Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

I'm not all that huge on Defensive schemes simply because I've been watching football long enough to know that they can all work and they can all be run with startling ineptitude. That being said, I do feel like there is a mindset out in the football defensive universe that simply fits into the current environment better than a lot of other options: the 4-2-5.

 

This topic kinda, sorta came up in the Ezekiel Elliot thread where I sketched out how the Bradley / Babich Defensive front aligns against a typical Offense with one Tight End. Thing is, while that alignment does occur it seems to me that the Defense is a bit inflexible when it comes to lining up and "playing football" so I started digging into some of the other things available out there and I discovered the 4-2-5. Believe it or not one of the best Defenses in the NCAA, TCU who plays teams where spread is the name of the game, runs this exact scheme.

 

Chris Brown of Smart Football did a really good write up on it that I thoroughly enjoyed. The thing that I think sets the 4-2-5 apart from other schemes is that instead of using two Safeties like the 4-3, the 3-4, and even the 5-2 use, it employs three. One guy covering the "deep third" of the field and two others really playing like hybrid LB / Safety types (Think: Telvin Smith for this spot). For those that don't want to click the links, I sketched out a typical alignment below (note that I'm not 100% certain on the depths being right, but I think you get the idea):

 

---------------------R

 

-----Z--------------Q----------F

------------Y-T-G-C-G-T----------X

-------------E-T----N-----E

-------------------S----W

<strong>--------SS-------------------WS</strong>

-------C--------------------------C

----------------------F

 

So the alignment is as follows: the Ends (E) align outside of the OT in order to occupy the blocker and to be available for pass rush. If you want to get frisky, have that End who is close to 'Y' give him a chuck if he seems him release down the field. The Defensive Tackle (T) is your typical 3-Technique like Sen'Derrick Marks who is used to blow up gaps and provide interior pressure. Nose Tackle (N) is exactly that. Sam and Will (S & W) are more like typical Middle Linebackers in the 3-4. Posluszny would do well here, but not Telvin. Maybe Skuta?

 

Now here's the fun part! The Strong and Weak Safeties (SS & WS) are what's known as force players. For plays outside, they run "inside out" to force plays to the sideline, or to funnel them back inside to the hit squad consisting of S, W, and the backside Safety. Also, with the Free Safety playing over the top, he can rotate over to cover for a blitzing Safety or even a Corner. Also, you can see how you can move into a "press" coverage look if you wanted to with any of the CBs on any Receiver that you wanted and just have the S to that side drop to zone to cover for him.

 

The advantage that I think this gives the Defense is that it allows you to put two "thumper" type guys at LB (S & W) in order to assist with run stopping, and they are also available to blitz either individually or the dreaded "X" blitx through the opposite 'A' gaps. Also, if you want them to drop into coverage, they only need to cover a quarter of the interior of the field instead of a third as you do with a 4-3. And with the inside leverage shown by the coverage players, you are forcing the QB to throw the fade or the out which, theoretically, should allow F time to cover ground and either break up or even intercept the pass.

 

Do you think it could work here? Do you care?

I advocated earlier this year to take Poz off off the field on 3rd down and use something like this. I approve.


I think the Cardinals do some stuff like this don't they?

I'm more of a 6-3-2 guy myself

you need hybrid players for this to work,  AZ gets away with it because they have a DB Bucannon who plays like a linebacker and a guy like the honey badger who can play either safety position and a bit of corner.


Our talent isn't too far off to do the same Telvin covers like a safety and Cyprien/Sample play like coverage linebackers.  Colvin can lineup in or outside.  My guess is for us to effectively play this scheme we Need a Corner like Bucannon the cardinals have to take Skutas spot on passing downs.


Seems like eventually the goal is to have a hybrid AZ/Sea defense


I really wish Fowler didn't get hurt.

Quote:you need hybrid players for this to work, AZ gets away with it because they have a DB Bucannon who plays like a linebacker and a guy like the honey badger who can play either safety position and a bit of corner.


Our talent isn't too far off to do the same Telvin covers like a safety and Cyprien/Sample play like coverage linebackers. Colvin can lineup in or outside. My guess is for us to effectively play this scheme we Need a Corner like Bucannon the cardinals have to take Skutas spot on passing downs.


Seems like eventually the goal is to have a hybrid AZ/Sea defense


I really wish Fowler didn't get hurt.

To make the defense work you need a player like Tony Conner at Ole Miss who also runs the 4-2-5. He plays that S//LB//CB hybrid and once he went down the defence just didn't work right.


It's hard to find the players that fit that role and when they get hurt it's hard to find suitable replacements.

My favorite D scheme . Appears to be the way forward to counteract how offenses are going too.

 

Heres a great read on it and how TCU implement it http://www.burntorangenation.com/2013/10...ver-2-read

 

I particularly like the way the way the front 6s assignments is completely separate to the secondary's which helps simplify things for the players.

if the offenses are going to continue to go the way of the spread and have 3 wide no fullbacks no inline tight ends and change to the zone read or zone blocking it makes sense to build a defense to counter it and this is probably the scheme that counters best.

http://grantland.com/features/hard-knock...patterson/


More reading material.

Quote:I'm not all that huge on Defensive schemes simply because I've been watching football long enough to know that they can all work and they can all be run with startling ineptitude. That being said, I do feel like there is a mindset out in the football defensive universe that simply fits into the current environment better than a lot of other options: the 4-2-5.

 

This topic kinda, sorta came up in the Ezekiel Elliot thread where I sketched out how the Bradley / Babich Defensive front aligns against a typical Offense with one Tight End. Thing is, while that alignment does occur it seems to me that the Defense is a bit inflexible when it comes to lining up and "playing football" so I started digging into some of the other things available out there and I discovered the 4-2-5. Believe it or not one of the best Defenses in the NCAA, TCU who plays teams where spread is the name of the game, runs this exact scheme.

 

Chris Brown of Smart Football did a really good write up on it that I thoroughly enjoyed. The thing that I think sets the 4-2-5 apart from other schemes is that instead of using two Safeties like the 4-3, the 3-4, and even the 5-2 use, it employs three. One guy covering the "deep third" of the field and two others really playing like hybrid LB / Safety types (Think: Telvin Smith for this spot). For those that don't want to click the links, I sketched out a typical alignment below (note that I'm not 100% certain on the depths being right, but I think you get the idea):

 

---------------------R

 

-----Z--------------Q----------F

------------Y-T-G-C-G-T----------X

-------------E-T----N-----E

-------------------S----W

<strong>--------SS-------------------WS</strong>

-------C--------------------------C

----------------------F

 

So the alignment is as follows: the Ends (E) align outside of the OT in order to occupy the blocker and to be available for pass rush. If you want to get frisky, have that End who is close to 'Y' give him a chuck if he seems him release down the field. The Defensive Tackle (T) is your typical 3-Technique like Sen'Derrick Marks who is used to blow up gaps and provide interior pressure. Nose Tackle (N) is exactly that. Sam and Will (S & W) are more like typical Middle Linebackers in the 3-4. Posluszny would do well here, but not Telvin. Maybe Skuta?

 

Now here's the fun part! The Strong and Weak Safeties (SS & WS) are what's known as force players. For plays outside, they run "inside out" to force plays to the sideline, or to funnel them back inside to the hit squad consisting of S, W, and the backside Safety. Also, with the Free Safety playing over the top, he can rotate over to cover for a blitzing Safety or even a Corner. Also, you can see how you can move into a "press" coverage look if you wanted to with any of the CBs on any Receiver that you wanted and just have the S to that side drop to zone to cover for him.

 

The advantage that I think this gives the Defense is that it allows you to put two "thumper" type guys at LB (S & W) in order to assist with run stopping, and they are also available to blitz either individually or the dreaded "X" blitx through the opposite 'A' gaps. Also, if you want them to drop into coverage, they only need to cover a quarter of the interior of the field instead of a third as you do with a 4-3. And with the inside leverage shown by the coverage players, you are forcing the QB to throw the fade or the out which, theoretically, should allow F time to cover ground and either break up or even intercept the pass.

 

Do you think it could work here? Do you care?

Basically a base nickel package only with an extra safety instead of a nickel back to facilitate better tackling than a nickel back and more speed than a base 4-3 LB?

 

Like anything else, it could work if you have the personnel to run it effectively, but it could pose problems.

 

If you conclude the Jaguars are kinda running it now if you view Telvin Smith as that extra safety, then to me a primary concern is physicality to stop the run.  On an inside run, can that guy stand up to a G/C coming to the next level? I know the alignment should preclude that to a large degree or, in a worst case scenario, have the LBs take on those guards/centers.   On an outside run, can he keep contain and be strong at the point of attack against a pulling lineman or a big TE?  I think that effect is exacerbated if, instead of the 3 WR set shown above, the offense is running 2 TE.

 

That is one of the many concerns I have had about the defense this year:  vulnerability against the run.  Granted we've played the whole year with Alualu at DT, so vulnerability against the inside run is a given no matter the scheme.  But there have been times offenses have run outside at Smith, and that corner has been soft. 

 

While an undersized LB can be effective in contain if schemed to protect him (The JJ era Cowboys exemplify this to me), I think it is fraught with risk without the DL to do it.

 

Right now, without any stud DEs or DTs for opposing offenses to concern themselves with I think a scheme can have its vulnerabilities against a team with a versatile, balanced offense.

 

I think the extra safety could also be exploited in pass coverage if his cover responsibility has him against a particularly fast/shifty WR, or possibly against a big/fast TE.

The hybrid SS/OLB positions does put a strain on the Scouting Dept to be sure, but is it any different than a few years back when the teams that ran a 3-4 were always looking for OLBs that could rush and drop into coverage?


Like any other scheme, if you put the wrong people into the wrong spots, it's not going to work but I do feel like the concept behind this defense is sound enough that it can actually flourish in the modern NFL.


I'm looking to see if I can't find some more alignments that would showcase the Defense's flexibility

Quote:Basically a base nickel package only with an extra safety instead of a nickel back to facilitate better tackling than a nickel back and more speed than a base 4-3 LB?


Like anything else, it could work if you have the personnel to run it effectively, but it could pose problems.


If you conclude the Jaguars are kinda running it now if you view Telvin Smith as that extra safety, then to me a primary concern is physicality to stop the run. On an inside run, can that guy stand up to a G/C coming to the next level? I know the alignment should preclude that to a large degree or, in a worst case scenario, have the LBs take on those guards/centers. On an outside run, can he keep contain and be strong at the point of attack against a pulling lineman or a big TE? I think that effect is exacerbated if, instead of the 3 WR set shown above, the offense is running 2 TE.


That is one of the many concerns I have had about the defense this year: vulnerability against the run. Granted we've played the whole year with Alualu at DT, so vulnerability against the inside run is a given no matter the scheme. But there have been times offenses have run outside at Smith, and that corner has been soft.


While an undersized LB can be effective in contain if schemed to protect him (The JJ era Cowboys exemplify this to me), I think it is fraught with risk without the DL to do it.


Right now, without any stud DEs or DTs for opposing offenses to concern themselves with I think a scheme can have its vulnerabilities against a team with a versatile, balanced offense.


I think the extra safety could also be exploited in pass coverage if his cover responsibility has him against a particularly fast/shifty WR, or possibly against a big/fast TE.

One thing about your post that I would point out is that while Smith would in fact play that hybrid role, remember that he would not be tasked with standing up against inside Power runs. He would be the seventh, or even the eighth man to be accounted for which is usually a free runner.

Quote:One thing about your post that I would point out is that while Smith would in fact play that hybrid role, remember that he would not be tasked with standing up against inside Power runs. He would be the seventh, or even the eighth man to be accounted for which is usually a free runner.

 

I would think, depending upon the offensive alignment, were he the 7th man, he may not be free, but if he were the 8th guy, yeah he most likely would be a free guy, or at most, have a WR trying to block him.

 

I thought the reads you provided were fascinating and informative.  While I have not watched as much college football as I have in the past, I have wondered how teams were countering the spread and uptempo schemes that have proliferated throughout college and to a lesser extent the NFL.

 

The concept of having almost 2-3 different defensive calls operating independent of the front end/back end of the defense is novel to me.

 

I would think you'd have to have DBs almost as smart as QBs in terms of identifying routes quickly to play the scheme effectively.  Not that having smart DBs is a BAD thing at all, mind you, but I would imagine the pressure to diagnose quickly and reacting accordingly is considerably higher than that of a more conventional defense.

 

Edit:  In retrospect, I can see my post focused more on the personnel grouping than scheme, so forgive me for that.

 

Your question focused more on the schematic soundness. Not sure I can even begin to address that portion of it, especially since I have just learned of the coverage concepts.

Quote:The hybrid SS/OLB positions does put a strain on the Scouting Dept to be sure, but is it any different than a few years back when the teams that ran a 3-4 were always looking for OLBs that could rush and drop into coverage?

 

 

Basically you are wanting similar size package but wanting Hips/Coverage over Bend/Pass rush....I personally think its harder to find a Bigger DB//Smaller LB that can fill that position than grabbing an undersized DE and making him into a rush backer....

Gus is probably getting some mad ideas from you guys right now.

Copyright this stuff.

Quote:Basically you are wanting similar size package but wanting Hips/Coverage over Bend/Pass rush....I personally think its harder to find a Bigger DB//Smaller LB that can fill that position than grabbing an undersized DE and making him into a rush backer....

I might also throw in a third consideration (bulk at point of attack) but acknowledge that may fall into the Bend/Pass rush category, just as speed is kind of implied in the hips/coverage category.

 

Not sure if I agree with your closing statement or not.  Both can be difficult to find.  I'd have to research that more.

Quote:Basically you are wanting similar size package but wanting Hips/Coverage over Bend/Pass rush....I personally think its harder to find a Bigger DB//Smaller LB that can fill that position than grabbing an undersized DE and making him into a rush backer....

more you are getting your size from the 2 inside linebackers and making up for size with the 3 safeties.  

Quote:I might also throw in a third consideration (bulk at point of attack) but acknowledge that may fall into the Bend/Pass rush category, just as speed is kind of implied in the hips/coverage category.


Not sure if I agree with your closing statement or not. Both can be difficult to find. I'd have to research that more.

Well the 3rd safety is also a factor in the run game...so point of attack kinda plays into both. Basically the main difference is finding that hip vs bend.


I just think it's harder to find a fluid hip big guy than one that can bend around the edge. Both are hard to find which makes these exotic defense hard to field not only depth but impact starters at said positions.

Quote:Well the 3rd safety is also a factor in the run game...so point of attack kinda plays into both. Basically the main difference is finding that hip vs bend.


I just think it's harder to find a fluid hip big guy than one that can bend around the edge. Both are hard to find which makes these exotic defense hard to field not only depth but impact starters at said positions.

 

The reason I made the distinction is the premise that a bigger guy generally speaking is stronger at the point of attack than a smaller guy (the hybrid safety, in this case). 

 

Schematically I get the point that an 8th guy in the box (generally a SS in those type schemes like 46) or the hybrid guy in this discussion has run responsibilities and will, on occasion, have to hold the point.

 

I don't think we are necessarily disagreeing here.

Quote:more you are getting your size from the 2 inside linebackers and making up for size with the 3 safeties.  

This is kind of the way I see it.

 

It seems to me a trade off between size and speed, and striking the balance between the two to allow for optimum effectiveness and versatility.

Quote:I advocated earlier this year to take Poz off off the field on 3rd down and use something like this. I approve.


I think the Cardinals do some stuff like this don't they?

 

I would like to see something similar to this as well. Having Poz on the field in 3rd and long plays makes me nervous because he is not the most athletic or quick guy. However, I believe he stays on the field because he's the captain of the D and gets the calls in and makes sure everybody is lined up correctly. In the future I think the team could do something like have Telvin as the lone true LB on the field with Cyp/Sample as the other "LB" and then three CB's and two safeties behind them.  It's not exactly what is explained above but I believe its a way to get the best personnel on the field on 3rd and long obvious passing downs.