[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Diggs makes the first part of his move (the out) at the 50. That's right where Mathieu has stationed himself and if the ball goes to Diggs on the out, Mathieu is in a position to get over there and make a play on it. So if that's the design of the coverage (a cover-2 Robber), then Sorensen had no need to drive on the out because Mathieu was in position to continue over on it.

Now obviously if he carried the route all the way to the sideline, that would've vacated Mathieu's zone. At that point, though, you have Hughes in the area.

He just can't be that aggressive on that route.



Yeah, if it's a cover 3 its on Mathieu. But Thornhill isn't playing like it's a cover 3 either. He's sticking right between the hash and the numbers - that looks like a cover 2 to me.

That's why some of this stuff can be tough - if it's a cover 3, Mathieu gacked it, for sure. I personally think it was a 2-deep robber sort of coverage and Sorensen blew it with a bit of an assist from Thornhill. And ultimately it could've been a disguised cover 1 with doubles on the underneath routes from Mathieu and Thornhill, in which case the blame is really on Spags for dialing up a crazy aggressive coverage w/ Sorensen being asked to do more than can reasonably be expected.

Would it surprise you though if that was the case? Spaggot clearly believes Sorensen is more than he is.