Why do we play so much off-coverage?

[Elmgrovegnome]

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.

Why is it necessary to throw a comment in like this?

Its obvious to me that there are an awful lot of armchair D coordinators who think they have it all figured out.

.

For the most part we are all friends here and there is varying degrees of football knowledge on this forum. Some people don't fully understand. Your posts are very informative. That is why so many people refer to you with questions. That comment sounds a bit haughty to me. Instead of poking fun at people for what they don't know, just keep imparting what you do know and help catch them up. Add to it that I was not in the best of moods so if I overreacted or took your words the wrong way, I apologize.


Back to the question. All I was saying is that on some plays when it is 3rd and short yardage why just give them the short pass? I understand the whole concept of keeping the plays in front of you. It is used in many sports. It works. And yes in football it is all based on good tackling and swarming to the ball. It isn't new. But again can't they tighten it up a bit in certain situations?

 

[CGI_Ram]

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".

How does the big nickel factor in, i.e. what situations, advantages, disadvantages?

Because to me, based on the concept of the D you describe, I'd run it all the time.

 

[Oldgeek]

I know playing press coverage can lead to a big play, my complaint is the off coverage seems to allow the receiver to catch the ball and enough time to juke the DB. If you watch other defenses, they are hitting the receiver as the are making the catch or very soon after. The juke can lead to a big play as easy as tight coverage at times.
JMHO

 

[CoachO]

How does the big nickel factor in, i.e. what situations, advantages, disadvantages?

Because to me, based on the concept of the D you describe, I'd run it all the time.

To me, it's like anything else. You change things up based on preparation and give them various looks throughout the game. The other thing that comes into play here, is exactly in the same way offenses do, you make certain calls at different times in the game to set up a special call at a critical time. Give them a similar look and put in a wrinkle to force a key turnover.

 

[CGI_Ram]

To me, it's like anything else. You change things up based on preparation and give them various looks throughout the game. The other thing that comes into play here, is exactly in the same way offenses do, you make certain calls at different times in the game to set up a special call at a critical time. Give them a similar look and put in a wrinkle to force a key turnover.

The defense, while we are all disappointed in how it performed in Washington, will be just fine over the long haul of the season. And... By "just fine" I believe they will still be a top 10 defense.

The offense? That's my bigger concern right now.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Well that big cushion hurt the Rams in the first half. The Steelers drove down the field and got the only TD. Why didn't it work?

 

[-X-]

Well that big cushion hurt the Rams in the first half. The Steelers drove down the field and got the only TD. Why didn't it work?

You answered your own question. They scored ONE TD (on a run).
Not a bad showing against a team that routinely scores 30 points.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

You answered your own question. They scored ONE TD (on a run).
Not a bad showing against a team that routinely scores 30 points.

Well we really have no way of knowing that since Ben R. got injured in the third Quarter.

 

[Fatbot]

Maybe there's been some INTs dropped and bad luck, but turnovers are sorely lacking. One takeaway per game will be a very long season. I think a key point to the defense philosophy is its lack of synergy with where the offense is at right now. It needs help in the form of timely turnovers. It needs a few short fields, some easy drive scores to gain some confidence. Instead the Rams starting field position today was at its own 20, 20, 19, 18, 3, 12, 9, 17, 21... Wow. Meanwhile Pitt also had some bad drive starts but the defense did not pin them down in 3-and-outs or get turnovers. There's a time and place to take more risk in coverage and it just seems out of sync with the big picture right now.

 

[jrry32]

Maybe there's been some INTs dropped and bad luck, but turnovers are sorely lacking. One takeaway per game will be a very long season. I think a key point to the defense philosophy is its lack of synergy with where the offense is at right now. It needs help in the form of timely turnovers. It needs a few short fields, some easy drive scores to gain some confidence. Instead the Rams starting field position today was at its own 20, 20, 19, 18, 3, 12, 9, 17, 21... Wow. Meanwhile Pitt also had some bad drive starts but the defense did not pin them down in 3-and-outs or get turnovers. There's a time and place to take more risk in coverage and it just seems out of sync with the big picture right now.

We dropped 2 Ints in the past two weeks and failed to recover one fumble today. We also have had a couple plays in the past two weeks that were borderline fumbles. The turnovers will come.

 

[Yamahopper]

Last year mid-season'ish off coverage or why there's more now was a topic on the NFL network.
Part of it was attributed to the how much bigger the WR'S are now compared to the past. Too easy for the CB to lose his footing letting a jailbreak to happen.
Part was also not as many Cb's play it in college as have in the past. Some have the tenacity to play it others don't. It's that simple.
Warner said it's what's in vogue now to keep the play in front of the DB'S.

Personally I like bump and run. It's always fun to watch a great WR like Bruce, Rice etc have a 5 yard Texas Death match with a DB every snap.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

The opposing qbs completed 80% of their passes again today. 80%.

While they kept the score down they didn't really give the offense much in the shape of field position. It has trouble going 20 yards let alone 80.

.

 

[Psycho_X]

There's nothing wrong with the scheme that we implement. The cushions annoy me also but it's what they are supposed to do. However, the point of the big cushions is to keep everything in front of the back 4-7 depending on what is called. What HAS to be cleaned up is missed tackles. Giving them a cushion and letting them catch the ball 4 or 5 yards up the field is pointless if the DB is going to flail at the WRs feet and not make a tackle and constantly letting them get 8+ yards instead. Just frustrating.

But having said that the defense did their job yesterday. And nothing they failed to do infuriates me more than watching a football bounce of Lance Kendricks ****ing chest!

 

[Fatbot]

Like much of what's frustrating with this team, the identity doesn't seem to be in sync. It pairs a hyper-aggressive blitzing front 7 with an uber-passive secondary, so the aggression is wasted on not getting many turnovers. It's a scheme that tries to eliminate big play risk by conceding the short completion, relying on a swarming defense with sure tackling -- and yet the Rams ranked near the bottom in missed tackles and team yards after the catch allowed. And also gave up key big plays in broken coverage last season anyway. Yet, somehow, it's still a very good defense that a team should win with -- the offense's schizophrenic identity is the greater issue.