http://www.glavic.co/samples/i...the-new-normal/

to the outsider, terms like nickel and dime have them scratching their heads. Why a nickel? 5 DBs, like a nickel. Why a dime? (Not because there are 10 DBs, but because two nickels equals one dime).

???
Some things you just have to accept with belief...

Semantics aside, this is a PF-worthy article about the concepts in the new base defense teams use vs. passing teams w/no running attack. A lot of it is common sense.

Across the line of scrimmage, the Giants defense assembles in defensive coordinator Perry Fewell’s favored 4-2-5 scheme (four defensive linemen, two linebackers and five defensive backs). Every defense has a 4-2-5 (or, in some cases, a 2-4-5) defense, commonly called a “nickel” package, in its playbook. A traditional nickel defense relies on two safeties and three cornerbacks. But Fewell’s Giants play a relatively unique brand of nickel, a package commonly referred to as “big nickel,” or “wolverine,” with three safeties and two cornerbacks.

For years, NFL defenses played the majority of snaps in either 4-3-4 or 3-4-4 personnel, earning these schemes the moniker of “base defense.” Conventional thinking echoed what that rhetoric implies, that these personnel groupings were a strategic default best suited to defend a variety of offensive plays. Stack the line of scrimmage with five defensive linemen in clear running situations. Move to six or seven defensive backs in obvious passing downs. But when in doubt, rely on your base defense.

Calling the 4-3-4 or 3-4-4 a base defense today is more of a semantic custom than a reflection of actuality. According to research recently published by Pro Football Focus, the league turned a corner in 2010, with teams playing fewer than half of their snaps in one of the so-called base personnel groupings. In fact, five or more defensive backs saw the field 52 percent of the time in 2011. Leading the way in that movement was Fewell and the Giants, who put at least five defensive backs on the field for a whopping 77 percent of snaps.

Nickel packages as a whole are up 9 percent since 2008, according to PFF’s research, yet dime and quarter personnel remain the same. Such disparity suggests that defensive coordinators believe offenses can run effectively on dime and quarter personnel but feel that the right nickel package — one in which the fifth defensive back is as much of a run-stuffer as he is a downfield pass-defender — can be played in an assortment of down-and-distance scenarios.

In five years, will the 4-3-4 and 3-4-4 be as tangential as the 5-2-4, a novelty grouping brought in to stuff a heavy offensive scheme? Will a fifth defensive back prove to be the best way to handle multiple tight ends, mobile quarterbacks and running backs who are sincere pass-catching threats out of the backfield?

Everything in the NFL is about countering a new concept that is successful and people tend to copy it. But some people do just as well doing the opposite of what everyone else is doing because sometimes they can find more talent and better quality individuals because everyone is running to follow the leader.

I really believe that having a successful team is really about finding the best 11 guys you can on both sides of the ball and then finding the smartest, most flexible, and most athletic guys you can to fill the squad (Leaving the K, P and LS out of this). And more importantly are coaches that can see what they have an know how to adapt and change as circumstances permit.

The NY Giants won two superbowls against the same team and both times they were underdogs. The weren't the better team but they won both times ( and you can argue about that as well). You can argue one team got lucky with this or that or a call went bad one way or the other. But the reason the Giants one the first superbowl game against the Patriots is that the coaches for the Giants found a few ways to disrupt Brady and learn what he was doing so they could disrupt him which kept them in the game.

Last year they took advantage of the Pats weakness, which was their D. But at the same time the Pats had a scary O, the Giants D didn't really have any standouts with their linebackers or secondary, but they had a scary line like they did the first time so the big nickel, the wide nine, the spread O all mean nothing unless you can consistently win with it. And that is not proven.

So is winning in the NFL all about the system, or the player and coaches and how they work together?

The only thing worse than being the 1st guy to try something new in the NFL, is being the 32nd guy doing the same old stuff.

Things could have went bad when Pittsburgh moved to a 3-4. Of course, if they didn't, they were going to keep overpaying marginal DL that didn't produce because they needed Solid Pass Rushing DL for the 4-3 to work and all the good ones were taken.

4-2-5 takes a few things. One is roster depth. In todays NFL you need that Tweener to stick over the TE. Of course, in a Greatest Show on Turf you needed that extra CB with quality skills to match up on the Slot... a Tweener just won't do there. In regular situations you need a guy LIKE a LB for run support, but one that can cover at TE reasonably well in man or go out and guard the flats. In power sets... well, get the hell out of the Nickel. OR employ a 4 Safety Nickel (oh yes, it CAN be done! LOL!).

Can you use the 4-2-5 as your Base? You could... but you'd still be switching that Nickel Man out depending on Situation, even while staying in the Nickel.

To answer the 2nd Posters question at the end:

"So is winning in the NFL all about the system, or the player and coaches and how they work together?"

Both. 2 sides of the same coin. You can craft an amazing system... if you don't have the type of players needed to execute it then you SOL. You can communicate like a Zen Master and have everyone working in harmony... if the players suck it only helps so much and if the system sucks it only helps so much.

It takes Talent... Talent is the Straw that Stirs the Drink. Now it takes a Head Coach with the ability to get the Talent to buy in, communicate and work together. Once he has that, his System can be ran. THEN he better have a good System, or else the top Teams will pick it apart.

A bland System with great Talent and Chemisty will still crush a bad team, they won't be able to overcome the Talent and Cohesion... but if you mean winning on a regular basis, it takes the symbiotic nature of those 3 things coming together... Talent, Chemistry, System. It does help to have the System in place, so the players can buy into it... so maybe it's Talent, System, Chemisty.

Brrexkl wrote: The only thing worse than being the 1st guy to try something new in the NFL, is being the 32nd guy doing the same old stuff.

Things could have went bad when Pittsburgh moved to a 3-4. Of course, if they didn't, they were going to keep overpaying marginal DL that didn't produce because they needed Solid Pass Rushing DL for the 4-3 to work and all the good ones were taken.

4-2-5 takes a few things. One is roster depth. In todays NFL you need that Tweener to stick over the TE. Of course, in a Greatest Show on Turf you needed that extra CB with quality skills to match up on the Slot... a Tweener just won't do there. In regular situations you need a guy LIKE a LB for run support, but one that can cover at TE reasonably well in man or go out and guard the flats. In power sets... well, get the hell out of the Nickel. OR employ a 4 Safety Nickel (oh yes, it CAN be done! LOL!).

Can you use the 4-2-5 as your Base? You could... but you'd still be switching that Nickel Man out depending on Situation, even while staying in the Nickel.

To answer the 2nd Posters question at the end:

"So is winning in the NFL all about the system, or the player and coaches and how they work together?"

Both. 2 sides of the same coin. You can craft an amazing system... if you don't have the type of players needed to execute it then you SOL. You can communicate like a Zen Master and have everyone working in harmony... if the players suck it only helps so much and if the system sucks it only helps so much.

It takes Talent... Talent is the Straw that Stirs the Drink. Now it takes a Head Coach with the ability to get the Talent to buy in, communicate and work together. Once he has that, his System can be ran. THEN he better have a good System, or else the top Teams will pick it apart.

A bland System with great Talent and Chemisty will still crush a bad team, they won't be able to overcome the Talent and Cohesion... but if you mean winning on a regular basis, it takes the symbiotic nature of those 3 things coming together... Talent, Chemistry, System. It does help to have the System in place, so the players can buy into it... so maybe it's Talent, System, Chemisty.

SD:

4 to 1 Marecic doesn't make it past the Philly game without coming up lame , and 10 to one he's out before we amass JB's  1-5 start.

Anybody who doesn't see this as a Heckert face saving move hasn't been paying attention .

he didn't earn his spot the firs year of cuts and the discrepancy couldn't have been more clear in this round where he was also protected .

Hardesty and Marecic , two bees in a bucket F  it.

Can't run can't catch and can't block , tits on a bull have more use.


SoulDawg

---------------------------------------------
--- SoulDawg74 wrote:

Brrexkl wrote: The only thing worse than being the 1st guy to try something new in the NFL, is being the 32nd guy doing the same old stuff.

Things could have went bad when Pittsburgh moved to a 3-4. Of course, if they didn't, they were going to keep overpaying marginal DL that didn't produce because they needed Solid Pass Rushing DL for the 4-3 to work and all the good ones were taken.

4-2-5 takes a few things. One is roster depth. In todays NFL you need that Tweener to stick over the TE. Of course, in a Greatest Show on Turf you needed that extra CB with quality skills to match up on the Slot... a Tweener just won't do there. In regular situations you need a guy LIKE a LB for run support, but one that can cover at TE reasonably well in man or go out and guard the flats. In power sets... well, get the hell out of the Nickel. OR employ a 4 Safety Nickel (oh yes, it CAN be done! LOL!).

Can you use the 4-2-5 as your Base? You could... but you'd still be switching that Nickel Man out depending on Situation, even while staying in the Nickel.

To answer the 2nd Posters question at the end:

"So is winning in the NFL all about the system, or the player and coaches and how they work together?"

Both. 2 sides of the same coin. You can craft an amazing system... if you don't have the type of players needed to execute it then you SOL. You can communicate like a Zen Master and have everyone working in harmony... if the players suck it only helps so much and if the system sucks it only helps so much.

It takes Talent... Talent is the Straw that Stirs the Drink. Now it takes a Head Coach with the ability to get the Talent to buy in, communicate and work together. Once he has that, his System can be ran. THEN he better have a good System, or else the top Teams will pick it apart.

A bland System with great Talent and Chemisty will still crush a bad team, they won't be able to overcome the Talent and Cohesion... but if you mean winning on a regular basis, it takes the symbiotic nature of those 3 things coming together... Talent, Chemistry, System. It does help to have the System in place, so the players can buy into it... so maybe it's Talent, System, Chemisty.

SD:

4 to 1 Marecic doesn't make it past the Philly game without coming up lame , and 10 to one he's out before we amass JB's  1-5 start.

Anybody who doesn't see this as a Heckert face saving move hasn't been paying attention .

he didn't earn his spot the firs year of cuts and the discrepancy couldn't have been more clear in this round where he was also protected .

Hardesty and Marecic , two bees in a bucket F  it.

Can't run can't catch and can't block , tits on a bull have more use.


SoulDawg

---------------------------------------------

Go see Joe for some Adderal.

Interesting thoughts Gents.

First take is Ward may have the skill sets for this. Second is we are too thin at DB to do this much. Third is I've seen too many years & too much football to say anything but this isn't a sum 0 answer.

Brrexkl wrote: The only thing worse than being the 1st guy to try something new in the NFL, is being the 32nd guy doing the same old stuff.

Things could have went bad when Pittsburgh moved to a 3-4. Of course, if they didn't, they were going to keep overpaying marginal DL that didn't produce because they needed Solid Pass Rushing DL for the 4-3 to work and all the good ones were taken.

4-2-5 takes a few things. One is roster depth. In todays NFL you need that Tweener to stick over the TE. Of course, in a Greatest Show on Turf you needed that extra CB with quality skills to match up on the Slot... a Tweener just won't do there. In regular situations you need a guy LIKE a LB for run support, but one that can cover at TE reasonably well in man or go out and guard the flats. In power sets... well, get the hell out of the Nickel. OR employ a 4 Safety Nickel (oh yes, it CAN be done! LOL!).

Can you use the 4-2-5 as your Base? You could... but you'd still be switching that Nickel Man out depending on Situation, even while staying in the Nickel.

To answer the 2nd Posters question at the end:

"So is winning in the NFL all about the system, or the player and coaches and how they work together?"

Both. 2 sides of the same coin. You can craft an amazing system... if you don't have the type of players needed to execute it then you SOL. You can communicate like a Zen Master and have everyone working in harmony... if the players suck it only helps so much and if the system sucks it only helps so much.

It takes Talent... Talent is the Straw that Stirs the Drink. Now it takes a Head Coach with the ability to get the Talent to buy in, communicate and work together. Once he has that, his System can be ran. THEN he better have a good System, or else the top Teams will pick it apart.

A bland System with great Talent and Chemisty will still crush a bad team, they won't be able to overcome the Talent and Cohesion... but if you mean winning on a regular basis, it takes the symbiotic nature of those 3 things coming together... Talent, Chemistry, System. It does help to have the System in place, so the players can buy into it... so maybe it's Talent, System, Chemisty.

I like your take here Brex and you mention some very solid points.

Getting back to the original poster's thought...yes.
That's why my question about having a SAM may be irrelevant if only 2 backers are on the field most the time.

brex, a 4 S 1 CB look would be interesting. if there are multiple tweeners. Just hope the O doesn't send everyone vertical at that point. If the O is sending them on shorter routes the bulk of DBs can handle them.

NYG also runs a 4-2-5 but their 4 DL are all DE! (NASCAR)

The irony of the Browns is they have a power-run team with a Belichickian 4-3 (strong DL and a decent secondary (other than an aging Mike Johnson and an aging Clay Matthews) their strengths on D were ours today. Jauron=Saban in 1994. NO or very little Blitzing.

On offense, same things. Weeds is Vinny. He does not have as good of a line in some areas but his LT and C are better than Everitt and T-Bone. The overall line in '94 was better--the RT and RG positions were better than they are now but the LT and C positions were not as good.

I could see T-Rich as a better Hoard, esp. if he can catch. Gordon, Benjamin=Derrick Alexander and Keenan McCardell--sure-handed. Little could be our powerful Carrier--he has good chemistry with Weeds like Carrier did with Vinny.

Nasdaq wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- SoulDawg74 wrote:

Brrexkl wrote: The only thing worse than being the 1st guy to try something new in the NFL, is being the 32nd guy doing the same old stuff.

Things could have went bad when Pittsburgh moved to a 3-4. Of course, if they didn't, they were going to keep overpaying marginal DL that didn't produce because they needed Solid Pass Rushing DL for the 4-3 to work and all the good ones were taken.

4-2-5 takes a few things. One is roster depth. In todays NFL you need that Tweener to stick over the TE. Of course, in a Greatest Show on Turf you needed that extra CB with quality skills to match up on the Slot... a Tweener just won't do there. In regular situations you need a guy LIKE a LB for run support, but one that can cover at TE reasonably well in man or go out and guard the flats. In power sets... well, get the hell out of the Nickel. OR employ a 4 Safety Nickel (oh yes, it CAN be done! LOL!).

Can you use the 4-2-5 as your Base? You could... but you'd still be switching that Nickel Man out depending on Situation, even while staying in the Nickel.

To answer the 2nd Posters question at the end:

"So is winning in the NFL all about the system, or the player and coaches and how they work together?"

Both. 2 sides of the same coin. You can craft an amazing system... if you don't have the type of players needed to execute it then you SOL. You can communicate like a Zen Master and have everyone working in harmony... if the players suck it only helps so much and if the system sucks it only helps so much.

It takes Talent... Talent is the Straw that Stirs the Drink. Now it takes a Head Coach with the ability to get the Talent to buy in, communicate and work together. Once he has that, his System can be ran. THEN he better have a good System, or else the top Teams will pick it apart.

A bland System with great Talent and Chemisty will still crush a bad team, they won't be able to overcome the Talent and Cohesion... but if you mean winning on a regular basis, it takes the symbiotic nature of those 3 things coming together... Talent, Chemistry, System. It does help to have the System in place, so the players can buy into it... so maybe it's Talent, System, Chemisty.

SD:

4 to 1 Marecic doesn't make it past the Philly game without coming up lame , and 10 to one he's out before we amass JB's  1-5 start.

Anybody who doesn't see this as a Heckert face saving move hasn't been paying attention .

he didn't earn his spot the firs year of cuts and the discrepancy couldn't have been more clear in this round where he was also protected .

Hardesty and Marecic , two bees in a bucket F  it.

Can't run can't catch and can't block , tits on a bull have more use.


SoulDawg

---------------------------------------------

Go see Joe for some Adderal.

Interesting thoughts Gents.

First take is Ward may have the skill sets for this. Second is we are too thin at DB to do this much. Third is I've seen too many years & too much football to say anything but this isn't a sum 0 answer.

SD:

I think yu meant Wade .

To that point Fort Gipson and the Badman showed some skills coming from nowhere .

We have no evidence Heckert picked any of them , we do have empirical evidence that he has a soft spot in his head for his own high profile picks , and no desire to have egg on his face to acknowledge their early epic and repeat failures .

Hardesty and Marecic don't belong on an NFL roster ,
not one which aspires to be good anyway.

YMMV.


SoulDawg