SB53 (and general) defensive strategy question

[QuantumMechanic]

On NE's TD drive in the Superbowl they hit on the idea of putting out a heavy set (2 RBs, 2 TEs) to force LA to put in their base defense because they had to worry about the run. Ok, that makes sense.

However, NE put all those heavy people out wide and went with an empty backfield. And they put people like Allen and a RB out the widest, with Gronk and Edelman in the slots. That caused LA to "waste" its cornerbacks on Allen and the RB and have LBs against Gronk and Edelman.

Yay for us, but why do defenses just passively accept clear mismatches like that at the line (this is far from the only example of this you'll see in a season)? Why not switch the LBs and corners and put the corners on the bigger pass-catching threats?

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

On NE's TD drive in the Superbowl they hit on the idea of putting out a heavy set (2 RBs, 2 TEs) to force LA to put in their base defense because they had to worry about the run. Ok, that makes sense.

However, NE put all those heavy people out wide and went with an empty backfield. And they put people like Allen and a RB out the widest, with Gronk and Edelman in the slots. That caused LA to "waste" its cornerbacks on Allen and the RB and have LBs against Gronk and Edelman.

Yay for us, but why do defenses just passively accept clear mismatches like that at the line (this is far from the only example of this you'll see in a season)? Why not switch the LBs and corners and put the corners on the bigger pass-catching threats?

I was listening to Michael Lombardi's podcast after the game and he said the Rams hadn't practiced a particular D against that personnel/alignment package, so when presented with that situation, the D has a default call. In the Rams' case, it was zone.

Teams do make adjustments in-game to such things, but the changes typically don't happen immediately (think BB taking a while to get a bigger corner on Chris Matthews in SB49). By employing this package in the 4th quarter, the Rams really weren't going to adjust until it was too late.

Regards,
Chris

 

[BTTA]

This went through my mind at the time, wondering if LA had thought about this more, they would have switched it up the way you mention.
But Burkhead and/or White on the boundary against a LB? That's going against the instincts of a DC, even if it is the wisest move.

 

[jah]

I'm not very qualified to answer, but my guess is it's a constant balance deciding how prepared your defense should be vs just trying to win the matchups at hand. After all, the more you're thinking about what ifs and contingency plans, the chance of miscommunication and slow decision making increases.

McVay only seemed to be concerned with execution all day so he probably thought simplifying the defensive game plan and "letting his guys play" would work. It didn't.

 

[maust]

I'm thinking putting a LB on James White out in space is threatening Brady with a good time.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I'm thinking putting a LB on James White out in space is threatening Brady with a good time.

Fair enough, but why waste a corner on Allen?

 

[catent]

Because the Rams were in zone they had to set their defense accordingly. Had they called man coverage, presumably they could’ve matched up with the Patriots receivers in the way you’re suggesting, QM.

The problem with that, I believe, is that had the Patriots used that heavy formation as one might expect them to (compact/under center), the Rams would’ve been in trouble because they’d have someone like Talib across the LOS from Gronk, and if the Patriots ran the ball that’d be trouble for LAR.

 

[Wheelman]

what happens if they just put Marcus Peters man to man with Edelman and have the rest of the defense playing zone coverage?

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

what happens if they just put Marcus Peters man to man with Edelman and have the rest of the defense playing zone coverage?

Then there's not enough zones being covered, or the zone assignments become too large of areas to effectively cover, by base D personnel no less. I suspect Edelman takes Peters out of his normal zone spot, then Gronk goes into the vacated zone or otherwise finds plenty of room in the weakened zone coverage.

Regards,
Chris

 

[Ring 6]

On NE's TD drive in the Superbowl they hit on the idea of putting out a heavy set (2 RBs, 2 TEs) to force LA to put in their base defense because they had to worry about the run. Ok, that makes sense.

However, NE put all those heavy people out wide and went with an empty backfield. And they put people like Allen and a RB out the widest, with Gronk and Edelman in the slots. That caused LA to "waste" its cornerbacks on Allen and the RB and have LBs against Gronk and Edelman.

Yay for us, but why do defenses just passively accept clear mismatches like that at the line (this is far from the only example of this you'll see in a season)? Why not switch the LBs and corners and put the corners on the bigger pass-catching threats?

I was under the impression that they did not put corners on Allen and Devlin and the RB.

Edit. After reading the other responses I guess the question is are you taking about man coverage or zone.

 

[maust]

Fair enough, but why waste a corner on Allen?

You rotate that corner down and the Pats run right at him

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

I do like how the Pats attacked the Rams differently in their 3 straight Hoss Y Juke calls...

First play had Develin and Burkhead out wide. Rams were in zone, but like QM said, it was a waste to have a CB cover those guys, so the CBs dropped deep while the OLBs sprinted to short wide zones to cover the RBs. This left a huge hole in the middle of the field for Edelman to torch the MLB.

On the second play, the Rams were determined to give more help in the middle with those LBs so the CBs took the outside short zones the LBs had on the first play, but still had to play deep enough to prohibit the streaking TEs to get behind them. This gave Burkhead enough space in front of Peters.

The first two plays set up the third. With Peters having been shown Brady will take advantage of any cushion he affords Burkhead, he had to play up a bit tighter. With Peters occupied, Brady and Gronk knew there would be a small window up the seam before the safety could get over. They were right.

Regards,
Chris

 

[QuantumMechanic]

On that long play to Gronk the LB (Littleton) also got confused and started following the motion man across the formation before realizing he screwed up and started running back to Gronk’s spot but was too late and Gronk got a free release off the line.

 

[Tony2046]

I do like how the Pats attacked the Rams differently in their 3 straight Hoss Y Juke calls...

First play had Develin and Burkhead out wide. Rams were in zone, but like QM said, it was a waste to have a CB cover those guys, so the CBs dropped deep while the OLBs sprinted to short wide zones to cover the RBs. This left a huge hole in the middle of the field for Edelman to torch the MLB.

On the second play, the Rams were determined to give more help in the middle with those LBs so the CBs took the outside short zones the LBs had on the first play, but still had to play deep enough to prohibit the streaking TEs to get behind them. This gave Burkhead enough space in front of Peters.

The first two plays set up the third. With Peters having been shown Brady will take advantage of any cushion he affords Burkhead, he had to play up a bit tighter. With Peters occupied, Brady and Gronk knew there would be a small window up the seam before the safety could get over. They were right.

Regards,
Chris

I think the Rams had the third play covered decently but the throw and catch was just so perfect that it was unbeatable.

 

[ALP]

i wonder if just going reg spread would have worked

all game pretty much we were scared of their D line, so we played with more pass protection than the 5 OL, but if we just let them take on the DL by themselves with no RB/TE/WR help, maybe we would have been able to do the same thing

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

I think the Rams had the third play covered decently but the throw and catch was just so perfect that it was unbeatable.

It wouldn't shock me if that play was supposed to have gone a bit more outside, away from the safety. Still, cant complain about a still stellar throw and catch. The Rams brought 5 on that play, too.

Regards,
Chris

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

i wonder if just going reg spread would have worked

all game pretty much we were scared of their D line, so we played with more pass protection than the 5 OL, but if we just let them take on the DL by themselves with no RB/TE/WR help, maybe we would have been able to do the same thing

The Pats ran a handful of 5-wide plays with conventional personnel. They were met with nickel/dime coverages. They completed one pass (to Edelman on 1st down where he rolled over the defender to make another 1st down). The Rams appeared to have prepared well for the 5-wide package in general, just not the 22 set.

Regards,
Chris