Spts1

Ultimate X’s and O’x thread

522 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, slickgadawg said:

I agree.  Man allows you to be more aggressive.  Its a risk reward defense.  Sure, you gonna give up big plays here and there but its the chaos and turnovers you can make and dictating to the offense that I like about man coverages.  The Falcons have been letting teams come back on them since Quinn took over the defense.  I think he sees that and is gonna dictate to the offense now witht these new schemes and bring more heat in the 3rd and 4th quarters to negate the quarterbacks sitting back there and marching down the field with those short passes like they have in the past...

Also simplifies it for the guys "this is your guy, cover him" 

Spts1 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yo_Lover said:

We got options really

Beasley, Takk, Clay, John, Campbell can all rush outside/play outside for the run

Allen, John, Grady, Jack, Senat, Davison can all rush from the inside/stop the run depending on the player.

I think we see a lot of 5-2 with 5 man rushes and cover 1 man behind it

Lotta options. They’ve been working Campbell at ILB in 3-4 this year. I don’t know if you’re gonna see Beasley out of position this year. I think quinn has put it on himself to stop tinkering with him and let he be a pure rusher. Of course you can mix things up but I think the only time you’re gonna see Campbell rushing from outside is if Beasley is catching a breather. Campbell will more likely be blitzing from inside in 3-4 this year. In 4-3 under he will rush from the SLB position. Just don’t see quinn taking Beasley out for Campbell if it’s a 3-4 front. He wants the most out of Takk and Beasley so they’ll get after the qb from nickel DE, 3-4 OLB, and 5-2 bear. Cominsky will play DE in base 4-3 under and DT. He can play DE in a 3-4 as well. Clay will be moved around in 5-2 and 4-3 and can play DE in 3-4. Really unlimited what can be done with all those guys. But I think whenever you see nickel and 3-4 the ends will be Takk and Beasley predominately. (DE in nickel and OLB in 3-4). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TheFatboi said:

Lotta options. They’ve been working Campbell at ILB in 3-4 this year. I don’t know if you’re gonna see Beasley out of position this year. I think quinn has put it on himself to stop tinkering with him and let he be a pure rusher. Of course you can mix things up but I think the only time you’re gonna see Campbell rushing from outside is if Beasley is catching a breather. Campbell will more likely be blitzing from inside in 3-4 this year. In 4-3 under he will rush from the SLB position. Just don’t see quinn taking Beasley out for Campbell if it’s a 3-4 front. He wants the most out of Takk and Beasley so they’ll get after the qb from nickel DE, 3-4 OLB, and 5-2 bear. Cominsky will play DE in base 4-3 under and DT. He can play DE in a 3-4 as well. Clay will be moved around in 5-2 and 4-3 and can play DE in 3-4. Really unlimited what can be done with all those guys. But I think whenever you see nickel and 3-4 the ends will be Takk and Beasley predominately. (DE in nickel and OLB in 3-4). 

With 

Takk Campbell Debo Beasley

And

Allen Davison Grady

We could go from a 5-2 to a 3-4 without even subbing a player out. If we mix it up QBs wont know who is rushing when.

Ergo Proxy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheFatboi said:

They’re using that 5-2 or Bear front. That’s when I think you’ll see Clay, Takk, and Beasley the most. Beasley seems to be playing pure end from what I’ve seen. 4-3 DE and 3-4 OLB. Clay May play some DE in 3-4 like he did in NE with Beasley standing up. From what I’ve heard Bailey say he’ll be playing big end and Little nickel. 

 

It certainly looks like a 52 bear may be our base.  I suspect we will model the Broncos 52.  Most call it a 34, but it’s a 52. 

I just question whether or not we have an ideal NT to run the scheme effectively.  But like Cover 3, the 52 simplifies things and our athleticism should be on display.  Oliver being up to the task is another huge thing in a 52.  Corners have to be well above average.

 Tru & Oliver are ideal press man corners.  

Ergo Proxy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FalconsIn2020 said:

It certainly looks like a 52 bear may be our base.  I just question whether or not we have an ideal NT to run the scheme effectively.  But like Cover 3, the 52 simplifies things and our athleticism should be on display.  Oliver being up to the task is another huge thing in a 52.  Corners have to be well above average.

Cant miss tackles either. 

52 can be base against the run if they’re in 21 personnel. The backend will def be cover 1. The weakness of 52 is spreading it out. The only loss the 86 bears had was to the dolphins cause they spread them out. That was pretty much what exposed how to beat that defense so over the next few years it lost its advantage. But if an offense comes out in 21 we most def will see 52(46). Quinn seems determined to stop the run at all costs this year. The defense can be top 5 if that’s the case. If they average only giving up only 60 - 70 ypg on the ground we’ll def be top 5-10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheFatboi said:

52 can be base against the run if they’re in 21 personnel. The backend will def be cover 1. The weakness of 52 is spreading it out. The only loss the 86 bears had was to the dolphins cause they spread them out. That was pretty much what exposed how to beat that defense so over the next few years it lost its advantage. But if an offense comes out in 21 we most def will see 52(46). Quinn seems determined to stop the run at all costs this year. The defense can be top 5 if that’s the case. If they average only giving up only 60 - 70 ypg on the ground we’ll def be top 5-10. 

My guess is it’s a similar model to the Broncos 52.  As I said earlier, most call it a 34, but it’s more of a 52

Godzilla1985 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, FalconsIn2020 said:

My guess is it’s a similar model to the Broncos 52.  As I said earlier, most call it a 34, but it’s more of a 52

Broncos changed schemes with Fangio

Also I'm not sure they've ran 5-2 for a minute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FalconsIn2020 said:

My guess is it’s a similar model to the Broncos 52.  As I said earlier, most call it a 34, but it’s more of a 52

Well it’s 3-4 if only 3 guys have their hand in the dirt so we’re DEFINITELY running 3-4 fronts. But we’re also running 52 with 5 downlinemen. Takk, Bailey, Davidson, Grady, Beasley all with their hand in the dirt. Or if it’s big Clay, Bailey, Davidson, Grady, Crawford. Or Bailey, Senat, Davidson,Grady, Crawford. So many combinations. 

HASHBROWN3 and Ovie_Lover like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

Broncos changed schemes with Fangio

Yeah, I was just saying it will be similar to their defense when Dumerville & Ayers were DE’s but labeled OLB’s and playing on the LOS.  That’s what made it a 52 rather than 34.  

What are they moving to this year?  Back to 4-3 under?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheFatboi said:

Well it’s 3-4 if only 3 guys have their hand in the dirt so we’re DEFINITELY running 3-4 fronts. But we’re also running 52 with 5 downlinemen. Takk, Bailey, Davidson, Grady, Beasley all with their hand in the dirt. Or if it’s big Clay, Bailey, Davidson, Grady, Crawford. Or Bailey, Senat, Davidson,Grady, Crawford. So many combinations. 

My understanding is that if both OLB’s are in fact DE’s and playing on the LOS, it is a 52.  

Ergo Proxy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FalconsIn2020 said:

Yeah, I was just saying it will be similar to their defense when Dumerville & Ayers were DE’s but labeled OLB’s and playing on the LOS.  That’s what made it a 52 rather than 34.  

What are they moving to this year?  Back to 4-3 under?

Yeah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 0:24 PM, Des-pool said:

Why are you guys so threatened by what this guy is posting? I appreciate his thread and what he is showing. You accuse him of being in his feelings, which he was, but you guys seem to be also. It’s a good football post for everyone not watching every camp thread.

agree 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 0:44 PM, atljbo said:

I've said this allllll summer... all the signs was there.....

 

Coach Quinn saying he would use Beasley and Takk in a different way.

Bob Sutton being brought in

 

bob sutton lol guy is terrible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, FalconsIn2020 said:

My understanding is that if both OLB’s are in fact DE’s and playing on the LOS, it is a 52.  

If they’re hands are in the dirt yes. If he’s in a 2 point stance and off the ball it’s a 3-4. A DE and OLB are the same thing basically. If his hands are in the dirt he’s a DE. If he’s in a 2 point stance he’s an OLB. Every play I’ve seen from the defense when Takk and Beasley are in a 2 point stance they’re off the ball. That’s a 3-4. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, UGABOZ said:

bob sutton lol guy is terrible

Dont think he brought Sutton in to be a DC..... I think he wants to flirt with the 3-4 to change it up and work at our players stengths.

 

KC lead the league in sacks as a 3-4 team and that's a element we need to improve.

 

I'm not even disagreeing that Sutton D was horrible last year... I would be worried if he was the DC this year... But I do know quinn thing is using players to there strength..... If u can bring in a coach that coached the D that lead the league in sacks and that's the specific thing he will help with..... 

 

I figured that's what we was doing  earlier this summer.

vel and Ergo Proxy like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TheFatboi said:

If they’re hands are in the dirt yes. If he’s in a 2 point stance and off the ball it’s a 3-4. A DE and OLB are the same thing basically. If his hands are in the dirt he’s a DE. If he’s in a 2 point stance he’s an OLB. Every play I’ve seen from the defense when Takk and Beasley are in a 2 point stance they’re off the ball. That’s a 3-4. 

Is it fair to say all defenses are now hybrid and labeling them any one thing is pointless?

Monolith2001 and vel like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, atljbo said:

Dont think he brought Sutton in to be a DC..... I think he wants to flirt with the 3-4 to change it up and work at our players stengths.

 

KC lead the league in sacks as a 3-4 team and that's a element we need to improve.

 

I'm not even disagreeing that Sutton D was horrible last year... I would be worried if he was the DC this year... But I do know quinn thing is using players to there strength..... If u can bring in a coach that coached the D that lead the league in sacks and that's the specific thing he will help with..... 

 

I figured that's what we was doing  earlier this summer.

kc has had premier pass rushers for a while now so talent helps 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, vel said:

Sutton knows more about 3-4 principles than DQ. May not scheme well, but he knows the formation, weaknesses, strengths, etc. 

spin it anyway you want to make the front office and DQ look good, the guy was a disaster in kansas city

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, FalconsIn2020 said:

Is it fair to say all defenses are now hybrid and labeling them any one thing is pointless?

I wouldn’t say hybrid but multiple. Multiple meaning it shows different looks. But a 3-4 look is still a 3-4. A 4-3 is a 4-3. A 5-2 is 5-2. The thing is do you have the personnel to pull a multiple defense off. Hybrid is a mesh. Takk and Beasley or Neal. He’s a safety/LB. that’s hybrid. Multiple is the ability to play different looks to match your offensive personnel. Mike smith wanted a multiple defense but he didn’t have the personnel to pull it off. The Steelers are still a 3-4 defense through and through. Same with the ravens. NE plays multiple fronts. But hybrid no I wouldn’t call it that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, vel said:

Yep. Master gameplanner. Creative schemes/designs. Aggressive play style. All of that is coming. That's just who he is as a coach. Every player he coached in Seattle has said. Even coaches he coached with. My body is ready. 

 

Vel after typing that:

 

tenor.gif?itemid=4778661

Vandy, vel, Ovie_Lover and 5 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, UGABOZ said:

bob sutton lol guy is terrible

Not hired for defense at all:

 

FLOWERY BRANCH, Ga. – The Atlanta Falcons announced Monday that they have hired former Kansas City Chiefs defensive coordinator Bob Sutton to fill a key assistant role.

Sutton, a former head coach at Army, is expected to help with in-game strategy, clock management, time-out usage and replay review for the Falcons. With coach Dan Quinn assuming the defensive coordinator role for the Falcons, he has sought to hire someone who can handle some of the in-game and clock management responsibilities.

 

https://www.atlantafalcons.com/news/falcons-hire-former-chiefs-defensive-coordinator-bob-sutton-as-a-senior-assistan

Ergo Proxy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheFatboi said:

If they’re hands are in the dirt yes. If he’s in a 2 point stance and off the ball it’s a 3-4. A DE and OLB are the same thing basically. If his hands are in the dirt he’s a DE. If he’s in a 2 point stance he’s an OLB. Every play I’ve seen from the defense when Takk and Beasley are in a 2 point stance they’re off the ball. That’s a 3-4. 

That’s what I’ve seen us running. Not 5-2.

TheFatboi likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now