If the coverage is a cover 3 then the short route by the WR is not the responsibility of the outside CB. His responsibility is to drop and cover a deep third. The inside CB has the short outside zone and the ILB or possibly the DE on this play would likely have responsibility to cover the other WR in the short area.
Look, there is no way - NO WAY - that the DE or ILB could POSSIBLY, conceivably, under any series of events, cover the WR in time to stop the 1st down.
The defense WANTS the QB to make that quick throw. The philosophy is that the DB can make the tackle before the line to gain.
Again, it is absolutely, completely, totally impossible for the CB to take the receiver short of the first down - the CB is 6 to 12 yards from the receiver. Receiver goes forward 3 yards, ball is out, WR catches it and is tackled IMMEDIATELY - 1st down. If the WR takes 2 steps, 5 yard gain. If he breaks a tackle, 10-yard gain.
The coverage is designed to give up 5-10 yards. That should have been the ******* coverage on 2nd and 23.
I just watched the replay and you know what's funny? The play that happened before that picture was 21 yard gain on 2nd and 23 by the TE and the steelers were in press coverage.
See above.
WHat happened on the play in the picture? Nothing. Moats jumped offsides to give them a first down.
It was the WRONG coverage for 3rd and 2. The fact that a penalty on the Steelers prevented the inevitable defensive failure is not a compelling argument. Or even a good argument. Or frankly, much of an argument at all.
If the Steelers had lined up in a goal line offense with no RB, no WR, just a bunch of lineman and TE's on the 3rd and 5, and were getting ready to run a QB sneak to get the 5 yards, the fact that somebody committed a penalty does NOT make the formation or play calling appropriate.
It just doesn't.
People look at these pictures as if it's man defense. You see Gay playing way off and assume he is supposed to cover Jackson on the short routes but that may not be his responsibility. It may be a LB who is supposed to flash into that passing lane.
Again, tape, there is simply no way a LB'er can prevent a 5-yard gain by the WR. Further, there is literally nobody within 12 yards of the WR on the bottom of the picture. If the QB immediately fires the ball to that WR, then he has the 1st down and is one broken tackle away from a 15 yard gain ... on 3rd and effing 2.
This guy ******* about Lebeau not doubling Jackson by the goal but on the winning TD, he was doubled. Gay had helo from Troy to the inside. Jackson faked inside and broke outside and Gay bit on the fake so Jackson beat him outside. That should have never happened. Gay never should have reacted to the inside fake because he had help. If he doesn't bite, he would have been in position to pick that off.
You are describing man coverage by Gay, and zone by Troy. That certainly may have been the coverage, but if so, then Gay is single covering on a move to the corner. Troy cannot cover that area, for God's sake, unless the play takes 4 seconds.
It is 2nd and goal on the 4. It won't take 4 seconds. So yes, Gay is expected to provide man-coverage on the play run, and he failed.
The bottom line is Lebeau does mix up his coverages. It's failing because no pass rushers are winning matchups and DBs are blowing coverages, like Mike Mitchell biting on an underneath route and leaving Louis Murphy wide open.
But you point out two clearly bad coverage calls - press coverage on 2nd and 23 and way off-man on 3rd and 2.
As well as the TD, where any move to the outside by the WR leave Gay 1-on-1.
