CB Artie Burns: Super Bowl teams have played man-to-man

[polamalubeast]

PITTSBURGH -- The New England Patriots, Denver Broncos and even their defeated Super Bowl opponents showed Artie Burns one common element of their defenses.

They played man-to-man coverage and played it well.

As the Pittsburgh Steelers dive deeper into their spring practices this week, they also continue a years-long project of transitioning to a more aggressive approach in their secondary.


Mike Tomlin made this shift clear when speaking after the selections of Artie Burns and Sean Davis following the 2016 NFL draft. Both went on to start as rookies.

Defensive backs coach Carnell Lake spoke along similar lines as he praised Cameron Sutton and Brian Allen after the 2017 draft. All are players the Steelers wanted to see more of, pressed in the faces of opposing receivers. Pittsburgh has decided, in short, it can only win so much without them.

"I think that we want to become more man-centric. That's the way teams win a Super Bowl," Burns said. "Every team that's won a Super Bowl the past couple years has played man."

read more


http://www.pennlive.com/steelers/ind...tie_burns.html

Steelers DB: Pats show need for man coverage

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...e-man-coverage

[polamalubeast]

I am glad that the steelers have learned from their mistakes....Especially with the safety rules that the NFL have since 2011, it's almost impossible to have success with the zone against the great QB.

Each zone has a hole ... this is not the case with the man to man defense.

I know the pressure is the key, but the pressure is useless if the opponent QB throw the ball very quickly, what you can do against the zone.

[Craic]

I absolutely agree that we need to move to man defense. However, although every zone defense has a hole in it, man defense has weaknesses as well. All it takes is one mismatch. One player that is faster than his defender, or can jump higher, or can gain separation, and it's serious trouble. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a man defense under safeties playing cover-2 or over-under with the outside CBs. Since we're still playing a three-man line, but now have linemen that can get to the QB, we now have the flexibility of dropping an extra person back into man coverage with the safeties over the top if they bring out three receivers. Even they bring out three, and send the RB and TE on a route, we're still sending four guys at the QB while covering and keeping the safety net over the top.

[Edman]

Man coverage is not going to be the de-facto win answer to beat the Patriots or anyone for that matter.

But at least it gives them a fighting chance, where in the Zone Defense, They have no chance to beat the Patriots.

[BlackAndGold]

Doesn't matter what coverage you use, pressure on Brady is the formula to beating the Pats.

[polamalubeast]

Doesn't matter what coverage you use, pressure on Brady is the formula to beating the Pats.

Pressure does not matter if Brady throws the ball very quickly.

That's the problem with the zone, it's easier to throw the ball very quickly against the zone.

[teegre]

Doesn't matter what coverage you use, pressure on Brady is the formula to beating the Pats.

Bingo!!!

When New York beat them, the Giants rotated six DEs (to keep constant pressure on Brady).

[polamalubeast]

Bingo!!!

When New York beat them, the Giants rotated six DEs (to keep constant pressure on Brady).

Their coverage was great too.(2007)

It takes both to be successful against them.

Great pressure with no coverage, it's game over for us.

[Mojouw]

This is like the 314th thread this argument has appeared on. Let me try and sum up:

1. The Patriots are not some mystical wizards descended from an alternate plane of reality. They are a timing offense designed to beat defenders to spots run by one of the most accurate QBs of all times. Additionally, they have a weapon that stretches the field horizontally (usually a RB) and vertically (Gronk) in the passing game. This places great amounts of stress on the defense - particularly at the spots where you put in your "subs". That means you either don't sub and get a mismatch on the back or the TE or you do sub and you take a pass-rusher off the field. These are fundamental principles of football not arcane magic.

2. The Steelers coaching staff are not brain-dead vegetables controlled by parasitical worms. They have a zone-bltiz defense with zone cover personnel. Since at least 2014 (the arrival of Shazier) they have been furiously attempting to revamp the top 15 players on the defense to be more scheme flexible. The down linemen can all rush on their own - not just from scheme. The linebackers all are comfortable in space/coverage with at least 2 of them (Shazier and Watt) likely to excel at it. The final piece is a rotating series of defensive backs that can man or zone. Oddly enough, that is what the entire league wants so it has been a slow process. This season looks like the first the Steelers may be willing to field a package or packages that moves away from zone or match-up zone.

3. Beating the Pats or any other "elite" offense isn't just pass rush, or man coverage, or both -- its disrupting their timing. Many ways you can do that. Disguise coverages, jam at the line, pressure on the passer, etc. You can run zone if you can do some of the others at the same time. In the SB, the Falcons did all of those things and made the Pats offense look very mortal. Then they just ran out of gas.

TL;DR -- more than one way to skin a cat. Man coverage is not some magic bullet that will fix all that ails the defense.

[polamalubeast]

3. Beating the Pats or any other "elite" offense isn't just pass rush, or man coverage, or both -- its disrupting their timing. Many ways you can do that. Disguise coverages, jam at the line, pressure on the passer, etc. You can run zone if you can do some of the others at the same time. In the SB, the Falcons did all of those things and made the Pats offense look very mortal. Then they just ran out of gas.

Very agree for disrupting their timing

But it's impossible to do that with what the coaching staff have tried against Brady in the last 10 years.

In fact no team has done a worse job than the steelers for that.

[Mojouw]

Very agree for disrupting their timing

But it's impossible to do that with what the coaching staff have tried against Brady in the last 10 years.

In fact no team has done a worse job than the steelers for that.

That's just a non-sense statement. By my quick count 22 franchises have less than 3 wins against the Pats since the hoodie took over. So "worse job" is really wide of the mark.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-foo...very-nfl-team/

[Born2Steel]

I hate the premise of building to beat any 1 team. My philosophy would be to build the best all around football team you can to win your division. One regular season game against the Pats, or Dolphins, or Raiders, or teamB, will not make or break any season. How you do in your division determines the playoffs. We do need to get this burden off our backs with losing to the Pats, but that is not what we are building for. Every thread does not need to end up as a discussion on what we need to do to beat those guys. Somebody brought up a valid point in a different thread about last season. If AB doesn't score that TD vs the Ravens on Christmas, this offseason would be all about how to beat the Ravens instead. Build the best football team you can. Win your division. Playoffs.

[polamalubeast]

That's just a non-sense statement. By my quick count 22 franchises have less than 3 wins against the Pats since the hoodie took over. So "worse job" is really wide of the mark.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-foo...very-nfl-team/

I mean, Brady has a QB rating over 120 against the steelers in the last 10 years (since 2007) .22 TD, 0 INT

No defense is less competitive against him in the last 10 years than the steelers and it is not because of the lack of talent of the steelers.

The only defense in the AFC that is as worse than the steelers against Brady are the Jaguars.

Maybe not

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...adTo00/splits/

[Mojouw]

I mean, Brady has a QB rating over 120 against the steelers in the last 10 years (since 2007) .22 TD, 0 INT

No defense is less competitive against him in the last 10 years than the steelers and it is not because of the lack of talent of the steelers.

The only defense in the AFC that is as worse than the steelers against Brady are the Jaguars.

Maybe not

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...adTo00/splits/

Yeah - that does suck. But wins and losses wise it isn't all that bad. Also Born2Steel made a key point that I think is a better way to say what I am trying to.

Don't focus on beating on team. Build the best team you can - wins will come after that.

[Born2Steel]

I mean, Brady has a QB rating over 120 against the steelers in the last 10 years (since 2007) .22 TD, 0 INT

No defense is less competitive against him in the last 10 years than the steelers and it is not because of the lack of talent of the steelers.

The only defense in the AFC that is as worse than the steelers against Brady are the Jaguars.

Maybe not

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...adTo00/splits/

Those stats are incredible. 6-6 against the Broncos, a winning record vs every other team.

[polamalubeast]

Yeah - that does suck. But wins and losses wise it isn't all that bad. Also Born2Steel made a key point that I think is a better way to say what I am trying to.

Don't focus on beating on team. Build the best team you can - wins will come after that.

The most important thing in the NFL is to be versatile, unfortunately the steelers are not versatile on defense at the moment, which is the reason why the steelers are not able to compete against the pats or against great passing attack.

I have hope this can change in 2017, but we'll see.

The reason why, me and many talk about beating pats is that it's probably the team we will have to beat if the steelers want to win the AFC.

The Pats have been in the AFC title game in the last 6 years.

- - - Updated - - -

Those stats are incredible. 6-6 against the Broncos, a winning record vs every other team.

But for the passing rating in his career, the Steelers are the team that Brady has the most success in his career after the falcons and the stats don't include the playoffs!

[Edman]

Don't focus on beating on team. Build the best team you can - wins will come after that.

Makes sense, if they weren't one of the most consistent franchises of this decade and a half, but they are.

Our "best team we got" wasn't enough to beat theirs. Again. No Gronk, and they still destroyed the Steelers. With a Lacrosse Player at WR. It was the same old story. The Steelers Offense sputters in the red zone and does absolutely nothing for 50 minutes, the Defense is constantly on its heels, Tomlin is stuck with another blank stare on his face as Brady goes off for another masterpiece performance on the futile Steelers Defense. Forgive me if I'm tired of the same old Patriots-Steelers script and tired of being embarrassed by New England.

The Steelers have to beat the Patriots. No If's, And's or But's about it. It may not seem cool or the ideal way to build a team to beat another, but this is the team and organization finally facing up to the upcoming reality of 2017 and beyond. "We do what we do" doesn't work. "Our way" didn't work. It didn't work for the past 15 years. "Our way" resulted in three AFC Title game losses and a 3-10 record against the Patriots in the Brady era. Something has to be done, or the team and we the fans will be be stuck staring at another long offseason like this.

[Craic]

Makes sense, if they weren't one of the most consistent franchises of this decade and a half, but they are.

Our "best team we got" wasn't enough to beat theirs. Again. No Gronk, and they still destroyed the Steelers. With a Lacrosse Player at WR. It was the same old story. The Steelers Offense sputters in the red zone and does absolutely nothing for 50 minutes, the Defense is constantly on its heels, Tomlin is stuck with another blank stare on his face as Brady goes off for another masterpiece performance on the futile Steelers Defense. Forgive me if I'm tired of the same old Patriots-Steelers script and tired of being embarrassed by New England.

The Steelers have to beat the Patriots. No If's, And's or But's about it. It may not seem cool or the ideal way to build a team to beat another, but this is the team and organization finally facing up to the upcoming reality of 2017 and beyond. "We do what we do" doesn't work. "Our way" didn't work. It didn't work for the past 15 years. "Our way" resulted in three AFC Title game losses and a 3-10 record against the Patriots in the Brady era. Something has to be done, or the team and we the fans will be be stuck staring at another long offseason like this.

The problem is the Pats* were doing this to the Steelers when Cowher was head coach as well. So, we have to ask ourselves, what is the constant between both head coaches since the early 2000s? The answer is the Dick Lebeau zone-blitz defense. Play man on the outside and zone in the middle.

To be honest, despite a certain thread I made at the end of last season concerning Tomlin and DC, I give them a pass for the AFCCG because they tried to play man coverage. It failed because they were not finished rebuilding the defense after the Dick Lebeau zone-blitz years. Moreover, watch them pick a second round CB two years ago, a first and a third round DB last year, and then another third round DB this year, all of whom can play man coverage, tells me they do get it. It just takes time to build. Especially when they had to dump so many draft picks into the O line after the garbage that was left to them by Russ Grimm—an aging line and horrible backups.

[Mojouw]

To further the argument one could take the position that the Pats offense during the Brady years is specifically designed to beat the zone blitz.

So it's a move counter move kinda thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[st33lersguy]

The Steelers should be able to play both coverages and use one or the other based on the opponent. For example use more man against Brady and other elite pass Os, but against someone like moonball joe, more zone would be better.

[Craic]

To further the argument one could take the position that the Pats offense during the Brady years is specifically designed to beat the zone blitz.

So it's a move counter move kinda thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be honest, I haven't paid enough attention to defenses around the league to make an argument either way, but you could be right. The question I would then have is, how do the Patriots play against non-zone blitz teams? Of course, the other question is, how much of their success is because they're still cheating?

It's a question that must always ​be asked when discussing the Pats*

[steel striker]

Yeah it's not rocket science pressure on Brady and, disrupt the timing on the WR.