Re: What about the Hobbs Trade?
posted at 4/30/2009 2:35 PM EDT
What the hay are you guys talking about? Of course Burress was Hobbs' man.
Look at the play. That wasn't cover-2 shell, and if it were it would have been Rodney (who was blitzing) who would have had that responsibility.
That was an off man-blitz straight-up with no deep help. Sanders' guy was way on the other side of the field, where Sanders was.
Sanders couldn't physcially cover Burress on that play. There was probably 15-20 yards between them. And if he had, there would have be a man left unguarded on the other side of the field, because he breaks after the TE/WR on the inside who runs a short out to the sideline. That tells you it was man to man coverage.
If you can look at this and tell me that any other man was supposed to be there to help Hobbs then I just don't know what to say.
He got beat. Plax is a really good WR. Hobbs is an average corner at best. Even putting aside the size difference, Plax will win that matchup the vast majority of the time. That is life.
Hobbs even takes a false step inside, or is caught peaking, and then gets turned around when Plax breaks on the corner route. Eli sees that matchup from the get go, and lobs the ball before any bltiz could have gotten him because he knows that even if Hobbs stays on Plax and doesn't bite on the PA, he still has an excellent chance that Plax out-jumps him in the endzone considering Plax has like 8 or 9 inches on the kid.
Maybe if Hobbs were bigger they could have tried Jamming Plax, but he isn't and that would have probably resulted in the same thing, TD NY.
Hobbs was not the worst corner in the league, and I am not a huge fan of Sanders' production, but please. There is no way you can pin that one on Sanders and be even remotely honest. At all. In any way.
We are all looking at the same play.