have for talent on the field. But he is instilling the "next man up" mentality.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2019
    resnor likes this.
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If a single play whose meaning is ambiguous is being used to determine whether the team is intentionally tanking, then we should safely conclude that we don’t know whether the team is intentionally tanking.
     
  40. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah we don't know. Right now everything is consistent with both tanking by the FO as well as rebuilding. However.. if we do end up with the #1 pick, then the likelihood we intentionally tanked is higher than otherwise because it's more likely you'll end up with the #1 pick if you intentionally aim for that result.

    Nevertheless, there is utility to keeping track of questionable calls because if you end up with a whole bunch of them, then it also serves as evidence something fishy is going on. Right now.. it's only two calls: the 2-point conversion attempt and this 3rd and 20 blitz. And 2 such calls in 7 games really doesn't mean anything because that probably happens with almost every coach.
     
    The Guy likes this.

Share This Page