Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

When you have the ideal personnel...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by BlindSite View Post
    Tampa 2 was the brain child of Dungy and Kiffin, I think Lovie was in there as well coaching the secondary or linebackers or something. Its an evolution of a Chuck Noll defense.

    It differs from the play cover 2 in that the safeties traditionally don't split and cover the field 50/50 that's actually a 43 defense thing. The more common thing if for the safeties to be roving and have a bigger role. Your FS needs to be as good as some corners and your SS needs to be able to smash people over the middle.

    Your MLB then becomes somewhat of a third safety dropping back to keep the play in front of him. Basically you need fast mobile hard hitters in order to be effective.

    In a cover 2 play the there's a hole behind cornerbacks and generally every player covers a small area with holes allowing good offenses to find placed to put the ball.

    I don't like the Tampa two because if you've got a playmaking wide receiver like Steve Smith for example or a Terrell Owens or a Westbrook/Reggie Bush type running back who can make players miss in the secondary even with the defense coming around the ball they get beat.

    Also if you run right at the heart of a tampa 2 defense with a power running scheme you can break it down. Bettis smashing Chicago around in his final year and Stephen Davis consistently trashing the Tampa Defense in 03 are evidence of this off the top of my head.

    There is no substantial difference between a Cover 2 and a Tampa 2. Dungy, Lovie, Marinelli all coached at Tampa and when they left, they simply changed the name to a Cover 2. Dungy said he copied the defense from Chuck Noll's Pittsburgh's team and I'm guessing he saw no reason after he left Tampa to continue to call it by that name. Lovie Smith and Marinelli followed suit. Each team that plays a Cover 2 has a few different wrinkles but in essense, It is exactly the same defense.
    Every defense has its strengths and weaknesses but Tampa and Indy have won the Super Bowl playing it and Chicago at least got to the Super Bowl using that system.
    Every system of defense is effective if you have the personnel to run it, if you don't have the proper personnel then every defenses weaknesses can be exposed.
    The Colts as mentioned won the Super Bowl using a Cover 2, New England and Pittsburgh using a 3-4 won a Super Bowl and the Giants using a basic 4-3 won a Super Bowl so it really doesn't matter which defense you use, each can bring you a Super Bowl victory if you have great personnel.
    Last edited by Iamcanadian; 05-07-2008, 06:39 AM.
    And proud of it!!!

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by bigbluedefense View Post
      The 46 bear is my 2nd favorite scheme of all time (i generally like the 46 period, including the Jim Johnson 46).

      However, I don't know if the Bear style of 46 would hold up against today's offenses, because like Marino shown in the past, as well as the 49ers, a spread offense will shread the 46 bear.

      Don't believe me? Go back and look at gametape of the 46 bear against the 49ers and dolphins. They used to have some games on youtube before google bought it. But now its no longer there. Your best bet is buying gametape of the Bears from 84-88. Or the 91 eagles, I believe they played the 49ers that year if im not mistaken.

      I still love that scheme though. I used to have Buddy Ryan's 46 playbook for Philly. I bought it off ebay. But lost it in the process of moving. Didn't get to finish it :(


      Also don't go soley on numbers. While I agree that the Eagles 46 with Buddy was one of the best defenses ever, i honestly feel that we can't put it in the same context as other defenses, bc regardless of how poor that Eagles offense was, all time great defenses should carry a team to a championship. No one remembers units unless they win championships, thats just how it is.

      You can buy play books on ebay?


      "O-H-I-O...its a four letter word."
      Mike Tirico

      Magilla Gorilla ain'ta killa, ...

      Roger Goodell's Beautify the NFL Campaign-No Violence-No Criminals-No Fun


      "(Ole Miss QB) Bo Wallace is one of those types of quarterbacks who is always trying to save the city but he's actually burning it down." -- NFC director of scouting

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by no love View Post
        Ultimately I think the real answer comes down to dollars and cents. What defense can give you the most bang for your buck that enables you to fill holes with players who fetch less money on the market, while also being able to pay for marquee names.

        I know in the past, the Eagles and the Bears have thrived off of the 46 and attacking style 4-3 defenses. But these schemes require the most skilled players who have experience in the scheme and cost the most. With the turnover associated with the salary cap, it is difficult to build the type of defense that the Ravens have built over the years without sacrificing a bit on the offensive end.

        It is for this reason that many teams ran the Tampa-2 and the 3-4 defenses, especially with the salary cap era. Both schemes utilize a lot of tweeners, undersized players, and role players who are easier to draft in later rounds and not as expensive. Just as an example, Tampa 2 lbs, dts, and cbs are cheaper than they would be in a 46 because of what they are required to do. In the 34, OLB and DE's are cheaper.

        So while the 46 and attacking 4-3 defenses might be the best defenses when you have the players. The tampa-2 and 3-4 allow for a more balancing TEAM.
        Sorry to be critical but this is garbage. New England and Pittsburgh switched to a 3-4 defense for a number of reasons, their HC's believed strongly in that defense and it gave both teams a huge edge in the draft as they were left with all the tweeners that nobody else would draft. That gave them a sizable advantage on draft day. However draft picks are slotted in the draft and get their pay based on what slot they are taken in. There is no difference in pay between the #15 pick for New England and Pittsburgh and the #15 pick for a basic 4-3 team, they get exactly the same money.
        Over time many teams switched to a 3-4 defense and all draft advantages were lost.
        The Cover 2 defense which was copied from Chuck Noll's Pittsburgh teams of the past and brought back into fashion under Tony Dungy who coached for Noll. He strongly believed in the defense and it also gave him a huge advantage on draft day as a lot of his personnel couldn't play for a 3-4 team or a basic 4-3 team. Again there is no savings in cap dollars since everybody is slotted by their draft position and each draftee receives the money paid to that pick.
        As the Cover 2 defense has spread, the draft advantage has dried up.
        The spread of the 3-4 and Cover 2 defenses had nothing to do with money and everything to do with winning Super Bowls.
        And proud of it!!!

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Iamcanadian View Post
          Sorry to be critical but this is garbage. New England and Pittsburgh switched to a 3-4 defense for a number of reasons, their HC's believed strongly in that defense and it gave both teams a huge edge in the draft as they were left with all the tweeners that nobody else would draft. That gave them a sizable advantage on draft day. However draft picks are slotted in the draft and get their pay based on what slot they are taken in. There is no difference in pay between the #15 pick for New England and Pittsburgh and the #15 pick for a basic 4-3 team, they get exactly the same money.
          Over time many teams switched to a 3-4 defense and all draft advantages were lost.
          The Cover 2 defense which was copied from Chuck Noll's Pittsburgh teams of the past and brought back into fashion under Tony Dungy who coached for Noll. He strongly believed in the defense and it also gave him a huge advantage on draft day as a lot of his personnel couldn't play for a 3-4 team or a basic 4-3 team. Again there is no savings in cap dollars since everybody is slotted by their draft position and each draftee receives the money paid to that pick.
          As the Cover 2 defense has spread, the draft advantage has dried up.
          The spread of the 3-4 and Cover 2 defenses had nothing to do with money and everything to do with winning Super Bowls.
          I am a little confused to your point, because you said that coaches switched to this scheme because of draft day advantages, but then you contradict that by say that the draft advantage has dried up. In either case, you don't venture to explain how some players who excel in these defenses are cheaper on the market than those who play in 4-3 schemes.

          Managing your cap based on personnel and philosophy on building a team have everything to do with winning super bowls. The scheme you run is very much tied into this.

          Mike Nolan has reiterated this a couple of times that there is a belief that running a 3-4 is much more cost effective due to the price of LB (the corps of your team) compared to that of linemen. 3-4 linemen are cheaper due to fact that their responsibilities are not to rush the passer. Even your best 3-4 OLB's are paid less than your top notch pass rushing DE's, it's in the franchise tag. Additionally, LB's give you the best bang for your buck with special teams value as well.

          As far as the tampa-2. While the draft advantage has lessoned, it is still there. You will ALWAYS be able to find undersized LB's who can EXCEL in a Tampa-2 in the later rounds. And while you can always find steals, it is easier when a talented player drops due to knocks on his size. Same goes for cornerbacks in the tampa 2, guys will drop because of speed concerns but may excel in a tampa 2 when they would otherwise fail in a 4-3.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by DragonFireKai View Post
            The difference between the 1991 Eagles and the 2000 Ravens is that the Eagles were hitched to a tragically bad offense, that made Trent Dilfer and Co look like the 2007 Patriots.
            Tragically bad you say? You mean like setting a record for most games without a touchdown bad?

            Comment


            • #51
              There's no right answer. "When you have the ideal personnel," all formations will work.

              A 3-4 with a dominant NT anchoring the line and powerful, explosive edge rushes to pressure the QB, or a cover-two with a penetrating DT, quick ends and mobile 'backers and DBs ... it doesn't matter. The key is having that personnel.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Dam8610 View Post
                Cover 2 is a play. Tampa 2 is a scheme. The Colts, Bucs, and Lions probably will run the purest forms of the Tampa 2 this year.
                Exactly. The Colts' favorite play on defense is actually a Weakside Cover 3. They'll come out in a Cover Two look, then before the ball is snapped, FS Bob Sanders will move down into the box to defend the run/weakside curl-flat area, while SS Bethea will rotate over the top to defend the deep middle. The Colts really only run Cover Two on third and long situations.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Most Tampa 2 teams run a ton more Cover 3 than Cover 2 nowadays. Mainly bc they need 8 in the box to stuff the run, so your options on 1st and 2nd down are limited.

                  Cover 2 has almost become a 3rd and long play. Its rarely used by Tampa 2 teams on running downs.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by DeathbyStat View Post
                    You can buy play books on ebay?
                    yeah, old playbooks that are obsolete. look it up, youll be amazed at what you can find.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Crickett View Post
                      Tragically bad you say? You mean like setting a record for most games without a touchdown bad?
                      I've already outlined how the Ravens offense was superior to the Eagles offense in pretty much every way.

                      Stand Tall and Shake the Heavens!
                      The Destroyer Is Manifest!
                      I reserve the rights to retract any posts made betwen midnight and 5 AM PST due to being really, really drunk

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by yourfavestoner View Post
                        Exactly. The Colts' favorite play on defense is actually a Weakside Cover 3. They'll come out in a Cover Two look, then before the ball is snapped, FS Bob Sanders will move down into the box to defend the run/weakside curl-flat area, while SS Bethea will rotate over the top to defend the deep middle. The Colts really only run Cover Two on third and long situations.
                        Wow, props for recognizing that, very true, Sanders is too much of a force in the short field to send him deep too often, but sometimes he does just read and react (i.e. his AFC Title saving 3rd and 4 play, I don't think he had the short responsibility).


                        The problem arises when people use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support instead of illumination.

                        If luck is where preparation meets opportunity, then clutch is where failure meets luck.

                        <Add1ct> setting myself on fire can't be that hard
                        <Add1ct> but tackling a mosquito might prove a challenge

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by bigbluedefense View Post
                          yeah, old playbooks that are obsolete. look it up, youll be amazed at what you can find.
                          Well, I know what will be on my birthday/christmas list.


                          The problem arises when people use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support instead of illumination.

                          If luck is where preparation meets opportunity, then clutch is where failure meets luck.

                          <Add1ct> setting myself on fire can't be that hard
                          <Add1ct> but tackling a mosquito might prove a challenge

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            gimme a 3-4 with LT coming off the edge and I'd win every game and murder QB's.

                            I like the versatility of a 3-4. I like having the speed rushers coming off the edge killing QB's. THe element of surprise. You never know who the 4th rusher is or where he's gonna come from. With a good DC, and personel, you can confuse the **** out of offenses and go nuts.
                            We ALL bleed scarlet
                            New York Giants Super Bowl 46 Champs
                            UNITED: I actually attend the college I root for
                            Originally posted by PalmerToCJ
                            BTW, if it's 3rd and 97... I'm throwing a screen pass to Brian Leonard and he will convert.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              I agree with Wyndham on this one and say they all work just as effectively, when you have the right personnel.

                              If you have humongous, athletic linemen with pass rush potential in a 3-4, you can throw around some over-sized LB's back there and just let them go crazy blitzing. I think we can all agree that that is the key to a successful 3-4 defense. The linemen. The reason the Patriots defense for a while looked so damn impressive is because of Warren, Seymour and Wilfork. They're all studs in that defense, and they make their old ass LB's look good.

                              In the 4-3, again, if you have great defensive line play you can make anything work. The Giants are the best example of that. Great pass rushers, solid LB's, and their secondary was pretty ugly at times, but they weren't exposed as much (only when T.O played them) because of the rush.

                              All in all, with the right personnel, you can play anything and be good at it.

                              Heck, you can run a 1-3-7 defense if you have Calais Campbell gain 50 lbs and take on Quadriple teams at the L.O.S...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information