why not scrap the d ?

I'll take a shot at this one.

I think, on average, defensive coaches understand that fundamentals is what ultimately lead to success more so than offensive coaches. I hope, that defensive coaches are not looking to switch schemes as often because they know that the only way they are going to get better on defense is by getting better at block shedding, tackling, and their keys, not by switching to a 3-4 or whatever. While on offense, its hard not to look at Baylor or Ok. St. scoring 40+ points a game and think "why aren't we doing that?!"

I think this adds to the argument that your offense needs to be "modular"(term stolen from fantom I believe) in its approach. Your offense should allow enough flexibility that if you have a good line and rb you wouldn't have to make a complete change in order to run the ball more efficiently.

On the same token a offensive coach could say same thing. The only way to get better is through better fundamentals ( blocking routes reads). I feel the need to jump ship on offence is a arms race idea. Ok the Oregon/ baylor/ ok.state teams are scoring 40+ a game we need more ammo ( explosive o) . I just wonder why the idea isent we need to get that 40+ down in the 20's not change systems.

I agree with nearly every thing you have said, but in the end how flexible can a defense be?

When it comes down to it, defense is just gap responsibility, leverage, and pass responsibilities. Regardless of the kids you have, you are always going to have to achieve those things to be successful. I encourage the use of different fronts and coverages, but I don't consider that being a flexible defense or being "modular", I just consider that playing good defense.

Maybe one year your front 4 can't generate pressure? So you blitz more. Maybe your corners can cover anyone in the state, so you run a little bit more cover 1 or something, none of this requires a change in scheme, you are just adjusting to your players and the talents they possess. Im not sure if this is being "modular", or just good common sense coaching.

People change offenses because it is sexy. People can pick up on offense better than defense and most fans point to the offense as the reason teams lose games.

No one plays madden for the defense, no on creates a player on a video game to play nose guard...

Its alot easier to say we cant win because the coaches run a boring offense than admit you dont have enough hamstrings or toughness to stop anyone from scoring 40 on you.

I believe the reason is this. No matter what defense you run, you have to be able to defend against all offenses. 4-3, 3-4, 5-2, 6-2, 3-3-5, whatever, you have to stop the deep ball, power up the middle/off-tackle, outside runs, boot pass...all those plays in 4WR sets, 0WR sets, and everything in between.

A defense that defends all those things, pretty much looks the same.

On offense, you can do whatever the hell you want. If you want to pound the ball all game you can do that, if you want to throw 50 times a game, you can do that.

You can't say "we're going to switch to a Dime defense this season instead of a short yardage defense" but you can say "we're going to switch from a Wishbone Team to a Spread.

It's more about flexibility than anything.

Also, I like to play NT in maddens!

Defense, how hard could it be? Cover every gap, contain the outside runs, play good coverage. At least that's what I used to think, until I worked with a defensive guy who really knows his stuff.

Contain or spill? If you want to stop Power, spill (unless you're playing man behind it), but be aware you're backers better track to the back hip to prevent the cutback as he strings his pursuit to the sideline. Cover 4 is there to stop the deep ball, right? It's also an excellent way to stop teams that want to run on the edges. Defending the spread? Just line up a guy over those slots and take away the free shot, play in your set zones or cover your guy, how hard could it be, unless you want to take it up a notch and pattern read, play C2 to the twins side and C4 to the pro side of TE Spread....

What I'm trying to say is there is a whole level to defense that is not obvious until you really dig into it. It's not just covering all the gaps and places they might throw, its about setting up your structures to account for what an offense can do out of a particular set and style of play, having guys in place to make a play after accounting for all of that, Oh, and don't forget that a good blocking fullback is a pain in the ars because until he commits he to one shoulder or the other is a 2 gap blocker. Oh and your kids better know their assignments without thinking about it, just read and react.

Don't mean to sound preachy, just saying if any of that sounds like something new, there's a lot more going on over there then I ever knew until I was exposed to those concepts and worked to understand what was going on, it's really helped me on the offensive side of the ball.

Ok some back ground I'm not a o guy or a d guy I'm a line coach that has been a oc and a dc.
Oc wise I'm a lot more conservitive at the core I want to run the ball. Have coached in wing-t,pro I and a option I.played in spread and one back systems in college. All these systems were diverse enuff to have runs to multiple backs to all gaps, a counter game,option, screen game, formation varations,3 step and 5 step game ,multiple launch points and pap. So with that being said I feel most systems have the tools needed to adapt to defenses and personal with out a change in system.

Now on defense I'm a lot more agressive. Multiple fronts covreges and pressure. Now I've worked in 3 systems 3-3, 4-5 and 5-2. One I liked (3-3) the other 2 I don't. I think there fine systems but to only use them as a read and react one front one coverage limited blitz system is like never taking your car out of first gear and at some point in the system you will be out matched talent wise with out a awnser.

So as a coach I've been on staffs and seen staffs scrap a offence that was complete diversified and scored points but keep a vanilla middel to bottom of the pack d and I just don't get it

clearly the only reason people change, tweak, or start from scratch on offense

I think Fantom nailed it (one mans 5 tech is another man's Jack LB) A defense can change a lot of what it actually does-coverage, technique, philosophy, etc- without changing what kind of defense (name wise) it is. Heck I have some good friends, we all run odd stack, and we all run it very differently.

That being written, I don't think teams scrap the O that much more frequently than the D