Quote
JimYoungblood53
Quote
Deadpool
The 4-3 under or Tampa 2
The Seattle hybrid 4-3 with cover 3?
The Eagles (maybe Schwartz himself?) wide 9 4-3?
I assume you don't have an issue with zone coverage? Seems to me the majority of NFL coverage is zone these days, you'd know more than I do, but I'd guess 66% zone 33% man? Is that too high? Too low? I don't know.
I personally was a big fan of Dick LeBeau's zone blitzing 3-4 Pittsburgh defense.
Tampa 2 was a 4-3 under--just an FYI
thats what I meant, I should have wrote it: The 4-3 under (Commonly known as the Tampa 2) so about thatSeattle 4-3 a cover-3 buzz so the always had a LBer in the flat, rather than a corner (cloud) or safety (sky) which was unique
wide 9 is a call not a scheme, any edge guy can play wide--but it was a pass rush set or call...and I liked it. Takes fast DEs, though
I suppose its more a formation than scheme, I was thinking the way the Eagles used it religiously I guess. It also takes good Lbersno one uses a lot of man because it's a sure loser unless you know
you pressure can get there. When you see it now is when there is at least 5 guys rushing
So to me, it's a matter of preferring any of those over a 3-4, but coaches like
the 3-4 because it is more visited. SO that is what we live with
I don't want just and under, I would like a 4-3 that plays the under, over, even, bear.
As far as coverages, what happens these days is the fronts have to match the coverage
back in the day the front was called then the coverage matched ut
so now, the coverage is called and the Dline has to adjust to that, so if there is a
strong side rotation then the line has to cheat to weak side...
LeBeau's defense was great, and in some ways Vrable uses it's concepts
but it fine---he was a smart guy
