Mario and wake have to be excited. It essentially takes responsibility away from them and puts it on the interior lineman and lbs.
Williams sounds like a fan here; If a player is lined up wider, then there is a bigger gap in between, there is no arguing this, which means the LB is responsible for a bigger gap, and the lineman are further away, which means they are further from helping, if needs be.
The wide-9 alignment is as much a run defense as anything. It was originally designed to defend against the early 2000's Colts offense which played heavily off of Edgerrin James outside zone plays(and play-action). It doesn't eliminate run responsibility for the defensive ends, it puts them in an advantageous position and depends on them to take advantage of it. There's a bit of a disconnect between the English language and football terminology here- there is a bigger space between the defensive linemen, but there's not a bigger "gap" from the standpoint of a linebacker responsibilities- they're still defending a single gap in the sense of a responsibility for a space between two offensive linemen. The linebacker isn't getting more on their plate, as the gap that "C" gap that a defensive end would typically be responsible for is still getting handled. Basically the defensive end and safety switch gaps- instead of the defensive end filling between the Tackle/TE and trying to spill the run outside and the safety filling the alley between the formation/wide receivers trying to force the run inside, they switch. The safety fill between the Tackle/TE, and the DE has either beaten the block of the TE or has control of him. The linebackers aren't as "protected" so to speak, but that's a philosophical difference, not an inherent one. You can protect them by playing them by covering up the offensive linemen in front of them, but you can also play them in space and make them a moving target to hit. I think both are viable.
The bolded is not correct, the LB is responsible for the gap in between the 2 Dlineman, it's the LBs job to stop whatever comes through that gap, and they are further apart, so the gap is bigger.
Pending health, the DL should be much deeper, and probably better this season. The big question is on the LBs. Two of our three starters have serious injury histories, so health is number one, and then the question of how Misi and Jenkins fit into this defense better than they did the previous one. The team allowed 120+ yards on the ground eight times last season, including over 200 twice. It honestly can't be much worse.
As I said earlier, I'm not going to believe our run defense is good until I see it, but I have to admit I do like the idea of giving Suh and others more space on the DL. Talent-wise our strength is on the DL not LB so you might as well design a defense around the DL and hope the LB's are up to the challenge. Of course.. as you point out the LB's are more crucial now in stopping the run, and.. well.. that's why I won't believe this works till I see it.
A gap is a very specific thing. It's the space between offensive linemen, referred to by letter: Sometimes you do have linebackers responsible for two-gaps. We don't really have to speculate though for this defense, Jim Schwartz has described how the gap assignments in the defense work(and its overall history) at a clinic. A safety is going to be responsible for that extra uncovered gap in the formation. That's why safeties are so key in this defense- and why the Dolphins went out and very quickly signed Isa Abdul-Quddus, a guy with experience and success in the scheme. The safety needs to be able to come down from a split safety look and fill a gap in the middle of the formation.
I know all about gaps and techs, but those are lineman gaps, not really the same as LB gaps, the LB is responsible for defending the areas in between and on the outside(3-4) of the D lineman, that is why the are called line backers, because they fill up the areas in between the D lineman, backing up the lineman. When a lineman changes from 6 to 9, he's now leaving 2 line gaps for the LB to cover, because that is the space between lineman, so the gap the LB fills is now bigger. For example, lets say the Dline are all lined up in the 4 gaps, which is done at times, are the LBs not responsible for any gaps? They are still responsible for the same thing, the area in between the D lineman.
Yes, and defenses have to account for them, LBs have to cover the gaps in between the D lineman, and that area can be 1 or 2 line gaps.
When you have Suh you can play the Wide 9. He obviously creates enough havoc on the inside be it from demanding an extra blocker and freeing up a LB, or clogging up the A gaps and forcing runners to the edge which theoretically would play right into our hands. This will a great scheme for us against the pass because we have a couple of very talented veteran DE's to get up the field and a pocket collapsing DT. How will it be vs the run? We will need to be sure tacklers on the back end of the defense or you will see many long TD runs against us. Will be interesting, I see a real benefit with this scheme if we can tackle. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not sure where you've gotten any of this, but there's a wealth of information on how linebacker gap assignments work and NFL playbooks that actually give you responsibilities. Here's a page out of an old Wade Phillips playbook that shows run responsibilities for a defensive front that's totally 1-gap like the Dolphins will be- https://html2-f.scribdassets.com/7ove0jcn2851gt56/images/38-e8b4c05ac1.jpg Note all the linebacker notes that reference gaps? That's giving them very specific run fits in specific gaps. That wouldn't work. You'd basically be putting linebackers in no-win situations the way it works in practice- a guy is going to line up over the outside shoulder of a guard and fill a gap between the tackle and tight end? That'd make it really easy on an offensive linemen- he'd basically be able to wait in a great position for the linebacker to meat his block. Like I said- there's a safety responsible for filling that gap in this defense. There's a lot more than four gaps. If you've got a tight end, there's four gaps on one side of the football.
Here's the big hole: DTs Jordan Phillips and Earl Mitchell were rated 122nd and 123rd against the run among 123 defensive tackles. http://miamiherald.typepad.com/spor...n-defense-will-be-better-amid-skepticism.html If we're going with a "wide nine" alignment, teams are going to hammer that weakness again & again.
I'm not sure that it really does put more on the backs of the defensive tackles, either- they are if anything free to be more aggressive- outside runs should be contained, they don't have to worry as much about cutbacks and being disciplined in certain areas. It's also worth noting that Jim Washburn and Jim Schwartz basically let Albert Haynesworth free of traditional notions of hap disciplines. They basically let him attack how he wanted and had the linebacker play off of him. If you wanna look at who is put under pressure in this defense, it's the safeties and defensive ends.
To me what Terrell Williams is describing could indeed be characterized as a "big hole" in the middle. He's describing a change in gap responsibilities from a defensive lineman to a linebacker. But linebackers are smaller, weaker and off the ball. So pretending that they have the same ability to protect a gap as a defensive linemen is silly. Would you rather have the defensive lineman on the outside gap or the inside gap? You could argue that the way it is usually, you've got a "big hole" on the outside. That would be fair. Would you prefer a "big hole" on the outside or a "big hole" on the inside? Tough question. Different people will see it different ways. I think Belichick and Crennel and his ilk would say outside because their priorities are always to strengthen the defense from inside-out. Bill Belichick favors linemen having two-gap responsibility. He has said the way the numbers work, someone's going to have two-gap responsibility. In a 4-3 or a 3-4 where the DLs are one-gapping, that would be one of the linebackers. In Belichick's favored defenses he's giving the two-gap job to a big strong defensive lineman rather than a linebacker because one is big and strong and closer to the line of scrimmage and so he'd rather give the duty to that guy. This difference in ability to cover gaps between big strong defensive linemen that are on the ball and smaller weaker linebackers that are off the ball, that's the basis of the argument that the Wide-9 leaves a "big hole" in the middle.
What your not getting here is that the LB has to be responsible for the area in between the lineman, and Ss are not playing in the box, one might, but 2 never, except in GL, so if the S is deep on that side, he's not filling any gap, and if you're playing the 2 deep Ss, neither will be filling gaps. There are definitely LBs that have 2 gap assignments, the MLB in a 4-3 nearly always has a 2 gap assignment, unless he's in a drop zone, then both OLBs have 2 gap assignments. Yes I know there is more than 4 gaps, I was just giving an example.
That is not true too much of the time though, he does get moved off his spot vs double teams, and teams will run right at that spot, there were plenty of examples of that last year, this is why I think he's overrated, he is a top DT, but still overrated imo.
The outside runs will still be the responsibility of the DEs, the fact that we're running the wide 9 won't make the DEs better at setting the edge, and the DE that is lined up at the 9 is on more of an island, and cutbacks, traps and draws are what you attack a wide 9 with. example; T comes out and blocks wide DE, G blocks DT, C pulls into huge hole on a trap left. For the W9 to really succeed, you need good edge rushers that can also set the edge well, stout DTs that can also put pressure on QBs(1 stout and 1 good passrusher will do), and good instinctive LBs. Just like the 3-4, the W9 requires the right personnel to do it well, not just good players, but the right good players, and if you don't, things can get ugly, because there are certain areas you NEED to be strong in for both of these Ds.
Yeah, the coach is really insulting the intelligence of even the beat writers with his comments... please tell me you read that epic Jedi mom trick joke before they censored me. If these coaches fail, they are in for one hell of a cosmic come-uppance from the likes of Armando Salguero who has seen this dog and pony show ad nauseum. Remember the scene in Beverly Hills Cop part two when Billy is unearthing an arsenal of weapons from his trunk.
I'm not getting it because it isn't an actual thing. Feel free to find any sort of sourcing for what you're saying, because I have and can provide actual NFL playbooks or other resources on any element you'd like here. Again, that's not true either- safeties in two-deep formations are quite frequently involved in run fits, and it's likely going to be a very common occurrence in this defense- be it a safety traditionally filling the alley as a force guy, or filling the C gap in a wide-9 type front.
This is really simple, LBs are not lineman, the LBs job is to fill the areas the lineman can't, like a web, so all areas are covered, that is why they are responsible for the areas that the lineman can't cover. I'm not sure how you can think that a S that is 15 to 20 yds deep is filling any line gap, they are there to clean up if a player gets through, which is why they are called safeties.
I played some LB. "Gap integrity".... the coaches call it. Some of these proposed theories are news to me. This description of a LBs duties as strictly backing the line with a preset gap responsibility, regardless of offensive formation ...is ill-advised. If only it were so simple! I'm sure you know... As a defender, the offense will dictate not only the gaps, but the personnel/packages you use to defend them.
You've basically invented your own theory on how things work and don't appear dissuaded at all by actual NFL playbooks, commentary by experts, explanations on why the scheme you haven't invented would be highly problematic, etc. It isn't a bad theory if you watched what was happening on the field and worked backwards without researching much more, but it isn't correct and I'm not sure why you insist on sticking to it despite there being really nothing to support it anywhere. Because I've read about this things, instead of guessing? https://www.xandolabs.com/index.php...:53cover-4-run-read-drill&catid=95&Itemid=164 You can find very similar rules from a number of other people on the topic, and similar ones for split safety schemes.
Yes, but you said clog and force to the edge, that is what he doesn't do enough, they move him off his spot, and can run it right at his spot, because he has been vacated.
I could see a high school coach choosing to teach that to players in the context of a very specific defense, sure. But it isn't inherently what linebackers do, or really even something you can find an example of being done at a higher level.
