Why do we play so much off-coverage?

[SuperMan28]

Yes, they do play WAY faster at home. It's something other analysts have mentioned too.

Glad it's not just me. If we play that fast against WAS then I do believe we win by at least two scores. I'm liking our chances tomorrow even more now.

Makes me wonder if we have a GSOT advantage with the home turf. An article like that needs to come out to boost excitement for home games.

 

[V3]

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".

If the Rams' front four are supposedly among the best in the league, shouldn't they be able to generate pressure and sacks without relying on the blitz so much? That's the part I don't get. If you give teams the short throws, you're effectively limiting what your D-line can do since they don't have nearly as much time to get to the QB because the QB gets it out almost immediately.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Of course this also allows the opposing team to use up the clock, wear down your defense, and keep your own offense off the field.

Very good point.

 

[Prime Time]

If the Rams' front four are supposedly among the best in the league, shouldn't they be able to generate pressure and sacks without relying on the blitz so much?

Good question to ask Gregg Williams. I'm guessing that's just his style though. He could have Robert Quinn, Aaron Donald, along with JJ Watt and the next best DT or DE in the league, and he would still blitz a lot.

 

[-X-]

If you play press man, take the inside shoulder and run the WR up the sidelines, what happens when it's a run? You're already in full sprint mode away from the play. Conversely, if it's a run play and you're in off coverage, the WR has to run block, can't get hands on you right away, and you can crash top down towards the RB. I mean, there are inherent weaknesses in all coverage shells, and that's why offensive coordinators try to exploit those weaknesses with what typically works at the time. In the meantime, defensive coordinators are constantly making in-game adjustments to what they think the OC is gonna do and vice-versa. It's a chess match. Williams shows blitz just as much as he actually does blitz too. That forces a quick decision by the QB who didn't really have to make one.

The way Williams' defense is set up, he relies on 4-man pressure to allow his back 7 to play zone coverage and clog the throwing lanes while giving his corners the latitude to play the QB and the ball. Those cushions you see are designed, in some cases, to account for dropping linemen after showing blitz during pre-snap. Takes away slants. Sometimes that works, and sometimes it doesn't. If coordinators could predict (cough, NE, cough) what an offense is going to do with 100% accuracy, there would be pure dominance out of any defensive unit. As of now, our pass defense really isn't a huge issue. Now when the run defense sputters, that's gonna effect everything. ESPECIALLY pass defense. Because now you have to commit to stopping one thing which produces vulnerabilities in the other.

I'm rambling, but I had a stream of thought and wanted to let it play out in my head. lol.

 

[CoachO]

I get all that but do they have to play so far back? If it is third and 8 why are the Corners 12 yards off? That is a guaranteed first down. Shouldn't down and distance determine how far off the ball they play?

I think if you look closely at the actual yardage you will find they are not 12 yards off the ball. Regardless. If you use your example of 3rd and 8, you are making the assumption that the CBs don't close ground and in the 2 seconds the QB has to get the ball out that the distance is still somehow 8-10 yards between the receiver and the CB.

Its obvious to me that there are an awful lot of armchair D coordinators who think they have it all figured out. At the end of the day this defense is and will be one of the more productive and toughest to play against. The game is 60 minutes. But yet it seems that many want to break it down one play at a time.

 

[CoachO]

If the Rams' front four are supposedly among the best in the league, shouldn't they be able to generate pressure and sacks without relying on the blitz so much? That's the part I don't get. If you give teams the short throws, you're effectively limiting what your D-line can do since they don't have nearly as much time to get to the QB because the QB gets it out almost immediately.

Not every play call is designed to end up in a sack. And when opposing offenses scheme to get the ball out quickly, as most do against the Rams, the pass rush, no matter how good the front four are, is not "getting home". In fact, sometimes the plan is to force a bad read or better yet a bad throw resulting in a turnover. It's not always about getting sacks.

 

[GabesHorn]

I liked watching the gints play containment more than try and sack the QB. It gave much less running lanes than our gap penetration hurt us against the same team. We got gashed and I'll bet Williams will have adjusted that so as not to have Williams and Bell do the same against us tomorrow. Hope the gang tackling is BACK!!! NO INJURIES!!!

 

[…..]

Its obvious to me that there are an awful lot of armchair D coordinators who think they have it all figured out. At the end of the day this defense is and will be one of the more productive and toughest to play against. The game is 60 minutes. But yet it seems that many want to break it down one play at a time.

Isnt that what fans do????

Last weeks game was sixty minutes, how'd that work out?

Wins bring less questions. I know its only been two games but ya got to expect questions after losses that have the entire nation rediculing us.

 

[V3]

Not every play call is designed to end up in a sack. And when opposing offenses scheme to get the ball out quickly, as most do against the Rams, the pass rush, no matter how good the front four are, is not "getting home". In fact, sometimes the plan is to force a bad read or better yet a bad throw resulting in a turnover. It's not always about getting sacks.

That's what I meant when I said "generate pressure" in my original post. I get that it's also about forcing QB's to make bad decisions. I just don't think I agree with the philosophy when it comes at the expense of short and intermediate passes, aka, bend but don't break. I think there's a happy medium Williams could be doing with less blitzing, more pressure on the WRs at the LOS, and less time on the field for the D.

I could be wrong, though.

 

[CoachO]

That's what I meant when I said "generate pressure" in my original post. I get that it's also about forcing QB's to make bad decisions. I just don't think I agree with the philosophy when it comes at the expense of short and intermediate passes, aka, bend but don't break. I think there's a happy medium Williams could be doing with less blitzing, more pressure on the WRs at the LOS, and less time on the field for the D.

I could be wrong, though.

I just don't agree. At the end of the day, this defense is not going to be the thing that we will be questioning.

This defense is designed to force the check downs and throws in front of the defense. Williams screams about flying to the football and tackling. Everything is to be funneled underneath and then come up and tackle.

When you look closely at the types of completions, there just aren't many in that intermediate (15-20 yard) throws. That's not to say there aren't plays that result in those gains. But again, it mostly the byproduct of missed tackles.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I think if you look closely at the actual yardage you will find they are not 12 yards off the ball. Regardless. If you use your example of 3rd and 8, you are making the assumption that the CBs don't close ground and in the 2 seconds the QB has to get the ball out that the distance is still somehow 8-10 yards between the receiver and the CB.

Its obvious to me that there are an awful lot of armchair D coordinators who think they have it all figured out. At the end of the day this defense is and will be one of the more productive and toughest to play against. The game is 60 minutes. But yet it seems that many want to break it down one play at a time.

Cant you answer a question without banging on people? I didn't realize that you were not an armchair QB. Which one of Fishers coaches are you?

 

[CoachO]

Cant you answer a question without banging on people? I didn't realize that you were not an armchair QB. Which one of Fishers coaches are you?

Really? I asked you a question based on your scenario. How is that banging on you? Instead you make a blatant personal attack.

I'm trying to understand what it is you are actually looking at rather than job stating facts assumptions and exaggerating the facts to make a point.

 

[jap]

Glad it's not just me. If we play that fast against WAS then I do believe we win by at least two scores. I'm liking our chances tomorrow even more now.

Makes me wonder if we have a GSOT advantage with the home turf. An article like that needs to come out to boost excitement for home games.

We might with Tavon and TGII on the field simultaneously. In fact, we may have a GSOT advantage anywhere with those two playing together.

 

[jrry32]

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".

Great post by CoachO. It's frustrating at times but it forces teams to either throw underneath the coverage and sustain a drive or tempt our pass rush with a longer developing play to find a hole in the zone down the field.(or to get a WR by the CB when he's playing off man down the field)

It's basically telling the other team to pick their poison. Do you want to try and have a long, sustained drive or do you want to risk sacks going for a big play? GW is betting on them making a mistake during their attempt at a long, sustained drive. And he's usually right. It all falls apart, though, when we're not stopping the run on 1st and 2nd down. When we can put teams in 2nd and 3rd and long, we put ourselves in a position to feast on them.

 

[jrry32]

Really? I asked you a question based on your scenario. How is that banging on you? Instead you make a blatant personal attack.

I'm trying to understand what it is you are actually looking at rather than job stating facts assumptions and exaggerating the facts to make a point.

It's tone, Coach. A lot of your posts tend to have a condescending feel to them. Like the "armchair coach" (or whatever it was) comment. You have great information to contribute. Just give it to people at face value. If they choose to ignore it or push back, stand behind your opinion (respectfully) or ignore their POV if their post annoys you.

You're a smart guy and a great football mind. I value your posts. You just have a tendency to come off as (for lack of a better word) grumpy. And trust me, I have a problem with being condescending too. It's something that I got used to doing on past boards (because of certain posters on those boards) and I make more of an effort here to watch out for it and stop it from happening.

Anyways, I do agree with both of you to an extent. I think there are some 3rd downs where they could tighten it up a bit but I also think there's some hyperbole when it comes to the cushions we're giving. Plus, our corners can often close fast and make the tackle short of the marker.(if they make the tackle)

 

[Ramhusker]

Great discussion here. I get the philosophy GW is deploying and I get the value of repetition for a young team like ours but I agree it is frustrating to watch at times because it seems to work two out of three plays but that third play always seems to be a dagger. It appears to be a trend that has our D's tongues hanging out in the 4th Qtr more often than not. And I know some of that is due to the O not sustaining drives and the combo of both is defeating. Would it stand to reason that teams knowing that we deploy this plan over and over again can effectively game plan for it with a pretty decent success rate? I'm thinking they do and have to the tune of about 60% if you measure it by winning percentage. And I know that is over-simplifying it but from the outside looking in, that's what we fans end up measuring everything by, wins. If we had a "shutdown corner" on this team, would GW's approach be that much different? Is this scheme mostly dictated by the type of players we have or is GW going to run it if we acquired Darrelle Revis in the morning? This D sure seems to have a "snowball" effect. It can roll down the right side of the hill and wreak havoc on our opponents or it can go the other way to our dismay.

 

[kurtfaulk]

I've not been able to see much of either of the first 2 games this year, but what befuddled me about the off coverage last year was that the corners would line up ~10 yds off the LOS, and then backpedal from there once the ball was snapped.

I think that has many befuddled. I've read through this whole thread and understand the concept but every time i see them playing off on 3rd down and the qb and wr play catch at the 1st down marker it infuriates the hell out of me.

And i understand the job of the opposition oc is to scheme for that pass but to my untrained eye it comes off as just giving them an easy 1st down.

.

 

[Mojo Ram]

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.

Good post CoachO

Right, if you're blitzing, moving safety's up etc... that all makes complete sense...but we can get pressure rushing just four. If it's my scheme with THIS front four i'm playing more man outside w/deep help and dropping linebackers more often.
I don't think Williams' scheme necessarily plays into the strength of our DLine. Don't get me wrong, i like his aggressive, attacking scheme, but i'd just like to see more plays mixed in that just rush four, occasionally blitz Ogletree, drop everyone else with our corners pressing. IMO we'd force more mistakes between the 20's that way.

JMO

 

[DaveFan'51]

If you play press man, take the inside shoulder and run the WR up the sidelines, what happens when it's a run? You're already in full sprint mode away from the play. Conversely, if it's a run play and you're in off coverage, the WR has to run block, can't get hands on you right away, and you can crash top down towards the RB. I mean, there are inherent weaknesses in all coverage shells, and that's why offensive coordinators try to exploit those weaknesses with what typically works at the time. In the meantime, defensive coordinators are constantly making in-game adjustments to what they think the OC is gonna do and vice-versa. It's a chess match. Williams shows blitz just as much as he actually does blitz too. That forces a quick decision by the QB who didn't really have to make one.

The way Williams' defense is set up, he relies on 4-man pressure to allow his back 7 to play zone coverage and clog the throwing lanes while giving his corners the latitude to play the QB and the ball. Those cushions you see are designed, in some cases, to account for dropping linemen after showing blitz during pre-snap. Takes away slants. Sometimes that works, and sometimes it doesn't. If coordinators could predict (cough, NE, cough) what an offense is going to do with 100% accuracy, there would be pure dominance out of any defensive unit. As of now, our pass defense really isn't a huge issue. Now when the run defense sputters, that's gonna effect everything. ESPECIALLY pass defense. Because now you have to commit to stopping one thing which produces vulnerabilities in the other.

I'm rambling, but I had a stream of thought and wanted to let it play out in my head. lol.

Maybe it's just me, But I don't think you were 'Rambling' at all -X-!