The Prodigal Chung Returns

[Super Nomario]

New FC column out about Chung's return and the role he's played this year, and last Sunday's game in particular: http://soshcentral.com/nfl/prodigal-chung-returns/
 

 
Chung did not drop into a deep zone once. The Broncos game is an extreme example, as the Patriots have used some two-deep shells in other games, but the trend towards a traditional free/strong safety split is clear. Chung now has a running partner in McCourty that lets him play to his strengths, providing run support in the box and covering tight ends, backs, and slot receivers in zone or man coverage underneath.

 
Chung's coverage on Tamme was a big play:

 

[mascho]

Newfound respect for Chung after reading this. Well done.

 

[ragnarok725]

This was really great. I saw the positive PFF scores for Chung and they matched the reality of what I thought I saw during the game. Good to see it holds up to more scrutiny than that.
 
So much of the defense's stability seems to stem from McCourty's presence at the back end. I cringe to think of the ripple effects a McCourty injury would cause.

 

[LondonSox]

This seems as unlikely a comeback as Sanchez! I'm pretty blown away, he was jaw droppingly terrible for the Eagles much of last year.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Awesome piece Dave.

I wonder whether the presence of Revis also has a lot to do with BB's comfort level in playing only one deep safety a lot more. Its definitely easier to play only one deep if McCourty can frequently cheat to one side of the field without having to worry so much about helping out Revis if he's isolated on a receiver.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

This was really great. I saw the positive PFF scores for Chung and they matched the reality of what I thought I saw during the game. Good to see it holds up to more scrutiny than that.
 
So much of the defense's stability seems to stem from McCourty's presence at the back end. I cringe to think of the ripple effects a McCourty injury would cause.

 
I think it was in the game ball thread but the comments on "McCourty didn't do anything" "McCourty was invisible" etc. were shocking. I was at the game, so I don't know how it played on the TV broadcast, but McCourty was in single deep coverage nearly the entire game. This is what enabled Chung to do what he was doing in the article. McCourty was on a complete island by himself all day to make sure no long plays occured, which freed up Chung.
 
I loved the game plan watching it from the stadium. It shows the trust they have in McCourty to do his job and do it well. It reminded me of the whole "revis island" stuff. if you can leave McCourty on an island and free up your other safety to do all sort of crazy stuff, line up where ever and are confident that McCourty isn't going to blow it, it opens up the defense to be creative. Same with Revis on the outside.
 
Edit: Well stated above by Morgan is Revis helps enable this as well to give McCourty more leverage to due to the same factors that he doesn't have to worry much about that guy.

 

[Van Everyman]

Excellent piece. And, agreed, a nice story given how far he fell after a few promising moments his rookie year.

 

[Super Nomario]

Awesome piece Dave.

I wonder whether the presence of Revis also has a lot to do with BB's comfort level in playing only one deep safety a lot more. Its definitely easier to play only one deep if McCourty can frequently cheat to one side of the field without having to worry so much about helping out Revis if he's isolated on a receiver.

I think Revis plays into it. Chung's been really solid in man-to-man coverage, but a safety only really plays man coverage in Cover 1. To play Cover 1 you need a FS that can hold up in deep centerfield by himself, and cornerbacks that can hold up in man. They tried to run Cover 1 in the AFCCG in January but after Talib left Demaryius Thomas kept torching Dennard. I think all the pieces fit pretty well in the secondary now.
 

 
I think it was in the game ball thread but the comments on "McCourty didn't do anything" "McCourty was invisible" etc. were shocking. I was at the game, so I don't know how it played on the TV broadcast, but McCourty was in single deep coverage nearly the entire game. This is what enabled Chung to do what he was doing in the article. McCourty was on a complete island by himself all day to make sure no long plays occured, which freed up Chung.
 
I loved the game plan watching it from the stadium. It shows the trust they have in McCourty to do his job and do it well. It reminded me of the whole "revis island" stuff. if you can leave McCourty on an island and free up your other safety to do all sort of crazy stuff, line up where ever and are confident that McCourty isn't going to blow it, it opens up the defense to be creative. Same with Revis on the outside.
 
Edit: Well stated above by Morgan is Revis helps enable this as well to give McCourty more leverage to due to the same factors that he doesn't have to worry much about that guy.

Yeah, it's hard to tell from the broadcast footage what the coverage shell is. I was stunned when I watched the all-22 and saw just McCourty deep, play after play.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

 
Yeah, it's hard to tell from the broadcast footage what the coverage shell is. I was stunned when I watched the all-22 and saw just McCourty deep, play after play.

 
Being at the game it's hard to remember, but did McCourty have any help deep at all during the first half?
 
Even watching the coverages during the game, for most of the game the CB's were lined up within 2-3 yards of the LOS and 6+ yards past the LOS to McCourty there was no one. Often this was a 10-15 yard area with just no one there the entire stretch of the field. Right at snap or right before the CB backed off (or the LB's) but there was a huge portion of the field open during the game at the snap. It was very difficult to figure out what type of protection the Pats were in.

 

[MainerInExile]

 
Being at the game it's hard to remember, but did McCourty have any help deep at all during the first half?
 
Even watching the coverages during the game, for most of the game the CB's were lined up within 2-3 yards of the LOS and 6+ yards past the LOS to McCourty there was no one. Often this was a 10-15 yard area with just no one there the entire stretch of the field. Right at snap or right before the CB backed off (or the LB's) but there was a huge portion of the field open during the game at the snap. It was very difficult to figure out what type of protection the Pats were in.

Yeah, the CBs were close, even when it was zone.  They did a great job of making every play look the same before the snap.

 

[Super Nomario]

Chung's a free agent at the end of the year? Will / should the Pats re-sign him? I think Tavon Wilson has kind of a similar skill set - problems in zone, but pretty good in man coverage and run support. Is he good enough to give a shot to? Wilson's in the last year of his rookie deal in 2015, so this seems like a position they might want to look at in the draft anyway.

 

[jsinger121]

I wouldn't spend anymore money to re-up Chung before any of the important free agents.

 

[Van Everyman]

Can I ask a stupid question? Why would zone coverage be harder to play? Man I can understand – as its often about physical ability and the need to anticipate. But isn't zone about knowing your assignments and your responsibilities in certain situations. Zone seems teachable.

What am I missing?

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

Can I ask a stupid question? Why would zone coverage be harder to play? Man I can understand – as its often about physical ability and the need to anticipate. But isn't zone about knowing your assignments and your responsibilities in certain situations. Zone seems teachable.

What am I missing?

 
There is a lot of mental processing that goes into playing zone, as well as, a need to be instinctual and disciplined.  It's a different set of skills, that I think are less physical and more mental.  
 
Take the Jeff Cumberland TD over Chung's head.  I know that was not necessarily a zone, but Chung bit on that play fake as hard as you can bite on a play fake.  Now apply that mental image of Chung selling out on some type of fake or double move while being responsible for a deep half of the field....see the problem?

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Can I ask a stupid question? Why would zone coverage be harder to play? Man I can understand – as its often about physical ability and the need to anticipate. But isn't zone about knowing your assignments and your responsibilities in certain situations. Zone seems teachable.

What am I missing?

 
Man: Cover this guy.
 
Zone: Cover this space, if the route tree is looking like X, then start shading up in this direction to jump this receiver before the ball arrives, but if the route tree looks like Y, make sure you're shading in the opposite direction, unless of course you read Key A from the offense, which means you really, really need to start backpeddling and thinking about this other thing...

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

oops... sorry