(09-25-2020, 04:25 PM)knarnn Wrote:

(09-25-2020, 04:04 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: I like your creativity.  But a few problems with that:

1.  You think Smoot will play the hook-curl zone better than Jack?  No.
2.  You are making a HUGE assumption that Jack just splits between 2 pass protectors like that is easy.  Basically, you're counting on a lineman to blow an assignment here.
3.  You would have no outside contain with your pass rush on the weak side without Smoot coming at the 5 tech..  Even if you did get pressure with Jack in that scenario, Tannehill could just roll to his left.  No one schemes a pass rush without outside contain of the QB... especially one that can run a bit.
4.  If you want to bring Taven here, fine.  That's still just a 4-man rush and they have 5 to block it.

Your idea is not terrible, but the play call here is better.  Just poorly executed.

Better then Taven? Yes.

We already have the contain caused by Chassion’s rush. Look at the traffic. Tannehill could only slide right in this play. 

Smoot would also be in a better position to slide towards Henry, who’s also wide open and unaccounted for in the current play design.

My bad, I can't see the players numbers on my phone.  You said 5 tech, and that's Chassion then, outside the tackle.  Smoot must the 3 tech on this play.  Smoot is not covering that better than Jack.  Henry was not unaccounted for... the corner would have him in Cover 2.  He just played it poorly/lazily after releasing the WR to the safety.

And you misunderstand Taven's role on this play... he has no primary zone responsibility.  He is just a re-route for the crossers and an extra body in the passing lanes.  You aren't exchanging Smoot for Taven in coverage here for what you are proposing... you are exchanging Smoot for Jack.  That's not good thing.  And if Taven does not drop and re-route the first crosser, Tannehill hits him or the 2nd crosser immediately anyway.

Your play is not better than what was called.  Sorry man.

---