CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: Cincydawg on February 13, 2018, 01:48:56 PM
-
OK, this sounds like a stupid question, but I'm asking how they do it mechanistically, when and why.
We can see them at times pointing and hollering and signalling, got that part. What are they changing exactly?
I can see when they appear to jump out of a blitz for example, or when they shift because of motion, the obvious stuff, but at times, to me, it looks like the offense is in a typical set and the defense starts adjusting, or looking to the sideline etc. and adjusting.
What are they seeing that I don't see? I guess the same question could be asked for the offense obviously, the QB comes up and sees what to me looks like a normal defense but points to some dude, and the linemen start pointing, and I presume they are calling out assignments in the line, right? Doesn't it get noisy?
There are a lot of "games within the game" going on and I don't have much of an understanding of how it all works in real time with the clock ticking.
-
I will defer to one of the many X & O experts here.
But, I assume the defense sees a particular formation with the particular personnel package and from watching film can assume what play or cluster of plays might be expected. They then shift the defense to match.
or obviously the D coordinator on the sideline calls for an adjustment because of what he sees or what the booth sees or just because his cut is telling him something
-
A lot of times when you see the defense line up and then see players start shifting, they are simply trying to confuse the offense. Some coordinators like to show a particular front or coverage, and then after the QB starts into his calls and the center makes his adjustments, they shift into a new look thus confusing the blocking schemes or the play routes.
There are times when a defense will automatically run a stunt or a blitz depending upon tendencies of the offense it a particular offensive set. You may be seeing the defensive players making calls to ensure that everyone is on the same page as usually this is audibled by a linebacker and/or a DB.
-
I guess a question is "How often do defenses really change their "play" significantly and how to they manage that?".
The risk of "broken coverages/ assignments" seems high, to me.
There is a LOT going on in a single play from scrimmage, and if someone could sort of lay out how colleges on both sides might handle that, it could be insightful for dummies like me.
Let's take some simple hypothetical. Both teams play fairly standard O and D. It's the first play of the game at the 25 yard line. Team A comes out in a typical set, perhaps with a slot receiver in motion, and the defense starts pointing and yelling and signaling and gets a sign from the sideline. What are they really doing there?
-
The QB comes up to the line and points with both arms to the left. The center grabs the ball and points off to the right and hollers something. The man goes in motion. The QB hollers out some "code".
What is really happening there?
I know in baseball, signals can get a bit complicated at times, but nothing like this. You know, man on second, indicators, who is covering between short and second, still not this tough.
-
There's not a simple answer here.
At the HS or college level, a LB pointing and yelling could honestly just be him identifying his key very deliberately. He also might do this simple task at the NFL level if his fellow LB is a rookie or something.
Personnel on offense can also be noteworthy to the defense, who either may just be making a very vocal note of the unique personnel or knowing that the personnel grouping suggests a certain play or play type.
You'll see LBs moving their DL a half-man over here and there due to the guy simply lining up wrong or due to a backfield shift or alignment (FB is offset rather than in the "i", etc). Should the DT be in the gap or shaded on a shoulder of an OL? Is he crashing down or taking on a double-team or running a stunt?
The crazy, last-second NFL-caliber defensive audibles based on the offense audibling is next-level stuff. The Captain has played in that D for many years and may often be an automatic "if this, then do that" type of check. Okay, the offense passes 80% of the time when it's in a one-back set with trips right. And when they adjust to the shotgun in that set, they like to drag the TE across the field backside, so heads up. But when they do run, the RB nearly always cuts back, so the weakside LB needs to keep his eyes on the TE and the RB coming to him........that sort of thing.
Most of the LB barking is the front 7, but an easy example of pass D adjustments would be a 4-WR set with a guy in motion, thus creating trips to one side. The D may have been set for man, but they'd want to audible to zone, at least on that flooded side of the field.
-
I'm just trying to get a better understanding of what happens pre-snap in college.
I see "stuff", I just don't understand most of it.
-
i don't think it's as complicated as it seems at the college level or below...
defense is reactionary- the squad may go out with one intention or set, just to realize it's no good and shift out of it.
on elite college teams and certainly in the pro's, the defense will 'draw' the offense by showing one look just to act like they know what the offense is doing shifting into another (smiling and taunting, pointing and threatening) and then getting the offensive play they actually want to begin with- this is knowing the audible tendencies of the opponent based on down, field position, clock, ect... O's counter by doing the opposite- marching to the line in one set with full intentions to shift into another--- making it 'not' an audible.
John Chavis, while DC at UT once in a blue moon was cut loose- and the defense would float like mad- no down linemen, lots of leap frogging linemen and LB pulling up and dropping back- it looked crazy, but it was to NOT show the O what set they were in. I wish they would have ran it more as it discombobulated the O more times than it didn't, and when it was all said and done, they were just in a 43. the players liked doing it though, it was plain to see.
but as far as method to madness, at the college level and below, i truly believe the players are picking up things they saw on film such as a slot showing intent to of picking the corner in a man-to-man and giving the LB heads up he's gonna hafta cover than- or seeing a OG ever so slightly shift his weight indicating he's going to pull or stunt and moving the DT six or eight inches inside or outside making the OG's job of picking up the block more difficult...
i like watching this cat and mouse game as much as watching elite players make the plays that make them elite..
it's been said a thousand times and i'm not the author, but- scheme puts the players in position, and the skill makes the tackle. for this reason it drives me nuts to see a defender either close on a player right before the snap or put too much gap by falling back, also right before the snap.... through the magic of DVR, you can rewind and watch either the DC or the position coach steam when they do that unsolicited. that's the O getting into the D's head, and it ain't an audible more than it is.
also you've got to consider ol' Madden's claim: Only an outmatched defense blitz's.... that's changed greatly this generation as defenses going on the offensive has become a lot more prevalent- but there is still a truth to it... defenses built around blitz packages as a matter of course are basically attempting to take ownership instead of be owned. they're more often hiding something than they are showing how good they are.
all that^ said, there is something else going on before the snap, and it's tied to directly to: players are actors. some of them are better than others at acting. even at HS level, the D players *again being reactionary watch their assignments and notice if the player is acting too 'nonchalant' or too interested, looks too long at the QB or exchanges a glance with a key blocker (if running)....
i have a love/hate thing going on with the advent of visors.
Corey Moore is a good if not one of the best examples... DE for VT around the turn of the century... the dudes eyes were HUGE and occupied at least 50% of the real estate behind that mask it seemed. He was also a helluva pass rusher and could cover, too... i asked him about that visor of his and he laughed and said it's responsible for at least half of his being in the right position... he said he'd approach the line and never shift his head from looking one direction while his eyes were looking the other- he'd give the QB or runner warm fuzzies he'd been fooled.. the funny part is, if he was wrong, he'd already be in the players head he was looking toward without hardly noticing him... he felt strongly that's why he seemed to always be in the play.
George Coontze, former GB linebacker and from up the road a bit from me used to be a customer of mine- he and i would BS from time to time about the game, and he'd bitch about players like emmitt smith wearing their helmets low across the brow and keeping their heads down taking position- and that it wasn't so much that he did it when he was going to run the ball by design (a 'tell' and giveaway) but that he wouldn't forget to do it when he didn't run the ball- he said half the players production was based on those seconds prior to snap and how well they 'sold' their part... emmitt excelled, and bought him a fraction of a second at least half the time, and that's all the time a player like emmitt needed.
like i said... actors.
and a recent case in point- the Bama QB who threw the OT streak TD to win the game.. he 'looked' the defender off the receiver for the separation he needed- he sold it well... Baker Mayfield is damn good at 'looking' players away. i could go on... i'll shut up now.
-
That's helpful, my takeaway is there is less going on than it seems in terms of complexity.
I have remarked how the QB will come up to the line fairly often and look at what appears to be a very standard defensive set and starts pointing and hollering.
If it's early in the game and it's 2nd down and 6 to go, it's not as if the defense needs to change into some strange set, and they don't seem to in the main, to me, but the QB often points to something.
In a loud venue, the hollering has to be drowned out unless you're in their ear, and whatever is said is apparently very brief, one word, as when the QB yells something back at the RB after an audible. It's not like he has time to say "Zebra 32 split", it's more like black or white.
-
That's helpful, my takeaway is there is less going on than it seems in terms of complexity.
I have remarked how the QB will come up to the line fairly often and look at what appears to be a very standard defensive set and starts pointing and hollering.
If it's early in the game and it's 2nd down and 6 to go, it's not as if the defense needs to change into some strange set, and they don't seem to in the main, to me, but the QB often points to something.
In a loud venue, the hollering has to be drowned out unless you're in their ear, and whatever is said is apparently very brief, one word, as when the QB yells something back at the RB after an audible. It's not like he has time to say "Zebra 32 split", it's more like black or white.
A lot of that pointing is probably calling out protections to OL with fairly limited viewpoints.
-
much of this yelling and hollering can be a simple calling out the keys and the defense that they are running w/o changing anything
similar to most sports, coaches like players to communicate. This just let's everyone know what the LB is seeing or the SS is seeing.
just reassuring the entire defense that the keys and responsibilities are correct
chatter is better than silence, even though all 11 know the play
-
Much of what a defense can do to adjust on the fly is determined in the film room. The players must be schooled on the opponent for any adjustment to work. All the yelling and pointing won't work otherwise.
-
It still is rather fascinating to me. I like to watch a game where the outcome is not of any real interest and watch one player entirely, not the ball. So, I see a lot of movement presnap and pointing and hollering and I sort of wonder what is going on beyond the obvious.
I realize the OL has to call out blocking schemes.
Which brings another question, how often are the audibles misunderstood creating a Big Play? I know last year on occasion the Dawg RBs had open lanes I could have drive a truck through and I wondered if that was a defense that messed up.
Get a guy out of position because he misheard the play seems like a real threat. OMAHA OMAHA!!!
And of course if it's loud and the right tackle mishears his assignment, bad things can happen.
-
i fully agree with that observation, Cincy, in that when a player 'sells out' it has a rich reward if he's right, or can cost them hugely if wrong.
as an example, and back to '11 i think it was... when LSU and BAMA played twice...
LSU had a reckless D that was a blast to watch. they seemed everywhere at once and created havoc. Meanwhile, Bama was methodical. 'MOST LIKELY' LSU had a player that was going to hit the carrier really quickly, and most often that resulted in a tackle... but if that player wasn't successful? - the O would get a few yards before another player closed on them. Bama, on the other hand, has played much the same since at least '08 with their method which was a touch softer 'padding' the carrier and that is always seemingly having three tacklers in the 'vicinity' (but not crawling all over the O player) of the play at any given moment, and almost to the point the first hit was to slow it down and the second/third to do the ugly.
those players (bama) played in a superior scheme by my reckoning... always being in the right place. meanwhile, LSU gambled. they got paid a LOT more than they had to pay, but it worked for them due to the athletes they had at the time. I want to tell you something over 15 players from that team were ultimately drafted.
i think this folds directly into how well a coach knows his players skill/talent, how much he trusts them, and how he adjusts the scheme to accommodate them.
-
Wide running lanes are what's supposed to happen when the play is blocked well and designed well. If the defense has shown a tendency and the OC sees it and calls a specific running play and it's executed, boom! The fact that it doesn't happen all that often tells you that it's a perfect storm when all of those things happen at once. Oftentimes the defense doesn't show an obvious tendency. Oftentimes the play call isn't just right. Oftentimes one guy misses his block.
What I hated most as an OL was when I was pulling, the guy next to me getting pushed back - retarding my progress and the play as a whole.
When you see a DL or LB come through scot-free and kill the QB, that can be any number of things. Sure, the QB could have audibled and a guy missed it, but that's not often the case. It's usually more about the DC finding a chink in the OL's blocking scheme and purposely exploiting it. Or even a tendency of a specific guy can lead to that as well.
Say you're a DC and you want to blitz through the B-gap between the guard and the tackle. If you blitz your inside LB straight through, either the OL will pick it up easily or due to their scheme, a RB will fill that hole. But on film, you notice that on a delayed blitz, that guard in particular, when he has no one to block initially, always turns in and double-teams whoever the center is blocking. That is useful information. Now you can plan to loop your outside LB towards the interior of the line, getting there a second or two later (on purpose), and that guard doesn't see him and has turned away from him. He gets through cleanly because the RB only has the assignment to block the inside LB on a blitz. Now honestly, if you can believe it, whoever is supposed to block that outside LB (if anyone - not everyone is accounted for on every play, by design)should be yelling during the play that his guy (the OLB) is blitzing inside.
It can get frustrating if you're playing guard and no one is lined up on you, no one blitzes immediately, you get a great chip on the nose tackle, knocking him over, but seeing your QB on his back because the OLB got through your area and your TE didn't yell a warning during the play.
Crap like that is why some coaches sleep in their offices, playing out all the what ifs....there aren't many in HS, some more in college, and plenty in the NFL.
-
And self-scouting is just as important....from that example above, if the OC knows that's an exploitable part of his blocking scheme/guard tendency, he can use it for his benefit. Okay, the RB checks the MLB - he's not blitzing, I'm going to run a banana or swing route - taking advantage of the missing OLB. The cat-and-mouse game of it is knowing if the coach on the other sideline is smart enough to expose the flaw or not - or if he's smart enough to wait and exploit it at the right time or immediately when he figures it out.
I was a DC for a few years up on the Rez, and I'd talk with the HC a lot about what ifs and all that, and he's laugh. I was way too deep with this stuff - we were small schools playing other schools who didn't know who their HC was going to be 2 weeks before the season started. I had come from 5A football in FL - pretty talented and big-time IMO, and our HC had come from OK and worshipped Switzer's Xs and Os, so we were set. But we didn't need to dip into our thorough football knowledge, because we could easily win without all that. That is, until we played non-Rez teams.
But the best Rez team of all time wouldn't beat an average 5A Florida squad - we only had like 20 players. We crushed all of the other Rez teams, but when we played 2-platoon white kids who had 3 meals a day, we'd be down 50-0 at halftime.
-
And I have to share this - the Navajo Rez is a basketball-mad place. Football is a 'meh' to them. They don't grow up watching it or playing it.
So one day I spend 20 good minutes installing a new defense, going through what each position does, whether run or pass. It's over, we go to the next thing, and our good pass-rushing DE goes, "wait, we've been on defense this whole time?"
1 - W....T.....F......
2 - when a guy isn't sharp and plays both ways and doesn't know Xs and Os.....I guess something like that can happen.
Because it did.
-
We only had 3 blitzes installed - A, B, and C. Boring stuff.
A few years back, LSU had each blitz named after a state, which I thought was great...if your players know more than a few states, lol.
But that's the thing, you could name them after anything. Sandwiches, women's names, cars, colors - it doesn't matter. The hard part is realizing a lot of these kids, and very often the most athletically gifted ones, aren't football nerds. They don't appreciate watching football or how a hole opens on offense or how a safety on defense can bait the QB. They just want to play, so simplification of complicated stuff is essential. Coaching is teaching, straight up.
-
When UGA had Grantham as DC, they would often be looking around clearly confused when the ball was snapped. Apparently his defenses were overly complicated and they had a hard time picking up what they were supposed to be doing.
The next year he was gone and it looked a lot simpler and they just played more than schemed, or so it seemed.
I suppose when you have a Roquan Smith kind of player, maybe you just tell him to go do whatever seems best at the time, or I would anyway. I have rarely seen a player with that much involvement in the plays.
-
Yeah, the best scheme only works if the players get it.
And there's little things that you only even mention once the players get the big things down - like if the defense is blitzing and you're the one getting double-teamed, take it on and look out for a screen pass. Or if you're an O-lineman and your defender slants away from where the ball is going, let him go and progress up to the 2nd level, look for a LB reading the play.
You don't get to those little things that make a big difference when a guy can't line up correctly or is a corner who thinks he's better than he is. Guys will pretend to suck at playing zone so that the DC will only feel comfortable being in man.
-
Yeah, the best scheme only works if the players get it.
Scott Frost said something interesting during an interview.............
said he spends more time in practice teaching technique and fundamentals and less time teaching scheme
he said he keeps schemes simple, but regardless of scheme, once the play starts players need to have fundamentals and technique to be "football players"
blocking, shedding blocks, tackling, moving in traffic, moving in the open field, angles are critical regardless of scheme
as alluded to earlier, a great football player out of position or unsure of his assignment is still better on the field than a player in the right place without the ability to make the play
Riley and Diaco seemed to run practices the opposite way - very little time spent on technique, mostly teaching schemes and plays
-
Yeah, the best scheme only works if the players get it.
You bet.
The LSU DC (Dave Aranda) is on record stating that he had not been able to run the same defense he did in Madison because of that. For complex schemes like his, you need a combination of film rats and talent. He had a whole bunch of the former in Madison, for sure, and a whole bunch of the latter at LSU, without question. If he can get all of that talent to buy in to the film part, look out.
-
Scott Frost said something interesting during an interview.............
said he spends more time in practice teaching technique and fundamentals and less time teaching scheme
he said he keeps schemes simple, but regardless of scheme, once the play starts players need to have fundamentals and technique to be "football players"
blocking, shedding blocks, tackling, moving in traffic, moving in the open field, angles are critical regardless of scheme
as alluded to earlier, a great football player out of position or unsure of his assignment is still better on the field than a player in the right place without the ability to make the play
Riley and Diaco seemed to run practices the opposite way - very little time spent on technique, mostly teaching schemes and plays
I feel like some coaches assume fundamentals, especially the higher up you get. To me, a good coach makes a player prove they possess fundamentals before worrying about schemes.
Yes, an idiot with his hair on fire can still make plays, but if you can put a guy in the right place who can't make the play, that's a player you need to get rid of. But you don't have to pick one or the other, especially if you're a helmet school.
Once your talented players know what they're doing and are proven to have the fundamentals, THAT'S when you get to have fun and be creative - a mad scientists with scheme.
-
It's been my experience that some guys just hit hard and some don't. Some can bring down a water buffalo and others can't fell a fawn. Some get tired and wonder why they're out there on the field and others get tired and keep pushing for the fun of it.
When you have those guys who just happen to hit hard and just happen to make plays, you let them loose - a controlled chaos. If you don't have those types, you need precision and consistency from your players and plan accordingly.
-
Controlled Chaos was Buddy Ryan. In Chicago, Buddy had the meat and potatoes.
He had Mike Singletary and Gary Fencik on the field as the field organizers, and the rest of the guys bought in.
Neither of those two were the cream of the crop from an athletic standpoint, but when you put those guys out there with Dent, Marshall, Wilson, Hampton, McMicael, Fridge, etc.. You're gonna win.
-
I watch UNC from time to time when nobody else is on of interest. The thing I see consistently is poor tackling. They will be in position and not wrap up or bounce off or whatever. It happens more than for other teams of similar ilk.
I have posited that they don't tackle much in practice perhaps fearing injury, and they had an abnormal number of injuries last year, which perhaps goes to S&C.
What are your thoughts on "live drills" with hard hitting versus easing off to avoid injuries?
Of course, the UNC players may not be that good either.
-
i've watched players at UT do the same thing, and not isolated incidents but as a matter of course- hard hitting fools yes (sometimes, anyway), but fail to make the tackle (really often, unfortunately). no wrapping... it's frustrating. and... it's absolutely coaching. whether it relates to practice or not i can only guess, and i'd guess it does- in high adrenaline situations muscle memory plays a greater role than most would think- that is speaking to practice's that basically play tag "gotcha, play's over" as opposed to real game speed and collision.
Jerry Rice is said to have ran to the endzone full speed after every practice play- not playing 'simulate/pretend that i did' but actually doing it... i'm thinking that kind of mental positioning "play isn't over yet" plays a heavy role in a players performance, and which is translated to a defensive player when they're getting up off the turf after every practice play, seeing it all the way through every single time... again, coaching.
-
i've watched players at UT do the same thing, and not isolated incidents but as a matter of course- hard hitting fools yes (sometimes, anyway), but fail to make the tackle (really often, unfortunately). no wrapping... it's frustrating. and... it's absolutely coaching. whether it relates to practice or not i can only guess, and i'd guess it does- in high adrenaline situations muscle memory plays a greater role than most would think- that is speaking to practice's that basically play tag "gotcha, play's over" as opposed to real game speed and collision.
Jerry Rice is said to have ran to the endzone full speed after every practice play- not playing 'simulate/pretend that i did' but actually doing it... i'm thinking that kind of mental positioning "play isn't over yet" plays a heavy role in a players performance, and which is translated to a defensive player when they're getting up off the turf after every practice play, seeing it all the way through every single time... again, coaching.
I've noticed this a lot with Ohio State at times. I've always thought it was a case of players more interested in being highlighted on Sports Center than anything else. There always seems to be those players that put their head down and bring everything they have to hit the ball carrier, but NEVER use their arms and wrap up.
It comes down to a couple of things. First, they need to practice tackling. You don't have to go full speed to do this, but you have to practice form tackling.
The second thing IMHO is that coaches reward big hits and never punish missed tackles. I would love to see a coach show praise to the guy that makes a great open field tackle while sitting someone on the bench that led with his head and completely whiffed on the tackle. That would send a powerful message.
-
I watch UNC from time to time when nobody else is on of interest. The thing I see consistently is poor tackling. They will be in position and not wrap up or bounce off or whatever. It happens more than for other teams of similar ilk.
I have posited that they don't tackle much in practice perhaps fearing injury, and they had an abnormal number of injuries last year, which perhaps goes to S&C.
What are your thoughts on "live drills" with hard hitting versus easing off to avoid injuries?
Of course, the UNC players may not be that good either.
Frost had this to say about tackling.
We are going to tackle. If you want to be very good at something you have to practice it every day. We will tackle in practice.
Riley was WAY too soft.
-
Defensive backs just tossing themselves into the ball-carrier drives me insane. You're small. Your only chance is to wrap up.
It's an epidemic.
-
the thing that bothers me the most is tackling up high
first of all, you may not bring anyone to the ground doing this
an then with all the concussion issues, any hit above the shoulders could result in a penalty and/or ejection
then you take aim at a shoulder you can easily end up hitting the player in the head
-
the thing that bothers me the most is tackling up high
first of all, you may not bring anyone to the ground doing this
an then with all the concussion issues, any hit above the shoulders could result in a penalty and/or ejection
then you take aim at a shoulder you can easily end up hitting the player in the head
There’s an unspoken element that if you go too low, you could get someone’s knee, end a season/career.
-
I watch UNC from time to time when nobody else is on of interest. The thing I see consistently is poor tackling. They will be in position and not wrap up or bounce off or whatever. It happens more than for other teams of similar ilk.
I have posited that they don't tackle much in practice perhaps fearing injury, and they had an abnormal number of injuries last year, which perhaps goes to S&C.
What are your thoughts on "live drills" with hard hitting versus easing off to avoid injuries?
Of course, the UNC players may not be that good either.
I sometimes wonder if tackling has always been about the same, but there are more space plays now.
-
There’s an unspoken element that if you go too low, you could get someone’s knee, end a season/career.
which is why you tackle the torso. it's a helluva lot easier to wrap around something that isn't flapping about like legs or arms... you'll see people hit high and the carrier have the upper body strength to resist it... or low and the knees keep churning kicking the would be tackler away... but wrapping the torso? they're going down...
it's not a macho tackle, but it works 99.9% of the time, where hitting alone only works i'd guess 60% of the time, and hitting high+wrap the carrier is getting a couple more yards, and hitting low+wrap is absolutely dangerous.
-
Tackling takes a toll on bodies (for both players) no matter where the hit takes place. It's a very rough sport.
I'd argue for hockey being even more rough.
-
which is why you tackle the torso. it's a helluva lot easier to wrap around something that isn't flapping about like legs or arms... you'll see people hit high and the carrier have the upper body strength to resist it... or low and the knees keep churning kicking the would be tackler away... but wrapping the torso? they're going down...
it's not a macho tackle, but it works 99.9% of the time, where hitting alone only works i'd guess 60% of the time, and hitting high+wrap the carrier is getting a couple more yards, and hitting low+wrap is absolutely dangerous.
seems to me the belt buckle or hips would be the target, hoping to not get much higher or lower than that
I just see way too much up around the shoulder pads
-
Frost had this to say about tackling.
We are going to tackle. If you want to be very good at something you have to practice it every day. We will tackle in practice.
Riley was WAY too soft.
Yeah, I think I agree, you have to do it, over and over. I think UNC plays soft because they practice soft.
Alabama doesn't get accused of being soft.
Is the modern linebacker on average 10-15 pounds heavier than the modern running back?
-
which is why you tackle the torso. it's a helluva lot easier to wrap around something that isn't flapping about like legs or arms... you'll see people hit high and the carrier have the upper body strength to resist it... or low and the knees keep churning kicking the would be tackler away... but wrapping the torso? they're going down...
it's not a macho tackle, but it works 99.9% of the time, where hitting alone only works i'd guess 60% of the time, and hitting high+wrap the carrier is getting a couple more yards, and hitting low+wrap is absolutely dangerous.
Bingo. That’s why so many now are teaching rugby style tackling. Much more reliable and less risky physicall. Chris Ash brought that to OSU, so to Northern’s point, when you see them go high and miss, they will get chewed out.
Most defensive yelling is not audibles, but rather clarity around one of two things: gap assignments, which are predetermined by the defensive play call but might be hard to figure out for a given offensive formation or shift. Or, player assignments that are designed to change based on offensive shifts or motions.
Then there are the real “audibles”, where the defense is changing the call completely based on something they or the coaches see the offense.
Great example was a couple years ago when the Badgers were killing OSU with a Jet sweep because they were in man coverage. The CB was trying to move across the field with the WR, but consistently got lost in traffic, and the ball carrier was getting around the end.
The halftime adjustment was to call for a rotation when the sweep player started in motion, with the responsible CB rotating to wher the free safety was, up high, and the FS (Malik Hooker) to come down and take the WR in man.
This allowed the FS to come somewhat downhill and visually avoid traffic, and make the tackle. It worked well...they stuffed it 3-4times so the badgers abandoned it after that.
So that required a communication to let the other DBs to know their assignment changed once the rotation began.
https://goo.gl/images/iQNoEz (https://goo.gl/images/iQNoEz)
(https://www.cfb51.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwebkit-fake-url%3A%2F%2F75403e2c-f53f-424a-8100-20cd7afe0e9f%2Fimagepng&hash=2eaeb51bcfb4af4bbd14ae3f66250199)
-
Yeah, I think I agree, you have to do it, over and over. I think UNC plays soft because they practice soft.
Alabama doesn't get accused of being soft.
Is the modern linebacker on average 10-15 pounds heavier than the modern running back?
I just don't think that's because of how they practice.
-
To answer the larger question, I believe defenses audible through sideline signals and players making calls and checks to one another, much the way a basketball team communicates defensively (I once watched a college basketball team go over communication which was enlightening).
Plus, defenses are built to match formations and such. Players have what they're supposed to do, techniques, keys to read. They might be told to tweak this and that, but it's not like defenses have "plays" in the way an offense does, granted offensive plays are a lot more granular than we make them out to be.
-
Bingo. That’s why so many now are teaching rugby style tackling. Much more reliable and less risky physicall. Chris Ash brought that to OSU, so to Northern’s point, when you see them go high and miss, they will get chewed out.
Most defensive yelling is not audibles, but rather clarity around one of two things: gap assignments, which are predetermined by the defensive play call but might be hard to figure out for a given offensive formation or shift. Or, player assignments that are designed to change based on offensive shifts or motions.
Then there are the real “audibles”, where the defense is changing the call completely based on something they or the coaches see the offense.
Great example was a couple years ago when the Badgers were killing OSU with a Jet sweep because they were in man coverage. The CB was trying to move across the field with the WR, but consistently got lost in traffic, and the ball carrier was getting around the end.
The halftime adjustment was to call for a rotation when the sweep player started in motion, with the responsible CB rotating to wher the free safety was, up high, and the FS (Malik Hooker) to come down and take the WR in man.
This allowed the FS to come somewhat downhill and visually avoid traffic, and make the tackle. It worked well...they stuffed it 3-4times so the badgers abandoned it after that.
So that required a communication to let the other DBs to know their assignment changed once the rotation began.
https://goo.gl/images/iQNoEz (https://goo.gl/images/iQNoEz)
(https://www.cfb51.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwebkit-fake-url%3A%2F%2F75403e2c-f53f-424a-8100-20cd7afe0e9f%2Fimagepng&hash=2eaeb51bcfb4af4bbd14ae3f66250199)
I assume since that was a halftime tweak, they weren't exactly needing to communicate through that. Once they saw jet, the safety was spinning down and the CB up.
But the rest of that makes all the sense.
-
I assume since that was a halftime tweak, they weren't exactly needing to communicate through that. Once they saw jet, the safety was spinning down and the CB up.
But the rest of that makes all the sense.
Yes, other than to communicate out loud to ensure that all 4DBs were aware, as it would be a huge bust in coverage if any of the 4 was on a different page.
That was just one example. The challenge for the defense is to ensure every gap, every eligible WR or every zone is assigned. Tough when offenses are moving and shifting.
Thus the birth and proliferation of RPOs, as they are usually designed to read the initial reaction of one player, most often a LB, or end, and to execute the opposite of what he reacted to and in effect making him wrong every time. Mayfield did that exquisitely to OSUs young LBs last year.
-
Well when offenses sort of set up and then 4 guys shift before getting into a stance, the defense needs to be able to adjust and not sh*t their pants or call timeout every time. So while it may be as simple as saying, "Yes, if the TE flexes out and the RB splits out wide that same way, you two still have the same responsibility."
But in my experience, it's common to have some players who act like their puppy died when the offense shows them something they haven't explicitly been taught. Those guys are usually the ones who have tunnel vision about their own position and aren't the type to zoom out and see big-picture stuff.
-
TCU's defense interests me, I'd like to attend a camp on it. Most defenses want to be stout up the middle, but theirs is designed to be stout on the edges, funneling everything inside - sort of an outside leverage on 'roids idea. I have no experience with the 3-3-5 and would like to understand it better.
I believe WV is normally running a 3-3-5, too, but TCU actually stops people sometimes.
-
some defenses are designed to "spill" everything to the outside and then run to the sideline, most are designed to seal the edge or corner and keep things in the middle of the field where pursuit doesn't have to run as far
-
TCU's defense interests me, I'd like to attend a camp on it. Most defenses want to be stout up the middle, but theirs is designed to be stout on the edges, funneling everything inside - sort of an outside leverage on 'roids idea. I have no experience with the 3-3-5 and would like to understand it better.
I believe WV is normally running a 3-3-5, too, but TCU actually stops people sometimes.
IIRC, TCU was a 4-2-5.
They also do something that was relatively unusual, which was split the calls into thirds. The front six and each half of the secondary got separate calls.
-
It's fascinating how Ds and Os have "evolved" over the years, is it not?
One can watch a game from say 1990, and it looks like a whole different thing, much simpler, much less "stuff".
I am reminded me of things like tank warfare or fortress designs. The defense devises a new technique or tactic and the offense adjusts. It was very common in WW 2 on both sides to use tank destroyers, often smaller, cheaper, lower armored vehicles with powerful guns often not mounted in turrets to attack tanks. They then devised different kinds of rounds designed to penetrate armor, like the sabot round.
Fortresses back when developed techniques to bounce cannon balls over the walls, or absorb them.
Cannons developed rifling.
-
I've often noted with friends I'd run a 4-2-5 as my base with today's offenses.... and my 4 up front would all be 3techs, no 1's and no 5's.. They hold the LOS and collapse pockets and let the guys behind them run. I also believe the touch required for passing to TE's 10 yards deep over the middle is a lost art in CF. So I also think TCU's stout at the edges is a good call, especially in pass defense.
-
With the speed we see today with some 235 pound linebackers, a 4-2-5 kind of general set could make sense. Maybe your 2 LBs are larger, while your safeties are also on the large side with 3 willowy DBs. I guess it would be kind of a 4-2-2-3.
UGA shifted to the 3-4 a while back and frankly it looks like a 4-3 most of the time. The difference is that either of the OLBs can go to the 3 point set on the LOS. So, they usually would have 4 guys set before the snap. At times, one would set and then back off late and the other would crowd the LOS. I thought it was pretty effective, but they also had a bit of talent on that defense too.
It would be neat if ESPN would have a one hour show each week showing more of the details of the game with film. They could show just how a defense reacted and the offense countered and what happened.
-
It would be neat if ESPN would have a one hour show each week showing more of the details of the game with film. They could show just how a defense reacted and the offense countered and what happened.
Yeah, but they make more money with people yelling vapid things at each other.
-
Can't blame 'em. They show what people watch. It's the viewers' fault.
-
I've often noted with friends I'd run a 4-2-5 as my base with today's offenses.... and my 4 up front would all be 3techs, no 1's and no 5's.. They hold the LOS and collapse pockets and let the guys behind them run. I also believe the touch required for passing to TE's 10 yards deep over the middle is a lost art in CF. So I also think TCU's stout at the edges is a good call, especially in pass defense.
How can you have four guys in a 3 technique? A 3 is the outside shoulder of the guard....
-
It would be neat if ESPN would have a one hour show each week showing more of the details of the game with film. They could show just how a defense reacted and the offense countered and what happened.
I think they do. Several maybe.
SEC film room does that. It's half an hour and could use more concentrated film stuff, but it does a pretty decent job. ESPNU had a Film Room show, but I'm not sure if it's still on.
-
How can you have four guys in a 3 technique? A 3 is the outside shoulder of the guard....
He is referring to 3t-type bodies.
-
I think they do. Several maybe.
SEC film room does that. It's half an hour and could use more concentrated film stuff, but it does a pretty decent job. ESPNU had a Film Room show, but I'm not sure if it's still on.
They might, I watch so little I wouldn't know, but someone here might note when it happens.
I avoid the shows where people yell at each other.
I cannot take yelling any more. It really makes me cringe.
-
To the thread topic; alot of the audibling you see on defense is going to be adjusting strength Over/Under in response to the offensive alignment. Sometimes that will necessitate a change in coverage as well.
Like bayareabadger, I am intrigued by the 3-3-5. I like the idea of being able to switch back and forth between 1-gapping and 2-gapping up front, and of course adding an 8th pass defender. Seems like it would easier to recruit and roster manage also, if you eschew the classic 43 rush end and just go with the DT bodies across the front.
I'd probably go with one real MIKE-type body at the second level, and flank him with 225lbish dudes who can rush the passer and run with a back. Everybody else would be Man-coverage specialists first and foremost.
-
Yeah, part of my point was to the HOW they do it in noisy environments. I've been at games where I could not be heard by my wife screaming in her ear. The second part was what are they adjusting? Obviously, that can be coverages, gap assignments, blitz packages, etc., but it happens pretty fast so I'm thinking the adjustments are fairly simple.
Make it too complex and folks will get out of position.
-
Shifting strength is pretty basic stuff. Anything more complicated than that may require a TO, or the crossing of fingers, if communication is impossible.
-
howdy @Hoss (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1658) !! it appears it's going to be nice having you around, sir, based on the quality of your posts so far!