Can you double cover a TE?

Darren29 · 05-15-2011, 09:21 AM

Got a game coming up against a team with average receivers but a beast at TE who's leading them in receiving. I'd rather double the TE more than the WR's, but can this be done? Or is it not worth doing?

FWIW, the TE has higher RR than any of their WR's.

QuikSand · 05-15-2011, 10:34 AM

Ben E Lou · 05-15-2011, 11:04 AM

I recall someone complaining in WOOF because my high-RR TE ended up double-covered virtually the entire game while my stud WR, who had RR of around 75, was getting single coverage. Now, it *may* be that it had something to do with the fact that it was during the time that I was running 100% 2-TE, so maybe the game treated TE1 as WR2 in determining doubling.

This much I do know: the "top WR" is "the guy with the highest RR."

QuikSand · 05-15-2011, 11:22 AM

I take it all back then.

Ben E Lou · 05-15-2011, 12:19 PM

OK. I just found and re-read that thread. It's unique to 2-TE sets. In 2-TE sets, double coverage will be assigned to either the WR or the top TE. Several people commented "the TE CAN be double-covered," but every single example presented was in a 2-TE set, so it sounds like just a quirk of that setup.

thenewchuckd · 05-15-2011, 12:39 PM

I would suggest thinking about jacking up your Weak-Side Man Cover and zeroing your Strong-Side Man Cover. Although, jacking up is relative. You still want to mix things up. I personally would never set either of these defenses to more than 25%.

Anyhow, the reason is that Weak-Side Man Cover is better against a TE.

Then again, you have to think of your players are see what makes sense. If you have good coverage LBs, a 3 deep zone may work well against a strong TE. If you have a good man/bump coverage SLB, then those defenses might work (I think that the SLB covers the TE, someone else can confirm maybe).

Strong-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man
defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the strong side of
the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the
weak side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with
linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety
and is slightly worse against teams with a good receiving tight end.

Weak-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the weak side of
the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the
strong side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with
linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety
and is slightly better against teams with a good receiving tight end.

Richard Overvold · 05-23-2011, 08:08 PM

From CCFL. For whatever reason, regular I formation had the TE double covered. Keep in mind that over 100k plays, there was only like 2 instances of this happening.

San Diego: I formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.
2-9-NYK35 (1Q: 06:01) C.J. Palmer pass completed to TE Graham Sitron for 13 yards. Tackled by CB Thomas Mayes, assisted by OLB Ronnie Boone. Sitron gained 4 yards after the catch. The quarterback threw into double coverage.

Miami: Weak formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.
3-17-MIA44 (2Q: 01:31) Otis Butler pass was thrown incomplete, intended for TE Ethan Watkins. The quarterback threw into double coverage.

I'm not sure what could cause double coverage in regular formations, or if it would be worth it to go after the reason this happened. Figured I'd throw these instances out there for discussion.

Steel · 05-23-2011, 09:28 PM

Sometimes TEs get doubled covered based on where the route was versus the coverage. You can't "game plan" to double cover a TE, but like was stated, if you run a good bit of strong side zone-cover 7, it will help, as long as you got LBs that are good in coverage.

Firefly · 05-23-2011, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steel

Sometimes TEs get doubled covered based on where the route was versus the coverage. You can't "game plan" to double cover a TE, but like was stated, if you run a good bit of strong side zone-cover 7, it will help, as long as you got LBs that are good in coverage.

That's my impression as well, but I can't recall many examples of a TE actually getting doubled. Maybe it's true that it only happens in 2-TE sets.

gstelmack · 05-24-2011, 08:02 AM

So the question is "how often does a TE get double-covered"? We might be able to answer that question in the not too distant future....

Firefly · 09-02-2011, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steel

Sometimes TEs get doubled covered based on where the route was versus the coverage. You can't "game plan" to double cover a TE, but like was stated, if you run a good bit of strong side zone-cover 7, it will help, as long as you got LBs that are good in coverage.

In that regard, I feel that the best chance of getting double cover on a TE might be not to double the WRs.

aston217 · 09-03-2011, 11:25 PM

The way DC works in this game is...really poor.

It makes no sense, and there's little clarity. Hopefully the gameplan analyzer has shed some light on this?

05-15-2011, 10:34 AM	#2
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	No.

05-15-2011, 11:04 AM	#3
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	I recall someone complaining in WOOF because my high-RR TE ended up double-covered virtually the entire game while my stud WR, who had RR of around 75, was getting single coverage. Now, it may be that it had something to do with the fact that it was during the time that I was running 100% 2-TE, so maybe the game treated TE1 as WR2 in determining doubling. This much I do know: the "top WR" is "the guy with the highest RR." __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

05-15-2011, 12:19 PM	#5
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	OK. I just found and re-read that thread. It's unique to 2-TE sets. In 2-TE sets, double coverage will be assigned to either the WR or the top TE. Several people commented "the TE CAN be double-covered," but every single example presented was in a 2-TE set, so it sounds like just a quirk of that setup. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

05-23-2011, 08:08 PM	#7
Richard Overvold n00b Join Date: Dec 2008	From CCFL. For whatever reason, regular I formation had the TE double covered. Keep in mind that over 100k plays, there was only like 2 instances of this happening. San Diego: I formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, keying aggressively on the pass. 2-9-NYK35 (1Q: 06:01) C.J. Palmer pass completed to TE Graham Sitron for 13 yards. Tackled by CB Thomas Mayes, assisted by OLB Ronnie Boone. Sitron gained 4 yards after the catch. The quarterback threw into double coverage. Miami: Weak formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass. 3-17-MIA44 (2Q: 01:31) Otis Butler pass was thrown incomplete, intended for TE Ethan Watkins. The quarterback threw into double coverage. I'm not sure what could cause double coverage in regular formations, or if it would be worth it to go after the reason this happened. Figured I'd throw these instances out there for discussion. Last edited by Richard Overvold : 05-23-2011 at 08:10 PM.

05-24-2011, 08:02 AM	#10
gstelmack Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Cary, NC	So the question is "how often does a TE get double-covered"? We might be able to answer that question in the not too distant future.... __________________ -- Greg -- Author of various FOF utilities

05-15-2011, 11:22 AM	#4
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	I take it all back then.

05-15-2011, 12:39 PM	#6
thenewchuckd Mascot Join Date: Sep 2010	I would suggest thinking about jacking up your Weak-Side Man Cover and zeroing your Strong-Side Man Cover. Although, jacking up is relative. You still want to mix things up. I personally would never set either of these defenses to more than 25%. Anyhow, the reason is that Weak-Side Man Cover is better against a TE. Then again, you have to think of your players are see what makes sense. If you have good coverage LBs, a 3 deep zone may work well against a strong TE. If you have a good man/bump coverage SLB, then those defenses might work (I think that the SLB covers the TE, someone else can confirm maybe). Strong-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the strong side of the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the weak side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety and is slightly worse against teams with a good receiving tight end. Weak-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the weak side of the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the strong side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety and is slightly better against teams with a good receiving tight end.

05-23-2011, 09:28 PM	#8
Steel n00b Join Date: Aug 2009	Sometimes TEs get doubled covered based on where the route was versus the coverage. You can't "game plan" to double cover a TE, but like was stated, if you run a good bit of strong side zone-cover 7, it will help, as long as you got LBs that are good in coverage.

09-03-2011, 11:25 PM	#12
aston217 College Prospect Join Date: Sep 2010	The way DC works in this game is...really poor. It makes no sense, and there's little clarity. Hopefully the gameplan analyzer has shed some light on this? __________________ OSFL (join us!) CFL Float likeabutterflysting likeabee. Last edited by aston217 : 09-03-2011 at 11:26 PM.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)