Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Strategic idee-ur

Matt Foley

By Matt Foley,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

What if you had 11 cornerbacks out there, and they swarmed to the ball on every play and tried to strip the ballcarrier and piled on? Call it the hornets nest defense. I think it would work.

Has anyone told you that "you just ain't right". Well if not then "there you go".:cheers2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mountainpantherfan Newbie

mountainpantherfan

Posted
Posted

I would agree that the 3-4 designed by Chuck Knox in Buffalo back in 1978 is different than the present as much by today's sophistication of scheme, more athletic players and a bend toward passing rather than running in the 80s. Back then they had what what was known as the Bermuda Triangle- Fred Smerlas, Jim Haslett, and Shane Nelson.

But what makes a 3-4 so unique is that if you look at Baltimore for example they line up as many as 7 or 8 guys within a yard of the line of scrimmage. The point is that properly run, the offense doesn't know which of the 7 or 8 guys are going to blitz so they have trouble with blocking assignments and picking up overloads for example. A 5-2 lined up as a 5-2 with guys just rushing straight ahead with little misdirection is very different from a 3-4 where 5 or 6 guys line up on the line and on different plays different guys actually attack. In both cases 5 guys rush but in one case it is easy to pick them up and in their other not so easy. As for your example if the steelers have 3 down linemen and 2 standing up who sometimes blitz, sometimes drop back and sometimes read and react, you have a 3-4 not a 5-2. Like you said a typical 5-2 is when 5 guys start down. BTW we ran a 5-2 on third down many times this year. It didn't change our base look from a 4-3 it just meant we changed into a 5-2 for that play.

And lastly I agree that we need to have more discussion about football and scheme instead of the typical name calling, blaming the coaches, FO and various other bitching which has overtaken this board in the past several months.

Considering the possible new rule change, no players will be down lineman which for the defense, could help even the playing field. If no players are down lineman, it would realy make it hard on any QB to determine what players are coming from where. For the most part, a base defense would no longer be needed and a good DC could scheme from just about any vantage point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Evil Hurney Mentor

Evil Hurney

Posted
Posted

Considering the possible new rule change, no players will be down lineman which for the defense, could help even the playing field. If no players are down lineman, it would realy make it hard on any QB to determine what players are coming from where. For the most part, a base defense would no longer be needed and a good DC could scheme from just about any vantage point.

Isn't that how the "psycho" defense in Green Bay was supposed to work this season? I like the idea, I just feel like it will be gimmicked out in a season like the lamecat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mesmer Newbie

Mesmer

Posted
Posted

What if you had 11 cornerbacks out there, and they swarmed to the ball on every play and tried to strip the ballcarrier and piled on? Call it the hornets nest defense. I think it would work.

I like it.:D

If I were head coach, I'd hire you to put this together. And then if/when it didn't work I'd shovel the blame on you and proceed to fire you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OneBadassCat Newbie

OneBadassCat

Posted
Posted

What if I was to design a defense that had no defensive ends, but rather four very powerful defensive tackles that did nothing other than surge forward on every play...the outer tackles thrusting slightly outward and the inner tackles attacking the guards. Imagine Kris Jenkins, the Williams boys from Minnesota and Ndamakong Suh all coming at you at once. The linebackers clean up on any running back who attempts to get through that and even blitz through the openings on passing downs.

Fire away at why my idea wouldn't work. I don't see how any opposing offensive line could handle that much power coming at them. Obviously you'd need speed at every position on the back seven.

It could work on certain situations but to use it as you're complete scheme you would need two FS, so it would be like Martin and Godfrey as the safety's because you will need their speed. Then you would need two LBs, like BEason and Davis, and then your 3rd LB would need to be an athletic freak like a Troy P, someone who can plug the run and make plays in the passing game. And that's a lot of money and talent required for a defense like that.

Your safety's would have to be really fast and be able to shred blocks I would think because it sounds like although the d-line would be stout on most plays, if the RB got out on the edge your safety's are going to have to be able to clean that up, and if the d-line doesn't get any pressure your safety's are going to need the speed to hold up in coverage.

It would be pretty useful in goaline situations I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raskle Contributor

Raskle

Posted
Posted

I like it.:D

If I were head coach, I'd hire you to put this together. And then if/when it didn't work I'd shovel the blame on you and proceed to fire you.

Too late.. he's already been hired on as the Rams DC. Meat's ideas here just have to be better than that craptastic display they've put on the past few years, right?? Right??

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wither Newbie

Wither

Posted
Posted

I like the 4-3 defense as a base, but it is truly a base. Almost every formation that the offense can come out with has (in my mind) an equivalent defensive formation. Thinking in terms of base packages is a little to your disadvantage.

I think the Nickel should be used more often. In 3 WR sets, use the Nickel and drop two safeties into zone, have a LB cover a TE (or a RB/FB) and another cover the primary RB.

With a 2 WR and 2 TE set use the traditional 4-3 and have a LB on each TE, with the last on the RB. Play the SS up a little in a closer zone with the FS playing a deeper zone.

In the case of a 4 WR set, use 4 CB (or a safety if one is injured or something), a SS, 2 LB.

Basically, for every receiver on the field, have a CB (if possible) covering them. A LB should never have to cover a WR. Likewise, for big TE's there should never be a CB covering them, but a LB. In the case the TE is quick or smaller, use a CB. In each of the examples, there are 2 DE and 2 DT, and everyone but the safeties is playing man. The question then becomes: when to blitz? I don't know. Another problem would be when players are staying in to block. My examples are mainly in the realm of passing. There is also the question of a LB covering a RB; can he keep up and properly cover him? Maybe it would be wiser to pull a safety down to cover him and drop a LB back into coverage. This would be easy to do when they are playing 2 TE's.

Obviously, all teams use variants of what I just stated. As has been discussed, the base defense is rarely used. However, when talking about football, the "4-3" and "3-4" is just thrown around even though people know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mountainpantherfan Newbie

mountainpantherfan

Posted
Posted

my hs ran a 5-2 and it is very similar to what the steelers run.not to mention our dc was a huge steelers fan so i know it was based off the great dick lol.

My hometown HS also runs a similar defense where there is no safetys and the guys who rush the quarterback are called Spurs. It's the extreme example of a hybrid 5-2 and 3-4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...