|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 9:38:02 GMT -6
I searched for this one and could not find it. A lot of talk goes on here about the "holy grail" of offense  The quest begins with the question: "Let's say I had 4 paralyzed kids, 3 obese kids, 2 blind kids, and 2 girls on my football team, what offense would give me the best chance to win?" The quest continues with coaches presenting their system (then someone gets upset, it turns personal, coach huey says "let's keep it profession", no one listens, tog shuts the thread down) Usually, we have to go on one of these quests about once a month.  Anyway, I was wondering what people think the "holy grail" of defense is, and why they think so? What defense levels the playing field? |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 27, 2007 9:54:24 GMT -6
46 Bear.........beats all. It adjusts to everything, the Bears and Ravens ran it, 'nuff said. If you use the 46, and use it correctly, obviously you will see results like this  |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Nov 27, 2007 11:06:12 GMT -6
Bro doesn't know what the hell he's talking about!
the 46?
The 46 couldn't hold a candle to the 1-10...
There's this team... in Alaska... that uses the 1-10... that hasn't been scored upon in 73 games straight...
Rumor has it... the coach stumbled on it when his Nose tackle ran to the LOS, but the rest of the team was still in the huddle... the offense was so confused, they fumbled the snap, and the NT ran it back for a touchdown...
Every since then, not a team has scored on them!
|
|
|
|
Post by revtaz on Nov 27, 2007 11:26:57 GMT -6
Dubber,
I never want to see that chart ever again.
I say the well coached defense, with good kids and great athletes. Competitive kids too.
No scheme is set-up to get beat. They are all set-up to win. There is the theory that unless you are a complete moron, there is no such thing as a bad coverage. I can run cover 0 and still make the play.
Personally, I like the 3-4/5-2 with a 4 spoke look in the secondary. Versatile, Aggressive, and Just downright easy to adjust.
Taz
|
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Nov 27, 2007 12:03:45 GMT -6
You guys are weird during the offseason.
Besiders, my defense is the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 13:10:25 GMT -6
Dubber, I never want to see that chart ever again. you weren't the one who googled "menstration" on an image search....... This question really interested me, because EVERYONE has the cure all for offense, but defense seems to be harder to come by. Another interesting point: Offensively, we all talk SCHEME.......this one is better than that one, I run this as a compliment to that, etc. Defensively, the answer seems to be FUNDAMENTALS...........good tackling, correct steps, reads, etc. Anybody know why? |
|
|
|
Post by eickst on Nov 27, 2007 13:32:14 GMT -6
because most defenses are reactionary. Defenses don't run "plays" the same way the offense does. No matter what the defense is reacting to what the offense is doing. You don't tell your corner to run a post. Your corner goes where the receiver goes. So he needs to "read" the player and follow him.
You don't tell your linebacker to run an arrow route. He reads that from the man he's covering.
If you gave your defense routes and blocking assignments just like an offense, I doubt you'd win very many games.
Some defenses are more aggressive than others, but they all require reads and reactions to what the offense does.
(btw my favorite defense scheme wise is the 2LD.)
|
|
|
|
Post by smurfturf on Nov 27, 2007 16:02:58 GMT -6
Personally, I am a big fan of the 4-2-5. We can blitz from anywhere at anytime, and don't have to adjust to formations at all. We could play base all year and get away with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 16:07:44 GMT -6
Personally, I am a big fan of the 4-2-5. We can blitz from anywhere at anytime, and don't have to adjust to formations at all. We could play base all year and get away with it. How does this level the playing field for you? 4-2 is your "preference", but is it an equalizer? Does it give you a distinct advantage over a 4-3 or 5-2 etc.? |
|
|
|
Post by coachmallory on Nov 27, 2007 16:08:09 GMT -6
A wise man once told me "if you dont have the boys bring the noise."
Aggressive blitzing defenses can be an equalizer
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 16:37:19 GMT -6
A wise man once told me "if you dont have the boys bring the noise." Aggressive blitzing defenses can be an equalizer good point........so, as you recruit better, or train your players better, do you eventually get away from this........ .........or, do you ride the horse that got you there? Stopping the run is obviously paramount when you have a bad team, so is blitzing the gap the answer when you suck? |
|
|
|
Post by smurfturf on Nov 27, 2007 16:37:34 GMT -6
The blitzing from anywhere at anytime is what makes it the great equalizer.
|
|
|
|
Post by eickst on Nov 27, 2007 17:13:40 GMT -6
I see perfect tackling and perfect pursuit angles as more of an equalizer than blitzing is.
What happens when your blitz gets picked up on every play? What happens when you blitz every play but your blitzers miss tackles and take horrible angles and take themselves out of a play?
Tackle tackle tackle tackle tack tack tack
Show those other teams what they lack lack lack
If I gave you a dollar you could keep most of the change
Cause all i really want is a quarter-back.
The best equalizing defense is an offense that can stay on the field for 45+ minutes out of a 60 minute game. (and score over 40 a game)
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 27, 2007 17:21:45 GMT -6
I play the 42 because the 44 sucks!  BUY MY VIDEOS! |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 17:28:16 GMT -6
I see perfect tackling and perfect pursuit angles as more of an equalizer than blitzing is. and you can do that out of any scheme........this is what I am getting at.....with defense we talk fundamentals, with offense we talk scheme |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 17:28:36 GMT -6
I play the 42 because the 44 sucks! BUY MY VIDEOS! oh brother  |
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Nov 27, 2007 17:33:38 GMT -6
The blitzing from anywhere at anytime is what makes it the great equalizer. Sorry, too easy... Every half-witted coach I've ever dealt with has said "WE NEED TO BLITZ MORE" when things aren't going well. I disagree entirely. Blitz where? Why? On what down? In hopes of doing what? The "equalizer" defense is the one you can coach up the best. That may sound like the worst B/S answer imaginable, but people change defenses like they change underware sometimes. I think a lot of coaches think that just getting out there in a 4-4 (or whatever their chosen defensive alignment is) and blitzing various guys on various downs is "good, aggressive defense." Having a defense that the coaching staff knows how to teach and believes in, that the kids thereby know how to execute and believe in, and that has adjustments built in for formations and key plays that opponents run is the best "equalizer" defense. Believe me, I've been in situations in the past where we've been outmanned and some genius wanted us to "BLITZ GUYS AND GET PRESHA," and our HC listened. We looked like a bunch of deserate idiots rushing upfield, having ballcarriers run by us and QB's hitting short routs for big gains. As a result, I felt like a desperate idiot, too. As much as everyone HATES to hear it, the best "equalizer" defense is a very well-coached defense (scheme, reads, keys, techniques, and ATTITUDE). I guess that puts the "PRESHA" on us, doesn't it!!??  |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 17:41:12 GMT -6
The blitzing from anywhere at anytime is what makes it the great equalizer. Sorry, too easy... Every half-witted coach I've ever dealt with has said "WE NEED TO BLITZ MORE" when things aren't going well. I disagree entirely. Blitz where? Why? On what down? In hopes of doing what? The "equalizer" defense is the one you can coach up the best. That may sound like the worst B/S answer imaginable, but people change defenses like they change underware sometimes. I think a lot of coaches think that just getting out there in a 4-4 (or whatever their chosen defensive alignment is) and blitzing various guys on various downs is "good, aggressive defense." Having a defense that the coaching staff knows how to teach and believes in, that the kids thereby know how to execute and believe in, and that has adjustments built in for formations and key plays that opponents run is the best "equalizer" defense. Believe me, I've been in situations in the past where we've been outmanned and some genius wanted us to "BLITZ GUYS AND GET PRESHA," and our HC listened. We looked like a bunch of deserate idiots rushing upfield, having ballcarriers run by us and QB's hitting short routs for big gains. As a result, I felt like a desperate idiot, too. As much as everyone HATES to hear it, the best "equalizer" defense is a very well-coached defense (scheme, reads, keys, techniques, and ATTITUDE). I guess that puts the "PRESHA" on us, doesn't it!!?? excellent! maybe my point should be: why do we not take this same philosophy for offense? hmmmmmmmmmmm..............  |
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Nov 27, 2007 18:05:17 GMT -6
Sorry, too easy... Every half-witted coach I've ever dealt with has said "WE NEED TO BLITZ MORE" when things aren't going well. I disagree entirely. Blitz where? Why? On what down? In hopes of doing what? The "equalizer" defense is the one you can coach up the best. That may sound like the worst B/S answer imaginable, but people change defenses like they change underware sometimes. I think a lot of coaches think that just getting out there in a 4-4 (or whatever their chosen defensive alignment is) and blitzing various guys on various downs is "good, aggressive defense." Having a defense that the coaching staff knows how to teach and believes in, that the kids thereby know how to execute and believe in, and that has adjustments built in for formations and key plays that opponents run is the best "equalizer" defense. Believe me, I've been in situations in the past where we've been outmanned and some genius wanted us to "BLITZ GUYS AND GET PRESHA," and our HC listened. We looked like a bunch of deserate idiots rushing upfield, having ballcarriers run by us and QB's hitting short routs for big gains. As a result, I felt like a desperate idiot, too. As much as everyone HATES to hear it, the best "equalizer" defense is a very well-coached defense (scheme, reads, keys, techniques, and ATTITUDE). I guess that puts the "PRESHA" on us, doesn't it!!?? excellent! maybe my point should be: why do we not take this same philosophy for offense? hmmmmmmmmmmm.............. Excellent, EXCELLENT point! Truthful answer for me personally: I (for one) DO. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2007 18:21:14 GMT -6
It comes down to STRESS.
What do you do on offense to stress a defense?
What do you do on defense to stress an offense?
We are a great blitzing team, but we force turnovers when teams THINK we're blitzing and throw into coverage.
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 27, 2007 19:13:10 GMT -6
It comes down to STRESS. What do you do on offense to stress a defense? What do you do on defense to stress an offense? We are a great blitzing team, but we force turnovers when teams THINK we're blitzing and throw into coverage. good point.........mixing it up is important question: would this philosophy work inside out? Say I sit in Cover 2 most of the time, then BAM! I bring 6 cover 0...........? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2007 22:18:31 GMT -6
We have a 5-man pressure that looks like 6 coming, we have 6 coming that looks like 4, we have 4 that looks like 6, we have 5 from one side that looks like 5 from the other, we have 4 that looks like 5, etc. And it's all by how we tag it and what we want the offense to think is happening.
Our equalizer is that we are 48% Base D and 46% Blitz so not only are we an even mix, but with the disguise you don't know which side you'll get even if you think you can find tendencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Nov 28, 2007 7:10:19 GMT -6
I've gone entire games without blitzing...even in a tight contest.
To me, as soon as you blitz even just one person, you now have a completely different defense. Your DBs have different responsibilities that may or may not also change based on the offense's formation.
This is all fine, except, I am a FIRM believer in running a defense where everyone knows exactly what is expected of them no matter what formation the offense goes in to. Now I might move my Dlineman from a 3 to a 2...but that's it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2007 7:33:06 GMT -6
I agree with you wingt74, that's why we practice every possible run fit that can come up, that's why we get their tendencies broken down well, why we work like crazy against screens and draws, why we completely understand the routes we'll see.
That's why we only have 12 defensive calls but have the flexibility to show things, to blitz from personnel or landmarks, etc. But we can make it look like we have a heck of a lot more. There's a lot of bluff going on in there.
If I thought I could line up in our Over Cover 2 every single play and dominate, then I'd be pleased to do it, but we know that sometimes we don't have all the size in the world and can't just line up and crush em.
But I too am a firm believer in running a defense where everyone knows what's expected of them no matter what. . .and I believe that we can do that with what we do. I just don't want to be in a defense where the offense knows where everyone is.
|
|
|
|
Post by CVBears on Nov 28, 2007 11:34:31 GMT -6
so does it come down to philosophy rather than scheme? for example only playing man coverage or only zone coverage or being multiple?
|
|
|
|
Post by eickst on Nov 28, 2007 14:27:34 GMT -6
At my age level I can't really use multiple, so we will try to get the players great at one coverage. I think that even at some of the other levels they would be better off sticking to one coverage and getting better at it.
Make everything as simple as possible for the players. That doesn't mean you can't show other things to the offense. Or show them the same thing all the time, but run multiple.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Nov 28, 2007 15:21:06 GMT -6
Lochness, I love it.
"Bring Presha"
Nice comment. Ever listen to Dane Cook?
We are a 3-5-3 team and we have four man, five man, six man and seven man pressures. The only constant is the alignment of the down linemen.
|
|
