LBs in zone coverage

[Patspsycho]

It seems to me as a casual observer that the vast majority of the wide open catches by opposing teams are coming between the LBs and the safeties.

So my question is, for those of you who are more learned than I, is why is this the case? Is it a question of scheme? If so, why hasn't it been corrected? Can it be? Are the LBs just too young, and not recognizing how far behind them the secondary is being stretched? Is it a misread by the LBs?

The one thing that seems to be NOT the case, is that it is NOT about the footspeed of the LBs. Many, many times when the receivers, especially WRs on deep ins and deep crossing routes, cross behind them, the LBs are not actually moving back. This suggests to me not that the LBs CAN'T drop farther back, but that for some reason they simply are not doing so when in zone defense.

So I ask you, collective knowledge of the forum, why do you believe this is occurring?

First off, it is not the scheme, or we would not be using it in the first place. It is a mixture of inexperience and breakdowns in communication. Next time we are in zone, keep your eyes on any of the eligible receivers after they get off the initial jam on the line, you will see them stem and break and that is where our troubles always start, when those receivers start crossing into different areas of responsibilities covered by different players on the D. Sometimes you will see a defender from a certain area (e.g., the curl) release his man into what I like to call the AOR (area of responsibility) without notifying the defender of the next area (let's say, the flat). Sometimes he does and sometimes the defender of the next area just doesn't pick it up, doesn't hear it, or is too confused or too locked on the QB (which is a sign of lack of trust in your teammates). Most of our trouble have come from cover 1 when we leave a LB in robber over the under middle, and Guyton is atrocious in this situation.. he has often failed to pick up a man going over the top on him. However I have to say that ever since Crable got released, Guyton is playing much more serious and more committed. He turned in a nice effort on Thursday. We do not have a "soft underbelly." That is a persistent myth.

I see a few posts asking why not man-to-man in consideration of our limited experience with zone, and the answer to that is the same answer to zone in basketball, it saves energy, and gives you more options with which to deal with faster players (or receivers). If you were to play cover 0 an entire game, you would tire out your defense pretty fast.

Also zone defense eliminates the deadly crossing patterns, rubs, picks, and stacks that any smart OC will start calling for, once he sees constant man coverage. So what you want is an ideal mix of zone and man coverage to keep the OC/quarterback off guard- just as you would have an ideal mix of the pass and run to keep a defense honest.

 

[RayClay]

It seems to me as a casual observer that the vast majority of the wide open catches by opposing teams are coming between the LBs and the safeties.

So my question is, for those of you who are more learned than I, is why is this the case? Is it a question of scheme? If so, why hasn't it been corrected? Can it be? Are the LBs just too young, and not recognizing how far behind them the secondary is being stretched? Is it a misread by the LBs?

The one thing that seems to be NOT the case, is that it is NOT about the footspeed of the LBs. Many, many times when the receivers, especially WRs on deep ins and deep crossing routes, cross behind them, the LBs are not actually moving back. This suggests to me not that the LBs CAN'T drop farther back, but that for some reason they simply are not doing so when in zone defense.

So I ask you, collective knowledge of the forum, why do you believe this is occurring?

Because catches aren't being made behind the safeties.

 

[Metaphors]

Good topic and timely with the Jets on tap. My thoughts...

1) I'm not sure that it is just the LB drop depth that is the problem. It is a hard throw to put the ball over a 6'4" LB and a hard-charging safety. More often than not, I've seen QBs being able to split the LBs for throws between the hashes...the easiest and quickest throws for a QB to make.

2) When the LBs have had success, it has been when they are moving laterally. Guyton's pick 6 and Ninkovich's picks were all laterally covering up players that thought they were in empty spots in the zone. QBs have an easier time when the defense is moving north-south in a zone. Make their drop have a lateral component and it looks like chaos to a QB.

3) The key to beating the San-grenade is to move him off of his first read. Once he does that he always follows with a) a checkdown, b) a wild fling down the field or c) a horrific decision to pass into coverage. This is where coaching and the long week make a difference. If the Pats can recognize where the San-grenade wants to go pre-snap, they can roll coverage after the snap and the results should be quite comical.

So the LBs will be key. Confuse the Jets post-snap, cover up the dump-down (no YAC) and move well laterally to be ready to capitalize on the inevitable bad decision.

 

[Kontradiction]

Interesting, the zero-blitz? Never heard of it, can you elaborate?

The Cover Zero. No deep safeties covering deep which leaves the corners in man-to-man coverage. Safeties would typically blitz. The Giants rolled it out against the Eagles a couple of weeks ago to mixed results. The zero blitz is basically a test for the quarterback to see how well he knows his offense and can make his reads. If he knows his offense well and can make his reads quickly, the zero blitz would be picked apart. That's why sending this type of pressure against a guy like Manning, with the rules changes considered and our secondary looking the way it is, would be pretty much suicide.

The entire 2nd half of the Jets game in week 2 BB sat back in that soft zone the entire half and gave a non-confident Mark Sanchez his confidence back. And in the end, that's what lost the game for us BB's decision not to pressure Sanchez when he was on shaky ground as it was, Sanchez had time to do his taxes that whole half and he picked us apart because of it and it cost us the game. Go back and watch it if you've DVR'd it or Google it. We sat back the whole second half and blew that game because of it.

Here is what I was able to find on the defensive alignments in that game...

Base: 45 of 68
Sub: 22 of 68
Short-yardage: 1 of 68

We were in our base defense on the vast majority of the snaps. This means that we were probably sending more than four rushers at Sanchez. From the fourth quarter review...

2. The most aggressive defensive play of the night from the Patriots came on a crucial third-and-6 for the Jets from the Patriots’ 45-yard line. Against four Jets receivers set out wide, the Patriots rushed seven players, including two of their six defensive backs – safeties Patrick Chung and James Sanders. Feeling the pressure, including an unblocked Sanders, Jets QB Mark Sanchez began to quickly sink and eventually threw to empty field as DE Mike Wright broke off his block and added to Sanders’ pressure. It was a key third-down stop by the Patriots, with the team down by a touchdown early in the fourth quarter.

4. The Patriots had their final realistic opportunity to stop the Jets on their second drive of the fourth quarter. On second-and-6, the Patriots tried to get more aggressive, blitzing OLB Rob Ninkovich from a slot coverage position. Sanchez calmly waited for Ninkovich to pass RB LaDainian Tomlinson on his rush, before dumping off a pass to Tomlinson and having blockers to clear the way ahead. It was another case of the Jets staying a step ahead of the Patriots, anticipating their added sense of urgency and using the screen pass to combat the increased blitz presence. This play set up a third-and-1, which the Jets converted to move to midfield.

From the third quarter...

2. The Patriots opened up the second half doing what they didn’t do on the final drive of the first half (a Jets field goal): pressuring the quarterback. As had been the case on his first sack of the game, DE Gerard Warren’s second sack came on a play-action by the Jets. This time, Warren benefited from OLB Jermaine Cunningham, who used good hand work on LT D’Brickashaw Ferguson to pressure Jets QB Mark Sanchez. Meanwhile, Warren had turned LG Matt Slauson around the corner, and was in position to record the sack of Sanchez when he stepped outside to avoid Cunningham.

So yes, the Patriots did send extra rushers in the second half. Some of it worked, some of it was picked up, and some of it failed.

 

[Marqui]

You are aware that the two teams run totally different defenses with totally different personnel, right? Technically, that's the same thing as saying, "you wanna know why the Jets and Steelers shouldn't run an aggressive one-gapping 3-4? Go back and watch a few Patriots games. That's why".

Yes, I'm aware they run different defenses. The point was young DBs tend to be more vulnerable to mistakes when covering man-to-man which results in huge plays (that fact is true for any defensive scheme). BTW, I agree with you that more man coverage will up our D get off the field on 3rd down. I just think that BB would rather give up a ton of yards and have horrible defensive statistics rather than have the D give up ridiculous plays like the Texans do.

As an aside, it should also be pointed out that the defensive mini-stand that eventually ended up winning us the Chargers game came because we FINALLY switched from zone to man coverage. It confused Rivers, who was exploiting the soft spots in the zone all throughout the second half, enough that their offense stalled for a long field goal.

Another example of that is when the Pats played more press coverage in the 4th quarter/overtime against Baltimore and Flacco couldn't move his offense to save his life.

 

[Patspsycho]

Another example of that is when the Pats played more press coverage in the 4th quarter/overtime against Baltimore and Flacco couldn't move his offense to save his life.

The only thing we did in the 4th Q to stop Flacco was to put Fletcher in the sub package to spy Rice and let Mayo/Guyton drop back and work the middle. Stopping Rice cold was what messed Flacco up.

 

[Marqui]

The only thing we did in the 4th Q to stop Flacco was to put Fletcher in the sub package to spy Rice and let Mayo/Guyton drop back and work the middle. Stopping Rice cold was what messed Flacco up.

Yea, but his decision to keep checking down was a result of some tighter coverage. I could be remembering wrong though, I haven't re-watched that game in a while.

 

[Deus Irae]

Who's capable of reliably shutting down his man in single coverage?

 

[borg]

For weeks I've been asking myself why the Patriots defense is so horrible defending the pass. This D starts five 1st round draft picks...G. Warren, Wilfork, Mayo, Meriweather, and McCourty. Add in the six 2nd rounders that contribute to this defense and noone can argue that BB hasn't used resources on this side of the ball. Stats show that the DE/OLBs have failed at attacking the QB. The eyeball test tells me that opposing QBs are picking apart the soft zone pass defense.
Which brings me to my new name for this defense......The Hope and Reality Defense
BB positions his LBs and DBs in layers for his zone scheme, especially on 3rd down. The HOPE is that the front 4 will bring enough pressure that the QB will be forced to release the ball early before the WR/TE can set up inside vacant zone space. The REALITY is that the pass rush fails and the safeties are instructed to remain in deep zone coverage to avoid the big play. No pass rush, plenty of time to exploit the zone....if pass is accurate, the sticks usually keep moving.
The Big Picture
The offense is the most prolific in the NFL and the most efficient. Consider that the offense is on the field only 27 minutes per game. Also consider that the offense usually secures the lead early on, which forces teams to abandon the running game. Pass attempts vs the Pats D in the last 3 games...46,52,49. So we are talking an average of 49 pass rushes and coverages. Consider McCourty is playing every snap, there is no way this D can think about man to man coverage as a primary tactic considering their time on the field. Which brings to my final point...
Depth
Coming into the regular season, you have to believe BB felt pretty good about his secondary. Big contract for Bodden, high hopes for new #1 pick, year 2 for Butler, and contributions from Wheatley and Wilhite. Add in a very deep safety group and I bet BB felt he had compiled a solid secondary. Losing Bodden started the snowball effect...and Butler's ineffectiveness has forced this group almost into survival mode.
So it is what it is: a thin CB group playing pass defense for 2/3s of the snaps with no pass rush help. Add in the BB defensive philosophy of "nothing deep" and these guys are on an island.
It can be very frustrating watching this defense and I sometimes yell at the TV for BB to take some risks. But then you see Branch exploit a DB mistake without safety help for a 79 yarder. And as someone mentioned, the Texans loss to the NYJ was equally perplexing...considering the lack of safety help with seconds left in the game. Maybe the coach knows what he is doing.
9-2 with draft picks up the wazoo...these holes will get filled and the second dynasty will be complete ( stay healthy Tom)

 

[Kontradiction]

Yes, I'm aware they run different defenses. The point was young DBs tend to be more vulnerable to mistakes when covering man-to-man which results in huge plays (that fact is true for any defensive scheme). BTW, I agree with you that more man coverage will up our D get off the field on 3rd down. I just think that BB would rather give up a ton of yards and have horrible defensive statistics rather than have the D give up ridiculous plays like the Texans do.

Yep. That would be a casualty of playing man-to-man almost exclusively. That wasn't what I was looking for. I was wondering why we don't alternate more often and stay mostly in zone. Based on reading this post, I can see that you agree with that stance.

Another example of that is when the Pats played more press coverage in the 4th quarter/overtime against Baltimore and Flacco couldn't move his offense to save his life.

Good call.

 

[pblmax99]

Not sure playing zone vs. Keller and Sanchez is right thing to do.....they will make plays vs a true zone...Jets will prob spread Pats out...and run...rely on their O Line to beat their man 1 on 1 or go play action and look for big plays...

 

[mesoslo]

usually in zone coverage the offense(the player with the football) has to beat the entire defense, where as with man coverage, if the offensive player beats the defensive player that is gaurding him, he usually gashes the defense for a massive gain, because the other defensive players are out of position because they are busy gaurding their defensive assignments.

zone coverages also foces players to throw away their original routes and find a soft spot in the zone go there hoping the QB will thow the ball to him.


Man coverage also requires a lot of stamina.

 

[zipster9]

Not sure playing zone vs. Keller and Sanchez is right thing to do.....they will make plays vs a true zone...Jets will prob spread Pats out...and run...rely on their O Line to beat their man 1 on 1 or go play action and look for big plays...

silly question, but...

If you play "Press coverage", what advantages to this method than "Zone coverage"? Meaning, is there a situation whereby "Zone" is better to utilize than "Press"?

 

[pblmax99]

silly question, but...

If you play "Press coverage", what advantages to this method than "Zone coverage"? Meaning, is there a situation whereby "Zone" is better to utilize than "Press"?

Play press...when blitzing...have a guy like Revis on your team...who is very physical...and trust to stay with WR....zone...if dont have great corners..Rex not a big fan of zone...but vs. Pats may be best way to go...

 

[pblmax99]

Revis plays press coverage basically every play...with Rex saying I dare you to try it..and throw to him....I'm gonna send my safety on his side...go ahead and try it.

 

[Patspsycho]

silly question, but...

If you play "Press coverage", what advantages to this method than "Zone coverage"? Meaning, is there a situation whereby "Zone" is better to utilize than "Press"?

Play press...when blitzing...have a guy like Revis on your team...who is very physical...and trust to stay with WR....zone...if dont have great corners..Rex not a big fan of zone...but vs. Pats may be best way to go...

Revis plays press coverage basically every play...with Rex saying I dare you to try it..and throw to him....I'm gonna send my safety on his side...go ahead and try it.

I think you are confusing press coverage with man to man. Press coverage is NOT always man to man.

I think what you want to discuss is man coverage (or cover 0) vs zone.

 

[pblmax99]

I think you are confusing press coverage with man to man. Press coverage is NOT always man to man.

I think what you want to discuss is man coverage (or cover 0) vs zone.

True....with Jets..hard to say...you know most of time will be man on Revis' side...but Rex throws in some zone underneath...fake blitz and drop a DL or LB...and send a safety....

 

[Patspsycho]

True....with Jets..hard to say...you know most of time will be man on Revis' side...but Rex throws in some zone underneath...fake blitz and drop a DL or LB...and send a safety....

There's a safety over him more often than not.

 

[Fencer]

Do any of our LBs (or safeties) have the ability to mug a TE at the LOS, then run with him in reasonably effective man coverage? Offhand, I'd think those skills don't go together; e.g. Vrabel excels at the first -- to the point he also excels on the other side of that matchup, which is what makes him such a good goal-line TE -- but never was the fleetest of foot.

I think it's more generally a matter of the LB jamming the TE, then doing something else -- like going after the QB -- while somebody else picks up coverage.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I single handedly blame Gary Guyton. Even when he has a good game, deep down i still hate him. He's fast but seems to have no acceleration. Balls are always caught in front of him and he doesn't jar any balls lose because he tackles with zero force. I feel that fletcher should replace him. When flecther is on the field, good things seem to happen.

Guyton is wonderful a revelation this year in pass coverage, and improved by 100% or more now that he is releived of playing actual running downs. Brandon now handles the run downs much better and Guyton is doing very well on pass coverage. Each complements the other and does best what the other is weakest at doing.