Most every analyst and fan alike has had semi-legitimate concern over the status of the corner position. Omar Kelly has been the most vocal with his constant harping on the number of signings, "four in twelve practices." Let it go, that is the team's job - make every position as deep as possible.
However, when the lights were on and the game was live, most of the corners looked pretty good. Actually, they looked really good, given that they didn't nave the best pass rushers on the field. Great lines makes the DBs look better than they might otherwise be. Could it be that we may have some depth at that position. They may not be household names, but they seemed to press well, and coverage was relatively tight. Having said that, there is much room for improvement. Many of the balls were underthrown. Better passing may have shown what many of us fear - that we lack experience and depth at corner. On this night though, we looked pretty good. The corners covered and pressed well. They had good make-up spead. THEY TACKLED WELL. Frankly, they tackled better than the DL and LBs combined.
While this article is about the corners, the fact that we gave up over 150 yards rushing to the Giants is something to write about in the next article. Maybe I will wait for after the Dallas game. And, Omar, I do agree with one point you keep making. We don't work on the running game and tackling enough in practice. Kim Bokamper is found of saying 10 straight days of two-a-days is what got him prepared for the season. I couldn't agree more. We do have work to do on both sides of the ball, rushing and tackling.
One last thought, there was an analysis done in 2014. I can't remember who did it, but the gist of it was that if Tannehill had just .43 seconds more time to pass, which was still under the league average mind you, he was over a 75% completion passer. Let's hope Coach Gase finds a way to get consistent play out of the O-Line.
However, when the lights were on and the game was live, most of the corners looked pretty good. Actually, they looked really good, given that they didn't nave the best pass rushers on the field. Great lines makes the DBs look better than they might otherwise be. Could it be that we may have some depth at that position. They may not be household names, but they seemed to press well, and coverage was relatively tight. Having said that, there is much room for improvement. Many of the balls were underthrown. Better passing may have shown what many of us fear - that we lack experience and depth at corner. On this night though, we looked pretty good. The corners covered and pressed well. They had good make-up spead. THEY TACKLED WELL. Frankly, they tackled better than the DL and LBs combined.
While this article is about the corners, the fact that we gave up over 150 yards rushing to the Giants is something to write about in the next article. Maybe I will wait for after the Dallas game. And, Omar, I do agree with one point you keep making. We don't work on the running game and tackling enough in practice. Kim Bokamper is found of saying 10 straight days of two-a-days is what got him prepared for the season. I couldn't agree more. We do have work to do on both sides of the ball, rushing and tackling.
One last thought, there was an analysis done in 2014. I can't remember who did it, but the gist of it was that if Tannehill had just .43 seconds more time to pass, which was still under the league average mind you, he was over a 75% completion passer. Let's hope Coach Gase finds a way to get consistent play out of the O-Line.
