Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Bears pull one over on the Pack
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 835691"><p>FYI, footballoutsiders.com shows Amos's 1,096 snaps as his total including special teams. His defensive snaps totaled 1,028. These counts include the one playoff game. Jackson missed 3 games (including the Philly playoff game), 946 total snaps, 905 defensive snaps. I'll assume the percentages posted so far need minor adjustments for snap count discrepencies for both Amos and Jackson, with raw numbers extrapolated below. So, to sum up:</p><p></p><p><strong>Amos</strong></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">254/1028 = 24.7% snaps in single high</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">685/1028 = 66.6% snaps at free safety</li> </ul><p><strong>Jackson</strong></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">11.3% of 946 = 107 snaps/905 = 11.8% in single high</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">71.8% of 946 = 679 snaps/905 = 75.0% snaps at free safety</li> </ul><p><strong>Takeaways</strong></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Amos had more than double Jackson's number and percentage of snaps at single high safety. Even if it happens to be the case that Amos took most of those snaps in the games Jackson missed, he still comes out well ahead in single high snaps given the data suggests the Bears played single high only about 1/3 of the time.</li> </ul> <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">As I surmised earlier, the data indicates that PFF counts both safeties as "free" in at least some 2-high coverages--cover-2, quarters, whatever--given these two players' total free safety snaps exceed 100%. Some other player(s) also had safety snaps for the 3 games Jackson missed, most likely for a similar percentage at free.</li> </ul> <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Traditionally, the high safety lined up on the TE side of the ball in a 2-high coverage would be considered the strong safety. As discussed earlier with the PFF breakdown of Whitehead's snap breakdown in last year's Rams game, PFF appears unconcerned with a player's uniform number or positional designation on the roster sheet; they look at positioning and role on each play. Given the number of TEs today that are oversized WRs split out running slot routes, I would surmise that PFF is not making that over-the-TE SS distinction. I have and will continue to agree with PFF's positioning/role approach in designating a player's position on any particular play.</li> </ul> <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Let's look at some clips from Eddie Jackson's extensive highlight reel from last year:</li> </ul> <p style="margin-left: 20px">[MEDIA=youtube]k8Lk-8o30u0[/MEDIA]</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Evident in these clips, and as suggested by the above data, there was a lot of positional interchangeabiliy with these two players. We saw the same in Green Bay with Clinton-Dix and Burnett in the Capers defense before Burnett got moved to ILB for a bunch of snaps over a long stretch, less so with Clinton-Dix in the Pettine defense.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Now, if the only play you looked at in that highlight reel above was the one at 0:48, you might be inclined to say, "that's a single-high safety play". However, if you look a little closer you'll notice Jackson outside the hash and only 10 defenders on the screen; it's a good bet this is cover-2 with Amos off the screen in deep coverage on the other side, one of those plays PFF might count as having 2 free safeties.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">However, if you look at the preponderance of plays in this reel, the one following the one at 0:48 as representative, we see Jackson attacking and route jumping into the under zones. In that second play, Jackson attacks and Amos starts into a backpedal. In this long yardage defense, PFF may have logged both as free safties. Clearly here, and throughout this tape, Jackson is given the lattitude to jump routes in the Bears predominantly rush-4 with zone or zone/man hybrid defense with Amos serving as the backstop.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Despite the interchangeability, if we are to say who is playing predominantly what in this defense, it is Jackson at SS and Amos at FS.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">That won't be the case for Amos in Green Bay. To what degree there is interchangeability with Amos/Savage remains to be seen, but it looks like the plan is to play Savage in the single-high role, with post-draft comments to the affect that he'll be patrolling the back end. That's the initial plan, anyway. Then we'll see how it evolves over time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 835691"] FYI, footballoutsiders.com shows Amos's 1,096 snaps as his total including special teams. His defensive snaps totaled 1,028. These counts include the one playoff game. Jackson missed 3 games (including the Philly playoff game), 946 total snaps, 905 defensive snaps. I'll assume the percentages posted so far need minor adjustments for snap count discrepencies for both Amos and Jackson, with raw numbers extrapolated below. So, to sum up: [B]Amos[/B] [LIST] [*]254/1028 = 24.7% snaps in single high [*]685/1028 = 66.6% snaps at free safety [/LIST] [B]Jackson[/B] [LIST] [*]11.3% of 946 = 107 snaps/905 = 11.8% in single high [*]71.8% of 946 = 679 snaps/905 = 75.0% snaps at free safety [/LIST] [B]Takeaways[/B] [LIST] [*]Amos had more than double Jackson's number and percentage of snaps at single high safety. Even if it happens to be the case that Amos took most of those snaps in the games Jackson missed, he still comes out well ahead in single high snaps given the data suggests the Bears played single high only about 1/3 of the time. [/LIST] [LIST] [*]As I surmised earlier, the data indicates that PFF counts both safeties as "free" in at least some 2-high coverages--cover-2, quarters, whatever--given these two players' total free safety snaps exceed 100%. Some other player(s) also had safety snaps for the 3 games Jackson missed, most likely for a similar percentage at free. [/LIST] [LIST] [*]Traditionally, the high safety lined up on the TE side of the ball in a 2-high coverage would be considered the strong safety. As discussed earlier with the PFF breakdown of Whitehead's snap breakdown in last year's Rams game, PFF appears unconcerned with a player's uniform number or positional designation on the roster sheet; they look at positioning and role on each play. Given the number of TEs today that are oversized WRs split out running slot routes, I would surmise that PFF is not making that over-the-TE SS distinction. I have and will continue to agree with PFF's positioning/role approach in designating a player's position on any particular play. [/LIST] [LIST] [*]Let's look at some clips from Eddie Jackson's extensive highlight reel from last year: [/LIST] [INDENT][MEDIA=youtube]k8Lk-8o30u0[/MEDIA] Evident in these clips, and as suggested by the above data, there was a lot of positional interchangeabiliy with these two players. We saw the same in Green Bay with Clinton-Dix and Burnett in the Capers defense before Burnett got moved to ILB for a bunch of snaps over a long stretch, less so with Clinton-Dix in the Pettine defense. Now, if the only play you looked at in that highlight reel above was the one at 0:48, you might be inclined to say, "that's a single-high safety play". However, if you look a little closer you'll notice Jackson outside the hash and only 10 defenders on the screen; it's a good bet this is cover-2 with Amos off the screen in deep coverage on the other side, one of those plays PFF might count as having 2 free safeties. However, if you look at the preponderance of plays in this reel, the one following the one at 0:48 as representative, we see Jackson attacking and route jumping into the under zones. In that second play, Jackson attacks and Amos starts into a backpedal. In this long yardage defense, PFF may have logged both as free safties. Clearly here, and throughout this tape, Jackson is given the lattitude to jump routes in the Bears predominantly rush-4 with zone or zone/man hybrid defense with Amos serving as the backstop. Despite the interchangeability, if we are to say who is playing predominantly what in this defense, it is Jackson at SS and Amos at FS. That won't be the case for Amos in Green Bay. To what degree there is interchangeability with Amos/Savage remains to be seen, but it looks like the plan is to play Savage in the single-high role, with post-draft comments to the affect that he'll be patrolling the back end. That's the initial plan, anyway. Then we'll see how it evolves over time.[/INDENT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
gopkrs
Capitol 8805
Latest posts
M
Top 30 Visits 2025
Latest: Magooch
44 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2025 NFL Free Agency
Latest: Curly Calhoun
Today at 9:50 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
N
Dome over Lambeau?
Latest: n4t
Today at 9:42 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Best FA in NFL History
Latest: Curly Calhoun
Today at 7:28 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The 80th Annual Amish Mafia Draft Contest
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Yesterday at 11:26 PM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Bears pull one over on the Pack
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
