Change of Scheme in Secondary

[OldCoach]

In a man defense, your safeties need to be very versatile. They have to bump and adjust in coverage in response to motion and different formations. They end up on the line and have to play the run more and in man coverage vs tight ends.

In a cover 2 based zone defense, this comes from primarily your Sam, will, and your corners. Your safeties end up in space a lot of the time over the top of the receivers(hopefully).

My question is this.... With Byron Jones having the athleticism that he does, would moving him to corner be a better fit for him?


He would be a fine st safety, but I'm thinking he might be a better corner than safety in a zone scheme.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

We play nickle and dime packages more than base so it doesn't really matter. In those packages we have and will continue to run a variety of coverages and looks, both man and zone.

 

[gmoney112]

In a man defense, your safeties need to be very versatile. They have to bump and adjust in coverage in response to motion and different formations. They end up on the line and have to play the run more and in man coverage vs tight ends.

In a cover 2 based zone defense, this comes from primarily your Sam, will, and your corners. Your safeties end up in space a lot of the time over the top of the receivers(hopefully).

My question is this.... With Byron Jones having the athleticism that he does, would moving him to corner be a better fit for him?


He would be a fine st safety, but I'm thinking he might be a better corner than safety in a zone scheme.

There are many other coverages than "man" and "cover 2". Often, it's going to be a mix depending on matchups, even having different coverages on each half of the field.

They're probably hoping to use his athleticism in a single high Cover 3 if I had to guess. He'll be fine at safety.

 

[OldCoach]

I guess my point is this. I'd rather have him as the underneath safety in cover 3. Any athlete can play out in space as the high safety. You kindof take away his versatility by putting him as the free safety.

 

[tm1119]

I'm still waiting for someone in the actual organization to say we are changing coverage scheme...

 

[waldoputty]

I guess my point is this. I'd rather have him as the underneath safety in cover 3. Any athlete can play out in space as the high safety. You kindof take away his versatility by putting him as the free safety.

jaylon may get the TE if recovered?

 

[OldCoach]

Well, I'm sure they got many coverages put in. If they are going to change their tendencies or their base, I don't figure it will be announced.

I just don't wanna see Byron Jones wasting away in space.

 

[OldCoach]

jaylon may get the TE if recovered?

The mike shouldn't ever be bumping out into man coverage in a man or a zone too often unless there is some kind of screw up.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

The mike shouldn't ever be bumping out into man coverage in a man or a zone too often unless there is some kind of screw up.

I don't know what the plans are for Jaylon other than to get him on the field and see what he can do. I will say that if a LB can cover a TE, that's a tremendous schematic advantage.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

In a man defense, your safeties need to be very versatile. They have to bump and adjust in coverage in response to motion and different formations. They end up on the line and have to play the run more and in man coverage vs tight ends.

In a cover 2 based zone defense, this comes from primarily your Sam, will, and your corners. Your safeties end up in space a lot of the time over the top of the receivers(hopefully).

My question is this.... With Byron Jones having the athleticism that he does, would moving him to corner be a better fit for him?


He would be a fine st safety, but I'm thinking he might be a better corner than safety in a zone scheme.

We're not going to play Cover 2. We'll likely play Cover 3 and man.

What I think we'll see more of is on say 3rd and 15, we won't be having the DB's standing at the first down marker and will instead look to make more plays on the ball in those situations.

As far as safeties go, if you want a good pass defense, your safeties need to be pretty good and regardless of scheme, safeties are asked to do a lot more these days. You're going to have to do a lot if you're playing man or Cover 1 or Cover 2 or Cover 3, etc.

I think we have a good thing in Byron. The QB Rating Allowed stat last season is misleading as they asked him to cover either top tier TE's or top tier WR's one-on-one in the red zone and if they complete a 5 yard pass for a TD...it kills your QB Rating Allowed. Byron had to make up for Church's limitations, Scandrick's bad wheels, Wilcox taking bad angles and missing assignments. I'd rather keep him at the safety spot and then use him as a slot corner on passing downs.




YR

 

[waldoputty]

The mike shouldn't ever be bumping out into man coverage in a man or a zone too often unless there is some kind of screw up.

i am not thinking base D, but in passing situations or nickel etc.
if he is running a 4.5 or better, he is faster than most TE including gronk, graham and reed.
i think only ebron runs a 4.5

 

[unionjack8]

The mike shouldn't ever be bumping out into man coverage in a man or a zone too often unless there is some kind of screw up.

Brian Urlacher EXCELLED at it down the seam......

 

[xwalker]

Well, I'm sure they got many coverages put in. If they are going to change their tendencies or their base, I don't figure it will be announced.

I just don't wanna see Byron Jones wasting away in space.

Jones is a big part of the reason that the CBs played better despite no significant improvement with the pass rush.

 

[TheCount]

What I think we'll see more of is on say 3rd and 15, we won't be having the DB's standing at the first down marker and will instead look to make more plays on the ball in those situations.

I really hope that's the case.

It was pretty clear to me last year that our secondary was at it's best in tight, man coverage last year. The Packers were beating the snot out of us until we finally decided to play our DB's more aggressively, then surprise surprise, we mount a comeback and their offense goes cold.

I'm sure you an guess what coverage we were in on that play that killed us. It certainly wasn't tight man.

 

[Nightman]

Does TJ McDonald fit?

He could be a cheap second half sleeper

 

[speedkilz88]

Does TJ McDonald fit?

He could be a cheap second half sleeper

 

[waldoputty]

I really hope that's the case.

It was pretty clear to me last year that our secondary was at it's best in tight, man coverage last year. The Packers were beating the snot out of us until we finally decided to play our DB's more aggressively, then surprise surprise, we mount a comeback and their offense goes cold.

I'm sure you an guess what coverage we were in on that play that killed us. It certainly wasn't tight man.

i hope the zone schemes we are doing are not out of date.
lets hope the reason GB torched us was simply lack of speed and not crappy scheme.
though we still have Oscan and he did not look the same

 

[DandyDon52]

I'm still waiting for someone in the actual organization to say we are changing coverage scheme...

no they would rather change players.

 

[DandyDon52]

i hope the zone schemes we are doing are not out of date.
lets hope the reason GB torched us was simply lack of speed and not crappy scheme.
though we still have Oscan and he did not look the same

last year scandrick was just a guy, he said early on he wasnt right. maybe he is back in form this next season.
"lets hope the reason GB torched us was simply lack of speed and not crappy scheme." yeah better hope.....alot !

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I really hope that's the case.

It was pretty clear to me last year that our secondary was at it's best in tight, man coverage last year. The Packers were beating the snot out of us until we finally decided to play our DB's more aggressively, then surprise surprise, we mount a comeback and their offense goes cold.

I'm sure you an guess what coverage we were in on that play that killed us. It certainly wasn't tight man.

I think we are best when we switch up the coverages between man and zone. The problem with man for us is we can't make plays on the ball. The problem with zone for us is that we don't get pressure. That's the killer of the play that killed us against the Packers...no pressure. That and Rodgers made an outrageous throw.




YR