Dropping Frank Clark into pass coverage

Submitted by JimBobFreedom on
I don't understand why we are dropping Frank Clark into pass coverage. Who else thinks this is a terrible mistake?

Reader71

September 20th, 2014 at 3:03 PM ^

Its part of a fire zone, which is far and away the most common form of blitz found in college and was a huge part of the Pittburgh Steelers winning ways for the better part of 30 years.

Not complicated. Bring an unorthodox pass rusher from point A (like a nickelback) but drop an unorthodox man into coverage (like a DE). It screws with the QBs reads and hots.

Uper73

September 20th, 2014 at 2:34 PM ^

Mattison not only drops DEs, but DTs as well, Glasgow, Pipkins, Henry all have dropped. I always assumed a LB comes into the dropping DL gap that's vacated, but I am guessing. Mattisons philosophy is built around stunts and blitzes

getsome

September 20th, 2014 at 2:54 PM ^

most DCs commonly drop DL into coverage in various zone games, not too big a deal.  the scheme i do not like is when mattison tries clark in MLB type position, just floating around before hitting his designated rush lane - just dont understand it, its not really confusing anyone and not really effective.  but i guess he needs to do whatever the heck he can in order to manipulate free rushers bc their pass rush continues to disappoint

UMfan21

September 20th, 2014 at 3:01 PM ^

I see no problem with it. Everyone knows he's our best pass rusher. It should surprise QBs into a bad throw if they think he's coming like he has been all day, except on this rare instance he dropped into a throwing lane.

As a change of pace, I like it. Besides, his rush hasn't been hitting home either. And if a QB is going to take 3 step drops, Clark may be better utilized in coverage anyway.

Mr. Yost

September 20th, 2014 at 3:28 PM ^

Jeez, does it really matter THAT much?!

Bitch about something else...not something that doesn't even happen very often. Bitch about digusing coverage, or blitzing, or the amount of plays someone gets. But Clark dropping into coverage once or twice a game isn't going to change much. It's not like teams can't score when he's rushing the passer.

JimBobFreedom

September 20th, 2014 at 8:07 PM ^

Sorry for that thread guys. My dad, a michigan grad, lawyer, who went to the 69 game as a student, who I have gone to every home game with since 1986, who by all accounts of those in our section is a keen observer of the game, explained he thought it was a mistake to drop frank Clark into coverage. I thought he had a good point, seems unnecessary to me, but i am just a commercial attorney whose only client is billion dollar private company. I don't know football that well and to do this right, I should have gone through tape like Brian does and analyze how many positive as well as negative defensive plays came as a result of the practice. I'm sure if I did so I would find that lining up frank Clark as a defensive back responsible for covering a slot receiver has in fact paid big dividends this football season. I mean, where else should an elite pass rusher that weighs 280 pounds line up on Saturday? Clearly, however, I am in over my head here, as I should have at least 17000 more posts that nobody negbangs in order to establish the elite credibility that you all have.