Why do we play so much off-coverage?

[CGI_Ram]

We are allowing an 80% completion rate.

The corners continually play so far off the WR... encouraging the quick pass... Which goes against our strong pass rush.

What am I missing?

I believe our philosophy is bend, don't break, willing to give up the short stuff... But if we played more man-coverage the QB would have to hold onto the ball longer.

These guys know more than I do, but I find the excessive padding on the WR frustrating.

 

[blue4]

We are allowing an 80% completion rate.

The corners continually play so far off the WR... encouraging the quick pass... Which goes against our strong pass rush.

What am I missing?

I believe our philosophy is bend, don't break, willing to give up the short stuff... But if we played more man-coverage the QB would have to hold onto the ball longer.

These guys know more than I do, but I find the excessive padding on the WR frustrating.

I agree. It doesn't seem logical. Instead of utilizing our greatest strength we seem to hamper it. Only thing I can think of is a lack of confidence in the CBs or McLeod.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

One of life's great mysteries.

.

 

[Ramsey]

We are allowing an 80% completion rate.

The corners continually play so far off the WR... encouraging the quick pass... Which goes against our strong pass rush.

What am I missing?

I believe Williams philosophy is bend, don't break, be willing to give up the short stuff... But if we played more man-coverage the QB would have to hold onto the ball longer.

These guys know more than I do, but I find the excessive padding on the WR frustrating.

I'm pretty sure your right CGI, it's all part of a bend but don't break defensive philosophy.

1. Take away the long pass play.

2. Make the offense put together 11-14 play drives to score on you, while you blitz the sheet out of 'em and force fumbles, interceptions, and offensive penalty drive killers.

3. Tighten the screws in the Red Zone and make them kick a field goal.

I feel for ya CGI. It's so frustrating to watch our freakish athletes play 10 yards off wide receivers.

Is it working? So far, yes! Although the Mob Squad allows an absurdly high completion percentage, the Rams are 10th in the NFL in allowing only 6.0 yards per pass attempt. I'll take that all year long!

I blame last weeks loss on the fact Rams are DEAD LAST in the NFL in Offensive Plays From Scrimmage. I don't mean to get metaphysical on you CGI, but sometimes the best defense is a strong offense. And visa versa. I'm not worried about our Defense.

 

[Oldgeek]

Nah, 3rd and 8 and they play off 12 yards? 80% completion will get you losses almost every week when you blitz and can't tackle. I think GW tries to get too cute at times and wants to "show" everyone how big and bad his D is. When you blitz and keep getting burned, he needs to try something else. Stop the run maybe?

 

[…..]

It gets alittle alarming when we allow guys like Kirk Cousins or Drew Stanton to look like all pro's.

 

[OldSchool]

This is the first and most important question I'd ask Fisher/Williams if given a chance. It just makes no sense when most teams with a good pass rush play more press and less off coverage.

 

[Mister Sin]

Drives me fucking nuts man.

 

[CoachO]

When you bring as much pressure (blitzes) as Williams is known to, you are risking giving up the home run by playing press coverage.

The concept is to force them to get to ball out fast. Underneath and fly to the ball. This is the very foundation of his defense. They work on it more than any other facet of their defense.

If you play press coverage and are isolated in man coverage, all it takes is one missed chuck at the line of scrimmage and the QB throws a quick fade and its bye bye.

Whether you agree with the the concept or not, this is the reason they do it. Completions are not the thing that matters. It's closing on the receiver and tackling that is the key to limiting the damage. When they went on their run last year over the last 8 games of the season, they didn't change the design, they improved (dramatically) their tackling.

You force them to throw underneath and jump the route. Johnson already has one INT from this design. And Jenkins is one of the best at it. It's also where they miss Gaines. As he may have been the best of the CBs at reading and closing on the receiver.

More often than not, the are going to be in some sort of zone coverage when they utilize this concept. So playing tight "in your face" coverage is asking for trouble. It's nothing more that "risk vs. reward".

 

[Legatron4]

When you bring as much pressure (blitzes) as Williams is known to, you are risking giving up the home run by playing press coverage.

The concept is to force them to get to ball out fast. Underneath and fly to the ball. This is the very foundation of his defense. They work on it more than any other facet of their defense.

If you play press coverage and are isolated in man coverage, all it takes is one missed chuck at the line of scrimmage and the QB throws a quick fade and its bye bye.

Whether you agree with the the concept or not, this is the reason they do it. Completions are not the thing that matters. It's closing on the receiver and tackling that is the key to limiting the damage. When they went on their run last year over the last 8 games of the season, they didn't change the design, they improved (dramatically) their tackling.

You force them to throw underneath and jump the route. Johnson already has one INT from this design. And Jenkins is one of the best at it. It's also where they miss Gaines. As he may have been the best of the CBs at reading and closing on the receiver.

More often than not, the are going to be in some sort of zone coverage when they utilize this concept. So playing tight "in your face" coverage is asking for trouble. It's nothing more that "risk vs. reward".

Good shit coach.

 

[Athos]

Yes, but I've seen this team get crushed on too many 3rd and mediums and 3rd and longs in the passing game with that stupid off man coverage. Hence the irate moods around here during games with that dumb off man coverage.

 

[CoachO]

Yes, but I've seen this team get crushed on too many 3rd and mediums and 3rd and longs in the passing game with that stupid off man coverage. Hence the irate moods around here during games with that dumb off man coverage.

And when that happens, its usually because someone either missed a tackle at the point of attack or missed an assignment allowing for a big play.

A lot of people think that this front four will "get home" every time a QB drops back. When teams are game planning a ton of 3 step drops, the pass rush just isn't going to be a factor on every play.

Again. It's risk vs. reward and the odds say that if they tackle, more often than not teams are not going to sustain 10 play drives against them.

 

[Speeps]

Imagine if we played bump and run, and let our front four go to work. Our defense would be a lot more effective. Currently, we willingly give teams 5 yard dump offs. Then they wonder why we can't get off the field on third downs.

 

[SuperMan28]

It's like they're playing prevent defense all game. But it worked against SEA.

WAS just over powered us with power O formations. They got away from it against the Giants and that didn't go well. However, they got down early thanks to the ST's being horrible. They played their best game of the season against us. Happens.

I wouldn't be surprised if we upset Green Bay. We rise when we're the under dog, fall when we are favored and on the road.

 

[MTRamsFan]

GW was asked in his presser about it, and I think his philosophy is to allow the underneath stuff. What his defense is built for is to stop the run (which we are either hot or cold) putting an offense in 3rd and long requiring the offense to run longer routes requiring the QB to hold the ball longer, thus allowing our defense to get pressure. It did not work last week because Washington ran the ball extremely well. Seattle was the complete opposite. We are a bend-don't break defense and we're counting on elaborate blitz packages to create pressure when our D-Line can't do it alone. If GW wanted to play man coverage, we need to have corners that are shut-down. I don't think we have it in JJ and Tru. JJ has the speed to cover, but isn't physical enough to cover receivers with size and speed. Tru has the size, but isn't as fast as most receivers. So, if we want to play more man coverage, we need to almost sellout with blitz packages so we don't leave our corners and nickel guys on an island. I hate watching defenses sit back and let teams dink and dunk the underneath stuff knowing at some point they will run out of space as they get closer to the end zone, which means we are willing to give up FGs rather than TDs. Sucks, but it ins't going to change anytime soon.

 

[CoachO]

Think this topic gets blown out of proportion. It's not like they play Thai "off coverage" every single play

People Are referencing the Washington game as an example of how they were very good. But the first priority has got to be stopping the run and keeping teams in favorable down and distance situations. When you are getting gashed in the rings me and giving up 6-8 yards in 1st down it changes everything in terms of play calling.

 

[HometownBoy]

Yes, but I've seen this team get crushed on too many 3rd and mediums and 3rd and longs in the passing game with that stupid off man coverage. Hence the irate moods around here during games with that dumb off man coverage.

Of course, if we watched one of our guys get beat like a drum and then burned for huge gainer because of the press ala Justin King we'd be complaining about that too.

I gotta go with Coach O on this one, sometimes you've got to execute and our team's tackling needs to change. I can say that our guys propensity to go for arm tackles and big hits instead of making sure they actually stop the guy can be attributed to coaching, especially since it's persisted for this long.

 

[Young Ram]

Coach O nailed it.

This D has been dominant with this concept. I'm sure they will be motivated this Sunday to prove all the haters wrong.

 

[fastcat]

Imo playing that far off the ball prevents the cbs from getting to the point of attack on edge rushes (if the runner gets to the edge) in a timely fashion. Also I see absolutely no reason to play 10 yrs off on a 3rd an 5. I mean if you wanna play off why not line up 5 yds off instead... just a little tighter to discourage the short pass. Then the safeties are 20yrds off lol and we don't seem to have a lb to cover the middle of the field so we have gapping holes in the middle. I don't get it and sometimes I wonder how does the qb even get sacked with that much room for a reciever to get open.

Imagine if we had corners that would jam the recievers and play tight man coverage with our pass rush on 3rd and 5.... maybe our corners aren't that good but I guess we will never find out

 

[-X-]

Playing off and giving your corners the ability to stay foot-footed and read the 3-step drop allows them to be able to break on the ball instead of making them stay in phase with the WR and mirror his moves. You want them to be able to read the QB, and not the WR. It's also predicated on the front 4 generating enough pressure to allow the corners to make plays. I wouldn't complain as much about the coverage in as much as I'd be wondering why we can't generate enough pressure with our front 4. We also do alternate who plays man in zone coverage. Usually it's Jenkins on their #1, but sometimes it's the other side as well, or both. It's constantly changing to give different looks, and I don't really have a problem with the cushions they give. I'd rather get nickel and dimed all day and get tight in the red zone than take the chance that one slip-up, bad read, or miscommunication during a CB-S pass-off will result in a 14 second drive culminating in a score.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Whether you agree with the the concept or not, this is the reason they do it. Completions are not the thing that matters. It's closing on the receiver and tackling that is the key to limiting the damage.

Coach Williams alluded to this in his press, When he said, something like, " ... sometimes letting them connect underneath is a good thing!"