|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311
Dawg Talker
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311 |
I saw this posted in one of the other threads...Quote:
The Browns plan to play a lot of the standard cover 2 defense with the safeties (Brodney Pool and Jones) back, helping cornerbacks Brandon McDonald and Eric Wright. But the key is the front seven stopping the run. If they don't, then the Browns have to bring a safety up near the line - and that puts more pressure on the two young cornerbacks. Another factor will be the ability of the front seven to pressure the QB.
pluto
The one thing I have to wonder about regarding this coverage is that in a "standard" Cover 2, the corners typically take the flat responsibility while the two safeties each line up 10 yards off the ball on opposite hash-marks. Their responsibility is to cover the deep-half of the field, respectively. We've all debated on the coverage abililties of our safeties, especially Pool. If we run the "standard" cover two, I agree that it will help our young corners because they will only have to worry about covering the flat, but that will require Jones and Pool to cover a whole half of the field on pass plays. Also, as Pluto points out, if we are unable to stop the run with our front-7 we will be forced to bring a safety up toward the LOS. I would imagine we would then rotate out of the Cover 2 and back into a standard base-3 defense, which would then put pressure back onto our corners. So it would be safe to assume that teams will try to establish the run against us early in order to force us out of our Cover 2. Then, they will open up the passing game to test EWright and BMac when we are in our base-3. Bottom line: It is imperative that we stop the run early and often. Teams will still go to the air to test the coverage ability of our safeties and to keep the rest of our defense honest but I think we can expect a heavy dose of the ground game as teams try to get us out of our comfort zone and attack us at our weakest point. What do you all think?
Follow me on Twitter <a href="link" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/CoachA12</a>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
I don't think the Browns will play a lot of cover 2, regardless of this report. And I also think Jones will still roam around and come into the box. He is a beast up front, and makes plays/ gets pressure when he does blitz.
Wright can play man. McDonald may be better suited for zone, but then again, you really can't tell right now. I don't really trust Pool one on one with another WR. But if he is helping with man coverage by doubling a guy, then he is the one to do it.
My main concern is our LB's dropping into coverage. Sometimes they looked lost, or not that they were lost, but they couldn't keep up with WR's who came in on the slant. It looked like they were ALWAYS chasing WR's while looking tired and exhausted, and not being able to stay with them. The front 3 can change that though. They shouldn't have to run as long with a WR if we are getting pressure pretty quick.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311 |
Quote:
Wright can play man. McDonald may be better suited for zone, but then again, you really can't tell right now. I don't really trust Pool one on one with another WR. But if he is helping with man coverage by doubling a guy, then he is the one to do it.
So I guess the question remains... what type of coverage scheme do we employ in order to take advantage of our players' strengths? And yes, I love me some Sean Jones' blitz. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,554
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,554 |
I say man up on the outside until our guys prove they can't do it.
Minnifield and Dixon would have been wasted if this bunch was coaching them.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311 |
Personally, I like a man defense. Zone leaves too many holes IMO; more room for error and miscommunication between safeties and corners. I would like EDub and BMac to be physical at the point of attack and jam guys off the line. But they need to be able to open their hips and run with the receiver stride for stride. We gave wayyyyy too much of a cushion in years' past in my opinion. We played off because we didn't have the speed to recover when WRs got a step on us. Instead of playing 7 yards off, I'd like to see 3-4 at the most on the outside. Now, whether this is feasible or not with our guys remains to be seen. The suggestion that we may be playing more Cover 2 indicates they may be more comfortable with our veteran safeties covering the deep, while our youngins take care of the short ball and run support on the weak side. This makes sense considering Eric Wright might be the best tackler we have.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,550
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,550 |
In a cover 2 the corners are going to bump and run or bump and release depending on whether its a run and pass. They just have to keep an eye on what takes place on the area they vacate like the dump down to the running back or a chip and roll to the tightend.
Last edited by Mourgrym; 06/02/08 12:37 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
This is way simplified. The Browns run mostly a traditional Cover 2, which only means that they have two defenders (usually the S's) playing deep halves. That does not mean that their CB's are also in zone full time though. Cover 2 is a coverage scheme referring to deep coverage, it is NOT a defense. That's the Tampa 2.
The Browns DB's run mostly man or quarters, with the CB's and S's having both run and pass responsibilities (hence why Pool was biting on so many play fakes early on last season).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Exactly..in a 34 you really want corners who are excellent in man coverage..
When you want to play zone you can do it anytime..
Me..I prefer man coverage..
But I suspect one thing will happen..if we are successful in stopping the run..U will see us sneak Jones up into the box just to create more havoc..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5 |
I think that running the cover 2 is a great idea. EW and BM could and have showed great potential at man coverage. With the improved d-line the linebackers would be free to roam plus the lb are getting younger and are faster then last years group. With the cb's in man and our safeties roaming over top and lb's underneath i think that our defense has a very exciting potential this season and i can't wait to see them play.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
Exactly. Of the 3-4 teams in the NFL, only the Steelers and Pats run a pure zone style defense behind it. The Chargers (well they play quarters, but they mix in bump and run on the CBs), Browns, Jets, Raiders (when they go 3-4), all run either man free with the SS crashing down in the box, or some kind of variation on that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,394
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,394 |
Quote:
Quote:
Wright can play man. McDonald may be better suited for zone, but then again, you really can't tell right now. I don't really trust Pool one on one with another WR. But if he is helping with man coverage by doubling a guy, then he is the one to do it.
So I guess the question remains... what type of coverage scheme do we employ in order to take advantage of our players' strengths? And yes, I love me some Sean Jones' blitz.
I hear ya there. That was another thing that I noticed after watching the Texans replay. He is a really good blitzer.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
j/c: Well.............I hate to ruffle feathers [as you all well know *L*] but I see all of this in a different light. Let me try to explain: ---I don't think we play a real Cover 2. Instead, I think we play a two deep zone, where we line the safeties up about 12 yds. deep and the corners vary their coverage. ---I keep reading about how so many love man coverage. Well.......it is almost non-existent in today's NFL. A true man defense is called Cover 0, where each guy locks up on a man. No one runs that BS. There are variations of man defense, but no one really runs a true man or Cover 0. It would be suicide. ---Most teams mix up their coverages quite well. In fact, that is one of the hardest things for QBs to overcome.........first they have to read the defense at the LOS and have a feeling for what coverage the D will be in [all based on tendencies], then they have to read coverages after the snap, which often are different than their pre-snap look. I am going to do a Reading Defenses and Coverages thread this summer. It will be similar to the Zone Blocking one I did last year. I'll explain more about coverages there. ---I think that zone defenses are much more effective than a straight Cover 0 [or man] defense. You can mix and match your coverages. You can man one guy up, perhaps two...........and sometimes.......no one mans up. The key is to create confusion for both the QB and receivers. You do need smart guys to play it well. Guys who read well and have good instincts. ---I think that we were forced to go to a Two Deep because Pool can't handle playing center field. This has compromised our defense. When Russel was here, we hardly ever played Two Deep. He was smarter and more instinctive than Pool. Jones is not good back there. He can be exploited. He is best playing in the traditional area for a SS.........about 3 to 4 yds. off the LOS. Cover the flat....trail the TE.......provide run support.........make tackles. He is out of his element playing in space and this really hurt our D last year. The Browns were forced to move him back there because Pool got burned way too often. Some like to say that Pool improved during the course of the year, but that is hogwash........he got more help, which in turn, hurt the run defense. ---Someone said the linebackers struggled chasing WRs across the middle. Not to be rude, but LBers are not supposed to chase WRs. That is a mismatch for any LBer. What they do is get depth on their drops. They typically move in straight lines and they are indeed playing a zone coverage. Inside linebackers do not chase WRs! Well.....unless the FS or SS is so far out of the play that the LBer is forced to. *L* ---I think Pool also compromised our D because our ILBers had to get so deep on their drops. They couldn't rely on Pool to come up and make plays. That is why draws were so effective against us. It is also why QBs could scramble so easily against us. Any kind of delay play killed us. ---Personally, I hate Cover 2 and I don't like a Two Deep zone. It is weak against the run and can be exploited by strong arm QBs who can throw the seam route to quick TEs or flankers. That type of defense is good against a weak armed QB who has no running game. Otherwise...........it can be exploited. ---I prefer a Cover 3 that can switch into Cover 1 or Cover 5 on occasion. I think you have to stop the run first. You cannot allow another team to impose their will on you. Unfortunately, we are extremely weak at FS and our SS is not allowed to play to his strengths due to the weakness of our FS. We also have two inexperienced corners who will probably be exploited, just as Wright was last year. I am really worried that we are going to be playing so "safe," that we will once again struggle against the run. Our linebackers are probably going to be asked to provide too much in the area of pass defense, that our run D will be compromised. ---You know...........I read some little snippet about Mike Adams somewhere on here. Who knows...........I can only pray that this guy might be the answer. Because unless Pool progresses tremendously, [and that is possible] our defense will suck again. Of course, it will be DA's fault again. 
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Good post, Vers. I'm not a big fan of cover 3. I think it gives up too much underneath. You are right, though, that people use cover 2 as a generic term for 2 deep. I prefer 2 deep IF your safeties can cover. Throw in a little Cover 1 and 5, and occasionally (late game situations) a 3 and I think that is best. You can add a sting to the 2 deep to get a good jam on the WRs.
One thing I would love to know if it would work at the NFL level is something I use as a great change up on D and we are going to use it this year at the next level (we started teaching it during spring practice). In a 3-4 alignment against a zone blocking offense, eagle both DEs. At the snap of the ball, the MLBs delay just a split second. Then they jailbreak. The coverage is a cover 0 (this type situation is the only time I believe in using cover 0, as a change up).
With the rules of zone blocking and if your MLBs are quick enough, there is a natural hole for both MLB between the Gs and C. You can lock down in cover 0 because the pressure should be incredible rushing 7. It isn't an every down D, but it is a great change of pace or surprise to be used sparingly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Question here... What's the difference between a 2 deep and cover 2?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Cover 2 uses 2 deep safeties but the CBs generally just cover the flats. With a 2 deep scheme, the safeties divide the deep half the field, but the CBs coverages vary.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Thanks. I should have known that one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
No problem, you want to learn. That's a GREAT thing. There are many solid football minds on here. That is a common misconception, even on this board. Alot of people refer to cover 2 anytime there are 2 deep safeties.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
No where in there did you talk about our defensive line. The front 3 will be key to whether or not we have a great defense.
yea.. we have a young defense, but things will be made so much more easier if the d-line does exceptionally well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,394
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,394 |
I don't know beans about defenses, but that sounds really cool.
After I rewatched the Texans game yesterday, I seem to remember Sean Jones jailbreaking through one of those gaps.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,311 |
REAL good stuff Vers and Coach. Vers, I like how you are able to translate your knowledge of the game to the NFL level. As you can see, I am somewhat unable to do that because I focus almost entirely on the high school level, where it is possible to man up, or play Cover 0. (Although, I think we're going to switch from a Cover 2 to more of a Cover 4 this year.) Our personnel dictates our coverage scheme. Which is why I started this thread. Do the Browns have the personnel to run a Cover ....er, scratch that... a two-deep zone?? My somewhat uneducated guess is no. I don't want to see Pool and Jones 12 yards deep covering the deep halves of the field. However, I don't want to see our young CBs get lit up all season either. So what do we do? I like the idea of having them being able to vary their coverage, but what I hate to rely on is the complexity that would involve. Mel has said he wants to simply things. To me, leaving them responsible for varying coverages doesn't simply things. It will require them to think a lot more and be able to communicate back and forth effectively between the safeties and LBs. Which is all fine and good, if you have a veteran unit, but not when you're trying to maximize the potential of two very young cornerbacks. I don't know. I guess we'll see how it all plays out. I'll be watching the secondary with close interest over the next few months. Anyway, I'll be sure to check back for your "Reading Coverages" thread this summer. Thanks again for the input.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Browns, Jets, Raiders (when they go 3-4), all run either man free with the SS crashing down in the box, or some kind of variation on that.
I always look at the type of corners we are looking to draft or bring in..and they usually have a press/man coverage skillset rather than guys who fit better in zone setups..which is good..you want your corners to be able to play some aggressive man without having to protect them in zone packages..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Good post, Vers.
Cover 2 allows the defense versatility because the corners can play the run, the short pass, or deep route with help from the safeties. I see why you think it's weak against the run because it only leaves 7 in the box, but that's something we're trying to get away from, I believe. Putting 8 in the box leaves us vulnerable deep and we struggle when we do that, especially with teams like Cincy & Pit, (or with anyone with a strong, accurate QB and decent receivers). Our revamped D-line should help with this as well as with stopping the run so there should be less of a need to keep 8 in the box. That's why I think they say we'll be seeing more cover 2.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hfMNC7T.jpg) "I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
I see this as just furthering the evolution of our defense to suit our talents.
In other words to be more flexible to protect a weakness within a game plane.
We did not play the cover two last season, because it was not put into our defensive plan
And I think they are trying to incorporate it into next seasons so we also have that option to go to.
I can’t add to the list of very good points already offered on this thread other then to say that we will have another option / look to throw at the offenses we face.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
Vers, when people are saying here that they run man coverage, they mean that the CB's are running man on the outsides, at the the very least. There is no team that evers a Cover 0, minus maybe a play or two a game. I'm sure you know that though, just wanted to clarify what I meant.
And if anyone mentions Brian Russell again I'll get sad...the most underrated FS in the NFL, period, and the Browns let him walk.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
let's remember that Pool was drafted as a SS because Savage didn't want to count on any draft pick made by Davis and Jones had been out the entire previous year. Technically [and sometimes practically], Pool is playing out of position. Pool doesn't really have the mindset of a FS, he's a chaser. I hope, along with everyone else, that he gets it this year so we don't have to blow our 1st or 2nd on a FS next year (especially since we already blew our 3rd and 5th for two non-conributors).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
Pool played FS at Oklahoma in a pro style defense playing a lot of deep coverage...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
He would have benefited by staying his junior year..I don't think he was ready to come out.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
Well, he declared after his junior season, if I remember correctly. Part of issue was after Mike Stoops left for Arizona, Pool and him were very close.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 647
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 647 |
I thought Cover2 was different than Tampa2 but the same thing as 2-deep.
What is a cover-5? Never heard that before.
Cover-2:
Corners play press man, SS and FS play deep halves, etc. Basically a 2-deep man under...the 3 LBs play man on the RBs, the 2 CBs play man on the WRs (5 men under).
*exception if the CBs play flat.
What I've seen done, even at the HS level, is where the FS rotates into centerfield (giving it a cover-1look). the SS comes up into the strongside flat and picks off passes instead of going down into the box to stop the run.
The strongside CB plays short zone instead of man against his WR like usual, giving the SS time and space to sit down and pick off the pass. This could work on the weakside as well because Cover 2 is symmetrical.
Tampa2 is different only in that Mike drops back enough to play FS or S, giving a cover2 look a cover3 look. But a disadvantage is that Mike might be too small to stop run and you'll sacrifice size for speed. It does make the LB zone holes smaller and easier to defend for respective defenders.
Go Browns!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,103 |
The way Tampa has run it's defense in the past few seasons, it's a Cover 3 (FS, MLB, SS) with the corners playing off man to the outsides. Then they allow the OLB's to cover a LOT of ground, but since they have such great speed there now, they can get away with it.
Or they play quarters (CB's and S's all playing both the run and pass) with the LB's covering the flats and short zones, and the MLB playing a robber in midfield.
Not trying to correct you, just adding on to the discussion. You are right about them being suspceptible to run more in a C3, but that's they love Hovan so much as a run stuffer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,394
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,394 |
Quote:
but that's they love Hovan so much as a run stuffer.
Go Wildcats!
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,845
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,845 |
Vers, Now these are the type of discussions I like.. football... Quote:
keep reading about how so many love man coverage. Well.......it is almost non-existent in today's NFL. A true man defense is called Cover 0, where each guy locks up on a man. No one runs that BS. There are variations of man defense, but no one really runs a true man or Cover 0. It would be suicide.
The reason as you know why teams cannot run this is because the way that the rules are written, a DB really cannot touch a receiver anymore. Jamming is a lost art and you only have 5 yards to really get physical. After that, its over. So that is why man-2-man is so obsolete now. Plus, finding good lock-up DBs, with good technique is almost impossible.
Quote:
keep reading about how so many love man coverage. Well.......it is almost non-existent in today's NFL. A true man defense is called Cover 0, where each guy locks up on a man. No one runs that BS. There are variations of man defense, but no one really runs a true man or Cover 0. It would be suicide.
A good D-coord has to disguise his coverages and who ever is calling the secondary signals has to know how to position and change his secondary effectively. I'm not sure Pool nor Jones is good at that.
Quote:
I think that we were forced to go to a Two Deep because Pool can't handle playing center field. This has compromised our defense. When Russel was here, we hardly ever played Two Deep. He was smarter and more instinctive than Pool. Jones is not good back there. He can be exploited. He is best playing in the traditional area for a SS.........about 3 to 4 yds. off the LOS. Cover the flat....trail the TE.......provide run support.........make tackles. He is out of his element playing in space and this really hurt our D last year. The Browns were forced to move him back there because Pool got burned way too often. Some like to say that Pool improved during the course of the year, but that is hogwash........he got more help, which in turn, hurt the run defense.
This is why I think if Baxter can return, I think he would be a better FS than Pool. Baxter can play in space and hopefully make the proper reads/calls. Jones is a traditional SS as you state, a decent hitter, good at run support and covering TEs.
BUT the caveat to all this is getting pressure on the QB. We have asked alot of our secondary because we usually get no pressure and have to commit 5 to a rush. This year, I hope it will be different.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,845
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,845 |
Quote:
One thing I would love to know if it would work at the NFL level is something I use as a great change up on D and we are going to use it this year at the next level (we started teaching it during spring practice). In a 3-4 alignment against a zone blocking offense, eagle both DEs. At the snap of the ball, the MLBs delay just a split second. Then they jailbreak. The coverage is a cover 0 (this type situation is the only time I believe in using cover 0, as a change up).
With the rules of zone blocking and if your MLBs are quick enough, there is a natural hole for both MLB between the Gs and C. You can lock down in cover 0 because the pressure should be incredible rushing 7. It isn't an every down D, but it is a great change of pace or surprise to be used sparingly.
I hope your D-Tackle or nose guard can take atleast the center and 1 guard with him because you are slamming the MLBs up the gut. At a minimum, with zone o-line blocking, 1 of your MLBs should be able to break through the line, right in the QBs face. Yes, your DBs should be able to lock down for atleast a 4 to 5 count but nothing more!! Those MLBs have to be fast and react quick!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Actually, Dog, all they need to do is take the C. The two guards are doubling on the DTs based on the rules (that's why you delay the blitz a split second by the MLBs). The rules in zone blocking are IOOL (inside over outside LB). So, the rules force them to double the DTs. That allows the MLBs a nice hole and also at least one OLB a free pass and the other matched up with an RB. When used sparingly, you usually have at least 1 MLB and 1 OLB meeting at the very vulnerable QB within 3 seconds of the snap.
It works, but has to be used sparingly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
o it definitely works...
pats got to Anderson often, and one play Bruschi got Anderson real good behind the los.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 105 |
This post is a big time over simplification. Quote:
j/c:
Well.............I hate to ruffle feathers [as you all well know *L*] but I see all of this in a different light. Let me try to explain:
---I don't think we play a real Cover 2. Instead, I think we play a two deep zone, where we line the safeties up about 12 yds. deep and the corners vary their coverage.
In the NFL, defenses change from series to series and game to game. There are different systems in place all around the league and each system has variations of similar types of defenses. Even the Bucs will blitz and even a man team like the Eagles will run zones. Yes, we play a lot of two deep, but, as you said, the corners vary their coverage, and that includes us running what has come to be called the Tampa-2.
---I keep reading about how so many love man coverage. Well.......it is almost non-existent in today's NFL. A true man defense is called Cover 0, where each guy locks up on a man. No one runs that BS. There are variations of man defense, but no one really runs a true man or Cover 0. It would be suicide.
What you just said is that no team runs Cover 0. So what type of defense does a team run when it brings seven or eight on the rush and plays man behind it? cover 0 means no deep zone or centerfielder. You can even have a spy and it can be considered cover zero (aka Man Free, etc.) Again, maybe nobody runs that 100% of the time, but every team has some variation of Cover 0 and they'll play it if the game plan and situation allows it.
---I think that we were forced to go to a Two Deep because Pool can't handle playing center field. This has compromised our defense. When Russel was here, we hardly ever played Two Deep. He was smarter and more instinctive than Pool. Jones is not good back there. He can be exploited. He is best playing in the traditional area for a SS.........about 3 to 4 yds. off the LOS. Cover the flat....trail the TE.......provide run support.........make tackles. He is out of his element playing in space and this really hurt our D last year. The Browns were forced to move him back there because Pool got burned way too often. Some like to say that Pool improved during the course of the year, but that is hogwash........he got more help, which in turn, hurt the run defense.
Sorry but that's just wrong. We played plenty of Two deep when Russell was here, particularly against strong passing Offenses like Indy's and Cinncinatti's. I don't think we'll see much of a difference in how we've played D here under Romeo this year just because we have new linemen. I think we'll play straight up on first and second downs and then become exotic with the blitz on 3rd downs just like we've done somewhat the past three years. The difference will be that the D-Line will make more of an impact with these better players. there'll be more double teams on the the big bodies and when the double team doesn't come the lineman will make plays against the one-on-one.
---Someone said the linebackers struggled chasing WRs across the middle. Not to be rude, but LBers are not supposed to chase WRs. That is a mismatch for any LBer. What they do is get depth on their drops. They typically move in straight lines and they are indeed playing a zone coverage. Inside linebackers do not chase WRs! Well.....unless the FS or SS is so far out of the play that the LBer is forced to. *L*
What the OP was taking about was defending the crossing routes. I don't think that the LBs will become magically better at running down swift WRs, but the better interior play will force the ball out sooner, when the receiver is within the hash marks and near the grasp of those LB islands. Rogers and Williams will also be better at disrupting throwing lanes than guys in the past like Fraser and Eason and Orpheus when he was all broke down, and this will prevent QBs from busting us up with crossing routes and drags.
---I think Pool also compromised our D because our ILBers had to get so deep on their drops. They couldn't rely on Pool to come up and make plays. That is why draws were so effective against us. It is also why QBs could scramble so easily against us. Any kind of delay play killed us.
No argument on the draws other than to say that impact D-tackles will stop those plays from ruining 2nd and 3rd and forever-tpe distances. But deep LBer drops are an essential part of spilt safety defenses. the seams are vulnerable in a Two Deep scheme and getting a Linebacker down the pipe will shut down that weakness- this is something that Urlacher excels at.
---Personally, I hate Cover 2 and I don't like a Two Deep zone. It is weak against the run and can be exploited by strong arm QBs who can throw the seam route to quick TEs or flankers. That type of defense is good against a weak armed QB who has no running game. Otherwise...........it can be exploited.
It's fine to have an opinion, but a basic Two Deep defense will corral a big play offense and force a lot of teams to sustain drives in order to score. If the team can fly around and hit and prevent YACatch/Contact they can make it hard on any team to score because it requires perfect execution to beat it. think about it: part of teams figuring out DA last year was to stop blitzing and drop deep, particularly the safeties. heck, even Pittsburgh went Two deep on us in the 2nd game. Now, if Rogers and Williams can make an impact on our front line as much as we all hope, playing a conservative seven man front, non-blitzing defense some of the time can still stop the run. As I previously said, no team runs one thing all the time, I just think that our defensive philosophy won't change just because we have new lineman.
---I prefer a Cover 3 that can switch into Cover 1 or Cover 5 on occasion. I think you have to stop the run first. You cannot allow another team to impose their will on you. Unfortunately, we are extremely weak at FS and our SS is not allowed to play to his strengths due to the weakness of our FS. We also have two inexperienced corners who will probably be exploited, just as Wright was last year. I am really worried that we are going to be playing so "safe," that we will once again struggle against the run. Our linebackers are probably going to be asked to provide too much in the area of pass defense, that our run D will be compromised.
Cover One and Three defenses typically put more pressure on the CBs because it is easier to create one on one situations on the outside with motion and look offs. I think we'll be fine against the run even with seven man fronts. Tampa and Balt in their hey didn't have to blitz or walk safeties up to stop the run because they had impact interior linemen in Warren Sapp and Sam Adams. Of course their LB were better than ours. We'll see how it plays out. i can guarantee that if the straight up approach fails to stop the run again, romeo and Mel won't sit tight, they'll start varying it up until something works better- like giving Pool less responsibility and ground to cover last year helped stop us getting beat over the top on his side .
T_
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064 |
Your reasoning is sound. But I might suggest that I disagree on the offensive philosophy. And partially our past D performance when it has (too often) been miserable. We need to apply pressure early and try to throttle a game's momentum our way. I agree stopping run early and often. But we got patiently picked apart too often, like late in quarters and our secondary usually figured mightily in the others; success to keep drives alive.
My disagreement or concern is based on how as OC I would plan to attack. I would go deep multiple times, make the Browns adjust; it will happen, like checking to make sure a monster is monster on older defenses. I would also go with film that showed what worked week in and week out: pillow coverage where we give a 12 yard cushion when they need *. I wouldn't be greedy. Show me soft corner and so-so run defense, especially ineffective blitz pressure and I will pick the corners and outs until an adjustment is forced. We need tighter regular coverage; it only helps the deeps too. a goal should be especially first half takeaways. JMO, but it isn't too tuff. Take what is there, and take it as veterans read D.
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Running the Cover 2?
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
