ADVERTISEMENT

PSU gave up 304 Passing Yards to a well-below average Passing Game. CJF needs to do something about TA's abysmal Zone Coverages packages before the Se

Could Not Agree More....If we see it, Franklin cannot find this acceptable.....Georgia or ND Will shred us with this Zone Pkg!
Georgia nor ND have great passing games. We'll see something similar. We're going to take away the run and force Stockton or Leonard to beat us--and why wouldn't we?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LMTLION
You don't think that kind of mistake can be made in man coverage?

No, an eligible receiver cannot be 30 yards behind the defense with absolutely no one on PSU's defense being aware of it in a Cover1 or Cover 0 package. On that play, it was the BSU TE. In Cover 1 or Cover 0 a specific player is assigned to the TE - if the TE goes out into secondary (as he clearly did here - he never even remotely attempted to block) the player assigned to him covers him. If the TE stays in to "run block", his assignment shifts to run-stop.

People saying PSU was in man on that play are utterly full of $hit and don't know what they're talking about. No way can a TE be alone 30 yards behind the defense with absolutely no one on PSU's defense even aware he was there 4 seconds into the play... and only became aware the receiver was there when the QB threw the ball !!! No way does a person assigned to the TE in Cover 1 or Cover 0 not know where the TE even is, and that he is 30-40 yards behind him, 4 seconds into the play. NO WAY! Could the assigned cover-man in a C1 or C0 bite on "play action", get caught flat-footed and allow the TE to get behind him? Sure he could, but he would also be chasing after him! The TE would not be standing by himself 30 yards behind the defense for several seconds with absolutely nobody from PSU's defense even aware he is there in C1 or C0. No way - absolutely can't happen.
 
No, an eligible receiver cannot be 30 yards behind the defense with absolutely no one on PSU's defense being aware of it in a Cover1 or Cover 0 package. On that play, it was the BSU TE. In Cover 1 or Cover 0 a specific player is assigned to the TE - if the TE goes out into secondary (as he clearly did here - he never even remotely attempted to block) the player assigned to him covers him. If the TE stays in to "run block", his assignment shifts to run-stop.

People saying PSU was in man on that play are utterly full of $hit and don't know what they're talking about. No way can a TE be alone 30 yards behind the defense with absolutely no one on PSU's defense even aware he was there 4 seconds into the play... and only became aware the receiver was there when the QB threw the ball !!! No way does a person assigned to the TE in Cover 1 or Cover 0 not know where the TE even is, and that he is 30-40 yards behind him, 4 seconds into the play. NO WAY! Could the assigned cover-man in a C1 or C0 bite on "play action", get caught flat-footed and allow the TE to get behind him? Sure he could, but he would also be chasing after him! The TE would not be standing by himself 30 yards behind the defense for several seconds with absolutely nobody from PSU's defense even aware he is there in C1 or C0. No way - absolutely can't happen.
Watch the replay--King blew his assignment--watch his reaction
Man is exactly when that happens because everyone is locked up not playing space
Your belief that no one can be that open in man is the definition of cluless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUblamo
load the box and keep the play in front of you. This was classic Paterno stuff
Exactly right.
Tom Bradley had a pretty good career designing “bend, don’t break” defensive game plans for big games.
Preppie must have received a new copy of “Football for Dummies” for Christmas. And he was apparently very anxious to prove he was worthy of the gift.
 
No, an eligible receiver cannot be 30 yards behind the defense with absolutely no one on PSU's defense being aware of it in a Cover1

If we were in Cover 1, a safety would have stayed deep regardless and would have at least been 15 yards deep when the TE leaked.

Cover 0 (which is what I'm sure we were in) left us with a LB who got lost in traffic with 0 safety help (which we didn't have on the play), which is exactly what that play call was designed for.

Cover 2 or 4, we would have had 2 or 4 guys 7-15 off the ball and we likely intercept the pass or he chucks it into the dirt or he scrambles for whatever.
 
The play where the tight end cut the long touchdown pass look like it was actually man-to-man and Kobe King got caught watching the play, he should’ve been covering the tight end.
Anticipation Popcorn GIF
Waiting for bushwoods response to this post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
I would suggest that we go to a man assignment on all eligible receivers with a Cover 1 as our base package so we can still get pressure. But we have to dump these gawd-awful zone packages as our base package on the vast majority of our 2nd and 3rd and long situations. PSU had a busted coverage where an eligible receiver was 30 yards behind our zone "prevent" defense for f'ing Pete's sake!!!

CJF has to get ahold of this situation or were going to get shredded down the line here - just utterly unacceptable performance by Tom Allen in this game and he refused to drop his silly zone coverages that were getting burned over and over again - many via huge chunk plays... long TDs..... etc... just horrid.
Yes, we gave up 300+ passing yards, but thier top runner to 90+ yards UNDER HIS AVERAGE! I do the goal and key to victory was controlling Ashton -- and we did rather emphatically. BTW we inception Marsden 3 times.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
 
Yes, we gave up 300+ passing yards, but thier top runner to 90+ yards UNDER HIS AVERAGE! I do the goal and key to victory was controlling Ashton -- and we did rather emphatically. BTW we inception Marsden 3 times.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
Yeah 4 turnovers--easily could have been 5--the defense was fine other than one blown coverage which happens. I was expecting one long run but it was a long pass instead.
 
Yes, we gave up 300+ passing yards, but thier top runner to 90+ yards UNDER HIS AVERAGE! I do the goal and key to victory was controlling Ashton -- and we did rather emphatically. BTW we inception Marsden 3 times.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

Their top runner! Who did he rack up yards against?
 
  • Angry
Reactions: psu1969a
The play where the tight end cut the long touchdown pass look like it was actually man-to-man and Kobe King got caught watching the play, he should’ve been covering the tight end.

That's laughable nonsense - when you're in Cover 0, you're literally assigned to a SPECIFIC eligible receiver by the Defensive Play Caller (usually MLB). NO WAY would King (who would be lined up directly in front of him and looking directly at him at the snap) just "not notice" that his Man-Assignment was running off the LOS straight down the sideline on a Wheel Route.... and continue to be oblivious to the fact that his COVER-0 ASSIGNMENT was 30 yards behind him standing by himself 4 seconds into the play! Not possible despite what you loser, jock-sniffers who have never even played organized football claim. It simply isn't possible if you are assigned to that specific Eligible-Reciever in a Cover 0 scheme. You morons further don't understand how these players provide "run support" in this type of scheme - if you are assigned to the RB or TE in a Cover 0, and your player "stays in" to block or run the ball (including a screen play) - you convert to run-support at the LOS and pursue the ball as your assignment has "tipped the play" by staying in and run-blocking. Many of you are utterly full of ignorant $hit that having a Cover 0 scheme means that you're going to be running way down field in pass coverage and can't provide run-support, if your assigned Cover 0 eligible receiver hasn't gone down field!

But you're utterly full of $hit that King could be assigned the TE in a Cover 0 assignment, be lined up directly across from him pre-snap and looking directly at him...... and not notice that he ran free directly off the LOS looping into a wheel route and running completely uncovered down the sideline for at least 4 seconds.... and King having no clue that he'd done any of this and thought he was still at the LOS.... Laughable nonsense and complete bull$hit.... NOT POSSIBLE!

King had deep Safety help in the zone scheme they were running, but he had no clue the BSU TE was 30 yards behind the defense until the QB threw the ball (like 4 seconds after the snap) - this is why he was the closest PSU defender when BSU TE crossed the goal-line (and he wasn't very close) - but again, the only reason he was closest is because he was playing the "deepest zone" help, but he didn't even start moving toward the BSU TE until AFTER the BSU QB threw the ball and the BSU TE was way behind the absurd match-up zone defense for at least 3 or 4 seconds. But claiming PSU was lined up in Cover 0 there and King just didn't notice his specific man-assignment leave the LOS without being touched and running straight down the sideline via a wheel route.... is a bunch of happy-horse$hit nonsense by a bunch of pin-headed jock-sniffers who've never even played the game that don't know squat about what they're talking about.
 
Their top runner! Who did he rack up yards against?

PSU was the only top rushing defense BSU played. Next highest was Oregon at like 35... after that SJSU which is like 75.... From what I saw he wasn't even the 2nd best RB out there.... and the schedule he played (loaded with weak rushing defenses) had a lot to do with his season stats.
 
We sold out to stop Jeanty, daring Madsen to throw it. There was always going to be one or two players open. They also ran very quick 2-second passes before our rush could materialize. He completed those passes.

But once he had to put the game one his shoulders and drop back longer than 2 seconds, he couldn’t do it. I thought the defensive game plan was near perfect.

This. PSU had linebackers and safeties up to stop Jeanty. It was absolutely the right defense because he is a risk to take it to the house on every play. When you have 8-9 men at the LOS you're going to give up slants and you're going to give up medium-range passing in the center of the field.

This is the impact a player like Jeanty has on a game. They have wide open receivers because PSU has to respect a guy who can break tackles and has that kind of explosiveness.

I don't have any problem whatsoever with PSU's defense. They were shorthanded without Carter, they had to play a lot in a pretty warm place, and they held this team to 14 points. That's damn impressive against a team with the nation's best TB and a pretty good passing attack as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Westcoast24
Did you bozos just hear what Saban said on Gameday when reviewing Oregon's defense.... and reviewed a "Cover 0" situation??? The Oregon defender was on his man and looked back at the LOS to see what was going on (i.e., took his eye off his assignment) causing a couple yard separation as receiver cut while Defender was looking back... resulting in a TD pass... Saban said, "I always told my guys, if you're in Cover 0 and you take your eyes off of your assignment, the only thing you're going to be doing is watching TD passes all game long.".

King was not "matched up" on the opposite side of the LOS on BSU's TD pass - he was not watching every move the BSU TE made off the LOS at the snap.... because he wasn't in Cover 0 locked up with BSU TE. If he were, it would have been physically impossible for him to not notice the BSU TE running a wheel route directly off the LOS and straight down the sideline with King assigned to him and looking directly at him as the ball is being snapped. NOT POSSIBLE jock-sniffers!
 
Did you bozos just hear what Saban said on Gameday when reviewing Oregon's defense.... and reviewed a "Cover 0" situation??? The Oregon defender was on his man and looked back at the LOS to see what was going on (i.e., took his eye off his assignment) causing a couple yard separation as receiver cut while Defender was looking back... resulting in a TD pass... Saban said, "I always told my guys, if you're in Cover 0 and you take your eyes off of your assignment, the only thing you're going to be doing is watching TD passes all game long.".

King was not "matched up" on the opposite side of the LOS on BSU's TD pass - he was not watching every move the BSU TE made off the LOS at the snap.... because he wasn't in Cover 0 locked up with BSU TE. If he were, it would have been physically impossible for him to not notice the BSU TE running a wheel route directly off the LOS and straight down the sideline with King assigned to him and looking directly at him as the ball is being snapped. NOT POSSIBLE jock-sniffers!
I don’t think this is helping your cause as much as you think it is. In fact it shows the opposite of what you keep saying. Keep up the good fight tho and Happy New Year.
 
Did you bozos just hear what Saban said on Gameday when reviewing Oregon's defense.... and reviewed a "Cover 0" situation??? The Oregon defender was on his man and looked back at the LOS to see what was going on (i.e., took his eye off his assignment) causing a couple yard separation as receiver cut while Defender was looking back... resulting in a TD pass... Saban said, "I always told my guys, if you're in Cover 0 and you take your eyes off of your assignment, the only thing you're going to be doing is watching TD passes all game long.".

King was not "matched up" on the opposite side of the LOS on BSU's TD pass - he was not watching every move the BSU TE made off the LOS at the snap.... because he wasn't in Cover 0 locked up with BSU TE. If he were, it would have been physically impossible for him to not notice the BSU TE running a wheel route directly off the LOS and straight down the sideline with King assigned to him and looking directly at him as the ball is being snapped. NOT POSSIBLE jock-sniffers!


Someone got caught looking at the QB moving toward the opposite side
 
Did you bozos just hear what Saban said on Gameday when reviewing Oregon's defense.... and reviewed a "Cover 0" situation??? The Oregon defender was on his man and looked back at the LOS to see what was going on (i.e., took his eye off his assignment) causing a couple yard separation as receiver cut while Defender was looking back... resulting in a TD pass... Saban said, "I always told my guys, if you're in Cover 0 and you take your eyes off of your assignment, the only thing you're going to be doing is watching TD passes all game long.".

King was not "matched up" on the opposite side of the LOS on BSU's TD pass - he was not watching every move the BSU TE made off the LOS at the snap.... because he wasn't in Cover 0 locked up with BSU TE. If he were, it would have been physically impossible for him to not notice the BSU TE running a wheel route directly off the LOS and straight down the sideline with King assigned to him and looking directly at him as the ball is being snapped. NOT POSSIBLE jock-sniffers!
Over the last few days Lando looks completely logical and sane compared to you.
 


Someone got caught looking at the QB moving toward the opposite side
Yeah, I was more of an offensive coordinator when I coached, but I could tell exactly what the defense was supposed to do on that once I saw the role out to the right and what those receivers did. King got caught looking at the quarterback.
 
Yeah, I was more of an offensive coordinator when I coached, but I could tell exactly what the defense was supposed to do on that once I saw the role out to the right and what those receivers did. King got caught looking at the quarterback.

QB roled to the left and the BSU TE ran a wheel route directly off the LOS down the left sideline.... LMAO. Furthermore, if you're locked in man-coverage with a specific assigned eligible receiver (i.e., Cover 1 or Cover 0) - you're lined up directly on your assignment and looking directly at them so you can first see what they are going to do off the snap (i.e, go into a pattern, start run-blocking... etc... for a TE assignment) - this is going to key what you are going to do next.... if TE starts blocking, you are going to look at what QB is doing.... if QB hands ball off, you're now part of run-support. If QB is dropping back, you're going to make sure TE is not running a fake blocking delay pattern... if TE still blocking, you're probably going to look screen.... etc.... But NONE OF THESE THINGS are what the TE did. The TE went directly into a pass pattern (a wheel route down the left sideline) and had anyone been assigned to the TE in a Cover 0 or Cover 1 scheme, that is PRECISELY what the assigned man defender would be looking at, at the snap of the ball.... the TE goes directly into a pass pattern down left sideline right off the snap, the TE's assigned man defender covers him as that is his primary assignment. King was nowhere near the TE at the snap, nor was he looking at what he was doing... King dropped immediately from the snap into a soft zone which is supposed to ultimately "match up" with eligible receivers that go into pass patterns depending on which eligible receivers go into patterns and what they do.... and where they run their pattern (taking some and "releasing" others as they come in and out of their zone.... how many come into the zone and what they're doing, etc....). King absolutely was not in a Cover 0 or Cover 1 Scheme - he was part of a soft, retreating "match up" zone (retreating because you're supposed to try to keep all receivers in front of you... essentially a form of a soft "prevent" defense). PSU's scheme failed miserably on TWO COUNTS - completely and utterly failed - and that would be understanding each other in a way that they were all interpreting their matchup assignments the same way AND, most importantly, keeping someone between ALL eligible receivers and the goal-line at all times (preferably more than one person on deep routes). Not letting eligible receivers BEHIND THE DEFENSE (i.e., keeping everything in front of you) is the first and fundamental creed of any "prevent" match-up zone... and PSU failed this most basic and fundamental principles COMPLETELY.

They failed the interpreting their ultimate zone coverage responsibilities all day - just like they did against BGSU.... USC..... duhO$U..... Oregon.......
 
QB roled to the left and the BSU TE ran a wheel route directly off the LOS down the left sideline.... LMAO. Furthermore, if you're locked in man-coverage with a specific assigned eligible receiver (i.e., Cover 1 or Cover 0) - you're lined up directly on your assignment and looking directly at them so you can first see what they are going to do off the snap (i.e, go into a pattern, start run-blocking... etc... for a TE assignment) - this is going to key what you are going to do next.... if TE starts blocking, you are going to look at what QB is doing.... if QB hands ball off, you're now part of run-support. If QB is dropping back, you're going to make sure TE is not running a fake blocking delay pattern... if TE still blocking, you're probably going to look screen.... etc.... But NONE OF THESE THINGS are what the TE did. The TE went directly into a pass pattern (a wheel route down the left sideline) and had anyone been assigned to the TE in a Cover 0 or Cover 1 scheme, that is PRECISELY what the assigned man defender would be looking at, at the snap of the ball.... the TE goes directly into a pass pattern down left sideline right off the snap, the TE's assigned man defender covers him as that is his primary assignment. King was nowhere near the TE at the snap, nor was he looking at what he was doing... King dropped immediately from the snap into a soft zone which is supposed to ultimately "match up" with eligible receivers that go into pass patterns depending on which eligible receivers go into patterns and what they do.... and where they run their pattern (taking some and "releasing" others as they come in and out of their zone.... how many come into the zone and what they're doing, etc....). King absolutely was not in a Cover 0 or Cover 1 Scheme - he was part of a soft, retreating "match up" zone (retreating because you're supposed to try to keep all receivers in front of you... essentially a form of a soft "prevent" defense). PSU's scheme failed miserably on TWO COUNTS - completely and utterly failed - and that would be understanding each other in a way that they were all interpreting their matchup assignments the same way AND, most importantly, keeping someone between ALL eligible receivers and the goal-line at all times (preferably more than one person on deep routes). Not letting eligible receivers BEHIND THE DEFENSE (i.e., keeping everything in front of you) is the first and fundamental creed of any "prevent" match-up zone... and PSU failed this most basic and fundamental principles COMPLETELY.

They failed the interpreting their ultimate zone coverage responsibilities all day - just like they did against BGSU.... USC..... duhO$U..... Oregon.......
Incorrect you don’t even know your left from your right. The quarterback rolled right
 
QB roled to the left and the BSU TE ran a wheel route directly off the LOS down the left sideline.... LMAO. Furthermore, if you're locked in man-coverage with a specific assigned eligible receiver (i.e., Cover 1 or Cover 0) - you're lined up directly on your assignment and looking directly at them so you can first see what they are going to do off the snap (i.e, go into a pattern, start run-blocking... etc... for a TE assignment) - this is going to key what you are going to do next.... if TE starts blocking, you are going to look at what QB is doing.... if QB hands ball off, you're now part of run-support. If QB is dropping back, you're going to make sure TE is not running a fake blocking delay pattern... if TE still blocking, you're probably going to look screen.... etc.... But NONE OF THESE THINGS are what the TE did. The TE went directly into a pass pattern (a wheel route down the left sideline) and had anyone been assigned to the TE in a Cover 0 or Cover 1 scheme, that is PRECISELY what the assigned man defender would be looking at, at the snap of the ball.... the TE goes directly into a pass pattern down left sideline right off the snap, the TE's assigned man defender covers him as that is his primary assignment. King was nowhere near the TE at the snap, nor was he looking at what he was doing... King dropped immediately from the snap into a soft zone which is supposed to ultimately "match up" with eligible receivers that go into pass patterns depending on which eligible receivers go into patterns and what they do.... and where they run their pattern (taking some and "releasing" others as they come in and out of their zone.... how many come into the zone and what they're doing, etc....). King absolutely was not in a Cover 0 or Cover 1 Scheme - he was part of a soft, retreating "match up" zone (retreating because you're supposed to try to keep all receivers in front of you... essentially a form of a soft "prevent" defense). PSU's scheme failed miserably on TWO COUNTS - completely and utterly failed - and that would be understanding each other in a way that they were all interpreting their matchup assignments the same way AND, most importantly, keeping someone between ALL eligible receivers and the goal-line at all times (preferably more than one person on deep routes). Not letting eligible receivers BEHIND THE DEFENSE (i.e., keeping everything in front of you) is the first and fundamental creed of any "prevent" match-up zone... and PSU failed this most basic and fundamental principles COMPLETELY.

They failed the interpreting their ultimate zone coverage responsibilities all day - just like they did against BGSU.... USC..... duhO$U..... Oregon.......
dude did you even watch the video clip? The QB rolled the opposite way. You call others idiots and you can’t tell from that clip the QB went one way and the TE went the other? Just stop already. Take a breath and maybe take a minute away from the internet.
 
I would suggest that we go to a man assignment on all eligible receivers with a Cover 1 as our base package so we can still get pressure. But we have to dump these gawd-awful zone packages as our base package on the vast majority of our 2nd and 3rd and long situations. PSU had a busted coverage where an eligible receiver was 30 yards behind our zone "prevent" defense for f'ing Pete's sake!!!

CJF has to get ahold of this situation or were going to get shredded down the line here - just utterly unacceptable performance by Tom Allen in this game and he refused to drop his silly zone coverages that were getting burned over and over again - many via huge chunk plays... long TDs..... etc... just horrid.

You appear to be new to football. You should consider reading more, and posting less.
 
Hey Preppie,
When you’re stuck down in the ditch, quit digging.
You’re wrong about this particular play.
You’re wrong in your assessment of the defensive game plan.
And you’re still fully incapable of communicating like a civilized adult.
By the time the sun sets, I fully expect you will be blaming the Boise State touchdown on Bill O’Brien.
 
Hey Preppie,
When you’re stuck down in the ditch, quit digging.
You’re wrong about this particular play.
You’re wrong in your assessment of the defensive game plan.
And you’re still fully incapable of communicating like a civilized adult.
By the time the sun sets, I fully expect you will be blaming the Boise State touchdown on Bill O’Brien.
Technically it was the refs fault.

Signed, Bushwood.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Safety Blitz
Our defenders do not get their spacing and responsibilities correct in these zone coverages - not sure if it is the design or the players just not understanding their assignments correctly, but there were multiple times BSU receivers floated into huge empty pockets in our zone coverages and no defender moved toward them and they remained wide-open by huge amounts separation to nearest PSU defender (and again, no defender was showing any awareness, or doing anything about, a BSU Receiver literally standing by himself wide open! This would include the BSU TD pass where the BSU RECEIVER was running by himself 30 yards behind the defense and not a single PSU defender even knew he was there or attempted to do anything about right through the QB throwing the ball (at which point there was nothing that could be done! It was Pop Warner-esque defense and not remotely how Zone Coverages are supposed to work!).

Cover 1 and Cover 0 (especially Cover 0) provide the same amount of run-support and make d-backs, FS and LBs coverage assignments much clearer. If their assignment doesn't go out and is run blocking.... etc.....

Remotely accurate QBs with a decently quick release have eaten our zone coverage packages up for breakfast, lunch, dinner and dessert! The BGSU QB threw for 375 yards against our ridiculously poor zone coverage packages and converted long 3rd Down after long 3rd Down. It is going to bite us in the ass down the line here and CJF needs to address it with TA post-haste.
The only thing that matters is points given up.
 
My only beef was the busted coverage on the TE throwback that went for a touchdown. Can’t have mental breakdowns like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13
The team that is behind most of the game by 2 or 3 scores more often than not will have a ton of passing yards.
Thats why I mop up in fantasy by drafting decent quarterbacks who play on teams who give up tons of points, because I will get passing yards o' plenty and "the game was decided long ago and this doesn't matter" TDs.
 
This thread is fandom gold. I'm convinced some fans won't ever be satisfied until Penn State wins every game 50 - 0.
God forbid the other team makes any plays. It's not like they're D1 athletes that practice, train, and commit to succeed.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT