I think that might have been the play where Champ ran back and and TE Wallace took a perfect angle on him and got him at the one yard line.  Am I right?

I also seem to recall that a switch in coverage was made.  I also remember Bailey ran down the strong side on his INT, so you are right again that he stayed in place.

I'm not sure what happened, but my suspicion is that NE switched WRs before the play and the CBs where told to stay at home.  the DC (defensive coordinator) may have read the play, and put double coverage on the other side to account for NEs top receiver.  The play might have been easier to read since the play was in the redzone and NE was likely to try a play that often works for them in that area.  If the other eligible receivers had heavy enough coverage, Bailey might have played his typical "off coverage" and baited Brady into the throw.

Info to the CBs in real time is limited to play, formation, and coverage type.  CBs live in the film room during the week, and are expected to learn the nuances of their target receiver, as well as habits of the QB.  CBs also trade information with the other CBs to "cross train" the information.

Excellent DB coaches and DCs will also share certain game films with the CBs to cover minute details, as in how something as small as how a certain WR sets his feet betrays routes.  (OCs and receivers' coaches try to detect and stop these habits).  They'll also cover QB tendancies (like how he looks around the field before making the throw or how the opposing team uses timed routes and how to detect them).  It is a very studious position.

Some time is spent showing CBs how to shed blocks to get after runners, but given their responsibilities in the pass it is reasonable to assume this training is minimal.  Some CBs got most of this training if they spent time on special teams before making the jump to starter.

In bump coverage there are several techniques, and they depend on the WR being blocked.  The simplest and most common technique is to extend the arms, keeping a natural bend at the elbows.  Get low to keep balance and keep the feet just past shoulder width apart.  On the receiver's movement the CB steps lateral (never forward) and gets his hands on the player.  The CB then "pops" or "jacks" the WR and immediately jumps back to ready for coverage.

THe two biggest errors in this technique are the temptations to either step forward and meet the WR or to "pop" the WR to hard.  Over commitment in either way can allow the WR to brush aside the pop and to get distance between the WR and the CB.

Some of the bigger CBs without as much speed can put a pretty good "jack" on a WR, and the couple of seconds delayed can ruin the pass play for he QB.  I remember Tony Dungy complaining a few years ago when his playoff team was getting jacked in bump in run, and he went to the rules committee to have them tell the officials to start enforcing a rule that was on the books but seldom enforced (about time and distance limits on CB/WR contact).

The primary goal of bump coverage is to delay the WR from getting into his route for a couple of seconds.  This does several things.

• It buys a blitz time to get to the QB,
• It is almost a given if a WR shows sign of an injury,
• It is an excellent technique against teams that base their throws on timing instead of normal reads,
• Larger CBs that excel at bumps use it to compensate for lack of speed (the play has already lost two seconds and the target isn't open to catch yet).  

that pick is the one shown in the picture above. The switch you are talking about was (again, if I remember correctly) one of the WR's went in motion across the formation all the way to the other side of the other WR, so Champ and Darrent were on the same side of the ball and the one following the motion man would've crossed the other. Rather than cross over each other, Champ had them switch so the CB following the motion man took the WR in place and the other took the motion man. I'm not sure, but I think Champ was the one following the motion man, so he ended up taking the WR staying in place (who would've ended up in the slot). So, rather than the motion resulting in the intended confusion and/or "pick" of the CB, it resulted in the pick-off by Champ. Does that make sense?

Most teams place their best WR on the offense's right side (the side the TE also lines up on, so it is called the "strong side").  Most runs that don't go up the middle also go to this side.

For this reason, most defenses place their best CB on the same side.

Occasionaly the defense may switch CBs.  For instance, if the WRs switch sides for a special play.  But sometimes the defense will keep the CBs "at home" even if the offense switches.  This may be based on the abilities of the two safeties, or it may be because there isn't much difference between the two CBs (as in some zone teams).

The defense may switch CBs for other reasons, for example, to run a special play where they need a certain type of CB on the other side of the field.  (Maybe the fast CB is going to blitz weakside, and the FS has been told to double cover the #1 receiver with the #2 CB).  When these plays happen it is almost always just a "sell" play (switching several times to make the offense take it more for granted, until the switch REALLY results in the special play).

But for the most part offenses and defenses like to keep their top WR/CB on the same side of the field.

The highest prices go to coverage CBs.  Not to take anything away from zone CBs (they have a hard job to do and a different way they go about it), but coverage CBs require more skill sets.  In fact, it would be considered a waste of talent to place an excellent CB in a zone scheme (like when Bly was playing for Detroit).  All CBs will play some zone and some man, but certain schemes require much more of one over the other.

I think most people would be shocked at just how much football players have to watch game film and study playbooks.  I've always zeroed in on any news about positions having to do study work for their positions, and this is what I've found out.  While some positions are more "studious" than others, there isn't a position on the team that doesn't have to study a playbook, and even the "thinnest" playbook for a specific player is no joke.

The QB has an unreal amount of studying to do.  He has to know the formations, sets out of formations, and new formations and sets created by "man in motion".  He has to know all of the routes as well as alternate routes for when a play breaks down.  Even the coordinator has his notes with him, and most QBs wear plays on their wrists, but the QB has to keep all of this in his head DURING the play and with guys trying to get to him.  He also studies game film on opposing CBs, SAFs, and coverage LBs.  

I've read that the Center on the OL is also a surprisingly smart position, since he has to read the defense for adjustments to change blocks.

The FB doesn't have it easy (even though lots of folks like me think it is becoming a "throw away" position).  Can you imagine having to learn all of the run plays, pass blocks, run blocks, and pass routes on top of all of that?  Are you ready for this?  The FB has more to study in terms of remembering the playbook than any other member of the offense except for the QB!

My personal view is that the SAFs have one of the most studious positions on the field for the defense.  While they are given assignments for each play (and there are tons of plays, each with variations), they are also charged with making major decisions on their own as a play unfolds.  More than any other position they watch the play unfold and determine there own course.  In fact, most pass plays have as a component routes to try and trick the SAFs ("pulling") out of position.  Smarts in a SAF are a requirement to play the position.

On the other hand, the LBs have more to remember in terms of playbook info, and have to study tendancies of more opposing players than any other member of the team (OL blocking tendancies if blitz, how the RBs tend to juke or power ahead, TE tendancies, how the QB moves in the pocket or breaks out, etc).  The MLB has the most information to keep track of in the LB group.

Even the DL has to study who they line up against, in terms of what does and doesn't work.  This in addition to having a wide variety of tactics with which to get by OLs.

Think the kickers are dumb?  Well, you're right.  But not real dumb.  Special teams are full of trick plays that may never even get to the field, but have to be accounted for.  How many kickers remember a rare and "never used" play called "Tora", which Elam and the entire FG crew had to run in a last second win in '07?  We may never see some of the trick plays that involve snapping the ball out of the endzone, or throwing on a fake punt.

In short, every position has to do a lot of studying.  Some studies are focused more on the playbook, while other positions are focused on learning about the guy you line up across from (like the OL and DL).  Scheme also plays a factor (Denver's OL requires much more intelligence).  I would be hard pressed to call any position much less studious than another.  It depends on which aspect of study is more difficult for the individual.

As a coach, I always respected the players because I realized that it may look easy to me on paper, but the players are out of breath, hurting, and trying to think in seconds what I prepared in hours.  I can't even begin to imagine the jump from HS to college, and from college to the pros.  A lot of players that have great talent don't make it in the pros and we just assume they weren't athletic enough.  I imagine a lot of those surprise busts came about because the jump in required study was too much.

It's questions and comments like yours that fuel MHR.  Let me know if there are more topics you'd like to read about.

For now, be sure to read Styg's series about DJ Williams.  I contributed info about the responsibilities of each of the LBs in a 4-3, and each post that Styg puts up will have my take on what a WILL, MIKE, and SAM is responsible for.  This weeks story described the WILL position that DJ started at, so I imagine Styg will include the descriptions for the other two positions DJ played as well.

I will be doing a story about the 4-3 versus 3-4 concept during the reloading season.  I'll credit you for raising the subject as well.  : )

Of course, there are 32 coaches and 96 primary coordinators.  I'll admit that I am familiar with only a small fraction of coaches and coordinators (and only through watching games or reading articles on the net).  You may have noticed that my game preps in '07 depended largely on how well I knew a team.  PITT runs such a unique offense and defense that I was able to write the prep off the top of my head.  Other teams like the PATS and INDY are so good it's hard not to be familiar with them (they get a lot of televised coverage).  

On the other hand, some teams I only know one side of the ball or very little about at all.  In those cases I have to cram a lot of research in before the game, and it is hard because there often is very little on the net that is in depth about a team's system.  For that reason my goal is to spend the regular season focusing on the systems of opposing coaches, coordinators, and schemes while spending the reloading season concentrating on sharing information about general football knowledge.

However, if you could help me to narrow your question I'd be glad to work on something for you.  If you could focus me in on just a few key coaches or teams I could handle that.  You make an excellent point, since many draft boards from the media seem to focus on good players that don't fit the system of a team (like Lang - non zone blocker for Denver - something Sporting News was big on a few weeks ago).