Henne and the myth of zone coverage

[dolphone]

I'm trying to wrap my head around this one, but I simply can't. It's the latest meme against Henne, but it simply makes no sense. Greyboy (IIRC) is the main proponent of this theory, I saw a couple other posters making reference to it, so I'd love some input on this...

WTH are you guys talking about? Henne can exploit man but not zone? And *umbrella*, of all things, causes him problems? When did this myth took hold? Why are people taking it as gospel?

 

[BenchFiedler]

I think they are referring to disguise coverage that the Steelers, Pats, Ravens, and Jets mostly use to confuse the QB. I still don't buy that myth as well.. So I'm with you on that.....

 

[DcDolfan420]

Word. I think this is all based on the patsy's game last year where Nincovich had 3 picks. Henne/Henning got mind******

 

[dolphone]

I think they are referring to disguise coverage that the Steelers, Pats, Ravens, and Jets mostly use to confuse the QB. I still don't buy that myth as well.. So I'm with you on that.....

Could be, but 'zone blitz' != 'zone coverage'. And it's not like he's the only one - it's the one defensive scheme that consistenly gets you good results against *anyone*.

Ironic that you list the Jets, since Henne has had some of his best games against them.

 

[akfinfan]

The Steelers, Jets and Ravens all use the blitz/pass rush to create turnovers in the secondary. They do disguise, however it's their pass rush that gets them these INTS. It's not just Henne that they do this too, it's also Manning, Brady, Brees, etc..... It's like the old saying goes. "Your Secondary is only as good as your pass rush." Of course there are exceptions as there are awesome corners than don't need the blitz to be effective, i.e. Darrell Revis, Charles Woodson, Nhamdi, Deion etc.....

I honestly think some people just want to find something negative about Henne because they don't like to be wrong and would rather see the Fins lose because Henne sucks, so they can prove their point rather than have Miami winning and Henne excelling be the reason just to be proven wrong.

 

[mega-fin-love]

The Steelers, Jets and Ravens all use the blitz/pass rush to create turnovers in the secondary. They do disguise, however it's their pass rush that gets them these INTS. It's not just Henne that they do this too, it's also Manning, Brady, Brees, etc..... It's like the old saying goes. "Your Secondary is only as good as your pass rush." Of course there are exceptions as there are awesome corners than don't need the blitz to be effective, i.e. Darrell Revis, Charles Woodson, Nhamdi, Deion etc.....

I honestly think some people just want to find something negative about Henne because they don't like to be wrong and would rather see the Fins lose because Henne sucks, so they can prove their point rather than have Miami winning and Henne excelling be the reason just to be proven wrong.

This is not true. Almost no one wants to be right so bad that they would rather the fins lose or struggle than be wrong. There could be a few retarded idiots that are like that but most fans just want to win. I would rather eat crow for the rest of my life and win games than be right and keep losing and I think most would agree. Having said that I think Henne sucks and will never be the answer. Good lord I hope he proves me wrong

 

[dolphone]

The Steelers, Jets and Ravens all use the blitz/pass rush to create turnovers in the secondary. They do disguise, however it's their pass rush that gets them these INTS. It's not just Henne that they do this too, it's also Manning, Brady, Brees, etc..... It's like the old saying goes. "Your Secondary is only as good as your pass rush." Of course there are exceptions as there are awesome corners than don't need the blitz to be effective, i.e. Darrell Revis, Charles Woodson, Nhamdi, Deion etc.....

I honestly think some people just want to find something negative about Henne because they don't like to be wrong and would rather see the Fins lose because Henne sucks, so they can prove their point rather than have Miami winning and Henne excelling be the reason just to be proven wrong.

The Steelers blitz very rarely. They do disguise coverage with the zone blitz. Same thing with the Ravens, even though they do use more base 4-3 than before. The Jets use many of the 46 principles in their defense, so it is all about the blitz, but Henne (and the whole offense, really) has proved very adept against this type of defense.

I don't want to get into the *intentions* of people, I just wonder... where's the evidence that he struggles against zone?

In particular I find the umbrella claim ridiculous. Cover-4 is about as good a coverage as you can get with the offenses Henne has played in, what with the infatuation with the curl and slant routes the previous regimes have had.

---------- Post added at 12:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 PM ----------

This is not true. Almost no one wants to be right so bad that they would rather the fins lose or struggle than be wrong. There could be a few retarded idiots that are like that but most fans just want to win. I would rather eat crow for the rest of my life and win games than be right and keep losing and I think most would agree. Having said that I think Henne sucks and will never be the answer. Good lord I hope he proves me wrong

So you agree with the whole "Henne struggles against zone but is good against man" claim?

 

[WesternNYDolfan]

Henne's biggest problem last year was the lack of route combinations and different routes called....defenses knew what to expect and sat of the routes

 

[mega-fin-love]

The Steelers blitz very rarely. They do disguise coverage with the zone blitz. Same thing with the Ravens, even though they do use more base 4-3 than before. The Jets use many of the 46 principles in their defense, so it is all about the blitz, but Henne (and the whole offense, really) has proved very adept against this type of defense.

I don't want to get into the *intentions* of people, I just wonder... where's the evidence that he struggles against zone?

In particular I find the umbrella claim ridiculous. Cover-4 is about as good a coverage as you can get with the offenses Henne has played in, what with the infatuation with the curl and slant routes the previous regimes have had.

---------- Post added at 12:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 PM ----------



So you agree with the whole "Henne struggles against zone but is good against man" claim?

not sure if I believe that or not. Unlike most on this site I'm not gonna comment either way because I'm not sure. I pretty much think he sucks all the time so the coverage doesn't matter to me that much. Once again though, I would love to be wrong

 

[dolphone]

not sure if I believe that or not. Unlike most on this site I'm not gonna comment either way because I'm not sure. I pretty much think he sucks all the time so the coverage doesn't matter to me that much. Once again though, I would love to be wrong

It's cool. This isn't about acusing someone of being a 'hater' or whatever, I'm just trying to find out where do people get the idea that Henne struggles against zone but not against man (or, alternatively, that he *can* succeed against man, but not against zone).

 

[dolpns13]

The Steelers, Jets and Ravens all use the blitz/pass rush to create turnovers in the secondary. They do disguise, however it's their pass rush that gets them these INTS. It's not just Henne that they do this too, it's also Manning, Brady, Brees, etc..... It's like the old saying goes. "Your Secondary is only as good as your pass rush." Of course there are exceptions as there are awesome corners than don't need the blitz to be effective, i.e. Darrell Revis, Charles Woodson, Nhamdi, Deion etc.....

I honestly think some people just want to find something negative about Henne because they don't like to be wrong and would rather see the Fins lose because Henne sucks, so they can prove their point rather than have Miami winning and Henne excelling be the reason just to be proven wrong.

Jets dont have a pass rush. Not with their Dline at least

 

[Mr. Magoo]

There are good posters on here who are proponents of this theory, and while I do think it has some merit (any quarterback who tends to stare down his targets and take an extra split second to make a decision is going to be vulnerable against zone coverage), I think it's been somewhat overdone.

The Dolphins' struggles against umbrella coverage as a team last year were, I think, more a part of strategic fallacies and offensive weaknesses that were exploited. The Dolphins intended to run a power running offense that faced mostly single high coverage in the passing game. The route concepts were designed to face these coverages primarily on third and short to medium as a means of extending drives so we could run the ball more. This whole thing has been talked about to death, but to state it once again, to me the failure of the Dolphins running game against the seven man box was the doom of their passing game.

The passing game wasn't structured to go against that soft a defense, it wasn't structured to carry the team. So they struggled. Henning mostly stayed away from the middle of the field -- a prime weakness in cover 2 shell -- and we failed to invest in a seam busting tight end who could exploit it more effectively. We didn't run enough of the classic cover 2 beater patterns -- the post corners, the double verticals. The goal and strategy never changed to fit the reality of our substandard interior run blocking offensive line. Without an ability to run on first and second down, the offense was not suited to convert third and long. So we didn't. Which is not to say Henne always did his best in these adverse circumstances, because he didn't. But when you look at those games in which we faced more single high looks despite our inability to produce against cover 2 and the Tampa 2 -- like the Oakland game or the first Jets game -- you see what the passing game could have been with a more effective running game forcing those looks from every team.

 

[Wildbill3]

was it henne struggling with the coverage? or was it the coverage was designed to contain that piece of **** offensive scheme we used?

 

[finfan54]

anyone can come up with a theory. in the end its still just a theory, not a fact. We do know however that henning was bad, the wildcat sucked really bad 85% of the time and b marshall has probs and fasano called out henne in front of the team and sparano threw henne under bus only to later regret and.....just add what u saw.

 

[Pachyderm_Wave]

There are good posters on here who are proponents of this theory, and while I do think it has some merit (any quarterback who tends to stare down his targets and take an extra split second to make a decision is going to be vulnerable against zone coverage), I think it's been somewhat overdone.

The Dolphins' struggles against umbrella coverage as a team last year were, I think, more a part of strategic fallacies and offensive weaknesses that were exploited. The Dolphins intended to run a power running offense that faced mostly single high coverage in the passing game. The route concepts were designed to face these coverages primarily on third and short to medium opportunities as a means of extending drives so we could run the ball more. This whole thing has been talked about to death, but to state it once again, to me the failure of the Dolphins running game against the seven man box was the doom of their passing game.

The passing game wasn't structured to go against that soft a defense, it wasn't structured to carry the team. So they struggled. Henning mostly stayed away from the middle of the field -- a prime weakness in cover 2 shell -- and we failed to invest in a seam busting tight end who could exploit it more effectively. We didn't run enough of the classic cover 2 beater patterns -- the post corners, the double verticals. The goal and strategy never changed to fit the reality of our substandard interior run blocking offensive line. Without an ability to run on first and second down, the offense was not suited to convert third and long. So we didn't. Which is not to say Henne always did his best in these adverse circumstances, because he didn't. But when you look at those games in which we faced more single high looks despite our inability to produce against cover 2 and the Tampa 2 -- like the Oakland game or the first Jets game -- you see what the passing game could have been with a more effective running game forcing those looks from every team.

This is exactly right. Most quarterbacks who are either young, or lack confidence in what they're seeing will struggle against zone coverage. Which Henne did... However, Miami's skill positions struggled against zone coverage, which caused the quarterback to suffer even more. The running game struggled against 7 in the box... Henning's offense will NOT work in that scenario. He has to be able to control the line of scrimmage for his offense to work.


Most of the time when you're facing a single high look, zone coverage by the cornerbacks will convert to man if he's attacked vertically... Miami's offense didn't attack vertically, therefore no convert. DB's were allowed to stay in zone coverage and consistently play the quarterback rather than playing their man.

Zone coverage is a little harder for a quarterback to attack anyway. It requires more anticipation and more accuracy... the receiver is relying more on the quarterback than the quarterback is relying on the receiver. Ball placement is vital.

Man coverage is easier to attack for a quarterback simply because your receiver is allowed to attack the ball more and make a play on the football. The quarterback is relying more on the receiver here. A quarterback is able to decipher a lot sooner who has the advantage between the receiver and the defensive back vs. man coverage.... the release at the line of scrimmage immediately tells him all he needs to know... the quarterback's top priority here is his responsibility for the safety(s).

The trick to consistently beating zone coverage and shell looks is controlling the middle of the field... you do that with a weapon at the tight end position. When you threaten the seams of a defense, it forces the safeties to play you more honest.

If you're not going to feature that type of vertical threat at the tight end position, spreading the field horizontally with receivers (spread offense) is the other way you attack the seams of a defense... which is where the upgrade in philosophy with Daboll comes into play.