AndyJohnson

Apparently one of the reasons Wilson has been working so much at corner in camp is that he will be playing corner in the nickel. (According to Solomon).

Our nickel D looks like

Seymour-Wilfork-Warren
Vrabel-Bruschi-Colvin
Samuel-Hobbs-Wilson-Harrison-Sanders

Over the course of a season we play 50% or more of our defensive downs in the nickel or dime. Against some teams, ie Indy, the nickel is our base.

That is an awful good looking nickel package. And as Solomon alluded to we may play it more and more as a 'regular D'

It makes some sense to me because with Harrison at S and Wilson at corner, we have excellent run support from the secondary. I would want Wilson playing outside as the weakside corner because where we are susceptible in the run game from this set is outisde on the weakside. As a sidenote, I have seen BB play this scheme on first down with both the base D removing the weakside ILB or the weakside OLB, that is line up in the base with an ILB or OLB replaced by an extra DB. Wilson strikes me as one of the best run support corners in the league if he plays there.

Essentially you would have the front 3 aligned as normal, Colvin SSOLB, Bruschi strongside ILB, and Vrabel weakside ILB/OLB. Vs. the Colts last year they ran this with Bruschi on the weakside, and he was able to get outside on wide runs because there was no TE, Seymour was head up on the T, and the G couldnt reach him. I like Vrabel better in this role however. Wilson would be the weakside corner to play force, and Harrison would provide run support inside.

Convert this to the base 3-4 by removing any one of the dbs and inserting Beisel, Brown, or TBC. Vrabel is going to turn out to be 1/2 OLB, half ILB.

PatsFanInVa

Delirious with it for teams that want to throw 70% of the time. But it's kind of a general feel-good mention, unless you're planning to apply nickel logic to our little (possible) issue with stopping the run.

That would mean starting (at least) Harrison shallow for run support, reading for run vs. pass, then adjusting. For the really potent offenses this may not be ideal (those teams with first-tier threats at multiple receivers -- including tight ends -- plus at running back.) Of course nothing is ideal, and you're talking about having an attractive nickel package not setting the nickel as the base, as I understand it.

It's intriguing to let Rodney's read/react skills dictate what he does in coverage vs. in run support, and pretty much treat him as the 4th 'backer, but I don't see him being in position to do anything but contain would-be long sprints, rather than nail a ball carrier a yard or two from the line.

I defer to your greater x-and-o wisdom -- enlighten me! (if in fact you meant to imply nickel as base.)

PFnV

maverick4

This is very similar to something I had proposed before, with the exact same personnel that you listed but with Rodney as a linebacker in a 3-4.

.

mgteich

This isn't much different from last year when Sanders was the nickel.

bucky

I sorta have to disagree with Solomon's prediction for the simple reason that Wilson is our best coverage safety, both in terms of man coverage and range in a zone, so it would make sense to have him playing S in certain passing situations. It would seem our best coverage "nickel" package would actually be a "dime" with Harrison playing a LB position, Wilson and Hawkins at safety and some combination of Samuel, Hobbs and Gay at CB/slot.

pats1

Poteat was really the nickel later on (Denver). Sanders was the dime.

The Pats play more of a 4-2 nickel, not as much a 3-3.

Last year it was:

Colvin-Seymour-Green-McGinest
Vrabel-C.Brown/Bruschi

Wilson-Hawkins, Samuel-Hobbs-Poteat

This year it will be:

Colvin-Seymour-Green-T.B.C.
Vrabel-C.Brown/Bruschi

Hawkins/Sanders-Harrison, Samuel-Hobbs-Wilson/Gay


However, in Atlanta, the Pats were playing more of a 4-1 dime against 3 WR sets.

Colvin-Wright(Seymour)-Warren(Green)-Vrabel

Davis (Bruschi, C. Brown)

Sanders was lined up essentially as a LB, but over the TE

Hawkins - G. Scott/C. Scott (Harrison), Samuel-Hobbs-Wilson(Gay)

Flying Fungi

Regardless of how this is actually interpreted by us as observers (some keener than others), this is an indication of a number of things from a coaching analysis:

--evolution of thought/scheme from BB's standpoint

--departure of Mangini's input

--arrival/increase of Pees' input

--response to perceived trends in 2006 opponents

--fitting scheme to better emphasize skillset of available talent

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Ochmed Jones

This defense, which I'll call "the heavy nickel" could actually morph into a 3-5 with the secondary playing the 3 deep coverage because of the two SS types you mentioned. Harrison (if healthy) and Sanders could play close to the line for run support (outside contain), and they can cover the WRs initially until they are passed to the Corners. And either is capable of coming up and covering the backs and TE(s) in the flats.

This defense puts eight in the box, but with the secondary palying a 3 deep zone, doesn't leave your pass defense that exposed. The LBs have to be able to cover the intermediate zone and Bruschi can with ease, not sure about Vrabel and/or Colvin

I doubt an NFL team could run it full time, but it would make a great 2nd and long defense against a pass happy team.