Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: This Week In GIFs

Looking Back At Arizona State: Playaction & The Domino Effect

During the 2009 Cal @ Arizona State college football game, Arizona State scored on an 80 yard touchdown pass.  Who was to blame for this defensive error?  Most football fans use a general rule of blaming the closest defender to the offensive player.  On this particular play, that was safety Marcus Ezeff.  Such however, a rule isn't always correct.  The closest defender to the intended receiver is not always the player at fault for the completion.

On this particular play, the defender who is more at fault for the touchdown is a cornerback, who is away from the intended wide receiver. 

Here is the play at issue (please excuse my poor quality images, I no longer have photoshop on my computer):

A3_medium

Arizona State is facing a 1st and 10 from their own 20 yard line.  Cal lines up in its 3-4 defense showing a two-deep look and with the cornerbacks showing man coverage.  A two-deep defense is a defense which has two deep defenders each guarding the right and left deep halves of the field.

Star-divide

A4_medium

The defensive error occurs at the snap of the ball.  Conte, Cal's left cornerback (the defense's left) reads run, and bites down on the playaction, leaving the WR that he is supposed to be covering completely undefended.  I've shown Conte's pursuit with a blue arrow, and I've circled the ASU WR in red.

A5_medium

The Cal safety to Cal's left side of the field presumably Cattouse or Johnson, leaves his deep 1/2 of the field and jumps down to defend the wide open WR along the sideline that Conte left unguarded.  I've shown the Cal safety's pursuit with a blue arrow.  This opens up the deep 1/2 of the field opposite of Ezeff (Cal's right safety)- which is not Ezeff's responsibility.  The ASU WR whom the pass was thrown to runs a deep post. I've shown the ASU WR's route with a red arrow.

A6_medium

As you can see from the above picture, Cal's left deep 1/2 of the field is completely wide open.  I've shown this area with a green box.  This is the area that Cal's left safety should be covering.

A7_medium

The above picture was taken exactly when the ASU WR caught the ball.  I've shown the deep left 1/2 side of the field with a blue box.  I've circled the ASU WR in red.  As you can see, the ASU WR is in the deep left 1/2 zone - where the left Cal safety should have been.  Ezeff was expecting help, but got none. 

Below is the play in its entirety (youtube video below courtesy of ieeebear):

 

 

Some people might think this play was a corner blitz and Ezeff had man coverage responsibilities on the ASU WR.  This conclusion is incorrect.  Had Conte been blitzing, he would have placed himself on the line of scrimmage, pretending he was trying to jam the WR he was covering.  Such an act would place Conte closer to the QB and would decrease the amount of time to get to the QB on his pass rush. Conte did not do this.  If Conte was on a blitz, he more than likely would have continued his pass rush - but like most defenders who are fooled by playaction, he stops his approach on the ball fake and heads down the field to resume his blown coverage.  Conte does this.  Furthermore, if Conte was blitzing, then Cal's left safety would have had man-coverage responsibility on the WR that Conte was pretending to cover.  Thus, Marcus Ezeff would have been the lone deep defender to cover the entire field and he would have aligned himself more towards the center of the field and not so wide to the right.  Ezeff did not do this. 

Comments from Cal Defensive Coordinator Bob Gregory support the conclusion that this was not a corner blitz.  Here's what Cal Defensive Coordinator Bob Gregory had to say about the defensive playcall:

We were in a two-deep.  It probably wasn’t the best call in the world.   It was first down and we were taking a shot because they had run it a bit on first down.  It was a play-action pass and we lost our middle linebacker and we also lost our backside safety on the play-action pass.  They kind of jumped at the run a little bit quick as opposed to playing back a little bit.  It was a combination of not great technique and I could have had a better call on first down.

Indeed, Gregory is correct.  Cal was playing its 3-4 defense in a two deep - meaning Cal had two deep safeties each covering 1/2 of the field.  This is not to be confused with a Cover-2 defense.  A Cover-2 defense involves all zone coverage.  But a two-deep implies that there are two deep defenders and the rest of the coverage is not zone coverage.  Gregory clearly made this distinction.  If you look at the play, you'll see that indeed, Cal is playing two-deep with man coverage.  Both cornerbacks Conte and Syd'Quan Thompson are locked up in man coverage. The linebackers appear to be in zone coverages (except for Young who is pass rushing).

Had Gregory would have called up a corner blitz, he probably would have mentioned it in his quote.  Furthermore, the resulting playcall would have put Cal into a 1-deep coverage and Gregory specifically states that we were in a two-deep.

 

Conclusion:

It only takes one defender to make an error on the field to give up a touchdown.  That defender doesn't even have to be the defender nearest the intended receiver or the ball carrier.  In this play, Conte was far from the intended WR.  Yet his mis-read of the offensive play as a run instead of a pass caused a domino effect.  His error caused him to leave his ASU WR undefended.  This caused Cal's left safety to vacate his deep zone to cover the ASU WR that Conte left undefended.  This allowed ASU's intended WR to catch the ball in Cal's left 1/2 deep zone where the Cal left safety should have been. 

Perhaps Ezeff shouldn't have been playing so deep.  Perhaps Ezeff shouldn't have been playing so wide.  Ezeff may be partly at fault, but his fault is minimal compared to Conte's.  Conte's error was the one domino which fell and knocked over the others. 

Cal Football has been plagued this year by its "10 man defense."  This is one of those plays.  It takes all 11 defenders to execute and win their individual battles for the play to be a success.  On this play, only 10 defenders executed and won their individual battles.

Comment 34 comments  |  3 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Thanks for the clarification, Hydro. It’s tough to see the whole play develop based on us the TV Highlights.

STAY THIRSTY, MY FRIENDS

by Thoroughbred on Nov 5, 2009 10:31 AM PST reply actions  

Wouldn’t you say that the opposite safety (Cattouse/Johnson) is also a bit at fault for jumping the short route instead of staying deep? Letting them complete a 10-yard pass isn’t as bad as letting a guy get behind you for a long TD. Though perhaps this is partly a consequence of playing a 2-deep rather than Cover-2 — he doesn’t see a receiver crossing into his zone if there’s an open man already on his side.

Conte probably would’ve been better off if he’d just kept coming — once he had bit so hard on the run fake, he may as well have just kept after Sullivan.

by sycasey on Nov 5, 2009 10:45 AM PST reply actions  

Yes, there is an argument that perhaps the left safety should have stayed home and is partly at fault too – although personally I don’t blame him for jumping the sideline WR.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 5, 2009 12:08 PM PST up reply actions  

Rec'd

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 5, 2009 10:52 AM PST up reply actions  

This

I’ve tried telling him…

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Nov 5, 2009 3:18 PM PST up reply actions  

To be fair, he might make a helluva asparagus hollandaise for all we know.

by sec119 on Nov 6, 2009 10:14 AM PST up reply actions  

That’s exactly what I see, too. Conte wasn’t fooled by a play fake. This may not have been a true blitz, but Conte took off like it was one. I agree, Hydro, that Ezeff can’t be solely blamed on this play, but I’m not sure Conte can either. This appears to me to be more of a team effort, rather than another example of “10-man football”.

Who knows what Conte was doing, or what he was supposed to be doing? But Ezeff was slow to react and took a horrible angle to make what should have been a TD-saving tackle. Meanwhile, the opposite safety did a poor job of reading the quarterback, jumping on Conte’s receiver when it appears Sullivan’s eyes were locked on Williams the entire play. And I also agree with Danzig below that Kendricks perhaps could/should have done more to disrupt Williams’s route.

Go Bears!

by California Pete on Nov 6, 2009 8:03 AM PST up reply actions  

Kendricks

Could Kendricks have jammed or put a hand on Williams? Kendricks was covering Williams. He starts out playing the run and gives a free release to Williams. But then he back pedals to cover the middle for a pass… covering who? Nobody. He’s out there all alone covering a phantom WR. If he was commited to the run or screen then he wouldn’t have backpedaled so deep or been playing so deep. He thought there was some crossing route in the middle. He soon knows he’s covering nobody and then goes back after Williams. Sullivan THEN passes it to Williams. Before the ball was passed, Kendricks knew he screwed up.

It’s then that Ezeff brackets Magaha, Williams becomes open and the rest is history.

I slowed down the God cam.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy_aWdhxQH0

by danzig on Nov 5, 2009 11:35 AM PST reply actions  

BTW Hydro. I totally agree with the domino effect you’re talking about. I’m just throwing in Kendricks into the mix.

by danzig on Nov 5, 2009 11:43 AM PST up reply actions  

I noticed the LB playing the matador defense as well, but that could be by design in a two-deep, where he just passes responsibility on to the safety.

The one thing I notice too is that in your slowed-down version it even further highlights Conte paying no attention at all to the receiver.

On ATQ I'm known as JSoCal Oski

It's spelled J-etc

by SoCal Oski on Nov 5, 2009 11:44 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, Im totally with you. I’m not arguing about Conte’s role in this. He sets this all in motion.

I’m just also pointing out that Kendricks didn’t really seem to be biting on the run or the pass. He didn’t seem to think it was going to Williams, since he doesn’t even touch him and releases him to Ezeff, just like Conte does with his man. However, he doesn’t look like he was playing the run either. He never approaches the line. He’s stationary, and from there, he backpedals. At least Conte was playing one or the other. Kendricks seemed to be playing neither. Either that some kind of TE crossing route to the middle that never came.

by danzig on Nov 5, 2009 11:51 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I agree about Kendricks. He was just sort of standing around, ball watching.

On ATQ I'm known as JSoCal Oski

It's spelled J-etc

by SoCal Oski on Nov 5, 2009 12:04 PM PST up reply actions  

Kendricks is in zone. Our linebackers typically don’t jam WRs. Kendricks isn’t really covering anyone because he’s in a short zone and the two ASU WRs to his side of the field ran deep routes. I don’t really think Kendricks did anything wrong. It just so happened that he’s away from the play.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 5, 2009 12:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Had Conte been blitzing, he would have placed himself on the line of scrimmage, pretending he was trying to jam the WR he was covering. Such an act would place Conte closer to the QB and would decrease the amount of time to get to the QB on his pass rush. Conte did not do this. If Conte was on a blitz, he more than likely would have continued his pass rush – but like most defenders who are fooled by playaction, he stops his approach on the ball fake and heads down the field to resume his blown coverage. Conte does this. Furthermore, if Conte was blitzing, then Cal’s left safety would have had man-coverage responsibility on the WR that Conte was pretending to cover. Thus, Marcus Ezeff would have been the lone deep defender to cover the entire field and he would have aligned himself more towards the center of the field and not so wide to the right. Ezeff did not do this.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 5, 2009 12:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Ah. Well that answers that question.

by danzig on Nov 5, 2009 12:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Maybe Conte “freestyled” a corner blitz?

On ATQ I'm known as JSoCal Oski

It's spelled J-etc

by SoCal Oski on Nov 5, 2009 12:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Just like someone said before, he went straight for the QB/RB, appears to have made up his mind as soon as the ball was snapped.

by CaliforniaCMB on Nov 5, 2009 12:04 PM PST up reply actions  

two questions to ponder

1. Given Conte’s mistake, should this play have resulted in an 80-yard TD reception? (Or rather, is giving up 80 yards “excusable” for the safeties?)

BDOG26 on BI made the argument that the other safety (not Ezeff) was also liable because in zone, especially for safeties, it’s critically important to stay in your coverage. Was anything accomplished by meeting Conte’s vacated receiver on the sidelines? If Sullivan had completed to the open receiver, it would have been a 30-yard gain for sure, but probably not 80 yards. In other words, in attempting to correct the problem Conte had created, the safety effectively put Ezeff and a deep play even more at risk. Conte caused the metaphorical dominoes to wobble one way, the safety snapped the table the other way and the dominoes came crashing down… touchdown Sun Devils.

2. Assuming Conte was supposed to stay in man (and not blitz), why did Gregory say that it “wasn’t the best call in the world”?

I take this to mean that given the play drawn up by the offense, the defense was ill-equipped to adequately stop a play out of this formation. From what I see, the problem is that the middle linebacker is playing man. Both the TE and slot WR cross the field (dig and deep post, respectively), cutting wtih good timing so that the TE draws the MLB underneath just as the WR Williams enters the soft area of the zone across the middle.

by ttgiang15 on Nov 5, 2009 12:05 PM PST reply actions   1 recs

(1) Yes, I agree with Beardog26 that the left safety can share some blame for not staying deep. Perhaps he should have stayed deep completely and not covered the uncovered WR that Conte vacated. Personally, I don’t blame the left safety that much because he jumped on the WR to his side of the field that was completely uncovered – which is sort of his responsibility.

(2) I was a bit perplexed by Gregory’s comments. A two-deep man coverage four man rush isn’t exactly “taking a shot.” I’m not sure what Gregory meant by that. In regards to not being “the best call in the world,” again, I’m not too sure what he means other than he wishes he called a different play instead based on the results. I don’t see this as a particularly bad playcall on first down. I’m assuming the linebackers, except Young, are in zone. Such a playcall is neither really conservative or aggressive. Perhaps to Gregory it was a bit more aggressive and “taking a shot” than he normally does because he put the corners in man coverage.

Gregory’s comment about losing the middle linebacker leads me to believe that the linebackers (except for Young), at least the MLB, were in zone. Perhaps the MLB had a robber zone down the field which would have put him closer to the intended WR and at least made the ASU QB think twice about throwing that ball.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 5, 2009 12:18 PM PST up reply actions  

Gregory’s comment, and Conte’s reaction at the snap, makes me think this was some type of corner blitz. Not an all-out, get-the-quarterback blitz, but a disguised “run blitz” using Conte to guard against the weak side. If you notice, all four linebackers line up on the strong side of the ball. I think Gregory gambled that ASU would run the ball on first down, and the “shot” that he took was to use Conte as a disguised fifth linebacker.

Assuming my interpretation is correct, is this a defensive play, Hydro, that you’ve seen before? And wouldn’t it shift more of the blame back on Ezeff’s shoulders, whose deep-zone responsibility would be more to the center of the field since the weak-side safety is now, effectively, a cornerback in a 3-5-3 defense? Regardless, I still can’t figure out why Ezeff was so preoccupied with Syd’s receiver. First, it’s Syd. Second, Syd gives a pretty big cushion. Third, the play begins on the opposite hash mark making a throw to Syd’s side that much longer and more difficult to complete. The slot receiver lined up against a linebacker is the far more dangerous threat. I like the concept of the play call—again, assuming my reading is correct—but it requires your strong-side safety to play more like a traditional free safety covering “center field”.

Go Bears!

by California Pete on Nov 6, 2009 8:34 AM PST up reply actions  

Well, I do think that if it was a corner blitz, that Gregory would have mentioned it. Furthermore, if it was a corner blitz, then the play more than likely would have put another defender to that side of the field to take the spot that Conte vacated, but in fact there was nobody. And as I said before, if it was a corner blitz, Conte probably would have placed himself closer to the LOS to shorten up the distance to the QB – and he didn’t do that.

I know Conte was very quick to rush the QB, and can be interpreted that he wasn’t fooled by playaction but was pass rushing form the start. Perhaps Conte thought it was a run prior to the snap. This often happens. Syd is great at sniffing out runs prior to the snap despite being in coverage.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 6, 2009 1:19 PM PST up reply actions  

I don’t agree with your interpretation. If it was a corner blitz and the left safety was playing effectively as a cornerback on the vacated WR, then this would make the defense a one-deep, and Gregory specifically said that it was a two-deep. Furthermore, then that would have forced Ezeff into “center field,” as you suggest, and prior to the snap he clearly was not playing center field. He showed a two-deep look and looked like he was expecting help.

The only interpretation I can truly think of, is a two-deep corner blitz without anyone replacing Conte in the vacated zone. This is the most plausible explanation, but I don’t really know if this would be a good play because it appears that nobody replaces Conte is his vacated zone.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 6, 2009 1:24 PM PST up reply actions  

I think we mostly agree. Conte was not on the same page as the two safeties. At all. We can only speculate as to why and who was primarily at fault.

You’ve broken down a lot more video of these Bears than I have, Hydro, to say the least, and I have absolutely no idea if Cal or anyone else plays a disguised 3-5-3 to defense the run. What I just can’t wrap my head around, though, is how Conte, or anyone else, could make as big a mistake as you’re suggesting. This was more than a guy biting on a fake; it was either a reckless gamble or a catastrophic mis-read of ASU’s pre-snap formation.

My alternative speculation that Ezeff was wider than he should have been, playing a more conventional two-deep rather than covering center field, seems like a more reasonable error for players of their experience to make.

Go Bears!

by California Pete on Nov 6, 2009 8:38 PM PST up reply actions  

Ezeff's tackle attempt

Nobody mentioned that Ezeff made a poor attempt to tackle the WR? He easily could have at least slowed him up at the 35 yd line, instead he completely whiffs and gets just air. If the WR was tackled at the 30 I doubt ASU gets a TD there.

by Bowlbasaur on Nov 5, 2009 5:06 PM PST reply actions  

It’s a bit hard to stop and adjust to make a tackle while running at full speed.

by Cali49a on Nov 5, 2009 6:22 PM PST up reply actions  

No, it’s not easy. But there is a reason the position is named “safety”. He needed to have taken a much better angle to at least have slowed Williams down.

Go Bears!

by California Pete on Nov 6, 2009 8:09 AM PST up reply actions  

You are right. Ezeff could have taken a better angle. Since you seem to know so much about the safety position and even why it’s named “safety,” you should slap on the pads, head straight up to Memorial, and show Ezeff how to take a proper angle while running 40 yards across the field on the fly because you are covering for your teammates mistakes. And don’t forget to enlighten him on how to adjust his angle at full speed in case the WR puts the breaks on and changes directions when you are 2 steps away.

by Cali49a on Nov 6, 2009 9:57 AM PST up reply actions  

California Pete to the rescue! LOL

Go Bears!

by California Pete on Nov 6, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Another deep post burn

Remember this?

It’s notable that the 2 deep covers came up to cover the underneath routes; this was how the play was designed. Ezeff had no support on man coverage deep and inside. The deep post was the critical weapon, as it often is against a cover 2, even if there is “man” on the WR. OSU will definitely try this tomorrow. In the WSU case, it wasn’t a blown coverage like the ASU example. Teams are unlikely to overlook the deep post preparing against Cal.

by crackpipe on Nov 6, 2009 2:45 PM PST reply actions  

Prior To The Snap

You can see Ezeff cheating over to Syd’s side, thus creating an even bigger hole over the middle and more territory Ezeff has to cover to make the play. So, basically, the instant of the snap and in the following couple of seconds, both our safeties are headed away from the center of the field.

by KikiRevenge on Nov 6, 2009 5:05 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The California Sports Website that's .....different from all the rest.

GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Humpty_dance_1_small
100 Days and counting... Sneak peek inside Memorial
Cal_2_small
Cal Softball Playoff Video: First Cal vs. Arkansas Game - Reid Steals Home
Cal_2_small
Softball Playoff Video: Cal vs. Iona
Ajoceywcalhatpic_small
DBD 5/18/12:  Riddles!
Cal_2_small
Cal Men's Crew Earns Second Place at the Pac-12 Championships

Recent FanPosts

Ab_small
DBD 5.25.12 #YOLO
Cstcst3644_small
DBD 5.24.12 Philip Philips is a person who exists?
Ab_small
DBD 5.23.12 Meeting yourself
Small
Rugby 7s in Philly!!!
Small
Cal vs Ohio State-getting tickets
Ab_small
DBD 5.22.12 I've made a huge mistake
Noneedtobeupset1_small
DBD 5.21.12 Jimmy Rustling DBD
Logo1_small
Cal rugby?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Coach Tedford is mic'd up for spring practice. Listen to him talk, while people practice! It is...
Steve Bartkowski elected to College Football Hall of Fame
Shareef Abdur-Rahim earns his Cal degree 16 years later!  Better late than never, right?  We're all proud of him.  Go Bears!  (H/T John Montgomery's Twitter)

Click here for more on this story from The Sacramento Bee.
Cal Women's Crew Captures Pac-12 Championship

Recent FanShots

Alex Morgan returns to Diamond Bar High School
DANBURY MINT CAL MEMORIAL STADIUM REPLICA- Just wondering if anyone had...
Alex Morgan links
Natalie Coughlin feature on ESPN
warren long should be offered he has all cal needs really good kid is the word around town.
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
WSJ Writer Urges Pac-12 & Big Ten to Secede From BCS Playoffs
KTVU profiles the USA Olympic men's eight rowing hopefuls, and it includes interviews with former...
Former Cal football players make career in music
Cal has one of college football's best passing and catching duos

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

More great SB Nation Blogs

Pac-12 On SBN

Pacific Takes (Pac-12)

Pacifictakes-165x74_medium

NORTH

AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)

UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)

CougCenter: (Washington State)

BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)

Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)

CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)

 

SOUTH

BruinsNation: (UCLA)

ConquestChronicles: (USC)

HouseOfSparky: (ASU)

Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)

TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)

Block U: (Utah)


Marshawnthusiasts!

Bear_small ragnarok

Script_cal_small HydroTech

Cal_football_2005_09_16_roll_07_012_small CBKWit

Cstcst3644_small TwistNHook

1262541127_small yellow fever

Avinash6_small Avinash Kunnath

Jahvidtician

Bear__small norcalnick

Monty_in_cal_gear_small Ohio Bear

Giorgiorope_small Berkelium97

Ajoceywcalhatpic_small Kodiak

Mbc_small ManBearCal

Members Of The Follettariat

Oski_mini_small LEastCoastBears

Sofele20squarecal_stanford2011_small solarise

47081_1264898881265_1793562355_517598_1551191_s_small FrankCohen

Rugby_split_small RugbyVet

Sam_i_am_small unclesam22

The Hit Squad

1129748640_small LeonPowe

Atom_small atomsareenough

Basketball_desktop_small CALumbus Bear

Humpty_dance_1_small Cugel