Man vs. Zone

[Slagathor]

I think many of us notice that we get burned a bit on quick slants while in zone coverage. I know I ask myself....why aren't we just staying in man to man as much as possible? That would be our strength.

Interestingly, Steve DeOssie was discussing the ineligible receiver play and why Baltimore just didn't simply call zone coverage. He stated that while playing MLB under Belichick, BB told him...if you see an alignment or something you're not familiar with pre-snap....don't take any chances....and just switch to a cover 2 type zone.
He was surprised Baltimore just didn't do that.

But it made me think. The Pats seem to fall out of man to man into zone and get burned a bit. Is this because our young, inexperienced linebackers are too often seeing things they aren't comfortable with and, like DeOssie, defaulting to zone?

 

[nabwong]

Playing man every down will tire your defense by half time. It's impossible to do.

 

[dales804]

I think many of us notice that we get burned a bit on quick slants while in zone coverage. I know I ask myself....why aren't we just staying in man to man as much as possible? That would be our strength.

Interestingly, Steve DeOssie was discussing the ineligible receiver play and why Baltimore just didn't simply call zone coverage. He stated that while playing MLB under Belichick, BB told him...if you see an alignment or something you're not familiar with pre-snap....don't take any chances....and just switch to a cover 2 type zone.
He was surprised Baltimore just didn't do that.

But it made me think. The Pats seem to fall out of man to man into zone and get burned a bit. Is this because our young, inexperienced linebackers are too often seeing things they aren't comfortable with and, like DeOssie, defaulting to zone?

BB addressed this early in the year. An offense can take advantage of a defense playing man coverage every snap. You have to mix it up.

 

[Ring 6]

I think many of us notice that we get burned a bit on quick slants while in zone coverage. I know I ask myself....why aren't we just staying in man to man as much as possible? That would be our strength.

Interestingly, Steve DeOssie was discussing the ineligible receiver play and why Baltimore just didn't simply call zone coverage. He stated that while playing MLB under Belichick, BB told him...if you see an alignment or something you're not familiar with pre-snap....don't take any chances....and just switch to a cover 2 type zone.
He was surprised Baltimore just didn't do that.

But it made me think. The Pats seem to fall out of man to man into zone and get burned a bit. Is this because our young, inexperienced linebackers are too often seeing things they aren't comfortable with and, like DeOssie, defaulting to zone?

No, we play zone by design. You cannot play man every snap.
By the way, if you are trying to stop slants, you want to be in zone, with LBs dropping into the slant area.

 

[Sicilian]

Just like an offense that is one dimensional will eventually face a well coached defense that can shut them down, a defense that always does the same thing will eventually get exploited by a quarterback who knows what to do against it.

 

[patfanken]

Its become very fashionable to demand press man coverage all the time. I hear the media pukes do it all the time and they don't know what they are talking about. I assume most casual fans think the Seahawks are a press man team when in actuality they play mostly a tight 4 to 5 man under zone. That's what they were in over 80% of the superbowl.

Zone gets a bad rap these days, especially the way the game is played. Too many of us think about Jack Del Rio and his Jaguar defenses that Brady simply shred every time we played him. But zone defenses HAVE their place, and can be almost as aggressive as man coverages. It can be almost embarrassing to run a pick play when a team is playing a zone.

Unfortunately Luck's mobility is going to make playing man coverages almost exclusively impossible. Having receivers simply run off defenders just by running routes opens up running lanes that could lead to Luck having a big day on the ground, Zone or modified zone coverage can take away that advantage or at least minimize it, since the defenders can immediately come up when they see Luck break the pocket, They won't have their back turned,

Another possible defense is using a "spy" and the Pats have the perfect man for the job in Jamie Collins, but that would be we would be using our best blitzer and coverage LB on simply watching the QB for break outs,. I think the Colts would take that trade all day.

Its going to be an interesting problem to solve. One which is not going to be solved by doing ANY one thing all the time,..,,or even most of the time. Mediots who think that all problems are solved by simply putting Darelle Revis on them all the time, really don't know what they are talking about, Their current narrative is to claim the Pats slow defensive start was due to them "being too cute, again".