Thread: WCO/Cover 2 needs to go
Hey, thats a great idea genius. Quick question, were we gonna find the warpigs to do that? Look, its easy to say, hey, lets collapse the pocket with a premier NT, but those types of NT's just don't grow on trees and the ones that do are gainfully employed making big big bucks losing on other teams that are playing C2.
09-18-2012, 10:40 AM #22
According to this dude's game notes, we rarely played a cover 2 or Tampa 2 set in game 1.
Jaguars vs. Vikings: Arif's Notes on the Game (Defense and Special Teams)
I didn't get to watch game one very closely, but he makes some interesting observations. Also, I think many would be surprised how often we do play man coverage.
I think the biggest issue we have is not so much in the schemes we play or even the players. It is more with the coaching and how they prepare the team, adjust in the game and mix up the plays to confuse the offense. Creativity is not a part of our DNA, we are predictable, teams figure us out pretty quickly and we are left trying to beat individual matchups with league average positional players in a game that favors the offense. Or more simply put, we don't confuse QB's.
09-18-2012, 10:58 PM #23Coordinator
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
Our problem isn't the C2. We have many problems on defense. Having that DT that pushes the pocket back and the QB into JA would certainly help, but wouldn't fix things. What we need most are LBs that can cover a TE man to man and know how to get in the throwing lanes in zone. But that's not our biggest problem. Our biggest problem is that we have no creativity on D. We don't mask our coverages...we don't attack, but react...and worst of all we telegraph our blitzes, whos coming and where they're coming from.(God I HATE that!)
09-19-2012, 05:11 AM #24
09-19-2012, 05:29 AM #25
Its pretty simple to see, when the LB is sent, you are no long in a traditional C2 cause someone has to cover that void. When a S comes up in the box, your in a C3. The play Whinny got burned on was a prime example of them being in a "man up" coverage as he had no dedicated S to that 1/4 behind him.
Long story short, and back to the original question posed by the originator of the thread....The answer still remains NO. Nothing wrong with the C2 scheme.
By the way, great find my friend. Some of the stuff like this is what I am holding back on.......
Overall, the zone packages seem fine, but I would like zone plays to be more situational if possible. Hook and curl zones are generally designed to operate within 7-10 yards from the line of scrimmage, but there were too many third downs that were passing plays under 5 yards that were converted because of the high zones. Calling for plays designed to prevent shorter passes in third down situations would probably be superior. Many of the "poor coverage mistakes" by the defensive backs in this situation actually seem to come from executing the plays that were called.
For those of you who don't normally read the articles that are provided, I recommend you do in this case. A very nice breakdown of all positions/players is provided.Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.
09-19-2012, 05:40 AM #26
B 2012 1 29 29 Harrison Smith Notre Dame 2012 3 3 66 Josh Robinson Central Florida 2012 5 4 139 Robert Blanton Notre Dame 2011 5 8 139 Brandon Burton Utah 2011 6 5 170 Mistral Raymond South Florida 2010 2 2 34 Chris Cook Virginia 2009 3 22 86 Asher Allen Georgia 2009 7 22 231 Jamarca Sanford Mississippi 2008 2 12 43 Tyrell Johnson Arkansas State 2007 3 8 72 Marcus McCauley Fresno State 2006 2 16 48 Cedric Griffin Texas 2006 5 17 149 Greg Blue Georgia
Truth is, we haven't drafted a true DT/NT since maybe Hovan if you think could be considered a 1 tech. I tend to think of him as more of a 3.
T 2011 4 9 106 Christian Ballard Iowa 2008 5 17 152 Letroy Guion Florida State 2005 6 17 191 C.J. Mosley Missouri 2002 7 7 218 Chad Beasley Virginia Tech 2001 2 26 57 Willie Howard Stanford 2001 4 35 130 Shawn Worthen Texas Christian 2000 1 25 25 Chris Hovan Boston CollegeMany many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.
09-19-2012, 05:46 AM #27
In the end, we haven't pressured the QB this year like we need to. When we have brought pressure it is the result of a S, CB or LB blitzing to help the DL. The truth is we let two untested QB's look like all pro's this year, when both have been made to look otherwise by teams that run the same scheme we do because they pressured the QB.
Reality is a bitch my friend.
I'd like to see the scheme changed, you call that frustration & bitching, yet you want to see DL & LB changes & you call it creative discussion?
I'd love to be able to play man to man. Hell, I thought we were even going to see something akin to it under Pagac with the "Zone Press" look that we never saw last year. So if your using that as the vocal point of your bitching, you'd better back the truck up my friend. I'm only discussing that which we have to discuss and that's the zone your beloved coaches want to run.
Last edited by Marrdro; 09-19-2012 at 05:48 AM.Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.
09-19-2012, 11:12 AM #28
Vikings vs. Colts: Arif's Notes on the Game (Offense)
Some highlights from his notes:
-Gives Musgrave credit for working to the player's strengths vs. enforcing a scheme
-Puts a lot of the conservative play on the WR's inability to break coverage (including the TE's)
-Feels that Ponder is doing what's being asked of him which is still limited, partly because of the WR's and partly because he is still getting up to speed
-Thinks Kalil is playing well and that Loadholt should be on notice
-Good pass blocking, but overall poor run blocking by almost every player
Probably should be in the game notes thread, but I think it helps address a lot of the WCO anxiety many on this site feel is the basis of our issues.
09-19-2012, 02:39 PM #30Asst. Coach
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
The Tampa 2 has got to go ... NOW! Does it really matter what we switch to? Could it possibly be worse than what we have now? I get that you need the right parts for the scheme, but Frazier has had how many years to get it fixed, and he hasn't. Don't forget, he was the DC under Chiller so I would at least expect the defense to be shored up by now.
The T2 is supposed to be an aggressive, hard hitting, ball hawking scheme. That doesn't sound anything like our "let em catch it, try to wrestle him down, and don't worry about takeaways" version. How the hell can you not be concerned about the lack of takeaways? It's the single most important stat in football. This scheme isn't fooling any team in the league anymore.
Besides, the Tampa 2 worked great for Tampa because they had the likes of Sapp, Rice, Brooks, Quarles, Kelly, Lynch, and Jackson roaming around on their defense. That talent pool would've made any scheme look brilliant. They had twice as many interceptions in 1 damn Superbowl (5) than our defense has dating back to week 5 last year. We've only had 2 interceptions (Grossman and McCown) in that time. That's 13 games, including an NFL record 9 game stretch last year where we had 0. In that same 9 game stretch we allowed 25 passing TD's and a combined QB rating of 132.1 (196/267 2409 yds 25 td 0 int). That's beyond pathetic.