Larry Lacewell breaks down defensive personnel fit

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by Bluestang

Claiborne is quite familiar with a cover 2 scheme at LSU, in addition to playing a man scheme.

Somehow the Tampa 2 has gotten pigeon-holed into this off coverage technique.

The DBs should be able to play any technique but more importantly they play alot of press coverage with outside leverage to funnel the WRs to the inside where the help is.

Do yourselves a favor and study some teams that run this type of defense.

LSU did not run more than a few snaps of cover 2 in Mo's entire time on campus.

If you are going to lecture people please have a clue what the heck you are talking about.

They ran a 4-3, yes, but with press coverage basically every play. And when they didn't press they ran a blitz of some sort.

We ran a cover 2 at Tech when I was there. It came out of the Jimmy Johnson coaching tree.

LSU runs cover 1. Almost exclusively. Read Claiborne's interviews after the draft and he says exactly that.

[TheCoolFan]

Originally Posted by 17yearsandcounting

I'd do the exact opposite of what this clown says.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by jterrell

LSU did not run more than a few snaps of cover 2 in Mo's entire time on campus.

If you are going to lecture people please have a clue what the heck you are talking about.

They ran a 4-3, yes, but with press coverage basically every play. And when they didn't press they ran a blitz of some sort.

We ran a cover 2 at Tech when I was there. It came out of the Jimmy Johnson coaching tree.

LSU runs cover 1. Almost exclusively. Read Claiborne's interviews after the draft and he says exactly that.

You are the one that appears to not know what he is talking about. Ignore is your friend.

[jterrell]

Originally Posted by gimmesix

Yes, people seem to be blindly assuming the corners don't press. Or just looking for reasons to complain.

What they are not considering is the fact that both corners should be in better position to make plays on the ball. Both Carr and Claiborne were brought in with the idea that they would make interceptions. Kiffin's scheme puts corners in position to do that by allowing them to play toward the ball instead of with their backs to it.

I don't see Kiffin using them in a lot of off-coverage, but instead playing to their strengths by having them come up and reroute the receivers, then play the underneath looking for the interception.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_2

This isn't complicated AT ALL.

The Tampa Cover 2 means the Safeties cover deep halves and there is no man responsibility. Yes. LBs and CBs can re-route guys (though now only within 5 yards) but they do nbot cover them.

In fact the CB play OFF THE BALL looking to come forward and make plays. They have to protect the Safeties on 15 yard outs and similar routes while the Safeties (and the MLB) prevent deep plays.

It is a perfectly good scheme. Can be very, very good.
But it takes time tp put pieces in place to fit it.
We haven't done that here.
Kiffin is far too old to hang out and wait on us to do so.

[Deep_Freeze]

Originally Posted by gimmesix

I keep forgetting about Wilber. It will be interesting to see if he seizes that SLB spot.

Yeah really the SLB spot will probably be solved in house between Conner, Wilber, and Albright. Not too much worry there, and it might be Wilber's best position anyway since he was really known for his coverage and not his pass rushing ability.

If Crawford and Wilber move into starting positions in this D, then that draft would start to look really pretty. Wilber has the potential to do it as you don't really need a world-beater in that spot with Carter and Lee on the field.

[Bluestang]

Don't quote garbage from Wiki to prove your point: http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...e-Tampa-2.html

DE: Rush with contain principles. Force the QB to step up into the pocket.
N: Rush A-gap weak with a two-way go on the offensive guard.
T: TEX (Tackle/End stunt) with the DE. Contain Rush. Tackle stunts first.
DE: TEX (Tackle/End stunt) with T. Scoop to strong side “B gap."
WLB: Read run/pass. Drop to weak hook, a depth of 10-12 yards between numbers and hash marks. Slide with the eyes of the QB.
MLB: Read run/pass. Open strong and run with any inside vertical route by No. 2. If no vertical by No. 2, drop to a depth of 15 yards and react to any underneath throw.
SLB: Read run/pass. Drop to strong hook, a depth of 10-12 yards between the numbers and the hash. Slide with the eyes of the QB.
[View Full Quote]C: Jam and re-route No. 1 to force an inside release. Drop to a depth of 12 yards with zone technique (back to the sideline) to protect the deep 7 (or flag) route. Rally to any ball thrown to the flat.
SS: Read release of No. 1 for run/pass key. Drop to a depth of 15-18 yards at your landmark — top of the numbers. Protect the 9 (or fade) route and react to any inside vertical. Verses two verticals, get depth and break downhill on the throw.
C: Jam and re-route No. 1 to force an inside release. Drop to a depth of 12 yards with zone technique (back to the sideline) to protect the deep 7 (or flag) route. Rally to any ball thrown to the flat.
FS: Read release of No. 1 for run/pass key. Drop to a depth of 15-18 yards at your landmark — top of the numbers. Protect the 9 (or fade) route by No.1 and react to any inside vertical.

[gimmesix]

Originally Posted by jterrell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_2

This isn't complicated AT ALL.

The Tampa Cover 2 means the Safeties cover deep halves and there is no man responsibility. Yes. LBs and CBs can re-route guys (though now only within 5 yards) but they do nbot cover them.

In fact the CB play OFF THE BALL looking to come forward and make plays. They have to protect the Safeties on 15 yard outs and similar routes while the Safeties (and the MLB) prevent deep plays.

To be honest, the last thing I'm worried about with this scheme change is the corners. They will come up and manhandle receivers, will undercut them on slants and/or drop back into the flats and will do fine with it, or if Kiffin has them carry receivers downfield some in man coverage, they will do fine with it.

Lesser corners than we've got have succeeded in the Cover-2. To me, it's a lot of handwringing over nothing.

As far as adjusting to the scheme goes, as I've pointed out in other threads, Kiffin immediately improved the Bucs when he became their defensive coordinator. Transitioning to a 3-4 is more difficult for most players because only a few have ever played the scheme. This is going back to basics.

[Chocolate Lab]

Not speaking for jt, but I don't think he's saying the corners can't do it, but that it's a poor allocation of resources in this defense to spend $50 million on one corner and to trade up to the 6th pick in the draft for the other. If we'd known we were doing this, we might have (for instance) done a smaller tradeup for a Fletcher Cox.

I do think it's funny when people act like they know more about schemes than someone who played DB in the Big 12. (Not saying you, gimme)

[5Stars]

Originally Posted by mgcowboy

I don't claim to have any kind of knowledge to argue with he says but my concern is whether he (i.e. Lacewell) is up-to-date with new defensive schemes and how teams use defensive personnel these days....

mind you Lacewell has not been in coaching for a while and he sees everything from his 20-30 years ago angle.....
These days you have different type of players speed-wise and physical-wise and DC do new things to utilize them.....

Dude! He has a TV.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

Not speaking for jt, but I don't think he's saying the corners can't do it, but that it's a poor allocation of resources in this defense to spend $50 million on one corner and to trade up to the 6th pick in the draft for the other. If we'd known we were doing this, we might have (for instance) done a smaller tradeup for a Fletcher Cox.

I do think it's funny when people act like they know more about schemes than someone who played DB in the Big 12. (Not saying you, gimme)

Captain Hindsight.

Having the corners we have gives more flexibility because they can hold up in man coverage calls.

What I find funny is your poor attempt at an insult based on assumptions.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by gimmesix

I keep forgetting about Wilber. It will be interesting to see if he seizes that SLB spot.

He's a better fit for a 4-3, IMO. He was never a very effective pass rusher at Purdue.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

Not speaking for jt, but I don't think he's saying the corners can't do it, but that it's a poor allocation of resources in this defense to spend $50 million on one corner and to trade up to the 6th pick in the draft for the other. If we'd known we were doing this, we might have (for instance) done a smaller tradeup for a Fletcher Cox.

I do think it's funny when people act like they know more about schemes than someone who played DB in the Big 12. (Not saying you, gimme)

It was dumb regardless of which defense you plan on running.

[gimmesix]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

He's a better fit for a 4-3, IMO. He was never a very effective pass rusher at Purdue.

I agree with you. I think SLB might fit him well. Of course, we first have to find out if any NFL defense fits him well ... but I do think he has a greater chance of succeeding in the 4-3.

[187beatdown]

Originally Posted by jterrell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_2

This isn't complicated AT ALL.

The Tampa Cover 2 means the Safeties cover deep halves and there is no man responsibility. Yes. LBs and CBs can re-route guys (though now only within 5 yards) but they do nbot cover them.

In fact the CB play OFF THE BALL looking to come forward and make plays. They have to protect the Safeties on 15 yard outs and similar routes while the Safeties (and the MLB) prevent deep plays.

It is a perfectly good scheme. Can be very, very good.
But it takes time tp put pieces in place to fit it.
We haven't done that here.
Kiffin is far too old to hang out and wait on us to do so.

Kiffin is good for 5 years at least unless we go consecutive record breaking years of being a failure on defense like we did under Ryan.

[Chocolate Lab]

Originally Posted by Bluestang

Captain Hindsight.

Having the corners we have gives more flexibility because they can hold up in man coverage calls.

What I find funny is your poor attempt at an insult based on assumptions.

I wasn't insulting anyone. Why did you think that?

And I know it's hindsight now. But with a little more foresight, we probably wouldn't have done the same thing we did. That's the risk of making a huge system change, though.

I have a suspicion Ryan blamed the corners last year for his bad defense, and it made Jerry angry when he spent a ton to get him two better ones and the D wasn't that much better. It was pretty clear even after that Pitt win that Jerry wasn't Rob's biggest fan.