Need help with trying to beat man press coverage and the nano blitz driving me crazy

So lateley I have ran in to peopole who press coverage and nano blitz I use the chargers and what happens is iam in shot gun most time I have kept a te to block and rb but the wr don't get off the line fast enough for the rb and line to hold up to what plays beat this stupid man press and I can't throw to the flats because ussally they bring there saftirs down low for coverage and what route does beat this coverage I was thinking about going 5 wide and throwing screen and hot routing my lft wr to slants I use run and gun pb any help would appereated thanks

Put WR in motion, hike while WR is in motion, or run a play with a green route where the receiver automatically gets put in motion before the ball is hiked. you can create schemes using this as well to fake your opponent, while mixing in runs and passes. Always highlight the WR as well even when it is a automated green route so that your opponent thinks you are manually doing this. Easy way to create a scheme

s0liddy wrote:

Put WR in motion, hike while WR is in motion, or run a play with a green route where the receiver automatically gets put in motion before the ball is hiked. you can create schemes using this as well to fake your opponent, while mixing in runs and passes. Always highlight the WR as well even when it is a automated green route so that your opponent thinks you are manually doing this. Easy way to create a scheme

i tried this with jackson from chargers and he has a 98 against the press coverage the play i was running was out of rng pb and in shotgun doubles call fl drag the auto motion is a drag route so i figured that this would work but the auto motion moves so slow it gives him time to set up nano and if i hhave my rb block and te block he would just be his saftey and watch for the drag route he was using this d play from 1-1-5 over storm bave he would globally blitrz his lb's and then bring safties low to cover rb flat routes etc... and drag routes thank u for the reply though