5-2 defense?

[starfrombirth]

I posted this in another thread but on second thought realized it might be worth discussing:
I also like the idea of that 5-2 that I was reading about somewhere on this board yesterday. Canty - Hatcher - Tank - Spears - Ratliff and then Ellis - Ware as the linebackers with Tnew and AJ as corners and Henry and Hamlin as safeties. You would have no idea where the pass rush is coming from. 7 real lineman to stuff the run or 5 to stuff the run and ellis and ware to cover the flat while the secondary shuts anyone else down. That would be sweet.

What do y'all think?

 

[Eddie]

:madden:

 

[dallasfaniac]

I posted this in another thread but on second thought realized it might be worth discussing:
I also like the idea of that 5-2 that I was reading about somewhere on this board yesterday. Canty - Hatcher - Tank - Spears - Ratliff and then Ellis - Ware as the linebackers with Tnew and AJ as corners and Henry and Hamlin as safeties. You would have no idea where the pass rush is coming from. 7 real lineman to stuff the run or 5 to stuff the run and ellis and ware to cover the flat while the secondary shuts anyone else down. That would be sweet.

What do y'all think?

I think the goal is to get your best 11 on the field and I'm not sure having all those big men on the line does that. This might be something you do on short yardage situations, but in my mind I would rather yank Spears and put another linebacker, any linebacker out there.

 

[Hostile]

If the ball ever got past the LOS we'd be in deep trouble because there are too many (7) people whose job it would be to pressure the passer. There's a reason for ILBs. They can pursue to the ball and make tackles.

 

[Brandon]

 

[fortdick]

Uh, what do you think the 3-4 is? The only difference is in a 5-2, the OLB's are called DE's and play with a hand down.

In fact, the high school I coached at ran a 5-2 and had the DE's stand up and play flats on passing downs. I asked the Def Coordinator if in fact, he was running a 3-4 instead of a 5-2, and he said yes. But the head coach liked the 5-2, so that is what they called it.

Go figure.

 

[dallasfaniac]

Uh, what do you think the 3-4 is? The only difference is in a 5-2, the OLB's are called DE's and play with a hand down.

In fact, the high school I coached at ran a 5-2 and had the DE's stand up and play flats on passing downs. I asked the Def Coordinator if in fact, he was running a 3-4 instead of a 5-2, and he said yes. But the head coach liked the 5-2, so that is what they called it.

Go figure.

Yeah but in the OP's 5-2, Zach Thomas and Bradie James are replaced with Hatcher and Spears so it's a much better 3-4.

 

[starfrombirth]

I remember reading in one of the posts yesterday that Wade actually had this lineup on the field. I don't know if it's goal line or not but you have actual big bodies that can stop the run on the way to sacking the quarterback. You can't double team anyone on the 5 man rush because someone is going to be unimpeded to the quarterback every time. They all plug a gap so you can't run through the line. A rb has to go around the edge where our speedy d can catch them if they don't outright catch them in the backfield. If we rush 7.... god help them. So lets say they max protect. They have 2 to 3 receivers out in the routes against 4 great corners and safety's. Who do you pick to win those battles most of the time? You can rotate this line with Siavii, Bowen, Spencer and the lb's with James, Zack, Carpenter, and Burnett. Rotate corners and safeties with Jenkins, Scandrick, Ball, Watkins, Brown, cough..cough.. Williams. I think this is a great idea and you can accuse me of Madden all you want especially since I haven't played Madden in years. I'm actually hoping for a discourse about the possible weaknesses and strengths not juvenile sneering without substance. If you can't refrain.... don't post. Thanks.

 

[fortdick]

Yeah but in the OP's 5-2, Zach Thomas and Bradie James are replaced with Hatcher and Spears so it's a much better 3-4.

I see your point. Playing DeWare in the middle would be a waste.

 

[fortdick]

I remember reading in one of the posts yesterday that Wade actually had this lineup on the field. I don't know if it's goal line or not but you have actual big bodies that can stop the run on the way to sacking the quarterback. You can't double team anyone on the 5 man rush because someone is going to be unimpeded to the quarterback every time. They all plug a gap so you can't run through the line. A rb has to go around the edge where our speedy d can catch them if they don't outright catch them in the backfield. If we rush 7.... god help them. So lets say they max protect. They have 2 to 3 receivers out in the routes against 4 great corners and safety's. Who do you pick to win those battles most of the time? You can rotate this line with Siavii, Bowen, Spencer and the lb's with James, Zack, Carpenter, and Burnett. Rotate corners and safeties with Jenkins, Scandrick, Ball, Watkins, Brown, cough..cough.. Williams. I think this is a great idea and you can accuse me of Madden all you want especially since I haven't played Madden in years. I'm actually hoping for a discourse about the possible weaknesses and strengths not juvenile sneering without substance. If you can't refrain.... don't post. Thanks.

must refrain.....must refrain....

 

[Eddie]

I won several National Championships on NCAA Football 2002 on the PS2 using the 5-2 defense and 1 play ... the all out 7 man blitz. I think both my LB's averaged 20+ sacks a season. Pretty amazing stuff.

 

[starfrombirth]

If the ball ever got past the LOS we'd be in deep trouble because there are too many (7) people whose job it would be to pressure the passer. There's a reason for ILBs. They can pursue to the ball and make tackles.

I see your point Hos but isn't it that the job of the safety anyways to play the pass until the run is recognized and then go stop it? I think this would literally be the defend the run on the way to the quarterback system. I think it's worth a try after all everyone laughed at Chicago's d under Ditka/Ryan until it worked and then look at what happened. With the athletism and talent we have, I think it could work well.

 

[SkinsSuck09]

Sounds crazy aggressive. You should call the Steelers about this one. I do like that it sounds extreme though.

 

[Hostile]

I see your point Hos but isn't it that the job of the safety anyways to play the pass until the run is recognized and then go stop it? I think this would literally be the defend the run on the way to the quarterback system. I think it's worth a try after all everyone laughed at Chicago's d under Ditka/Ryan until it worked and then look at what happened. With the athletism and talent we have, I think it could work well.

They call them Safety because they are the last line of Defense on the run, not the first.

You could pull an occasional play off with a lineup like that, but the OC is simply going to make make the 7 defend wide and then attack the gaps looking for the underneath.

You can't underestimate the value of ILBs. They are generally every team's leading tacklers for a very big reason.

 

[starfrombirth]

Sounds crazy aggressive. You should call the Steelers about this one. I do like that it sounds extreme though.

Thank you. I aim to please and your right, this is an aggressive defense but remember what the giants did last year? They put their best linemen on the field at the same time and their defense exploded. I know this isn't quite the same but the concept is. Put a lot of TALENTED big bodies in motion to the quarterback with a good secondary and I'm willing to bet good things will happen. Now this is all predicated on the linemen actually being able to tackle while going through the hole to the qb but I haven't seen us have a tackling problem with the line and lb's, and that is what this whole defense would be based on.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

Ware-Ratliff-Johnson-Hatcher-Ellis
James-Thomas

Wouldn't that just be the 3-4 with Ware and Ellis in a 3point stance ?

 

[starfrombirth]

They call them Safety because they are the last line of Defense on the run, not the first.

You could pull an occasional play off with a lineup like that, but the OC is simply going to make make the 7 defend wide and then attack the gaps looking for the underneath.

You can't underestimate the value of ILBs. They are generally every team's leading tacklers for a very big reason.

Defend wide how? Agains 2 receivers, 3 or 4? it they go 2 even if it's wide they are double covered. If they go 3 wide, 1 is double covered by a safety and corner and the other 2 or manned up by AJ and Tnew. I'll take that anyday and they leave 7 monsters going to the qb with almost no blocking. If they go 4 wide, the protection is even worse leaving single coverage on their receivers with corners and safeties that are good enough to be corners and that's if Dware and Ellis don't hammer one of them on the way to the qb. I still like the scheme but I do see your point.

 

[Yeagermeister]

A 4 wr set would be murder vs a 5-2. If I were a qb I'd love to Ellis and Ware try to cover a wr.

 

[starfrombirth]

Ware-Ratliff-Johnson-Hatcher-Ellis
James-Thomas

Wouldn't that just be the 3-4 with Ware and Ellis in a 3point stance ?

No. The idea is to have the Biggest bodies on the field that can pass rush and stand up against the oline to tackle a rb if he is there. I like James and Zak but they are not going to beat an Olineman to get to the qb unless the lineman is already occupied. With the lineup I had you would have single blocking on Hatcher, Ratliff, Canty, Tank, and Spears. Even Spears can handle that. That then leaves Ellis and Dware unblocked to the qb in a pass rush situation. If they move to block ware and ellis, who are you going to unblock of the front 5? If you go max protect to block them then who do you send in the routes to go against the secondary I mentioned that has a chance to win consistently.

 

[Hostile]

Defend wide how? Agains 2 receivers, 3 or 4? it they go 2 even if it's wide they are double covered. If they go 3 wide, 1 is double covered by a safety and corner and the other 2 or manned up by AJ and Tnew. I'll take that anyday and they leave 7 monsters going to the qb with almost no blocking. If they go 4 wide, the protection is even worse leaving single coverage on their receivers with corners and safeties that are good enough to be corners and that's if Dware and Ellis don't hammer one of them on the way to the qb. I still like the scheme but I do see your point.

They would put 2 TE packages in and have the TEs move laterally wide with the OTs doing the same. This would produce gaps. Trust me, they can block 7.

Remember Parcells saying we would "beg teams to blitz us?" Sending 7 exposes the Defense more than sending 5 or 6 would.