Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I'm curious how Cover Zero could be zone.  Say I have three WRs, one in the slot, a typical arrangement, and two DBs and a safety to cover them in ZONE?

How does that work?  Maybe on goal line?  Or fourth and one, but I'm talking about a normal play.

If you play a three man zone D, I'm going to have my guys just sit in an open area all day, or flood one side with two guys against your one.

Only thing I can think of is in a compressed situation where there is no "deep" routes available because it's in the red zone. You could have 6-7 defenders in a shallow zone.

But by definition Cover 1/2/3/4/6 are all shell coverages where you have deep players in a zone. If you have only a shallow zone, where there is no man-to-man responsibility to follow a receiver deep, and nobody over the top, you're in big big trouble.

I've also heard, though, that Saban's scheme tends towards a zone/man hybrid, called pattern matching. But that is still at its base a man coverage, with the only real difference (as I understand it) being that the defenders assign their "man" responsibility based on receiver breaks off the LOS. I.e. if you're the outside corner and the outside WR breaks inside while the slot breaks outside, you and the defender inside of you will switch your man assignments based on those breaks. 

I'm curious how Cover Zero could be zone.  Say I have three WRs, one in the slot, a typical arrangement, and two DBs and a safety to cover them in ZONE?

How does that work?  Maybe on goal line?  Or fourth and one, but I'm talking about a normal play.

If you play a three man zone D, I'm going to have my guys just sit in an open area all day, or flood one side with two guys against your one.

I literally specified goal line and 4th-and-1. 

Nubbz needs to calm down.  Playing cover 0 otherwise doesn't make any sense.  MAYBE vs a wildcat formation, but not if you've shown it before (bc then the RB would throw).

I don't care what coaches call it, but there are zone defenses with no one deep.  Hell, goal line necessitates it (if you're in zone).  This is an odd thing to debate.

Obviously, you don't run Cover 2 on your own 5 yard line.  Anyway, the term was new to me.  And the Dawg QB hit a several long throws, and the Dawgs couldn't run worth spit.  I infer MSU really sold out to stop the run, a good plan, and was vulnerable over the top.

That could simply just be aggressive safety play - focusing too much on the QB and run game and not enough on being the deepest man.  

Would you ever predict UGA would win a game with 1 yard rushing or whatever it was?  No, so while damaging, the idea behind aggressive safety play towards the LOS made some sense.  They just did it too severely and for too long, I guess.

Where did you get blitz? I was refering to the very definition - your creating scenarios then naming them

Cover 0 simply suggests no one is responsible for the deep part of the field.

You threw in zone-man hybrid and I'm not sure why.  If I'm on the goal line or 99% sure the other team isn't going to take more than a 1-step drop, I may choose to not waste any of my defenders by playing them deep. 

I mentioned blitz to retort your hybrid.  If I'm playing Cover 0 and man-under, that would be odd, but feasible.  But, if I'm blitzing everyone between my DL and DBs, that "shell" with no one deep (of 4-6 players) is going to be responsible for the quick-action (if any) in front of them, as that field was abandoned by the blitzers.

I'm sorry you've never heard of Cover 0.  Suggesting it doesn't exist is arrogant I guess.  And odd to be arguing the point so much.

I'm sorry you've never heard of Cover 0.  Suggesting it doesn't exist is arrogant I guess.  And odd to be arguing the point so much.

It was not that cover zero doesn't exist. It's that cover zero zone may not exist. 

It was not that cover zero doesn't exist. It's that cover zero zone may not exist.

It definitely does in high school.  Meh, I'm not bothered by it.