bob2the2nd
member 32
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,049
- Reaction score
- 23,128
- Points
- 135
He in fact did not have an excellent game out side of that 1 play......
-
Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.
Denzel Ward
- Thread starter Stark
- Start date
adam81king
All-Star
- Joined
- May 20, 2010
- Messages
- 5,806
- Reaction score
- 9,356
- Points
- 113
Denzel must not want that big extension... #Pause
Out of the Rafters at the Q
Out of the Rafters
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2008
- Messages
- 26,113
- Reaction score
- 55,544
- Points
- 148
Los216
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2012
- Messages
- 34,889
- Reaction score
- 40,732
- Points
- 148
I think Denzel is a little frustrated playing so soft in his zone and he would much rather play more press. He looks frustrated having to give guys a cushion and chase them down. I notice on plays where he's pressing and running stride for stride with his man he's way more animated after making a stop.
Remember that Cornerbacks have big personalities and these guys love to compete. I think Denzel wants to go out there and compete and not feel limited by his scheme.
Ohio
Woosah
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 41,966
- Reaction score
- 48,863
- Points
- 148
bob2the2nd
member 32
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,049
- Reaction score
- 23,128
- Points
- 135
Then when he is playing man he needs to step up and show he can play? Even man man where he could play tight coverage he got burned in the 4th
Ohio
Woosah
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 41,966
- Reaction score
- 48,863
- Points
- 148
Ward has been one of the best man corners since he stepped into the league.
Sunday was the worst game in his career, easily. He just had a bad day. Think it can be chalked up to being an outlier.
Was encouraging to hear Stefanski talk about how hard Denzel was working at it in practice today.
All that said, I'd really like to see Denzel in man more often than not. There's no question he's much better in man than zone. And you can overall still play a zone defense with one of your corners in man...almost like a box-and-one in basketball. We started seeing some of this late in the game (as you mentioned), there's really no reason to wait until the 4th quarter to start mixing up looks and sending blitzes. And we saw it have a positive impact. Newsome's PBU and Delpit's sack were two of the biggest plays of the game. We need to see this variety throughout the game.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 36,686
- Reaction score
- 93,652
- Points
- 148
Wait, so because Ward isn't as acutely on his game in zone compared to man, the Browns shouldn't be expected do it?
From PFF last year...
www.pff.com
All 32 teams combined to run zone coverage on 59.0 percent of snaps with just 34.9 percent man coverage (the remaining 6.1 percent falling into a miscellaneous category including prevent, red zone, and goal line defenses which can contain elements of both and don’t sit accurately in a typical coverage shell).
I keep seeing Browns fans framing this like Woods is doing something radically different. What he is doing is modern NFL defense. That's only bizarre to Cleveland fans because we usually hire some defensive coordinator two or three years behind the learning curve.
I'm cool with some exotic coverages where Ward plays man on an elite receiver and there's a unique zone shell everywhere else for ten plays a game... but the majority of the game? How about Ward works on being a pro-style corner as well?
From PFF last year...
Taking a closer look: Examining the NFL's coverage scheme tendencies | NFL News, Rankings and Statistics | PFF
PFF's Sam Monson examines the league's coverage scheme tendencies in the zone-friendly NFL of today.
www.pff.com
All 32 teams combined to run zone coverage on 59.0 percent of snaps with just 34.9 percent man coverage (the remaining 6.1 percent falling into a miscellaneous category including prevent, red zone, and goal line defenses which can contain elements of both and don’t sit accurately in a typical coverage shell).
I keep seeing Browns fans framing this like Woods is doing something radically different. What he is doing is modern NFL defense. That's only bizarre to Cleveland fans because we usually hire some defensive coordinator two or three years behind the learning curve.
I'm cool with some exotic coverages where Ward plays man on an elite receiver and there's a unique zone shell everywhere else for ten plays a game... but the majority of the game? How about Ward works on being a pro-style corner as well?
Ohio
Woosah
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 41,966
- Reaction score
- 48,863
- Points
- 148
That article is from 2017 assessing coverages in 2016. Where do you see it's from last year?Wait, so because Ward isn't as acutely on his game in zone compared to man, the Browns shouldn't be expected do it?
From PFF last year...
Taking a closer look: Examining the NFL's coverage scheme tendencies | NFL News, Rankings and Statistics | PFF
PFF's Sam Monson examines the league's coverage scheme tendencies in the zone-friendly NFL of today.
All 32 teams combined to run zone coverage on 59.0 percent of snaps with just 34.9 percent man coverage (the remaining 6.1 percent falling into a miscellaneous category including prevent, red zone, and goal line defenses which can contain elements of both and don’t sit accurately in a typical coverage shell).
I keep seeing Browns fans framing this like Woods is doing something radically different. What he is doing is modern NFL defense. That's only bizarre to Cleveland fans because we usually hire some defensive coordinator two or three years behind the learning curve.
I'm cool with some exotic coverages where Ward plays man on an elite receiver and there's a unique zone shell everywhere else for ten plays a game... but the majority of the game? How about Ward works on being a pro-style corner as well?
I would be interested in seeing the latest data.
Here is an article from PFF this year assessing schemes from all teams last year:
Defensive scheme analysis for all 32 NFL teams | NFL News, Rankings and Statistics | PFF
Every NFL team has a defensive identity, often a combination of philosophies from past and present coaches. Here's how each of the 32 squads projects to stop offenses in 2021.
www.pff.com
There are many teams whose base scheme is Cover 1, which is man coverage. Most teams also blitz and/or switch up coverages on 3rd down.
The Browns were literally the only team in the entire league who's base was a zone coverage, with a 3rd down mentality of...sitting in the same zone coverage.
Based on this data, it appears what Woods is doing is not modern NFL defense. I'd actually argue it's the exact opposite. He sits in the same vanilla cover 3 for 95% of the game, regardless of opponent and, to this point, regardless of personnel. Maybe this made sense last year when the roster was devoid of talent on defense, but that is not the case this year.
Overall, I believe the defensive scheme should be based on the personnel. Pigeon-holing players into playing "your" scheme 95% of the time is not a recipe for success, and the results we've seen thus far reflect that. Moreover, our impact players have not made an impact to this point. Denzel just had his worst game probably in his entire life. John Johnson and Troy Hill haven't been any good. All the Linebackers have been lost in coverage. Honestly the coverage in general has been so bad that even the DLine, which has been the lone bright spot for the defense, can't get enough time to get home for sacks.
Good coaches adapt to the talent they have. Adjustments need to be made. This scheme and refusal to mix things up is not working for this team. When the Houston Texans are moving the ball at will on you, it's time to look in the mirror and re-evaluate what we are doing here.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 36,686
- Reaction score
- 93,652
- Points
- 148
That article is from 2017 assessing coverages in 2016. Where do you see it's from last year?
I would be interested in seeing the latest data.
Here is an article from PFF this year assessing schemes from all teams last year:
Defensive scheme analysis for all 32 NFL teams | NFL News, Rankings and Statistics | PFF
Every NFL team has a defensive identity, often a combination of philosophies from past and present coaches. Here's how each of the 32 squads projects to stop offenses in 2021.
There are many teams on whose base scheme is Cover 1, which is man coverage. Most teams also blitz and/or switch up coverages on 3rd down.
The Browns were literally the only team in the entire league who's base was a zone coverage, with a 3rd down mentality of...sitting in the same zone coverage.
Based on this data, it appears what Woods is doing is not modern NFL defense. I'd actually argue it's the exact opposite. He sits in the same vanilla cover 3 for 95% of the game, regardless of opponent and, to this point, regardless of personnel. Maybe this made sense last year when the roster was devoid of talent on defense, but that is not the case this year.
Overall, I believe the defensive scheme should be based on the personnel. Pigeon-holing players into playing "your" scheme 95% of the time is not a recipe for success, and the results we've seen thus far reflect that. Moreover, our impact players have not made an impact to this point. Denzel just had his worst game probably in his entire life. John Johnson and Troy Hill haven't been any good. All the Linebackers have been lost in coverage. Honestly the coverage in general has been so bad that even the DLine, which has been the lone bright spot for the defense, can't get enough time to get home for sacks.
Good coaches adapt to the talent they have. Adjustments need to be made. This scheme and refusal to mix things up is not working for this team. When the Houston Texans are moving the ball at will on you, it's time to look in the mirror and re-evaluate what we are doing here.
Appreciate it, I read a time stamp of 2020 but you are right, it's from 2017. I think I read it in 2020 and thought it was publish date. My bad there!
I would also like to find more analysis on the direction of coverages since then... my understanding has been that man coverage is in decline with mobile QBs gaining starting jobs.
The blitz matter is a work in progress as the defensive personnel becomes comfortable with the franchise and terminology. So many new faces this year, many of whom are 1st and 2nd year pros.
The most valuable part of your article is the fact the blitzes were not an overall success last season. That's something to keep track of as the Browns begin to blitz more in 2021.
Lee
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2005
- Messages
- 41,135
- Reaction score
- 61,965
- Points
- 148
Wait, so because Ward isn't as acutely on his game in zone compared to man, the Browns shouldn't be expected do it?
From PFF last year...
Taking a closer look: Examining the NFL's coverage scheme tendencies | NFL News, Rankings and Statistics | PFF
PFF's Sam Monson examines the league's coverage scheme tendencies in the zone-friendly NFL of today.
All 32 teams combined to run zone coverage on 59.0 percent of snaps with just 34.9 percent man coverage (the remaining 6.1 percent falling into a miscellaneous category including prevent, red zone, and goal line defenses which can contain elements of both and don’t sit accurately in a typical coverage shell).
I keep seeing Browns fans framing this like Woods is doing something radically different. What he is doing is modern NFL defense. That's only bizarre to Cleveland fans because we usually hire some defensive coordinator two or three years behind the learning curve.
I'm cool with some exotic coverages where Ward plays man on an elite receiver and there's a unique zone shell everywhere else for ten plays a game... but the majority of the game? How about Ward works on being a pro-style corner as well?
Its not the zone persey, its the fact we ran a very vanilla line and were not getting pressure. We need more line stunts, send 5 some, pressure on the QB is the most important thing and we didnt get any.
Ohio
Woosah
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 41,966
- Reaction score
- 48,863
- Points
- 148
I do think (or, hope) what we've been seeing truly is a "vanilla" version of the defense we ultimately end up playing by years end. But, after seeing what happened this past Sunday, I'm ready for the training wheels to come off. Yes, that may lead to some bumps in the road and some broken coverages, but we just played the worst team on our schedule and they were unstoppable until their QB (not to mention many other players) had to leave the game due to injury. It can't get worse than the worst team on your schedule scoring at will on you.
The opening paragraph in that article was telling:
This suggests a constant evolution with NFL defenses. As a Browns fan, I hope we see some sooner rather than later.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 36,686
- Reaction score
- 93,652
- Points
- 148
Lots of complaints about heat on the QB - can I remind that despite only sending four in week one, they had heat on Mahomes 44% of the plays?
They tried the same thing in week two, it wasn't as successful for pressure numbers, but the team still won comfortably. Why try exotic and risky blitz packages if the team is up and a shaky rookie QB is in for the opponent?
People keep referring to the Texans driving on us in the second half... you guys realize the offense was substantially below average in yards and scoring, right?
I'm not saying it's all a dance in the daisies, but this defense did what it had to do against a bad team at home. Style doesn't get you more points. Against the Bears, it has to be better.
They tried the same thing in week two, it wasn't as successful for pressure numbers, but the team still won comfortably. Why try exotic and risky blitz packages if the team is up and a shaky rookie QB is in for the opponent?
People keep referring to the Texans driving on us in the second half... you guys realize the offense was substantially below average in yards and scoring, right?
I'm not saying it's all a dance in the daisies, but this defense did what it had to do against a bad team at home. Style doesn't get you more points. Against the Bears, it has to be better.