Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 240

Thread: Ask Anything (Defensively)

  1. #1

    Default Ask Anything (Defensively)

    Figured I'd put some proactive effort in and post this up.

    Anyone who has any questions about anything relating to defenses in the game of football (from pee wee to college) can post it here and I will do my best to answer it. I should be able to answer all or at the very least refer you to someone who could answer that question, or find it myself and respond back.

    Anything from 0-9 positions on the DL, LB positions further back, under and over fronts, different types of 34s, what a double fan is, types of blitzes and stunts, and my specialty is defensive backfields so I promise I can answer any question you have about coverages!
    Russlin jimmies since 1981

  2. The Following 2 Users High Fived TheReverend For This Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
    Figured I'd put some proactive effort in and post this up.

    Anyone who has any questions about anything relating to defenses in the game of football (from pee wee to college) can post it here and I will do my best to answer it. I should be able to answer all or at the very least refer you to someone who could answer that question, or find it myself and respond back.

    Anything from 0-9 positions on the DL, LB positions further back, under and over fronts, different types of 34s, what a double fan is, types of blitzes and stunts, and my specialty is defensive backfields so I promise I can answer any question you have about coverages!
    I actually have a question about defending the spread option/a running QB. There seem to be two trains of thought on the subject. The first is that it is a gimmicky offense and Defenses just need tape, the other is that it legitimately puts a defense at a disadvantage by needing to play 11 v 11 football. Assuming the QB is an average passer from a defensive perspective is the spread option actually legitimate at the Pro level(tough to defend)? why/why not?


    Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable. -
    Mark Twain

    I am a great believer in luck, I find the harder I work, the luckier I become-Thomas Jefferson

  4. The Following 2 Users High Fived catfish For This Post:


  5. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by catfish View Post
    I actually have a question about defending the spread option/a running QB. There seem to be two trains of thought on the subject. The first is that it is a gimmicky offense and Defenses just need tape, the other is that it legitimately puts a defense at a disadvantage by needing to play 11 v 11 football. Assuming the QB is an average passer from a defensive perspective is the spread option actually legitimate at the Pro level(tough to defend)? why/why not?
    ABSOLUTELY.

    Not only does it make 11v11 football and level the playing field more, but it creates SEVERAL huge offensive advantages:

    1. Multi-dimensional offense. You've heard of taking away the passing or running game to make an opposing offense "one dimensional", but what do you do when the running game itself is multidimensional? The reaction time from the snap to the potential hand off is nill for a defensive player and breaks them down to assignment football (player x responsible for player y). If a team designs to remove a Ray Rice from Baltimore, they put the game on Joe Flacco's arm. If a team designs to remove McGahee from Denver, Tim can run rampant.

    2. More than 11 v 11: Tim's run ability and that multi-dimensional rushing game usually translates into at LEAST the weakside DE playing contain (often BOTH DE's), which dramatically slows the pass rush as they're now taking away rushing lanes instead of trying to apply quick pressure. We also generally see 1-2 LBs playing "spy", which opens up coverage seams even more (ref: Miami deep throw to Fells, both TDs @ Oakland, etc).

    3. Size advantage. Going "spread" will bring dime packages out from opposing defenses. More DBs will = better coverage, better speed, but smaller... something a massive player like Tebow can run rough-shod on (heck, we've even seen Aaron Rogers run crazy on defenses thanks to spreads).

    Let me know if you want more details towards any of these.
    Russlin jimmies since 1981

  6. The Following User High Fived TheReverend For This Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On your '6', Stupid!
    Posts
    10,702

    Default

    I would like to know your football resume.

    Tia

    Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
    Bitter Clinger. Deal with it.

  8. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Adopted Bronco:
    Ray Finkel
    Posts
    86,712

    Default

    In my opinion the option wont last at the pro level. At least with a inconsistent passer as it stands at the moment. In order for something like this to work longterm Tim will have to improve dramatically in the passing area and on a consistent basis for it too be successful in the long run. Which is why when it comes to QB's in the NFL they are always more successful as pass first, run second QB's.

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On your '6', Stupid!
    Posts
    10,702

    Default

    I believe we all saw with our own eyes, how the option is no longer an option (pun intended).

    Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
    Bitter Clinger. Deal with it.

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
    ABSOLUTELY.

    Not only does it make 11v11 football and level the playing field more, but it creates SEVERAL huge offensive advantages:

    1. Multi-dimensional offense. You've heard of taking away the passing or running game to make an opposing offense "one dimensional", but what do you do when the running game itself is multidimensional? The reaction time from the snap to the potential hand off is nill for a defensive player and breaks them down to assignment football (player x responsible for player y). If a team designs to remove a Ray Rice from Baltimore, they put the game on Joe Flacco's arm. If a team designs to remove McGahee from Denver, Tim can run rampant.

    2. More than 11 v 11: Tim's run ability and that multi-dimensional rushing game usually translates into at LEAST the weakside DE playing contain (often BOTH DE's), which dramatically slows the pass rush as they're now taking away rushing lanes instead of trying to apply quick pressure. We also generally see 1-2 LBs playing "spy", which opens up coverage seams even more (ref: Miami deep throw to Fells, both TDs @ Oakland, etc).

    3. Size advantage. Going "spread" will bring dime packages out from opposing defenses. More DBs will = better coverage, better speed, but smaller... something a massive player like Tebow can run rough-shod on (heck, we've even seen Aaron Rogers run crazy on defenses thanks to spreads).

    Let me know if you want more details towards any of these.
    thank you, I agree with others when they say the option won't take off in the NFL, but figured it was the result of teams fearing injury to the QB rather than it being a "gimmick" that won't work. Appreciate the info.


    Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable. -
    Mark Twain

    I am a great believer in luck, I find the harder I work, the luckier I become-Thomas Jefferson

  11. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rcsodak View Post
    I would like to know your football resume.

    Tia

    Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
    Frankly that's just not your business. Feel free to "test me" on whatever you'd like though. Or feel free to just doubt me. I don't mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Northman View Post
    In my opinion the option wont last at the pro level. At least with a inconsistent passer as it stands at the moment. In order for something like this to work longterm Tim will have to improve dramatically in the passing area and on a consistent basis for it too be successful in the long run. Which is why when it comes to QB's in the NFL they are always more successful as pass first, run second QB's.
    It'll be here to stay, just situationally. Denver itself didn't run the spread option as a base. As Tim develops, so will our offense.

    Quote Originally Posted by rcsodak View Post
    I believe we all saw with our own eyes, how the option is no longer an option (pun intended).

    Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
    I believe we all saw with our own eyes how it opened up a verticle passing game against the #1 pass and #1 defense in the NFL.

    Quote Originally Posted by catfish View Post
    thank you, I agree with others when they say the option won't take off in the NFL, but figured it was the result of teams fearing injury to the QB rather than it being a "gimmick" that won't work. Appreciate the info.
    No problem.
    Russlin jimmies since 1981

  12. The Following User High Fived TheReverend For This Post:


  13. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    another question...is there something schematically that can be done to increase created turnovers by our D. We pretty much sucked at TO differential last year, would be nice to get more short drives. We seem to be getting pretty good outside pressure. Is it a matter of needing more inside pressure, better corner/Safety play or something schematically that can be changed. or is it all just a roll the dice thing


    Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable. -
    Mark Twain

    I am a great believer in luck, I find the harder I work, the luckier I become-Thomas Jefferson

  14. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by catfish View Post
    another question...is there something schematically that can be done to increase created turnovers by our D. We pretty much sucked at TO differential last year, would be nice to get more short drives. We seem to be getting pretty good outside pressure. Is it a matter of needing more inside pressure, better corner/Safety play or something schematically that can be changed. or is it all just a roll the dice thing
    Yes. More zones. We played a lot of man and cover 1 schemes and when we did zones it was more cover 3 looks (more prone to give up the short passes).

    Man coverage is playing the WR first and most of the time your back is to the QB. In zones you're able to read the QB and his eyes from your zone and make a play on the ball MUCH easier.
    Russlin jimmies since 1981

  15. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
    Yes. More zones. We played a lot of man and cover 1 schemes and when we did zones it was more cover 3 looks (more prone to give up the short passes).

    Man coverage is playing the WR first and most of the time your back is to the QB. In zones you're able to read the QB and his eyes from your zone and make a play on the ball MUCH easier.
    thank you again


    Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable. -
    Mark Twain

    I am a great believer in luck, I find the harder I work, the luckier I become-Thomas Jefferson

  16. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On your '6', Stupid!
    Posts
    10,702

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
    Frankly that's just not your business. Feel free to "test me" on whatever you'd like though. Or feel free to just doubt me. I don't mind.



    It'll be here to stay, just situationally. Denver itself didn't run the spread option as a base. As Tim develops, so will our offense.



    I believe we all saw with our own eyes how it opened up a verticle passing game against the #1 pass and #1 defense in the NFL.



    No problem.
    Lmao. Guess that answers that.

    And the Pitt win was dick Lebeu out-thinking himself.

    Did he not watch tape from the Chi/NE/Det/KC games?

    Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
    Bitter Clinger. Deal with it.

  17. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rcsodak View Post
    Lmao. Guess that answers that.

    And the Pitt win was dick Lebeu out-thinking himself.

    Did he not watch tape from the Chi/NE/Det/KC games?

    Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
    I realize that you're trying to troll me, so let's bring it back to THIS level:

    What do you think Lebeau did differently than Chi/NE/Det/KC games?

    And use detail. This should be fun.
    Russlin jimmies since 1981

  18. The Following 2 Users High Fived TheReverend For This Post:


  19. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Adopted Bronco:
    Josey Jewell
    Posts
    30,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheReverend View Post
    I realize that you're trying to troll me, so let's bring it back to THIS level:

    What do you think Lebeau did differently than Chi/NE/Det/KC games?

    And use detail. This should be fun.
    Actually, I thought that was a reasonable inquiry. If you are going to pose as a
    defensive expert, it would seem to me it is fair to ask of your resume.

    -----
    Though He slay me, I will trust in Him . . . (Job 13:15)


  20. #15

    Default

    It was simple how pits screwed up the put 11 men in the box no safety help for Taylor and if u want to act like a know it all then u should let people know wats ur experience

Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Gregg Popovich: Spurs Are Horrible Defensively
    By Retired_Member_001 in forum NBA
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-14-2008, 01:09 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group