Groves and I had a point of disagreement on what exactly happened. He's right, I am not the defensive coordinator. But I did see the safeties roll to the wide side, which makes me think Amerson was supposed to stay on Rogers as the short-side of a Roll Cover 3. This makes sense, as in a way that is them not fully honoring Rogers' catching abilities. I also saw the DC chewing Amerson out, not a safety, after the play. BUT-- more interestingly, how effective is cover 3 really going to be with the likes of Patterson and Hunter? It seems like it could potentially allow 1 on 1 situations deep, with the CB's having to keep up on a foot race from the LOS. Surely that is a terrible play to run much against our particular personnel? Or no?
It could be a good situation for us, but don't forget the safety playing over the top. This is where the purple and gold dipshit would have been invaluable: Exploiting the soft zone underneath the 3 deep and behind the LBs.
But if Z. Rogers can exploit Amerson, I think we'll be okay. I actually really like our WR situation . It isn't an embarrassment of riches anymore, but it is solid and will only get more versatile as the injured younger guys come back.
Call me crazy, but ZR is going to have to do it in more than one game for me to be convinced. Other than that, I'm with you.
Thank you. I've used that qualifier many times on a message board, but you are the first to ever oblige my request.
