Run Defense: Possible Solution

[Floatyworm]

Lol. So the guys who can't hold their one gap should now be given a 2 gap assignment. That should work...

@ least the LBers would be free to run to the football. That's been the problem. Guards have free run to the second level....and by the time LBers get off blocks....they are catching the RBs w/ a full head of steam and getting dragged to death for another 3-4 yards.

 

[xwalker]

My mom used to say

“Jay if you tackle the man as soon as he get the ball you aint gotta be huffin and puffin to try and catch it”

My basketball coach said "X, if you were 7' tall instead of barely 6' tall, you would be good at this game"...

 

[xwalker]

Well I wonder if the coaches think these people aren't smart enough the run this complicated of a defense and that's why we run what we run all good points you made anything would be better than what the hell were playing that's for darn sure

My opinion, is that it is the result of coaching by committee.

The setup with Marinelli as the D-Coordinator with Richard calling the plays and taking on more and more of the D-Coordinator duties is coaching by committee. If 2 people are in charge, then nobody is really in charge...

 

[CB61]

My opinion, is that it is the result of coaching by committee.

The setup with Marinelli as the D-Coordinator with Richard calling the plays and taking on more and more of the D-Coordinator duties is coaching by committee. If 2 people are in charge, then nobody is really in charge...

Exactly but is Richard limited to calling marinelli's defense? Or does Garrett have his nose stuck in it? But I agree one person needs to be running the defense

 

[Haimerej]

I don't know which specific play that you are referencing.

It was the one we spoke about. I think it was TD run IIRC.

This does not tell me which specific play that you are referencing:
"Covington being responsible for the playside A gap but the center gets him turned with a reach block to the weakside A"

Also, "The playside defender" does not indicate a specific defender. There are more than 1 play-side defenders.

Keep the context of the conversation. You referenced, "the Cowboys defenders have moved too far outside," to which I'm saying it's their [playside defender's] job to get outside and turn the run back inside.

As I've tried to explain, the outside zone run which gives the RB the option to cut back inside, changes the concept of "playing your gap" on defense.

No, it doesn't. I've been trying to tell you this since you've began this narrative of yours about the scheme being the problem. As I said in a past discussion, you beat zone runs by maintaining your gap integrity, giving the runner no cutback option. The change is simply that the gaps are moving as the o line tries to get leverage on the defense.

With an OLineman coming to block a LB, that LB's gap is outside that OL if the RB runs outside, but that LB's gap is inside that OL if the RB cuts back inside.

Gap assignments don't change. What LB are you referring to above?

In the Cowboys scheme, it's similar for the 1tech when the run is to his side. The 1tech is in the play-side A gap. On outside zone runs he is required to squeeze down the B gap which is an "open" gap. The problem is that if the RB cuts back the Cowboys scheme expects the 1tech to get back and play his original A gap.

The B gap is the Mike's gap in that scenario.

 

[Haimerej]

@ least the LBers would be free to run to the football. That's been the problem. Guards have free run to the second level....and by the time LBers get off blocks....they are catching the RBs w/ a full head of steam and getting dragged to death for another 3-4 yards.

What LBs? This scheme is designed for the weak side backer to run free. Playing a two gap technique isn't going to occupy more than one defender, either. The main reason the offensive linemen are getting to the second level is the DTs don't command double teams. When you see Covington get turned out of his gap by a reach block from a center and the guard releases to the second level, the issue is that the center was able to beat Covington without help from the guard.

 

[efh313]

Or maybe we can just tackle them.

 

[xwalker]

The playside defender is supposed to turn the runner back so he doesn't get the edge. If the rest of the defense is maintaining their gaps he'll have nowhere to cut.

If you're referencing my critique of that one play, LVE was indeed late to his gap. He was lined up on the strongside but effectively played the Will as the run went to the weak side. But the main problem with that play was both defensive tackles getting beaten by reach blocks and losing their gaps. LVE wouldn't have been as late if the runner wasn't able to hit Covington's assignment gap on his cutback.

I don't even know which game you are referencing but looking through plays with Covington at 1tech, maybe it's this one.

Covington is not the problem on this play.

• The backside DT (Collins) let the RT get inside.
• That kept the RG from having to block or help block Collins.
• The RG was free to get out and block Jaylon.
• It was 2nd and 7. I think the Cowboys were going to stunt if it had been a pass play.
• The stunt would be DT Collins moving outside and DE Bennett coming around behind Collins to the inside.

With my suggested change, if they used it on this play, the LB #48 Thomas would be outside and up near the line.
- The RDE would play the B gap, instead of the C gap.

Watch this play and envision if #48 was outside the RDE and up near the line.

Envision the RDE's initial alignment being head-up or shaded just slightly outside the LT and him playing the B gap.

Based on specific players, I would actually have LVE and Thomas swapped putting LVE up on the line outside the RDE.

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

Our DE's get too far up field at times and our DT's get pushed around too easily. So if our DT's are being pushed around playing the one gap then they will definitely be pushed around playing the two gap.

This scheme isn't designed to stop the run and neither are the players. So playing a little 3-4 against a base offensive set could be beneficial.

No one would describe our front four or our front seven as big and physical. And to me that's the real problem. They are not big enough or physical enough to endure the grind that comes with playing their positions.

 

[Haimerej]

I don't even know which game you are referencing but looking through plays with Covington at 1tech, maybe it's this one.

Covington is not the problem on this play.

• The backside DT (Collins) let the RT get inside.
• That kept the RG from having to block or help block Collins.
• The RG was free to get out and block Jaylon.
• It was 2nd and 7. I think the Cowboys were going to stunt if it had been a pass play.
• The stunt would be DT Collins moving outside and DE Bennett coming around behind Collins to the inside.

With my suggested change, if they used it on this play, the LB #48 Thomas would be outside and up near the line.
- The RDE would play the B gap, instead of the C gap.

Watch this play and envision if #48 was outside the RDE and up near the line.

Envision the RDE's initial alignment being head-up or shaded just slightly outside the LT and him playing the B gap.

Based on specific players, I would actually have LVE and Thomas swapped putting LVE up on the line outside the RDE.

That's the play. Covington starts on the C's left shoulder and is immediately head up with him after the snap. The RB being able to run off the C's left hip is a win against Covington. Something as simple as Covington being in his gap would've caused a hesitation or change of direction. Jaylon isn't exactly diagnosing and getting downhill either, but the back had no hesitation before getting to the second level.

 

[quickccc]

My biggest problem with this is that a 3-4 defense requires 2-gapping and everything the DL has been coached for years is how to attack upfield in a 1-gapping scheme.

Even if you disregard the years of training, we dont have the big immovable guy for 1tech let alone a Nose Tackle. Even DLaw looks a bit small for 3-4 end.

Then you consider Quinn hasn't looked good in the 3-4 system either.

You aren't stopping the run with 3 down lineman if you arent 2 gapping. We'd be trying to 2gap with an undersized DL that has been almost exclusively 1 gapping for years, and our best pass rushers would be playing out of position. Dont even get me started on what happens when Lee is asked to play inside for extended periods.

I dont like it.

quinn and DLaw would be OLB rush guys in a 3-4 scheme .,, but then we;d have to find one gap 3-4 DTs and LVE and Jay would be the middle men.
and they'd have to re-learn a different system ..ditto with DLaw ... Marineli would be gone as that's just not his scheme and wouldnt know anything different than
this one gap, upfield-movement oriented 4-3 scheme.

my remedy would be change the current 4-3 DL coach with a new and improved 4-3 guy ...lets change how we play defense upfront, and lets add phsyicality over
movement,,...we've tried that under an old schoo dinosaur and its not working to our advantage

the same way saints have vastly improved their middle interior - added a stout 1 tech in FA Malcolm Brown ...the same way Vikes drafted their pro bowl 1 tech Lindvall Joseph in the 2nd rd. ..the same way we need to change the 1 tech and invest higher than the Marinnelli types that's been a revolving door here for years .

- i want to be in a 4-3 with idea players and idea coaches - that enables US to " out-physical " the other team... rather than vice versus...
We simply dont have the right team ,, right players ...right coaches for that to happen.

my biggest question would be with the management - do they realize that we need to upgrade and move away from marinelli era ... or will they still have the " oh we are so lucky to have ole Rod Marinelli around " mentality ?

 

[xwalker]

That's the play. Covington starts on the C's left shoulder and is immediately head up with him after the snap. The RB being able to run off the C's left hip is a win against Covington. Something as simple as Covington being in his gap would've caused a hesitation or change of direction. Jaylon isn't exactly diagnosing and getting downhill either, but the back had no hesitation before getting to the second level.

Covington was held on that play. IIRC, even one of the announcers mentioned it.

Regardless, the scheme should not be dependent on 1 player making that play.

Collins letting the RT get to the inside is a bigger problem from fundamentals aspect than anything related to Covington.

• There were 2 OL that were free to block LBs.
• The RG blocked Jaylon. If Collins moves toward the RB, then he engages the RG and either delays him or Collins is free to tackle the RB.
• Covington plays the Center straight up in somewhat of a 2-gap technique. This a part of the play call due to the play having Collins planning to stunt and move outside if it's a pass.
• If Collins was playing to squeeze down to the inside, then Covington would play a half-gap to his right.

Re-cap: If Collins moves inside towards the RB.

• Collins engages the RG, keeping him from blocking a LB.
• Covington plays a half-gap to his right and engages the LG.
• The Cowboys DTs have a chance to keep blockers off of both Jaylon and Thomas.
• At worse case only 1 of Jaylon or Thomas has an OL free to block them.

That play is all about scheme problems.

The Cowboys were going to stunt on 2nd & 7 when there was an equal chance for a run or pass.

 

[quickccc]

All they need to do is study the Super Bowl and how the Pat played defense against the Rams zone running scheme.

The Pats were playing 4-3 last year and just made a couple of tweaks to their alignment on run downs to counter what the Rams did to the Cowboys.

they don't need to study only the Rams/Pats SB game ....they can do the very watch with the Saints/Rams game that followed a game afer the Cowboys playoff loss
.. and the Saints run a 4-3 scheme too, ...and the Rams did not do JACK vs the Saints in run game

its amazing how you always want to KEEP totally bypassing that Saints playoff game.... and just stick to Rams/Cowboys. or Rams/Patriots game
as examples .

between both Gurley and CJ Anderson.. both were totally snuffed under 3.0 yds per carry.... ..or the Rams OL was made rather ordinary and rushed only for a mere 77 totals
,,and that run defense performance was from a 4-3 scheme ,,, the Rams could not " out-physical " or 'misdirect " Saints run defense ... we should revamping our front to be similar, imo.

 

[xwalker]

quinn and DLaw would be OLB rush guys in a 3-4 scheme .,, but then we;d have to find one gap 3-4 DTs and LVE and Jay would be the middle men.
and they'd have to re-learn a different system ..ditto with DLaw ... Marineli would be gone as that's just not his scheme and wouldnt know anything different than
this one gap, upfield-movement oriented 4-3 scheme.

my remedy would be change the current 4-3 DL coach with a new and improved 4-3 guy ...lets change how we play defense upfront, and lets add phsyicality over
movement,,...we've tried that under an old schoo dinosaur and its not working to our advantage

the same way saints have vastly improved their middle interior - added a stout 1 tech in FA Malcolm Brown ...the same way Vikes drafted their pro bowl 1 tech Lindvall Joseph in the 2nd rd. ..the same way we need to change the 1 tech and invest higher than the Marinnelli types that's been a revolving door here for years .

- i want to be in a 4-3 with idea players and idea coaches - that enables US to " out-physical " the other team... rather than vice versus...
We simply dont have the right team ,, right players ...right coaches for that to happen.

my biggest question would be with the management - do they realize that we need to upgrade and move away from marinelli era ... or will they still have the " oh we are so lucky to have ole Rod Marinelli around " mentality ?

Very few coaches use a 2-gap 3-4 anymore, if any.

The successful 3-4 defenses like the Wade Phillips defense are 1-gap 3-4 defenses.

My change is really much more simple than it sounds.

If the 4-3 has:
LVE: WLB
Jaylon: MLB
Lee: SLB

Then LVE moves to the outside of the DE that is on the same side as the 1tech DT.

If the 1tech is on in the left, then LVE moves to the outside of DLaw.
DLaw moves a step or two to the inside and head-up on the RT.
DLaw and LVE swap gap assignments with DLaw taking the B gap (inside the RT).
The DTs and Quinn stay in about the same position as they are in the normal 4-3 alignment with the 1tech on the left.

On straight ahead runs, only DLaw and LVE have changed gap assignments.
On outside zone runs to the 1tech side, the 1tech does not have an open gap to his outside shoulder anymore. DLaw has the B gap.
This allows the 1tech to stay inside and defend the inside cut back by the RB.

 

[xwalker]

they don't need to study only the Rams/Pats SB game ....they can do the very watch with the Saints/Rams game that followed a game afer the Cowboys playoff loss
.. and the Saints run a 4-3 scheme too, ...and the Rams did not do JACK vs the Saints in run game

its amazing how you always want to KEEP totally bypassing that Saints playoff game.... and just stick to Rams/Cowboys. or Rams/Patriots game
as examples .

between both Gurley and CJ Anderson.. both were totally snuffed under 3.0 yds per carry.... ..or the Rams OL was made rather ordinary and rushed only for a mere 77 totals
,,and that run defense performance was from a 4-3 scheme ,,, the Rams could not " out-physical " or 'misdirect " Saints run defense ... we should revamping our front to be similar, imo.

What difference does it make if I reference the Pats vs Rams or Saints vs Rams?

Both the Pats and Saints were playing a 4-3 defense last season.

 

[Haimerej]

Regardless, the scheme should not be dependent on 1 player making that play.

No scheme is. But every scheme is prone to break down if an assignment is missed.

 

[Haimerej]

Covington plays the Center straight up in somewhat of a 2-gap technique.

No, Covington got outleveraged to his A gap assignment by a reach block. I agree on your take with Collins, but Covington being out of position isn't by design. Something as simple as him being on the C's left shoulder is the biggest issue with that play. Collins not being there would've been mitigated by LVE closing in with a better angle.

 

[xwalker]

No scheme is. But every scheme is prone to break down if an assignment is missed.

That play was not an example of missed assignments.

A player not quite making a play is not the same as a missed assignment.

Covington could easily have shot the gap between the OC and LG, but the RB would just cut back to the opposite side A gap with Collins outside the RT.

Collins didn't really have a missed assignment either. The scheme had him planning to stunt which is why he was moving outside and easy for the LT to get inside of him.

Planning to stunt on 2nd and 7 was just not a good idea, especially for defense that was struggling against the run.
- Maybe the Cowboys coaches under-estimated the RB Mattison on that play.

What method do you use to review games?

 

[xwalker]

No, Covington got outleveraged to his A gap assignment by a reach block. I agree on your take with Collins, but Covington being out of position isn't by design. Something as simple as him being on the C's left shoulder is the biggest issue with that play. Collins not being there would've been mitigated by LVE closing in with a better angle.

Covington could easily get and stay in the gap between the OC and LG.

The Cowboys 1tech DTs shoot gaps unless the play-call specifically requires them to play straight up on a blocker.

This play shows how the 1tech takes a step play-side when the 3tech will be squeezing down the backside A gap.

If you are saying that in the other play that Covington does not have the physical ability to take a step to the play side, then that would be absurd. The OLinemen in the other play did nothing to force Covington to play straight-up vs taking a step play-side.

The different is that this play was 1st and 10. The Cowboys were playing run on this play instead of focusing to stunting if it was as pass like they were on the other play.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I've seen many suggestions on improving the run defense such as the DL playing 2-gap.

There are many reasons that probably would not work.

A better change might be to use a 3-4 look on 1st downs.

• A 3-4 look can be done just by moving an OLB to the outside of DLaw.
• DLaw would move towards the inside, to head up on the RT.
• Since LVE is out injured, I'll reference Lee as his replacement.
• 
  
• For the following explanation to make sense, "pretend" that the normal 4-3 alignment is:
  • Jaylon: WLB
  • Lee: MLB
  • Thomas: SLB
• For the 3-4 look, the WLB moves outside and up on or near the line.
• Using the concept that Jaylon is the 4-3 WLB, then he becomes one of the 3-4 OLBs.
• RDE Quinn shifts outside and becomes the other 3-4 OLB.
  • Jaylon-DLaw-1tech-3tech-Quinn
  • .............Lee..........Thomas..........
• The basic gaps:
  • Cgap-Bgap-Agap-Agap-Bgap-Cgap
• 4-3 assignments (with 1tech left):
  • LDE-LB-1tech-LB-3tech-RDE
• 3-4 Look using 4-3 position names:
  • LB-LDE-1tech-LB-3tech-RDE
• Against the run DLaw now has the Bgap, which was assigned to a LB.
• The LB that had the Bgap now has the Cgap that DLaw had in the 4-3 alignment.
• The Cowboys biggest issues in run defense have been against the outside zone run.
  • The RB has the option to cut back inside.
  • Some defenders are split trying to defend both the outside run and the inside cut back.
  • The LBs are getting boxed out from from moving side to side by blockers.
  • Against outside zone, 1tech is trying to defend both outside and inside.
    • On outside runs to the 1tech's side, the Bgap is "open".
    • On outside runs to the 3tech's side, it is the Agap that is "open".
  • The 1tech needs to move quickly to the outside against the outside run.
  • The 1tech taking himself out of the inside, makes it easy to block for the inside cut back.
• 
  
• With the 3-4 look:
  • Jaylon's assignments against the run would be outside regardless.
    • His need to move side to side is reduced. Blockers can not box him out laterally.
  • Lee's assignments against the run would be inside regardless.
    • His need to move side to side is reduced. Blockers can not box him out laterally.
  • The 1tech's need to move outside is minimized.
    • There is not an "open" gap between him and the outside.
    • A DE now fills that gap instead of it being assigned to a LB.
• 
  
• Key Benefits:
• "Squeezes" 3 DL inside the area between the outside shoulders of the OTs.
  • In the 4-3 there are just the 2 DTs in that space.
• WLB is outside and up on the line.
  • His run assignments are outside instead of split between inside and outside.
  • Blockers can not box him out from moving outside since he is already there.
• MLB continues to line up inside.
  • His run assignments are inside instead of split between inside and outside.
  • Blockers can not box him out moving laterally if his assignments are inside.
• Minimizes 1tech DT's need to quickly move to the outside against outside zone runs.
  • This keeps the 1tech DT in place when the RB cuts back inside.
• Trade-Offs:
  • Pass defense on 1st downs against 3 WR sets.
  • The defense can still use this "look" when the Nickel CB replaces a LB vs 3 WR sets.
  • Jaylon-DLaw-1tech-3tech-Quinn
  • ..................Lee...........................Nickel-CB.
  • The run assignments are all set based on the side where the OLB is aligned.
  • The OLB and Nickel CB will be on opposite sides.
  • When offensive players motion to the opposite side (slot CB or TE), the defense needs to stay in place.
  • This results in situations where the OLB is lined up on the side with the slot WR.
  • The LB and a Safety would play hi/low zone on the slot WR.
  • The LB can bump or impede the path of the slot WR, with a Safety picking up coverage behind him.

Nothing you can say or pretend will change the fact that our DT's overall are horrid. Our scheme is horrid, our safeties are weak and our linebackers get pushed around.