Jump to content

Biggest Difference On Defense? Philosophy


kwfalconsfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Like many of you, I was so sick of the "bend don't break" philosophy the past many years. I get it...with all of the injuries we had the past 2 seasons, if you gamble too much with inexperienced players, big plays will happen...mistakes will happen. The problem is, our coaches should have seen it wasn't working after the first few games and changes. If you're going to lose, lose attacking instead of letting teams pick you apart.

I am excited to see in just 2 short quarters of pre-season play, that Quinn's defense is NOT going to sit back and let lousy QB's light us up. Yes, I watched as the announcers talked of "Geno Smith's coming out party!" because he was playing the Falcons. I watched as rookie Bridgewater had his "Coming out party!" vs the Falcons. It's been painful watching this, but I don't think it will happen with Quinn.

Yes, our players are different this season and hopefully better. Yes, schemes are going to be better suited to the players. But the #1 difference will be the philosophy of ATTACK and make the opposing team make plays to win. I liked Mike Smith and he did a LOT right the past few years. Had we not had 5 rookies starting on defense last year, it's possible he could still be the coach for years to come. However, his "bend don't break" philosophy "broke" his job... Can't wait for the new season to start!

Edited by kwfalconsfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny because the cover 3 we're predominately running now, is essentially bend but don't break, but I agree the front 7 seems a lot more aggressive or at least a lot less hesitant than the last few years - I put a lot of that down to the simplicity of Quinns scheme vs Nolans complex schemes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a combo of two things:

1) better scheme. Or should I say easier scheme for the talents that we have

2) the old regimes' message had grown stale. The same old smitty message about how to play defense, but not producing results

In Quinn and smith, you hear a very clear message. Contain your gap, and play fierce. Simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quinn's scheme is by definition, a BBDB. It's Cover 3/Cover 1 with press coverage on the outside.

But it also incorporates 34 attacking principles rushing at different times the SLB, Edge and interior guys. BVG ran the true Tampa 2 which rarely if ever blitzed and relied on 4 man pressure

I rather like this Carroll (I guess he's the originator) scheme. It makes use of 2 gap, and 1 gap players. I particularly love the lineup with TJax, Soliali, Hageman or Babs/Clayborn and Vic off the edge. So brilliant how it closes down one side of the field and has the SAM crashing the line behind Vic.

But it's flexibility to go completely light and athletic in the next series is where it really stands out. We had at one time I think Schoffield, Goodman, Babs and Vic and then went Goodman, Clayborn, Babs and Vic with Reed at SLB. Pure attack mode.

IMO the ability to incorporate so many lineups and personnel based on desired effect sets this D apart from the Tampa 2 as it's much more difficult to simply wear this defense down by running up the gut on it. If you want to pound the ball, we simply go big. You wanna go pass happy, we put in the greyhounds and pin our ears back

But it's so interesting how the Cover 3 itself is much more basic than the Cover 2 that BVG and Dungy ran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I put "Philosophy" in the title instead of scheme because I'm not talking schemes...I'm talking attitude. Even the linemen that came back shed pounds (Babs in particular is looking great) so they can attack. They are not gaining weight to "hold down their space against the run." So, while I appreciate the technical analysis, I still think I would definitely call this line more of an "attacking" defense than last season. Of course it also has to do with effectiveness, players, schemes, etc. That's the thing I love about football...it is ALWAYS a combination of things to succeed or it's just one weak link in the chain that makes a team fail, if you can't hide it. Last season, we had far too many weak links especially once the injury bug hit us for a 2nd year in a row.

I'm amazed at how little I hear people talk about the injuries we had on defense last year. I believe one game, we had 5 rookies out there on defense. That is crazy. You're talking half of the defense was JUST out of college. I'm no fan of our defense the past couple years, but we'll never know if we wouldn't have won 2-3 more games had we not been ravaged by injuries. That would have resulted in playoffs and possibly Mike Smith having his job still. N-if-L.

Hopefully we have improved our injury luck this year (or get it out of our system in the pre-season).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this before, but if you let ANY NFL QB, even a rookie, sit back and run their offense with no kinks in their timing they will kill you. Either rapidly, or slowly with 1000 paper cuts. Defense in the NFL is about DISRUPTION. "Putting their QB off his spot", as Babs said.

I was a big Smitty fan and will always be thankful for the stability he brought to this franchise, and thought much of the blame belonged to Dimi. (Still do when you look at our depth). But it's very clear at this point that Smitty's bend/break philosophy and Nolan's complexity was holding our defense back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old adage "The team takes on the personality of their head coach" seems to be apparent with Quinn taking the helm. I too, appreciate what Smitty brought to the Falcons, but over the last couple of years it became boring, predictable, painful, & any other disappointing adjective you'd like to insert!

#Quinning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cover 3 is "bend but don't break" defense. It's a shell to keep everything in front of you. Cover 2 is high pressure defense. Especially cover 2 zone. So I don't think the philosophy has changed unless we are showing this vanilla coverage because of preseason. I think the talent has changed obviously. We have some nice pieces in the front seven and 2 nice defensive backs relative to the rest of the league. We still have holes, but I'm pleasantly surprised at how much we added in one offseason albeit to just one side of the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically Monte Kiffin is the real originator. Our scheme is very much related to the Tampa 2.

I think people see "effective" and equate it to "attacking" and "ineffective" and equate that to "BBDB." We run a 4-3 with zone coverage and take it 3 deep. The Tampa 2 does the same thing but the MLB has the deep third between the two safeties, whereas our FS has the deep third between the two corners. The front 7 principles are somewhat different, but Kiffin came up with the 4-3 under concept, too. Here's an article where Carroll talks about it in depth:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/football-breakdowns/2013/5/16/4322210/seahawks-defense-history-pete-carroll-monte-kiffin

They take different routes to get there, but the two defenses are very similar conceptually.

Yup I know that. The differences in the incorporation of 34 principles and a more exotic blitzes while maintaining gap control and zone coverages. The cover 3 aspect is far more basic and dendent upon the FS than the original kiffen concept. BVG ran very soft zones and relied on strictly front four pressure. He also lacked that Derrick brooks type of cover LB needed. Spoon was supposed to be that, I guess.

What I love about both the kiffen and Carroll modified approach is the interior pressure from the quick UT. I like the Carroll version better because it's a true hybrid and you see the big bodies ala TJax (bryant in Seattle) Soliali (membane) in with a a guy like hageman (mcdaniel) or a Babs, then switch up to brining the Bennett types (maybe Clayborn) inside for better pass rush. IMO the LEO and use of a SLB that you usually see in 34 (long tall pass rushers like Reed) is a fantastic wrinkle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this before, but if you let ANY NFL QB, even a rookie, sit back and run their offense with no kinks in their timing they will kill you. Either rapidly, or slowly with 1000 paper cuts. Defense in the NFL is about DISRUPTION. "Putting their QB off his spot", as Babs said.

I was a big Smitty fan and will always be thankful for the stability he brought to this franchise, and thought much of the blame belonged to Dimi. (Still do when you look at our depth). But it's very clear at this point that Smitty's bend/break philosophy and Nolan's complexity was holding our defense back.

Yup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup I know that. The differences in the incorporation of 34 principles and a more exotic blitzes while maintaining gap control and zone coverages. The cover 3 aspect is far more basic and dendent upon the FS than the original kiffen concept. BVG ran very soft zones and relied on strictly front four pressure. He also lacked that Derrick brooks type of cover LB needed. Spoon was supposed to be that, I guess.

What I love about both the kiffen and Carroll modified approach is the interior pressure from the quick UT. I like the Carroll version better because it's a true hybrid and you see the big bodies ala TJax (bryant in Seattle) Soliali (membane) in with a a guy like hageman (mcdaniel) or a Babs, then switch up to brining the Bennett types (maybe Clayborn) inside for better pass rush. IMO the LEO and use of a SLB that you usually see in 34 (long tall pass rushers like Reed) is a fantastic wrinkle.

I'm pretty sure Carroll attributes the 3-4 principles to Kiffin, though.

But the basics are just covering gaps and having a fundamentally sound defense that is opportunistic and relies on turnovers. You basically frustrate the QB into making a mistake or alternatively get to him with pass rush to get him to the ground and get off the field on 3rd down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think smith and Nolan had two different philosophies which caused our defense to be overly complicated and lack confidence. The new defense is simple and kind of resembles that of bvg, except our front 7 is a lot better at attacking. I really like that Quinn is being hands on with his strength at coaching the front 7, seems to be paying off. It'll be interesting to see a full 4 quarters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure Carroll attributes the 3-4 principles to Kiffin, though.But the basics are just covering gaps and having a fundamentally sound defense that is opportunistic and relies on turnovers. You basically frustrate the QB into making a mistake or alternatively get to him with pass rush to get him to the ground and get off the field on 3rd down.

http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2013/1/19/3890928/gus-bradley-defense-leo-position

I found this interesting. Seems it was Siefert in San Fran that caused him to develop this unique style. Makes sense thinking back to those great San Fran defenses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! @ posters still defending Smith after watching what a defense is suppose to look like with the right coaching. Sure we added some personnel but the facts are 8 of the 11 starters were on the team last year. And of the returning starters, all of them look better this year than they ever did under smith especially, Babs, Jackson, Worrilow and Alford. A few non starter hold overs look awesome also like Allen and Hageman. It was definitely the coaching and not the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone posted an excellent series of posts detailing the Pete Carroll 4-3 under-cover 3 defense....each post covering the different units.....Dline, LB's, and secondary. Also covered the run principles versus the pass defense principles. I read every word. It was detailed and excellent.

Basically the front 7 runs a 4-3 with 3-4 elements in gap responsibilities. The secondary does run a coverr 3...but with man press elements according to match ups, field position, and game situation.

NOTHING about Carroll's nor Quinn's defense is BBDB...nor is there nothing timid about it. It is a high risk defense in both run fits and pass coverages. It is simple...but if one dude doesnt do his job, like Bradford missing a run fit against the jets....it's lights out. There aren't a lot of blitzes. There isn't alot of high risk, jailbreak stuff. There is no deception or trickery.

But it is aggressive...it is attacking. Nothing BBDB about it whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...