Thread: The Difference Between Traditional Zone and the T2

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096314

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309

Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.

Because Marrdro says so, and he has an extensive collection of books

Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

Everyone has their own variation, TOmlin, Fraizer, Dungy, etc. all tweak what they do where they go. If I'm not mistaken, Fraizer worked under Dungy, so I'd imagine the scheme will be pretty damn close to what Dungy ran.

Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.

Bingo. We don't have the right players. Winfield and Griffen can be good physical cover 2 corners, since they're not asked to cover much ground, they're physical at the line. However, we play them off more than at the line, our safeties aren't overly quick, and since they're the last man standing, they need to be.

our LB's are quite frankly awful cover 2 linebackers. EJ is a great run supporter, and great blitzer. His ability to get back and cover the middle third leaves alot to be desired. Leber isn't very quick, his pass coverage isn't bad though, because his technique is solid. Greenway is really the only one suited for this, with speed, strength, the complete package.

Our front 4 is getting smaller and quicker, a sign they're focusing on the pass rush rather than stuffing the run. I suspect in the next few years, or even in FA, we'll be targeting some quicker cover LB's. EJ won't be aroudn too much longer, and when it comes time to replace him, look for a faster player to come in, that is if they do intend to keep the Tampa-2

WHAT?

You guys can't even tell me if we run the C2 or the T2. WOW.

End of discussion for Marrdro.

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1096324

Sorry Marr,
I cosign a lot of the things you say but you are up shit's creek on this one.

Taking a bad angle has nothing to do with the scheme you run. In fact, the cover 2 and the Tampa doesn't really change the safeties responsibility. It has a bigger impact on the depth the MLB must get. However, even with the changes in play calling, taking a bad angle is never part of a defense, it is a mistake and not doing your job.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81ce293c/Jacobs-goes-on-73-yard-jaunt

What part of scheme is the angle the safety took? I don't believe that this was even cover two...looks like cover 3 or man.
As a FS in HS, I got beat deep looking in the back field lots of times but...when the ball crossed the line, my angles were always spot on.

First, I can go pull a video were they do it right.....

Second, I agree with your MLB comment (atleast you know the difference), but what happens when the MLB is blitzing because the front 4 aren't getting it done?

How does that change the RFS and LFS's alignment and subsequent angles?

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096371

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309

Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.


BTW

Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.

No one has said anything of the sort. What has been said is that in most cases, to limit the big play, the defense will be patient and let the team (much like you see in a prevent defense) not take risks attempting to intercept the ball.

What that means is they don't go for the INT and risk letting the reciever get behind.

You might not have missed that if you would have opened the urls or even read just the snippets that were provided.

Thats OK though, they haven't gone away. You just need to go back and read them instead of making shit up. :P

Limiting the other team from getting a big play does not mean that the defense cannot get an INT.

The point I believe you might have missed in there which I did come across is that the speed of the defense is meant to confuse the offense and create turnovers by capitalizing on the mistakes that speed makes.

Speed does absolutely no good if you lay back 15 yards and don't use it just like speed on the DL does no good if you don't use it to create pressure on the QB. I just don't see how you can harp on one (DL) and then so willingly accept the other.

Of course in the end I know that you don't really believe what you are saying and that you are just playing devils advocate in order to increase traffic and discussion so for that I will just say well played my friend.....

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1096334

Marr knows. I think he is just striking up a discussion. Our safety play is horrendous. Look at pass breakups not Ints. With 48 sacks...we should have had a fair number of pass breakups. We didn't.

I have never ever ever once said we don't have issues on the backend. Any yutz can see that. My point in this is that it is compounded by horrendous play by our front 4 last year.

When they aren't getting it done, you have to bring help. Usually thats a LB which weakens one of the short zones automatically. To help alleviate that, the CB and the S have to adjust their approach to covering their zones. Again, that affects the angles the DB's have to take especially when they are intially running in coverage and have to stop, turn and then pursue a runner that the DL and LB's just missed.

Why is that so hard to get across to some of you?

Wish I could pull a clip. I'd show you some of those highlights.....

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096372

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096314

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309

Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.

Because Marrdro says so, and he has an extensive collection of books

Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

Everyone has their own variation, TOmlin, Fraizer, Dungy, etc. all tweak what they do where they go. If I'm not mistaken, Fraizer worked under Dungy, so I'd imagine the scheme will be pretty damn close to what Dungy ran.

Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.

Bingo. We don't have the right players. Winfield and Griffen can be good physical cover 2 corners, since they're not asked to cover much ground, they're physical at the line. However, we play them off more than at the line, our safeties aren't overly quick, and since they're the last man standing, they need to be.

our LB's are quite frankly awful cover 2 linebackers. EJ is a great run supporter, and great blitzer. His ability to get back and cover the middle third leaves alot to be desired. Leber isn't very quick, his pass coverage isn't bad though, because his technique is solid. Greenway is really the only one suited for this, with speed, strength, the complete package.

Our front 4 is getting smaller and quicker, a sign they're focusing on the pass rush rather than stuffing the run. I suspect in the next few years, or even in FA, we'll be targeting some quicker cover LB's. EJ won't be aroudn too much longer, and when it comes time to replace him, look for a faster player to come in, that is if they do intend to keep the Tampa-2

WHAT?

You guys can't even tell me if we run the C2 or the T2. WOW.

End of discussion for Marrdro.

That was not the question Marr.

The question was do we run the pure T2 or some variation of the T2

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096370

Again, I hope the staff has Guion ready to go in that role.

Or, as I've said before, that role in our defense is dead. No more 350lb guy to clog up the middle. Smaller, quicker guys to get after the quarterback.

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096376

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096372

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096314

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309

Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.

Because Marrdro says so, and he has an extensive collection of books

Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

Everyone has their own variation, TOmlin, Fraizer, Dungy, etc. all tweak what they do where they go. If I'm not mistaken, Fraizer worked under Dungy, so I'd imagine the scheme will be pretty damn close to what Dungy ran.

Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.

Bingo. We don't have the right players. Winfield and Griffen can be good physical cover 2 corners, since they're not asked to cover much ground, they're physical at the line. However, we play them off more than at the line, our safeties aren't overly quick, and since they're the last man standing, they need to be.

our LB's are quite frankly awful cover 2 linebackers. EJ is a great run supporter, and great blitzer. His ability to get back and cover the middle third leaves alot to be desired. Leber isn't very quick, his pass coverage isn't bad though, because his technique is solid. Greenway is really the only one suited for this, with speed, strength, the complete package.

Our front 4 is getting smaller and quicker, a sign they're focusing on the pass rush rather than stuffing the run. I suspect in the next few years, or even in FA, we'll be targeting some quicker cover LB's. EJ won't be aroudn too much longer, and when it comes time to replace him, look for a faster player to come in, that is if they do intend to keep the Tampa-2

WHAT?

You guys can't even tell me if we run the C2 or the T2. WOW.

End of discussion for Marrdro.

That was not the question Marr.

The question was do we run the pure T2 or some variation of the T2

Marrdro struggles at understanding that the T2 is a variation of the Cover 2.

but you know how he is, throw one word out there he doesn't like and he'll pounce. Call him on doing the same and he gets all butthurt.

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096374

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096371

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309

Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.


BTW

Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.

No one has said anything of the sort. What has been said is that in most cases, to limit the big play, the defense will be patient and let the team (much like you see in a prevent defense) not take risks attempting to intercept the ball.

What that means is they don't go for the INT and risk letting the reciever get behind.

You might not have missed that if you would have opened the urls or even read just the snippets that were provided.

Thats OK though, they haven't gone away. You just need to go back and read them instead of making shit up. :P

Limiting the other team from getting a big play does not mean that the defense cannot get an INT.

Never said it didn't. What I said was that they won't risk giving up the big play by trying to play man to man. They will press/route their man, and if he stays in their zone they will keep him in front of them, if he wants to go deep they will turn him over to the S and stay in their zone.

Pretty hard to get INT's if your not playing man to man/press coverage.

The point I believe you might have missed in there which I did come across is that the speed of the defense is meant to confuse the offense and create turnovers by capitalizing on the mistakes that speed makes.

Speed does absolutely no good if you lay back 15 yards and don't use it just like speed on the DL does no good if you don't use it to create pressure on the QB. I just don't see how you can harp on one (DL) and then so willingly accept the other.

Speed also does absolutely no good if you are weakening your zones by bringing a LB to get pressure (when your front 4 aren't getting it done) because no matter how fast they are, their zones increase and the distance to cover increases with it.

Of course in the end I know that you don't really believe what you are saying and that you are just playing devils advocate in order to increase traffic and discussion so for that I will just say well played my friend.....

I always believe what I'm saying and in this case, I am not playing devils advocate here.

Everyone wants to put the blame on shitty pass coverage (that = lack of INTs to the casual yutz) solely on the DB's and continue to ignore the issues we have on the DL.

In the end, I blame Madden. That damn game makes fans think you just go for INT's all the time. :P

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1096377

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096370

Again, I hope the staff has Guion ready to go in that role.

Or, as I've said before, that role in our defense is dead. No more 350lb guy to clog up the middle. Smaller, quicker guys to get after the quarterback.

Thats why the Lions just added another one to their DL.

Smaller quicker gets your ass run over all the time. Watch, it started to slide (run stopping) 2 years ago. It will continue to slide this year as well if they don't beef up the middle.

Something to think about.....When you get 4 or 5 yards a pop on the run, you don't have to pass my friend. Atleast until you've gashed the defense so much on the ground they are cheating up to stop it (with their backend) and then you gash them with the play action fake.

Does Madden have that concept in it? :dry:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096380

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096374

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1096371

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1096309

Somewhere in all of that I mssed the part where it says the scheme is designed to allow the WR to catch the ball unchallenged and then tackle them shortly after the completion.

I also missed the part where it says that the CB's and safeties are not to attempt to INT the ball, but rather to watch it fall harmlessly to the turf and then get back to the huddle.

Additionally if the true T2 relies on speed and pressure on the QB from the Dline then I am baffled as to why we would want another fat pat replica on the field since it looks like we should be going for the faster, athletic type DT's like they just did in Detroit and like we used to have in the good old days with Randle and Thomas.

I am going to have to go back to night school on this stuff.


BTW

Has anyone on the Vikings ever stated that we are indeed running the pure unabridged version of the T2 or is it yet another variation based on personnel?

Because if we are running the pure T2 but we have fairly slow LB's and DB's it seems we might just be screwed looking at the overall speed on our back 7.

No one has said anything of the sort. What has been said is that in most cases, to limit the big play, the defense will be patient and let the team (much like you see in a prevent defense) not take risks attempting to intercept the ball.

What that means is they don't go for the INT and risk letting the reciever get behind.

You might not have missed that if you would have opened the urls or even read just the snippets that were provided.

Thats OK though, they haven't gone away. You just need to go back and read them instead of making shit up. :P

Limiting the other team from getting a big play does not mean that the defense cannot get an INT.

Never said it didn't. What I said was that they won't risk giving up the big play by trying to play man to man. They will press/route their man, and if he stays in their zone they will keep him in front of them, if he wants to go deep they will turn him over to the S and stay in their zone.

Pretty hard to get INT's if your not playing man to man/press coverage.

Ah, but we DO play man coverage. You act as if we play 100% strictly 2 deep safeties, corners in flats, OLB's in hooks and MLB deep middle. Not the case.

The point I believe you might have missed in there which I did come across is that the speed of the defense is meant to confuse the offense and create turnovers by capitalizing on the mistakes that speed makes.

Speed does absolutely no good if you lay back 15 yards and don't use it just like speed on the DL does no good if you don't use it to create pressure on the QB. I just don't see how you can harp on one (DL) and then so willingly accept the other.

Speed also does absolutely no good if you are weakening your zones by bringing a LB to get pressure (when your front 4 aren't getting it done) because no matter how fast they are, their zones increase and the distance to cover increases with it.

Who said anything about pressure? PF is talking about DL speed to presure the QB, and CB speed to make up ground he voluntarily gave up pre-snap.

In the end, I blame Madden. That damn game makes fans think you just go for INT's all the time. :P

Of course you do, like the guys that blame the govmunt because DEY TOOK UR JUURRBS!!