Pats/Seahawks SB - Flat-Slant Concept Vs Cover 3/1

[Brady-Carter]

28-14... Brady was 4-12 with 1 INT in the 3rd Q

When Seattle went to Cover 2. Which is a short route concept beater. This thread like I said above is more about a concept on O that exploits a concept on D. Just a small part of the game, lots of other factors went into why the Pats won.

But getting the Hawks out of their base D(cover 3) By using a Flat/slant concept with a built in RB screen, is interesting to me.

 

[yseJ]

very good write-up
but this isnt the first time someone tried doing this to hags, its just the first time it worked really well
it takes a HoF qb with a quick release who is king of short passing and receivers who run precise routes and in general dont allow corners to jump slants and shield the ball away. plus pass-catching RBs are a big plus too

also didnt hurt that lane got hurt early so there was a clear weak link they could exploit

 

[Roid Jones]

Good read

 

[Roid Jones]

Cool story bro.. Point is, they were injured, including their pass rusher Avril & Hill.... Pats are the luckiest SB winning team ever... A healthy Seahawk team beats Pats same way they beat Broncos...

Stay mad fakkit

 

[Brady-Carter]

very good write-up
but this isnt the first time someone tried doing this to hags, its just the first time it worked really well
it takes a HoF qb with a quick release who is king of short passing and receivers who run precise routes and in general dont allow corners to jump slants and shield the ball away. plus pass-catching RBs are a big plus too

also didnt hurt that lane got hurt early so there was a clear weak link they could exploit

Ya, having Amedola and Edleman on the flat and Gronk and Lafell on slants really helped the Pats to be able to disguise the routes(with different formations). I was trying to think of a way for the Broncos to do the same, but they just did not have the players for it really.

 

[Bernie Madoff]

I coach breh, trust I know X's and O's

Seahawks shoulda won, but blame the head coach and OC

Woulda, coulda, breh...

 

[Bryan Danielson]

Ehhh the whole secondary was injured, all that stuff Woudnt of mattered

Woulda been the same effect even if everyone isn't injured, there just aren't enough underneath defenders in a cover 3 scheme (which is Seattle's bread & butter).

Cool story bro.. Point is, they were injured, including their pass rusher Avril & Hill.... Pats are the luckiest SB winning team ever... A healthy Seahawk team beats Pats same way they beat Broncos...

Hmmmm.... I'm gonna agree with Educated that if the Seahawks wouldve been healthy. They prolly wouldve won their 2nd SB. Injuries do play a MAJOR factor in games and in that game they lost like 2 players and Sherm and Thomas were clearly not themselves

Now that was just 4 players..... for the sake of consistency.... Then my NINERS wouldve NEVER been 8-8 if it wasnt for the fact that 95% of our defense was either injured or suspended for the practically the whole season. People are so quick to say bad shyt about us like last year we really digressed when really we was playing with less than a full deck. I think if we wouldve had our guys the whole season, at worst we wouldve been 11-5, Bears, Raiders, Rams, and Charger wouldve never beat us and Seattle woudve have swept us. Im not even sure we'd lost that one game to the Cards so I'm gonna say 12-4

 

[JLova]

If the 9ers were healthy a couple years back, the Hags don't win their 1st SB. What's the point in all this "if ### didn't get injured then...." sh1t? It's part of the game...as sh1tty as it is.

 

[Stone]

Ya, having Amedola and Edleman on the flat and Gronk and Lafell on slants really helped the Pats to be able to disguise the routes(with different formations). I was trying to think of a way for the Broncos to do the same, but they just did not have the players for it really.

Styles make fights as they say.

/Seattle's weakness in the secondary is against smaller, quicker receivers(Sanders,DJax, TY Hilton)

Thomas and Decker's style plays right into their hands, plus their d-line was better last year.

Pats' offense doesn't have flashy skill players, but they consistently get 3-5 yards on first down and set themselves up for third and short better than anybody and it's due to these short throws and receivers like Edelman and Welker previously being difficult to tackle so they always manage to get that extra yard or two. Add that is the best at identifying advantageous matchups and exploiting them and it's curtains

Broncos offense would consistently get into 3rd and long situations where against the elite defenses you're much more likely to fail.

 

[Pesci]

Cool story bro.. Point is, they were injured, including their pass rusher Avril & Hill.... Pats are the luckiest SB winning team ever... A healthy Seahawk team beats Pats same way they beat Broncos...

someone call the whambulance

 

[South Paw]

very good write-up
but this isnt the first time someone tried doing this to hags, its just the first time it worked really well
it takes a HoF qb with a quick release who is king of short passing and receivers who run precise routes and in general dont allow corners to jump slants and shield the ball away. plus pass-catching RBs are a big plus too

also didnt hurt that lane got hurt early so there was a clear weak link they could exploit

Lane going out was big. With kam and earl injured they had extra safeties active, and didn't activate Burley, who's their backup nickel. When Lane went out they had to put Maxwell in the slot and Simon got abused on the outside.