Mario Williams moving to LB

[Mvp2014]

Wrong.

In your calculation he would have dropped into coverage about 70ish times....well. Ware dropped into coverage 6 times all last season, 6.

They don't drop into coverage much at all in Phillips system. And he sure as hell isn't gonna change that scheme.

Maybe hes doing some spy coverage and not playing man on man but no way did he rush all but 6 plays, i dont buy it.

[thefuzz]

Maybe hes doing some spy coverage and not playing man on man but no way did he rush all but 6 plays, i dont buy it.

You said that seeing Pep or Mario in coverage would make you chuckle.

I said that in Phillips system they rarely if ever drop the OLB into coverage.

You said that Ware dropped 10% of the time.

He actually dropped into coverage 6 times all season, or less than 1%.

You are wrong, please admit it, and go talk about how DE in the 3/4 aren't good players because they don't get many sacks.

[Mvp2014]

You said that seeing Pep or Mario in coverage would make you chuckle.

I said that in Phillips system they rarely if ever drop the OLB into coverage.

You said that Ware dropped 10% of the time.

He actually dropped into coverage 6 times all season, or less than 1%.

You are wrong, please admit it, and go talk about how DE in the 3/4 aren't good players because they don't get many sacks.

i said nothing about pep or mario in coverage. you are making poo up now. I would never watch the cowboys anyway. I know that Harrison drops several times a game. Get a life

[thefuzz]

Except nobody knew how Pep would fair in a 3-4 defense...

Even LeMarr Woodley and James Harrison have to cover a TE multiple times in a game. Thinking about Pep or Mario Williams covering a TE on a somewhat regular basis makes me ....

Sorry MVP, thought this was you.

At the same time, in Phillips system I bet Mario drops less then 10 times next season, and that was the entire point. He will do well, as would Pep had he moved.

[Urrymonster]

You said that seeing Pep or Mario in coverage would make you chuckle.

I said that in Phillips system they rarely if ever drop the OLB into coverage.

You said that Ware dropped 10% of the time.

He actually dropped into coverage 6 times all season, or less than 1%.

You are wrong, please admit it, and go talk about how DE in the 3/4 aren't good players because they don't get many sacks.

Actually...you are wrong...

Ware dropped into coverage 66 times which worked out to about 7% of his total snaps.

[Urrymonster]

Please watch some football before making posts like these.

I would love to know how many combined snaps Harrison, Phillips, Ware, Woodley, and Applewhite dropped into coverage last season.

My guess less than once a game.

Harrison = 328 of 1198 (27%)

Phillips = 119 of 929 (13%)

Ware = 66 of 940 (7%)

Woodley = 248 of 1132 (22%)

Applewhite = 160 of 622 (26%)

Stats include playoffs and plays that are voided due to penalties

[thefuzz]

Harrison = 328 of 1198 (27%)

Phillips = 119 of 929 (13%)

Ware = 66 of 940 (7%)

Woodley = 248 of 1132 (22%)

Applewhite = 160 of 622 (26%)

Stats include playoffs and plays that are voided due to penalties

Where did you get these numbers?

I asked my friend Aaron Schatz of FootballOutsiders.com, a site that studies tape of every NFL game, what he thought of the move, and to work up some stats on Williams and Ware to see how much each pressured the passer in recent seasons. "To be honest,'' Schatz said, "I don't think Mario Williams as outside linebacker is that crazy. The strongside linebacker [in Phillips' defense] only rarely drops into coverage and the weakside linebacker almost never drops into coverage. Last year, our game charters had Ware in coverage on six passes. That's it. [Antwan] Applewhite, the weakside linebacker in San Diego, was in coverage on just nine. Williams makes more sense there than as a five-technique end.'' The five-technique end has run and rush responsibilities and lines up on the outside shoulder of the offensive tackle.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/05/10/mail/index.html#ixzz1NPA1fEYM

Guess this is all crazy talk.

[Urrymonster]

Where did you get these numbers?

I asked my friend Aaron Schatz of FootballOutsiders.com, a site that studies tape of every NFL game, what he thought of the move, and to work up some stats on Williams and Ware to see how much each pressured the passer in recent seasons. "To be honest,'' Schatz said, "I don't think Mario Williams as outside linebacker is that crazy. The strongside linebacker [in Phillips' defense] only rarely drops into coverage and the weakside linebacker almost never drops into coverage. Last year, our game charters had Ware in coverage on six passes. That's it. [Antwan] Applewhite, the weakside linebacker in San Diego, was in coverage on just nine. Williams makes more sense there than as a five-technique end.'' The five-technique end has run and rush responsibilities and lines up on the outside shoulder of the offensive tackle.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/05/10/mail/index.html#ixzz1NPA1fEYM

Guess this is all crazy talk.

Honestly? It really does sound like crazy talk. Do you honestly feel that a team can get away with dropping the OLBs into coverage only a handful of times each season?! The whole genius of the 3-4 defence is built around confusion, so never making them do anything different isn't exactly confusing. Also, if neither OLB rarely dropped into coverage, that means they were permanently rushing 5 guys, there would have been open receivers virtually every single play...

My stats come from profootballfocus and they re-watch all games multiple times, recording each players responsibility for every snap.

I don't doubt Williams has the athletic ability to play the position, but I find it difficult to believe those stats.

[thefuzz]

OLB's are for rushing the passer and outside run support.

ILB's are for rush support, and coverage.

For the most part.

As for the rushing 5 guys...the front 3 really don't "rush" at all, just hold the linemen up, hold their ground, and clog the running lanes. The OLB's do the rushing, with some help from CBs and S's.

Maybe your site is right, but it sure doesn't sound like it.

[Urrymonster]

OLB's are for rushing the passer and outside run support.

ILB's are for rush support, and coverage.

For the most part.

As for the rushing 5 guys...the front 3 really don't "rush" at all, just hold the linemen up, hold their ground, and clog the running lanes. The OLB's do the rushing, with some help from CBs and S's.

Maybe your site is right, but it sure doesn't sound like it.

Ummm, seriously? The front three aren't really rushing the passer? Regardless of what you think they are doing, there are actively 5 guys engage with the offensive line on every single play. Minus 5 from 11 and you have 6 guys left in coverage. Now the ILBs aren't going to be left in 1 on 1 matchups too often, otherwise there will be no one in the middle of the defence. So that actually means you are giving them just 4 guys in potential man coverage, and thats using both safeties.

I am genuinely interested who you think covers the TE in this scheme of yours?!

Your description kinda fits 3-4 for dummies. I assure you, the NFL employs DCs who are slightly more sophisticated than sticking with the 101 of 3-4 defences.

Going by your logic that also means the ILBs rarely blitz? As I mentioned the whole point of the 3-4 is disguised blitzes, as they can shoot any gap quickly if the DLine can occupy the right spaces. The 3 ILBs alone at SD accounted for 8 sacks between them, so please explain why.

I dunno, I am just baffled at why you are so rigidly stuck to this way of thinking.

Yes, fundamentally the OLBs are to rush the passer, but that doesn't mean they always do. Seriously, you are absolutely convinced, DWare didn't rush on just 6 snaps of over 900?!

[Urrymonster]

Maybe your site is right, but it sure doesn't sound like it.

I think you are looking at those numbers without reference. For example you have no idea how often the ILBs, DEs and even DTs drop back as well.

You do know that Pep used to drop back into a zone right? Considering this, which do you think drops into coverage more often, the 4-3 DE or 3-4 OLB?

[thefuzz]

Ummm, seriously? The front three aren't really rushing the passer? Regardless of what you think they are doing, there are actively 5 guys engage with the offensive line on every single play. Minus 5 from 11 and you have 6 guys left in coverage. Now the ILBs aren't going to be left in 1 on 1 matchups too often, otherwise there will be no one in the middle of the defence. So that actually means you are giving them just 4 guys in potential man coverage, and thats using both safeties.

I am genuinely interested who you think covers the TE in this scheme of yours?!

Your description kinda fits 3-4 for dummies. I assure you, the NFL employs DCs who are slightly more sophisticated than sticking with the 101 of 3-4 defences.

Going by your logic that also means the ILBs rarely blitz? As I mentioned the whole point of the 3-4 is disguised blitzes, as they can shoot any gap quickly if the DLine can occupy the right spaces. The 3 ILBs alone at SD accounted for 8 sacks between them, so please explain why.

I dunno, I am just baffled at why you are so rigidly stuck to this way of thinking.

Yes, fundamentally the OLBs are to rush the passer, but that doesn't mean they always do. Seriously, you are absolutely convinced, DWare didn't rush on just 6 snaps of over 900?!

The front 3 in the 34 are not there to "rush" the passer. How many sacks does Casey Hampton have? How about Luis Castillo, or Franklin? If they get sacks....great, but it's not their job.

What is the O playing when you are drawing up your plays? If you have two 5 tech DE's, and 1 NT holding the line, and 2 OLB's rushing, you still have 6 players to either drop into coverage, sit in zone, provide support, rush the passer, etc.

I think that you are looking at the numbers as if they didn't rush the passer, they were in coverage. That ain't the initial arguement. People were saying that Mario can't cover the TE, honestly what they are saying is that he can't play man on the TE. I am saying that in Phillips scheme, he won't have to.

I provided the article above that stated that Ware was in "coverage" just 6 times last season. Mario is playing the exact same position in the exact same D. Why is this so hard to understand?

[Urrymonster]

The front 3 in the 34 are not there to "rush" the passer. How many sacks does Casey Hampton have? How about Luis Castillo, or Franklin? If they get sacks....great, but it's not their job.

What is the O playing when you are drawing up your plays? If you have two 5 tech DE's, and 1 NT holding the line, and 2 OLB's rushing, you still have 6 players to either drop into coverage, sit in zone, provide support, rush the passer, etc.

I think that you are looking at the numbers as if they didn't rush the passer, they were in coverage. That ain't the initial arguement. People were saying that Mario can't cover the TE, honestly what they are saying is that he can't play man on the TE. I am saying that in Phillips scheme, he won't have to.

I provided the article above that stated that Ware was in "coverage" just 6 times last season. Mario is playing the exact same position in the exact same D. Why is this so hard to understand?

You have missed the point. Whether the DL is to rush the passer or not, by committing the two OLBs on virtually every passing down which you claim to rush the passer, you are removing 5 guys who could be in coverage. The moment you send 5 guys, it is termed a blitz and do you know of one team that blitzes nearly 100% of the time?

In addition, your article claims he was in coverage 6 times all season. That is just a ridiculous notion. Calling it coverage implies zone and man coverage and he will be asked to do both at times.

For arguments sake I looked at Dallas' first game against the Redskins using PFF's statistics. Ware was thrown at 3 times, once when the TE was targeted. In game two he was thrown at 3 times. So, that is 6 times he was definitely in coverage within the first two games.

I agree that for the most part people refer to 'covering the TE' as man coverage, but you are completely ignoring some of the other coverage responsibilities that he has. He certainly was not in coverage a total of 6 times.

[Mvp2014]

Ummm, seriously? The front three aren't really rushing the passer? Regardless of what you think they are doing, there are actively 5 guys engage with the offensive line on every single play. Minus 5 from 11 and you have 6 guys left in coverage. Now the ILBs aren't going to be left in 1 on 1 matchups too often, otherwise there will be no one in the middle of the defence. So that actually means you are giving them just 4 guys in potential man coverage, and thats using both safeties.

I am genuinely interested who you think covers the TE in this scheme of yours?!

Your description kinda fits 3-4 for dummies. I assure you, the NFL employs DCs who are slightly more sophisticated than sticking with the 101 of 3-4 defences.

Going by your logic that also means the ILBs rarely blitz? As I mentioned the whole point of the 3-4 is disguised blitzes, as they can shoot any gap quickly if the DLine can occupy the right spaces. The 3 ILBs alone at SD accounted for 8 sacks between them, so please explain why.

I dunno, I am just baffled at why you are so rigidly stuck to this way of thinking.

Yes, fundamentally the OLBs are to rush the passer, but that doesn't mean they always do. Seriously, you are absolutely convinced, DWare didn't rush on just 6 snaps of over 900?!

I'm glad there is someone who is willing to look this stuff up. Like you said, the beauty of a 3-4 is having no clue who will rush and where the coverage will be.