Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option

Posted: 1/13/2013 10:11 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



SoulDawg74 wrote:
Gameface64 wrote: After watching Kaepernick dismantle the Packers last night, its clear the read option as run by RG3, Wilson and Kaepernick is going to be a copied NFL trend. To have a QB that can execute a single play with 3 viable options is going to stress the hell out of defenses.

They all have that one play where the QB and RB set up like an off tackle run, then the QB can hand off, pull it back and pass, or pull it back and run. The only thing I can think that will undo these type of offensives is if the QB's start getting badly hurt. RG3 and Wilson are small, we saw Griffin go down, but Wilson hasn't taken a nick, and Kaepernick looks indestructable. If college ball starts churning out these kind of QBs, it will really take off. I recognize that all three QBs above can also pass really well, and operate out of the pocket as well as on the move. None are strictly runners.

So does a 4-3 set provide any advantage over the 3-4 against these new hybrid offenses?

If the Browns go to an attacking 3-4, how well can they defense this triple option threat?

I'm not sure, but I can guess that really fast LBers would be the first order of the day.

How many yards did SF rush for last night: 323
Yards passing: 263

Yeah it's a passing league, but not always.

One other question: anybody else notice the predominance of shotgun sets? Not sure I understand this idea that you can't run out of the shotgun/pistol. Is that a rule that's about to fail?
SD:

Dammit gf , I hate 20 questions , especially multiple questions within questions .

The read option was effective against both the 34 and the 43 , as evidenced by Wilson erasing a 20 point lead in the second have vs the Falcons 43 , while the embers were still smoldering over Don Capers 34 dumpster fire the day before.

So my answer is you have to refine the defense to task , and do what defenses are supposed to do when faced with options , kill the QB .

DC's will have all offseason to break down film on this junk , and once linebackers have specific keys to use where they aren't running around playing button button who has the button , the toll will be catastrophic .

Then you'll see a reversion right back to the time tested offense we'll be running hopefully to perfection .

You want to run , nevermind using our QB add Lacey in the backfield with TR .

We would be two suited like a Bid Wiss , Boston hand ,
with the ability to run and pass seemingly at will , as Notre Dame found out in their bowl game , that beats the hell outta read option .

The read option flourished because it wasn't taken seriously , getting this undo attention  will be its death .

$.02

SoulDawg

Great take here SD. I couldn't agree more.

Once teams start telling their DE or OLB's to disregard the RB and make the QB their primary target, the read option will go the way of the Wildcat.

You can't protect your QB by running him all over the field. In the end your QB still has to be able to play from the pocket. This is why the Pats will beat the 9ers in the SB. The Patriots will destroy Kaepernick everytime he attemps runs the read option play whether he keeps the ball or not.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/13/2013 10:35 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


+ 2

First thing ATL needs to do is drill CK like as if frackin' shale, repeatedly. 15 yard flags be damned.

If they don't you can be DAMN sure BB or the Ratbirds will in the SB.

Kid ain't slidin & is acting all baDD & sh!+. It's only a matter of time, smarts & ballz.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/13/2013 10:47 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


Yeah, I wondered what happened to the "spy" concept on defense.  Sure, the spy better be faster and quicker than 10 years ago, but there's nothing really new in life (and sports), just packaged in a different way.  If Kaepernick is still running for 50+ yard TDs four or five years from now, I'll tip my hat.  But somehow I doubt it.

1/6/04 Rest in peace "Daddy Wags." May perpetual light shine upon you.

"It's alright to have a hitch in your swing, but when you have a flaw in your hitch, you're in trouble." - Leon Wagner

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 9:10 AM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



poppa9601 wrote:

Great take here SD. I couldn't agree more.

Once teams start telling their DE or OLB's to disregard the RB and make the QB their primary target, the read option will go the way of the Wildcat.

You can't protect your QB by running him all over the field. In the end your QB still has to be able to play from the pocket. This is why the Pats will beat the 9ers in the SB. The Patriots will destroy Kaepernick everytime he attemps runs the read option play whether he keeps the ball or not.
Kapernick CAN play from the pocket, and so can Wilson and RG3. If you watch the games you see they run as a change of pace, or use the threat of the run to make defenses cover more of the field.

While the Pats may certainly "destroy" the 49ers in the SB, I doubt that it will be as simple as drilling CK whether he keeps the ball or not. First you have to get near him, and if you saw what happened to Green Bay, you may be suggesting that they hit him when he's on his way downfield to celebrate a teammate's touchdown. They ran well with Gore and his backup, and Crabtree and Davis can catch it.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 9:13 AM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


DW,

I doubt Kaepernick will be running for almost 200 yards per game 5 years from now either. But I would bet that he'll still be a very good NFL QB who's a threat to run, and I bet there will still be versions of plays where young QBs have an option to throw, run or pass.

There's nothing new in the game, but the game always evolves.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 9:49 AM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



Nasdaq wrote: + 2

First thing ATL needs to do is drill CK like as if frackin' shale, repeatedly. 15 yard flags be damned.

If they don't you can be DAMN sure BB or the Ratbirds will in the SB.

Kid ain't slidin & is acting all baDD & sh!+. It's only a matter of time, smarts & ballz.
By this logic, wouldn't you do the same to Brady ior any other QB? Just drill him regardless of flags and knock his ass outta the game, whether he's got the ball or not.

Being facetious of course, but as a defensive strategy, what you suggest isn't really viable. I agree that if Kapeernick doesn't know to slide, then game on. But that's dealing with him as a runner, and not really addressing the question of defensing the read/option play that I described where he can hand-off, pass or run.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/14/2013 10:02 AM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



Gameface64 wrote:
poppa9601 wrote:

Great take here SD. I couldn't agree more.

Once teams start telling their DE or OLB's to disregard the RB and make the QB their primary target, the read option will go the way of the Wildcat.

You can't protect your QB by running him all over the field. In the end your QB still has to be able to play from the pocket. This is why the Pats will beat the 9ers in the SB. The Patriots will destroy Kaepernick everytime he attemps runs the read option play whether he keeps the ball or not.
Kapernick CAN play from the pocket, and so can Wilson and RG3. If you watch the games you see they run as a change of pace, or use the threat of the run to make defenses cover more of the field.

While the Pats may certainly "destroy" the 49ers in the SB, I doubt that it will be as simple as drilling CK whether he keeps the ball or not. First you have to get near him, and if you saw what happened to Green Bay, you may be suggesting that they hit him when he's on his way downfield to celebrate a teammate's touchdown. They ran well with Gore and his backup, and Crabtree and Davis can catch it.
Yeah Game, CK can play from the pocket, but that's not what beat the Packers. What beat the Pack is that they played the run first, meaning they went for the fake, every time, and allowed Kaepernick the room to run and/or the time to throw. The Rats or Pats won't make that same mistake.

The read option is no more the wave of the future than was the Wildcat.  The defenses will catchup. They always do.

If I'm coordinating the defense, I tell my guys to drill CK everytime they run that crap and then tell the ref that he faked me out and I thought he had the ball. Can't have it both ways. Can't make your QB part of the running game and expect the protection that
is afforded a passer. That crap won't fly. Not against BB.

But either way, like Nas said, penalties be damned. Hit him, hard.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 10:47 AM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


I realize that some will see this as a gimmick. But I don't see it as an offensive system, its just a component of traditional offensive ideas with a new breed of player expanding certain possibilities.

Think how Lawrence Taylor changed the OLB position, and to this day you see LT type players who emulate his game from 20 years ago.

One team doing something is a gimmick, four of five teams doing it is a trend. It's not going to eliminate pocket passing offenses, but it may become a variation of them. I could see more non-prototypical pocket passers carving out NFL careers. Sure seems no one had a high grade on Wilson or Kaepernick and they're both doing OK, and don't seem to be one or two-year flashes, at least imo.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/14/2013 1:22 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



Gameface64 wrote: I realize that some will see this as a gimmick. But I don't see it as an offensive system, its just a component of traditional offensive ideas with a new breed of player expanding certain possibilities.

- That's all well and good Game, and I have no doubt that some more teams will be trying to copy the success that the 49ers and S-hawks had this year, but I just feel that RG3 will be the norm, not the exception. To run that crap you're going need more than 1 starter quality QB, you might need 3.

Think how Lawrence Taylor changed the OLB position, and to this day you see LT type players who emulate his game from 20 years ago.

- Tell me, has anyone emulated LT's game? Not really, there's only one LT and it could be that there will only be one Colin Keapernick. We'll see.

One team doing something is a gimmick, four of five teams doing it is a trend. It's not going to eliminate pocket passing offenses, but it may become a variation of them. I could see more non-prototypical pocket passers carving out NFL careers. Sure seems no one had a high grade on Wilson or Kaepernick and they're both doing OK, and don't seem to be one or two-year flashes, at least imo.

It's a gimmick that has caught teams by surprise, same as the wildcat. And just like the Cat it will run it's course and be done. Every team in the league has run the Wildcat to some degree, that doesn't make it a trend, just a fad. Even Shurmur, after stating he wouldn't, did.

The read option is only effective if the QB runs with the ball. Sooner or later they'll get RG3'd. When that happens they better have a very good backup plan, or their entire season will be down the drain.

Putting your QB at risk like that is dumb football. I wouldn't be surprised if the 49ers find that out the hard way before the THIS season is done.



Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 2:50 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


I see your all your points above as valid, just not completely convinced.

- RG3 got hurt partly because he didn't slide. Wilson made it through the entire season. Kaepernick has been running wild and he hardly gets touched. Compared to RG3, Wilson has stronger, thicker looking legs, Kaepernick is a big dude. Newton's done two seasons without major injury. RG3 may have been the most fragile in terms of physique of the 4 QBs we're talking about.

- Pocket passers get hurt too. Think about it, guys standing stationary and often blindsided or caught in a scrum with O-lineman falling into their lower body. Yep, running around can get a QB killed, but I'd like to know just how much it increases the odds.

- LT was pretty unique, but we've seen some guys like Merriman and Ware who play the same type of game. People didn't say, well, LT is a once in a lifetime player, so we won't bother looking for tall fast OLBs to rush the passer and generally disrupt the offense.  I think teams will look for tall fast QBs with good arms who can stretch a defense in more than one direction.

Y'know, at some point the hurry-up, the no-huddle, and the 3-4 were all gimmicks. Once upon a time someone said the forward pass was a gimmick.

Halfback Ernie Green used to block for FB Jim Brown.

To be clear, not saying that college offense is the NFL future. Just that athletic prototypes evolve, and elements of the game might follow that evolution.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/14/2013 3:22 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


IMHO you're better off in a 43 if you're going to play against the read option.  Since the purpose of any option defense play is to limit the options of the QB and force him to make a mistake (or attack your strength) you are probably better able to focuse on playing a fundamentally good defense than a defense that sacrifices fundamentals for disguises.

The 34 relies more on the disquised zone blitz and catching the QB by surprise.  But against an option a blitz leaves an opening.  If you're playing base 34 v. 43 you are more likely to give up 3-4 yards rather than 2-3 yards just because of reaction times from your backers.


In general you just need to play an honest defensive set.  You do that with a solid front 7 that can play disciplined.  And a bend/don't break defese like Belichick/Romeo  that gives up small chunks of yards in the middle of the field but keeps everything in front of them and tightens up as they near the redzone. 

IMHO NFL defenses in the past 3-4 years have become more undisciplined at the line in response to pass-first offenses.  You get guys who gamble against the pocket pass and don't look to defend the run or stay home in their position in case of an option.  Positionally they've build around more ends with speed.

The success of the read option is likely going to see a response in defenses where they work more at fundamentals.  

Frankly this is a good time to ignore the trend on offense and go more pass oriented - not less.  And against a read option offense you want ends like Courtney Brown rather than Jabaal Sheard. 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/14/2013 10:52 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



daddywags wrote: Yeah, I wondered what happened to the "spy" concept on defense.  Sure, the spy better be faster and quicker than 10 years ago, but there's nothing really new in life (and sports), just packaged in a different way.  If Kaepernick is still running for 50+ yard TDs four or five years from now, I'll tip my hat.  But somehow I doubt it.
Browns used to have a LB (#94) from an SEC school (NOT Big Money) that was a good spy. I forget his name but he was here in '05 or '06 and was decent in a 3-4.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/14/2013 11:01 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



0tter wrote:

IMHO you're better off in a 43 if you're going to play against the read option.  Since the purpose of any option defense play is to limit the options of the QB and force him to make a mistake (or attack your strength) you are probably better able to focuse on playing a fundamentally good defense than a defense that sacrifices fundamentals for disguises.

4-3 is better vs. mobile QBs. Exhibit A: 1991-1995 Browns 4-3  vs. Warren Moon and John Elway. They englobed him, whereas the 30 front was more confusing, but if the QB got by--that's a first down. Browns used the 40 vs. Cunningham, but went to a 3-4 in 1993 against the 49ers' Steve Young b/c it worked for the Giants. Even though they should have stuck with the 40.

The 34 relies more on the disquised zone blitz and catching the QB by surprise.  But against an option a blitz leaves an opening.  If you're playing base 34 v. 43 you are more likely to give up 3-4 yards rather than 2-3 yards just because of reaction times from your backers.

Same deal with the Flex 4-3 in '75-85 w/Landry, but in a 40 front. The LBs and DL were allowing extra space to read the D, but lost reaction time as a result.


In general you just need to play an honest defensive set.  You do that with a solid front 7 that can play disciplined.  And a bend/don't break defese like Belichick/Romeo  that gives up small chunks of yards in the middle of the field but keeps everything in front of them and tightens up as they near the redzone. 

That was the undoing of the Montana 49ers. BB/RAC used a nose-to-toes 30 front with cover-2 shell. Very basic, but basically, held them to FGs as the natural confines of an end zone gave a D an advantage. The O had to play in a compressed space, and with the talent the G-men had man to man, they could play an invincible D to a draw.



IMHO NFL defenses in the past 3-4 years have become more undisciplined at the line in response to pass-first offenses.  You get guys who gamble against the pocket pass and don't look to defend the run or stay home in their position in case of an option.  Positionally they've build around more ends with speed.

I see teams going to more big-nickel w/bigger DBs. Disadvantage: Read-Option teams will option them with bigger backs that can run and catch out of the backfield like Gore and Foster. You see more base nickel, but instead of using the base 4-DL you use some OLBs as DEs instead of real DEs in the "fast" nickels nowadays.

The success of the read option is likely going to see a response in defenses where they work more at fundamentals.  

Frankly this is a good time to ignore the trend on offense and go more pass oriented - not less.  And against a read option offense you want ends like Courtney Brown rather than Jabaal Sheard. 

Why the Quiet Storm? Sheard is a beast. Interesting take.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 11:24 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



kosartoslaughter wrote:
0tter wrote:

IMHO you're better off in a 43 if you're going to play against the read option.  Since the purpose of any option defense play is to limit the options of the QB and force him to make a mistake (or attack your strength) you are probably better able to focuse on playing a fundamentally good defense than a defense that sacrifices fundamentals for disguises.

4-3 is better vs. mobile QBs. Exhibit A: 1991-1995 Browns 4-3  vs. Warren Moon and John Elway. They englobed him, whereas the 30 front was more confusing, but if the QB got by--that's a first down. Browns used the 40 vs. Cunningham, but went to a 3-4 in 1993 against the 49ers' Steve Young b/c it worked for the Giants. Even though they should have stuck with the 40.

The 34 relies more on the disquised zone blitz and catching the QB by surprise.  But against an option a blitz leaves an opening.  If you're playing base 34 v. 43 you are more likely to give up 3-4 yards rather than 2-3 yards just because of reaction times from your backers.

Same deal with the Flex 4-3 in '75-85 w/Landry, but in a 40 front. The LBs and DL were allowing extra space to read the D, but lost reaction time as a result.


In general you just need to play an honest defensive set.  You do that with a solid front 7 that can play disciplined.  And a bend/don't break defese like Belichick/Romeo  that gives up small chunks of yards in the middle of the field but keeps everything in front of them and tightens up as they near the redzone. 

That was the undoing of the Montana 49ers. BB/RAC used a nose-to-toes 30 front with cover-2 shell. Very basic, but basically, held them to FGs as the natural confines of an end zone gave a D an advantage. The O had to play in a compressed space, and with the talent the G-men had man to man, they could play an invincible D to a draw.



IMHO NFL defenses in the past 3-4 years have become more undisciplined at the line in response to pass-first offenses.  You get guys who gamble against the pocket pass and don't look to defend the run or stay home in their position in case of an option.  Positionally they've build around more ends with speed.

I see teams going to more big-nickel w/bigger DBs. Disadvantage: Read-Option teams will option them with bigger backs that can run and catch out of the backfield like Gore and Foster. You see more base nickel, but instead of using the base 4-DL you use some OLBs as DEs instead of real DEs in the "fast" nickels nowadays.

The success of the read option is likely going to see a response in defenses where they work more at fundamentals.  

Frankly this is a good time to ignore the trend on offense and go more pass oriented - not less.  And against a read option offense you want ends like Courtney Brown rather than Jabaal Sheard. 

Why the Quiet Storm? Sheard is a beast. Interesting take.

SD:

Courtney Brown was one of the top fifty busts of all time ,

He's a sheet defensive end in any system , not for talent because of attitude .

Soft stinking pussy , just the type of goody two shoes mommas boy Browns fans think was so important .

Gimme the bad boy Sheard , and 10 more like him .

The Deacon Big Daddy Lipscomb  Ernie ladd Jack Youngblood , they'd of ripped off his head and sheet down his neck for staining their position with his pitiful weak ass play.

You want an Elephant along the lines of Woodley or Harrison , with the ability to get to the passer like Derrick Thomas or that kid in Denver now if you go 34 .

Leave the Courtney's home to do the ironing, but don't you ever bring no slob like tha back for my team.

We passed on the tone setter in Arrington , to get a thumbsucking baby sitter in Miss Courtney , hated the choice then , and it still  sends me into a rage recalling it now..

That sheet don't work on defense .

The Rats are great because if they didn't have football half them guys would be locked up .

You have to get guys with the mentality to bust you up and then laugh  at ya when your world comes tumbling in.

SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/14/2013 11:36 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



0tter wrote:

IMHO you're better off in a 43 if you're going to play against the read option.  Since the purpose of any option defense play is to limit the options of the QB and force him to make a mistake (or attack your strength) you are probably better able to focuse on playing a fundamentally good defense than a defense that sacrifices fundamentals for disguises.

The 34 relies more on the disquised zone blitz and catching the QB by surprise.  But against an option a blitz leaves an opening.  If you're playing base 34 v. 43 you are more likely to give up 3-4 yards rather than 2-3 yards just because of reaction times from your backers.


In general you just need to play an honest defensive set.  You do that with a solid front 7 that can play disciplined.  And a bend/don't break defese like Belichick/Romeo  that gives up small chunks of yards in the middle of the field but keeps everything in front of them and tightens up as they near the redzone. 

IMHO NFL defenses in the past 3-4 years have become more undisciplined at the line in response to pass-first offenses.  You get guys who gamble against the pocket pass and don't look to defend the run or stay home in their position in case of an option.  Positionally they've build around more ends with speed.

The success of the read option is likely going to see a response in defenses where they work more at fundamentals.  

Frankly this is a good time to ignore the trend on offense and go more pass oriented - not less.  And against a read option offense you want ends like Courtney Brown rather than Jabaal Sheard. 

SD:

You might want to spend a weekend on NFL films and look at Defensive End play during the period you was still slobberin on yourself and playing with toys too young to understand what real defensive ends look like .

Before you ever want to use that name as some example of something.

SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/15/2013 5:11 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


I too see and understand your POV, it's an exciting brand of football. I just don't think it's sustainable nor a valid option to build your offense around.

Yeah Kaepernick has done a good job of getting down before taking a big hit. But sooner or later he's going to need that drive sustaining, all important first down. And when he goes for that extra yard or so, "bam", someone's gonna light himup, just like RG3.

Maybe that never happens, maybe CK goes on to be the greatest QB in NFL history, I just somehow doubt it. But regardless of if it happens to CK or not, the more QB's you have running that crap, the more likely it becomes. And considering TCE and all that it entails, I don't want my QB taking any unnecessary extra chances.

Besides, there's a difference between gimmick and innovation. The 3/4, no huddle, the 2 minute drill were all innovations. The option read is nothing new to football, just to the NFL. But that's nolonger the case. It'll be interesting to see what happens from here on out.

No doubt teams will copy some form of it next year. I just hope it's not us.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/15/2013 10:02 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



poppa9601 wrote: I too see and understand your POV, it's an exciting brand of football. I just don't think it's sustainable nor a valid option to build your offense around.

Yeah Kaepernick has done a good job of getting down before taking a big hit. But sooner or later he's going to need that drive sustaining, all important first down. And when he goes for that extra yard or so, "bam", someone's gonna light himup, just like RG3.

Maybe that never happens, maybe CK goes on to be the greatest QB in NFL history, I just somehow doubt it. But regardless of if it happens to CK or not, the more QB's you have running that crap, the more likely it becomes. And considering TCE and all that it entails, I don't want my QB taking any unnecessary extra chances.

Besides, there's a difference between gimmick and innovation. The 3/4, no huddle, the 2 minute drill were all innovations. The option read is nothing new to football, just to the NFL. But that's nolonger the case. It'll be interesting to see what happens from here on out.

No doubt teams will copy some form of it next year. I just hope it's not us.
SD:

Bill parcells broke it down , in the same context  i use  Kille the QB .

He said wasn't nothing but a College offense , and in that case , his first second and third option was to hit the QB on every single play no a matter where the ball ended up .

So it might sound barbarrack to some , but i guarantee under that type of pressure the QB will get tired of running  before you  get tired of hitting him .

As dfenses adjust these mobile QB's will garviate back to the pocet to earn their bread .

that mobility will be back to stressing defenses in Emergency situations  and nobody can game plan that .

Down the road when we're in the hunt for QB , which won't be anytime soon if we're lucky .

Our ultimate target is a Came Newton endowed athlete who throws like Tom Brady .

A Rottenberger with class.


SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/15/2013 10:28 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 


SD,

What d'ya think Cam's shelf life is?  I see him having a long career.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/15/2013 10:31 PM

Re: 4-3 or 3-4 vs the read option 



0tter wrote:

IMHO you're better off in a 43 if you're going to play against the read option.  Since the purpose of any option defense play is to limit the options of the QB and force him to make a mistake (or attack your strength) you are probably better able to focuse on playing a fundamentally good defense than a defense that sacrifices fundamentals for disguises.

The 34 relies more on the disquised zone blitz and catching the QB by surprise.  But against an option a blitz leaves an opening.  If you're playing base 34 v. 43 you are more likely to give up 3-4 yards rather than 2-3 yards just because of reaction times from your backers.


In general you just need to play an honest defensive set.  You do that with a solid front 7 that can play disciplined.  And a bend/don't break defese like Belichick/Romeo  that gives up small chunks of yards in the middle of the field but keeps everything in front of them and tightens up as they near the redzone. 

IMHO NFL defenses in the past 3-4 years have become more undisciplined at the line in response to pass-first offenses.  You get guys who gamble against the pocket pass and don't look to defend the run or stay home in their position in case of an option.  Positionally they've build around more ends with speed.

The success of the read option is likely going to see a response in defenses where they work more at fundamentals.  

Frankly this is a good time to ignore the trend on offense and go more pass oriented - not less.  And against a read option offense you want ends like Courtney Brown rather than Jabaal Sheard. 

Thanks for the detailed response. I thought 4-3 at first too, but then I was thinking that a fair amount of read option works off misdirection. If the offense isn't sure if the 4th (or 5th) rushers are coming from one side or the other, they could roll right into a tackle for loss. Likewise, you can't cause hesitation in a LBer who's shooting into the backfield anyway.

Just thinking.....
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote