Cover 2?

[steelers1]

Do you honestly believe that if you ran 4 receivers on streaks against a cover 2 zone defense, that you would have 4 receivers against the 2 safeties and that the 2 CBs would just be sitting there defending their zone against nobody? If the CB doesn't have any imminent threat to that zone, he will be playing the receiver. The deep middle is the major weakness (which is the reason for the Tampa 2 which has the MLB play the deep middle and makes it a pseudo-cover 2 and more of a cover 3).

Streaks aren't the best way to beat the cover 2 like you are so caught up with. Sending a streak up the seam can split the safeties, but you're not going to run all streaks and only have the 2 safeties covering you. The area behind the corners is soft, like you said, but that's why corner routes/deep outs can be effective. That and the deep post is the way you exploit the cover 2. Sending them all deep shouldn't fool anybody. In Madden the CB will stay with the receiver for about 3 yards and just let him go even with no other threat to enter their zone, and that is just dumb.

[Obelysk]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

Read the part that is underlined I understand what both of you mean but come on... a cover 2 basicly turns in to a cover 4 ???..? So you are telling me that if I run 4 verts vs your cover 2 you want your cover 2 to basicly turn into a cover 4......Thats not right IMO.... You cant have the best of both worlds here you picked cover 2 thus giving u 5 underneath defenders and 2 over the top....You picked that to stop the WCO (west coast offense) quick passes (dink and dunks) and you want it to turn basicly into a cover 4 when my guys go 4 verts.....Thats not fair to the offense at all.....its a no win situation Also this is not universal for the entire NFL...This "may" just be how 1 or 2 teams run their cover 2...But this is giving the CPU of the defense too much power....By doing it the way he wants to you take away the weakness of the cover 2 He says he is talking more about the Tampa 2 wich is more like a cover 3 and by his statement "if" the outside wrs run verts he wants the CBs to cover that to making a cover 2 (5 underneath defenders) A cover 5 (with 5 over the top defenders) Am I the only one who is understanding this.....The weakness of the regular cover 2 is deep (seams and attacking the safties and the area behind the CBs) and the Tampa 2 covers the "post" or "seam" barely that is how those coverages are suposed to work Guys I understand what he wants and everything but It would be better if he gave some diagram to better discribe how he would want the cover 2 to play something like the 4 verts becuz in not seeing it at all (sorry for the spelling) dont think im trying to bash you its just that If you want to cover deep you call cover 4/ if you want to cover short you call cover 2/ and if you want to cover in between you call cover 3....but you cnt expect a cover 2 to be a cover 4 that isnt fair to the oiffense that 1 play can cover soo many areas on the field..

I see your point but technically the Cover 2 is simply two deep safeties, what ever you do underneath is almost irrelevant. So basically you can run all man to man with two safeties deep and is still a Cover 2. Most people associate the Cover 2 with two safeties deep and the underneath zone coverage which even though is not wrong its definitely not the only Cover 2 play. Same thing with the Cover 3, but I do agree that for the sake of the game they should not change from one play to another.

[WFColonel56]

Quote: Originally Posted by steelers1

Do you honestly believe that if you ran 4 receivers on streaks against a cover 2 zone defense, that you would have 4 receivers against the 2 safeties and that the 2 CBs would just be sitting there defending their zone against nobody? If the CB doesn't have any imminent threat to that zone, he will be playing the receiver. The deep middle is the major weakness (which is the reason for the Tampa 2 which has the MLB play the deep middle and makes it a pseudo-cover 2 and more of a cover 3). Streaks aren't the best way to beat the cover 2 like you are so caught up with. Sending a streak up the seam can split the safeties, but you're not going to run all streaks and only have the 2 safeties covering you. The area behind the corners is soft, like you said, but that's why corner routes/deep outs can be effective. That and the deep post is the way you exploit the cover 2. Sending them all deep shouldn't fool anybody. In Madden the CB will stay with the receiver for about 3 yards and just let him go even with no other threat to enter their zone, and that is just dumb.

I agree but.......But you expect a CB in cover 2 to run down the field with the WR is BS I agree he should play deeper but no deeper than 10-13 yards...... The way you discribe it all I would do on defense is call a cover 2 all game long and dare someone to put together a master plan to stop it

(oh and in 09 they play around 5 yards deep)

[steelers1]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

I agree but.......But you expect a CB in cover 2 to run down the field with the WR is BS I agree he should play deeper but no deeper than 10-13 yards...... The way you discribe it all I would do on defense is call a cover 2 all game long and dare someone to put together a master plan to stop it (oh and in 09 they play around 5 yards deep)

10-13 yards instead of 3-5 would make all the difference in the world, and when a CB would go to pass the defender out of his zone, he would only retreat off the receiver if he saw someone as a threat in his zone. The way they have it makes almost any passes to the outside a weakness against the cover 2 zone, and that's not the way it should be. And this is all made worse by the defenders in zone not 'attacking' the receivers enough in the first place.

[WFColonel56]

Quote: Originally Posted by steelers1

10-13 yards instead of 3-5 would make all the difference in the world, and when a CB would go to pass the defender out of his zone, he would only retreat off the receiver if he saw someone as a threat in his zone. The way they have it makes almost any passes to the outside a weakness against the cover 2 zone, and that's not the way it should be. And this is all made worse by the defenders in zone not 'attacking' the receivers enough in the first place.

Ok I think we are on the same page but where the other guy loses me is when he says it should almost play like a cover 4.....To me that implys that he wants the Cbs around 20 yards deep or deeper if nobody is in there zone and I just dont agree with that

[strickzilla]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

Ok I think we are on the same page but where the other guy loses me is when he says it should almost play like a cover 4.....To me that implys that he wants the Cbs around 20 yards deep or deeper if nobody is in there zone and I just dont agree with that

the cover 4 thing is kind of right if the play is that long and the cb zone is empty he job is to read/drop. if the play is running long enough for the cb to get 10-15 yds back its either a broken play or a coverage sack.


on another note if the cover 2 played correctly then i would make playcalling more important. things like flooding the zone and making those post pattern throws all the more important

[reyes the roof]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

Ok I think we are on the same page but where the other guy loses me is when he says it should almost play like a cover 4.....To me that implys that he wants the Cbs around 20 yards deep or deeper if nobody is in there zone and I just dont agree with that

So if you send 4 guys on fly patterns, what are the CBs supposed to do when the receivers all pass through their zones? There would only be one other possible guy to cover, so at least one of the corners would be just standing around doing nothing, there is no reason for him to stay in his zone, and that's assuming you aren't keeping a RB or TE in for protection

[GrnEyedBanditTN]

Actually, the way Cover 2 was taught to us in college (see my signature) was this... all reads were made off of the #2 receiver to your side (slot, TE, RB, etc.). To make this illustration "easier", I will use the 4 WR, 1 RB set (inside WR #2 outside #1). If the #2 runs any vertical route, the CB takes #1 man to man. There are holes on the outside between the CB and S... the smash route was designed to exploit it. Smash (#1 runs a hitch #2 runs a corner). I am a Bears fan, so I am extremely familiar with their version of the Tampa 2. I also am a UT Vols fan and have seen Monte Kiffin up close teaching the defense as well.