TdotFalcon Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 (edited) Hey AFMB members, this is the depth chart that I have personally come up with. Smitty had been speaking about us using more cornerbacks on the field to help with pass protection. I think this is a great idea. Notice that I have put Owens on the opposite side of D-Rob. These are our elite run-stuffing corners, who don't mind laying the wood. Also, this provides confusion for the opposing O-Line. Blitzes can be dialed up from anywhere on the field. We can get aggressive from anywhere and still have enough capable men in coverage. Our lack of a third linebacker would be now abolished, and with Jerry and Babs commanding doubles up the middle I am not worried about only having Lofton and Peterson in there. This said, I would like to see a DE drafted with our 19th pick to go opposite of Abraham. If he isn't ready to go week 1, Kroy is more then capable. Jerry will be back and Babs is enormous. I think this set with 2 LB will be optimal. If we get Spoon, take Peterson's spot.Our recent additions have given us enormous depth at the corner position, and have enabled us to do exactly what Smitty speaks of. Having this many corners on the field, and having 2 of them who hit like safeties, I think this is the solution for 2010.Let's have some productive conversation. Edited March 13, 2010 by TdotFalcon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misznay-Schardin Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 (edited) If we run that formation, teams are going to be running all over us.On a more serious note... Brian Williams has no business being matched up on the other team's #1 WR, and when did John Abraham become a LDE?A reasonable starting line-up?LDE - Kroy Biermann/Brandon GrahamDT - Jonathan BabineauxDT - Peria JerryRDE - John AbrahamSLB - Stephen NicholasMLB - Curtis LoftonWLB - Mike Peterson/Sean WeatherspoonLCB - Dunta RobinsonRCB - Chris Owens/Brent GrimesNB - Brent Grimes/Chris Owens/Brian WilliamsSS - William Moore/Erik ColemanFS - Thomas DeCoud Edited March 13, 2010 by Radical Ace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miKevicK777 Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 If we run that formation, teams are going to be running all over us.On a more serious note... Brian Williams has no business being matched up on the other team's #1 WR, and when did John Abraham become a LDE?obviosuly this would be for pass down formations, like 3rd and longand on ur 2nd note.... use ur WILD imagination, and flip it around Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misznay-Schardin Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 (edited) obviosuly this would be for pass down formations, like 3rd and longand on ur 2nd note.... use ur WILD imagination, and flip it aroundTD has already strongly suggested that Williams will see a larger role on the inside, so that means you can expect him at NB/DB more than starting. Since he had a major ACL tear and reconstructive surgury, I think it is dangerous as is have him on the outside either way.EDIT: His post suggests we use this as a base set, utilizing an aggressive CB blitz scheme to make up for the fact we would have one less LB on the field. Edited March 13, 2010 by Radical Ace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TdotFalcon Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 His post suggests we use this as a base set, utilizing an aggressive CB blitz scheme to make up for the fact we would have one less LB on the field.Exactly. It is becoming a passing league, and the Jets ran this set all season last year.They were aggressive with blitzing (something like 45% of the time).Obviously we would change the set if its an obvious running down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misznay-Schardin Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Exactly. It is becoming a passing league, and the Jets ran this set all season last year.They were aggressive with blitzing (something like 45% of the time).Obviously we would change the set if its an obvious running down.They were NOT running a 4 DB set as their base set, no team in the NFL does that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TdotFalcon Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 (edited) They were NOT running a 4 DB set as their base set, no team in the NFL does that.If not a dime, then a CB can be switched out for a safety.The Jets ran with 3 DL but a whack of DB's Edited March 13, 2010 by TdotFalcon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misznay-Schardin Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 If not a dime, then a CB can be switched out for a safety.They simply ran a 3-4 base defense that played much like a 4-6. 3 DTs, 4 LBs, SS in the box, press coverage on the outside, and one roaming FS. Running with that many DBs on the field, you will get ran all over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drathdon Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Why does everyone think we're going to get run all over on 3rd and long? This isn't an every-down package, the man said. Reading is fundamental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misznay-Schardin Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Why does everyone think we're going to get run all over on 3rd and long? This isn't an every-down package, the man said. Reading is fundamental. Actually, the man said that we would simply change out one of the CBs for a Safety in running downs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TdotFalcon Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 (edited) lol i also asked for productive conversation.Futhermore I stated if it is an obvious running down, to not run this set. Use it on 1st and 10? I wouldn't mind with mixed blitzes. Owens hits like a safety anyways.Smitty wants to run 6 and 7 DB'sI think this is the optimal setup for that request, simply put.Will he run it as a base defense? Likely not, but I think this is how he should do it. Edited March 13, 2010 by TdotFalcon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBeattz Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 If we run that formation, teams are going to be running all over us.On a more serious note... Brian Williams has no business being matched up on the other team's #1 WR, and when did John Abraham become a LDE?A reasonable starting line-up?LDE - Kroy Biermann/Brandon Graham 1DT - Jonathan Babineaux 2DT - Peria Jerry 3RDE - John Abraham 4SLB - Stephen Nicholas 5MLB - Curtis Lofton 6WLB - Mike Peterson/Sean Weatherspoon 7LCB - Dunta Robinson 8RCB - Chris Owens/Brent Grimes 9NB - Brent Grimes/Chris Owens/Brian Williams 10SS - William Moore/Erik Coleman 11FS - Thomas DeCoud 12Sorry but.That can't really be a reasonable starting line-up when it's putting 12 players on the field.This line-up actually looks like it has a ton of potential. It seems like it could be used kind of like the wildcat has been used on offense.As has been said, you wouldn't necessarily want to use it on running downs. But then again, if Robinson and/or Owens were to pass their receivers off to Grimes and Williams, they could go lay the wood on the RB or try to sneak in on a blitz if it's a fake. With that kind of deception throwing off the opposing offense from time to time, I'm pretty sure Williams and Grimes could handle the covering chores when necessary.I feel like the looks you could give the O with this package, especially if you've got corners with more than just cover skills, would add a valuable dynamic to our rising defense.If TD adds a quality pass rusher, then the improved pass rush suddenly make this package look even more appealing. I think one of the keys would be the linebacker(s). If they can be relied on to keep the run in check even with less linebacking manpower, then why not use this package.I'm going to have to look into the possabilities more, the thought of it is pretty exciting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TdotFalcon Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 Sorry but.That can't really be a reasonable starting line-up when it's putting 12 players on the field.This line-up actually looks like it has a ton of potential. It seems like it could be used kind of like the wildcat has been used on offense.As has been said, you wouldn't necessarily want to use it on running downs. But then again, if Robinson and/or Owens were to pass their receivers off to Grimes and Williams, they could go lay the wood on the RB or try to sneak in on a blitz if it's a fake. With that kind of deception throwing off the opposing offense from time to time, I'm pretty sure Williams and Grimes could handle the covering chores when necessary.Exactly my thoughts, well put! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misznay-Schardin Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Sorry but.That can't really be a reasonable starting line-up when it's putting 12 players on the field.I know that, obviously you would switch out the NB for one of the OLBs. Usually you include your line-up for just your base set, but do to the amount of 3+ WR sets used these days, the NB is pretty much a starting player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBeattz Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Exactly my thoughts, well put!Thank you much. That'd be a potent and exciting scenario I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBeattz Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 I know that, obviously you would switch out the NB for one of the OLBs. Usually you include your line-up for just your base set, but do to the amount of 3+ WR sets used these days, the NB is pretty much a starting player.I understand that. It's just that the OP put up a chart showing an unusual line-up with new possibilities, and you kinda came back saying that his line-up would be ran on easily in that set, and attacking his placement of JA55.He put a chart up and a description and you attacked it and placed up an unreasonable 12 man line-up. Typically you WOULD put up your base set line-up and discuss personal changes and whatnot, but in this case, the topic of discussion was a non-base set line-up and the possibilities that would come with it.There's no dramas. Just the discussing of a proposed line-up's potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TdotFalcon Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 Smitty did say that he was thinking of Williams as an inside guy, perhaps switching him with owens on the right side? that would work too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBeattz Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 lol i also asked for productive conversation.Futhermore I stated if it is an obvious running down, to not run this set. Use it on 1st and 10? I wouldn't mind with mixed blitzes. Owens hits like a safety anyways.Smitty wants to run 6 and 7 DB'sI think this is the optimal setup for that request, simply put.Will he run it as a base defense? Likely not, but I think this is how he should do it.You're chart shows 5 DBs. Imagine if Lofton and the D-Line were dedicated solely to preventing the run. Switch Peterson for Moore. Now you've got Robinson, Owens, and Moore who can basically float from coverage to run support and/or blitzing schemes. You've got 6 DB's of which the QB has to be aware, that at least one is going to come from somewhere. Then you've also got the ability to go man-to-man on 3 receiver sets, with a safety deep for help over the top or to cover a TE. Leaving a 2nd man available to bring pressure. QBs and OCs would have their work cut out for them. They'd have to stick to short passes most likely in order to get the ball out quick enough. At that point you could even feign the blitz with one of the DBs and then pull him back into coverage to jump a short route. Quickly of course.I don't know. Seems like the possiblilties go on and on with this package. Good stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.