WTF... I just read the first 2 paragraphs and almost spat out my food.
Jimmy Lake didn't predominately run Tampa 2 in college.. wtf.
Is the poster just thinking that because he was a coach in Tampa Bay that he just magically will always adopt the Tampa 2 as his base defense?
When Lake was DC at UW, you would tend to see more of a single high safety... a really high single high where most likely he's out of your TV screen.
I used to always think that UW was playing 10 guys on D at snap, forgetting that the single high was out of the frame.
Usually on the initial downs, the single high you see has a cover 3 behind it.
Later downs, may go to a Cover 2.
After a few Cover 2, will show 2 high safeties at snap and then move to a Cover 3 or Cover 1.
Goal Line, will see more Cover 0.
Maybe ran some Tampa 2, but this was not the base coverage. Didn't have the linebackers to do that well in my opinion. And plus would see more dog blitzes instead.
Remember this defense was like a 2-4-5 or something like that. Worked really well when you had a strong 2 like Vita Vea and Greg Gaines.. and especially in the Pac 12 at that time when teams were pass happy. Started to be less effective when teams started to run the ball more and after they couldn't get strong linemen to replace studs like Vea and Gaines.
Also the coverages depended on the teams. Against Mike Leach, Lake ran a whole lot of zone concepts and felt like the DBs, but especially the LBs were playing much more off. More 2 high safety looks at snap than single high, but would morph from 2 high to Cover 3 more.. vs the opposite.
At least that's what I remember, but maybe I forgot alot. Or maybe I've got the same bias because UW is highly influenced by the Seahawks which was synonymous to Cover 3 flat or buzz. But I'm pretty sure that Tampa 2 wasn't the base D.
