good read on what how defenses are changing in the NFL...

[rayzor]

posted this in another thread, but thought it would make for interesting conversation or at the least would be a good read.

On the video screen, Payton cued up a play from the Saints' 2009 game with the Jets. New York had a left defensive end over New Orleans's right tackle, no one over the right guard, center or left guard, a defensive end over the left tackle and a standup linebacker on the end's right shoulder. Quarterback Drew Brees stood at the line figuring what to do. Linebackers and defensive backs moved around, showing nothing. "And here they come," said Payton. "They knock at the front door with one guy, then shove 10 through the back."

At the snap the Jets flooded the left side with four rushers. Traffic on the line stopped two of them. The others, linebacker Bart Scott and safety Jim Leonhard, steamed around left end. For the Saints, left tackle Zach Strief had to pick up one, and tight end Jeremy Shockey, behind Strief, should have gotten the other. At the moment of truth Leonhard ducked low, taking a wide rush outside, and Strief and Shockey both blocked him. Scott, left free, smashed into Brees, forcing an incompletion. "Win for the defense," Payton said.

The strange 2-3-6 alignment, with no defenders over the three interior linemen, caused the Saints to change their blocking scheme after this game from man to zone on blitzes around the corners. Their name for the new scheme: Jet Stream. Just one more move to try to keep ever-morphing defensive fronts—aren't the Jets supposed to play a straight 3--4?—from wrecking the offense's plans.

.

.

.

The biggest myth in football is that your base defense is what you are. The Patriots are known as a 3--4, so they should want a big nose guy and 290-pound defensive ends who play the run first. Right? When New England signed troubled defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, the outcry wasn't so much about Haynesworth's work ethic but about how he'd fit in. Haynesworth hates the 3--4, and Bill Belichick's a 3--4 guy. But is he really? "That's a media fabrication," the Patriots coach says. "There are a lot of different alignments out there. It's the techniques, the fundamentals that you teach your players, more than the 3--4, 4--3 that people say you use."

In fact the Patriots played a 3--4 on just 39.7% of their snaps in 2010, according to game-tape analysis by ProFootballFocus.com. The site counted 29 plays on which New England cornerback Kyle Arrington lined up at defensive end, with his hand on the ground.

The Patriots weren't alone in this public deception. Super Bowl champ Green Bay, another so-called 3--4 team, had just two defensive linemen on the field on 68.6% of its plays, according to Pro Football Focus. "Our guys are used to dropping in coverage," says Packers coordinator Dom Capers. "It's all about picking your spots—when to rush, when to drop. Sometimes it's a little bit faddish, just to show a different front."

"Confusion," said Payton. "That's the word. Football has become the battle of confusion."

In 1990, NFL teams threw an average of 483 times a season. That number rose to 540 in 2010. "We're never going back to a running game," says Texans defensive coordinator Wade Phillips. "Now fullbacks run once a year. We're going to stay a passing league." In the '80s the Giants bulked up the middle of their D to stop Dallas's and Washington's strong running games and won two Super Bowls. These days there may be a few games in which an offense runs on 60% of its plays, but far more frequently the ratio is 60% pass, 40% run. To contend with those pass-heavy attacks, defensive architects are changing up, becoming more and more unpredictable. Some of the ways they're doing so:

Varying the fronts to create mismatches. Many teams have started doing what Rex Ryan did as coordinator for the Ravens and now does as Jets coach—flood one gap or blocker with two, three or even four defensive linemen or linebackers. That challenges a quarterback to change his protection call to keep more blockers in. On one play in that 2009 Jets-Saints game, New York showed a heavy rush on the left side; Brees kept a running back in to block ... and at the snap the Jets dropped a lineman and a linebacker from the group into coverage, negating Brees's protection call. "They rushed four but ate up six of our guys," Payton said. "They were able to double two of our receivers without leaving anyone open."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1189944/1/index.htm

there's been a lot of discussion over how things look scary for the defense because of the lack of strength at DT and CB. i think we are weak there, but i don't think that it will snakebite the defense the way many think it will.

the overall defense is strong. it's the scheme and playcalling and their ability to disguise things and confuse the offense that will bring success.

[mj4life]

i expect us to do alot of different things are far as personnel goes, i think you see our linebackers blitz more esp. davis

[Mr. Scot]

McDermott flirted with some alignments like this. Word was Andy Reid didn't like it.

[Jai.]

Good read.

[panthers55]

McDermott flirted with some alignments like this. Word was Andy Reid didn't like it.

Word is that McDermott is very creative and innovative. I sure hope that Rivera turns him loose.

[jramsey4]

Funny I got crap for suggesting a formation with only 2 down lineman about 2 years ago. I guess it wasn't as far fetched as some posters made it out to be.

[Jackofalltrades]

Probably a big reason RR is fine with just three DT's in Zona.

I trust him.

[csx]

Probably a big reason RR is fine with just three DT's in Zona.

I trust him.

They could have 10 DTs on the roster and only 3 would be active. It doesn't matter the first game.

[bleys]

unless we start seeing formations like 2-3-6, then we still need effective pass rushers from our DLine..

I understand the point of the article... namely, technique and where to hit the gaps.. with all that said, you still need effective pass rushers and clogs on the DLine.. regardless what you want to call it.

[frash.exe]

Like i've been saying the past few years the running game is becoming secondary, so either evolve accordingly or become obsolete

[panthers55]

If you think about it another way though, the best of both worlds is being able to run the ball and pass it. With the majority of teams evolving to mostly passing the ball, it makes sense that defenses are evolving to stop the pass. It is certainly possible as they move toward smaller faster linemen and formations with multiple blitzers there will be giant holes through which to run as players storm one gap while leaving another essentially uncovered. Smaller guys who can be rooted out by big maulers like Otah.

I don't really buy the rationale that passing is all that matters or that running the ball or stopping the run aren't that important. Look at the Panthers and our DT situation. What does everyone want? A big fat guy who can plug the middle against the run not a fast small guy who can rush the passer. We are worried as much about Wells gashing us for 125 yards as we are about Fitzgerald going nuts in the secondary.

What do we say we need to help Cam out while he develops? A strong running game and a good defense. Running the ball and stopping the run while limiting the passing.

Whe all the emphasis is on passing and stopping the pass, teams that can run the ball and pass present challenges to teams only built to do one but not both.

[j2sgam]

Excellent read.. Could answer any questions about keeping 6 linebackers....