The Cover 2 Defense

[cutter73]

Cover 2 isn't any more easy on playcalling than a base 4-3 is. It seems that way when you look at it, but the teams emply different looks presnap the same way other defenses do.

It's also a misconception to think cover 2 defenses never blitz. They do, but they probably do it less often. Most often what they emply is mort of a run blitz, kind of like what you see Bob Sanders doing in Indy at times. They blitz enough to keep the option open and that makes to offense have to account for it.

The base coverage also allows more variety in blitz options. Ronde Barber has a good number of sack in his career for a DB. Coming off the edge on a CB blitz isn't as risky when you have a linebacker and safety covering the deeper routes.

There are a lot of things you can toss into the base cover 2 and keep the offense guessing. People tend to think Cover 2 and tie it directly to the Bucs, and rightfully so in a lot of instances. But don't forget that the Bucs had Sapp and Rice both on the line for awhile, so blitzing to get pressure wasn't really an issue. Other teams have run the defense with different wrinkles, both before and after TB popularized it. I've seen interviews with players from the 70's, and a lot of them, Steelers included, will tell you that the Steel Curtain played a lot of what was basically a cover 2 defense. In fact, Dungy played on that Steel Curtain defense for a couple years and worked for the Steelers and Chuck Noll from 1981 -1989 as an assistant coach and Defensive Coordinator. Dungy took a lot of Nolls defensive philosophies, tweaked them a bit, and brought them to Tampa where the whole thing really caught on as the Tampa 2.

For my own vote, the best Cover 2 D ever was the Steel Curtain. Not taking anything away from Dungy, who is one of the finest coaches I can remember watching, but there is a lot more to the Cover 2 than what Dungy runs. Saying all Cover 2 defenses are the same is kind of like saying that Mike Holmgens version of the West Coast offense is the same as Bill Walshes. On a basic level it is, but everyone has their own take on it.

[steveo]

I am not a fan of the "Tampa 2" as it is easy to exploit if one is patient. This scheme is IMO the reason why indy hasn't been more successful in the playoffs which really comes back to Dungy not ever adapting and being out coached.

[Kruza]

Quote: Originally Posted by cutter73

Cover 2 isn't any more easy on playcalling than a base 4-3 is. It seems that way when you look at it, but the teams emply different looks presnap the same way other defenses do. It's also a misconception to think cover 2 defenses never blitz. They do, but they probably do it less often. Most often what they emply is mort of a run blitz, kind of like what you see Bob Sanders doing in Indy at times. They blitz enough to keep the option open and that makes to offense have to account for it. The base coverage also allows more variety in blitz options. Ronde Barber has a good number of sack in his career for a DB. Coming off the edge on a CB blitz isn't as risky when you have a linebacker and safety covering the deeper routes.

Ronde Barber regularly blitzed from the slot whenever he lined up as a nickel back against 3-WR sets, but I hardly recall him blitzing whenever he lined up outside against standard 2-WR sets. Maybe it just something Tony Dungy or Monte Kiffin weren't comfortable with calling against those particular personnel groupings.

Anyway, a common tendency for teams running the Tampa-2 is to seamlessly disguise between this scheme then employ a Cover 3 scheme and vice versa at the drop of a hat as a pre-snap adjustment so to briefly confuse the quarterback and hopefully make him hold the ball long enough for the pass rush to get to him. But all the defensive players on the back end have to be on the same page in order to pull this off successfully -- and one or two guys not getting the call can lead to disastrous results. See Matt Ryan's very first NFL regular season pass to Roddy White that went for a touchdown against the Lions.

Kruza

[allBthere]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

Neither Freeney nor Mathis have the skills to play in space to be 3-4 rush backers. If the Colts want to go 3-4, they would have to replace almost every defensive player they have.

well maybe they should look at that. The personel gets shifted a lot year to year anyway. They do have one pretty darn good corner, and I actually perfer Mathis to Freeney, since he seems to be involved in more tackles. Keep sanders, keep the corner (name is escaping me) and keep mathis (and probably freeney bc of contract) get a nice big fat DT like Rogers on the Browns.

Now that Im talking about replacing some colts..while I'm at it I'd love to see a playmaker added on offense since they don't really have one. I play-making WR or RB. Like a WR who's great for yards after the catch or a really explosive rb who can bust a large one. (Randy moss, Fitz, Boldin, steve smith, TO (would be hilarious) anyway someone like that) and an RB that is FAST

[Exonerated]

I wouldn't mind seeing the colts move away from the cover 2.

The good corner is Kelvin Hayden.

12th best corner this year. Kelvin Hayden, Indianapolis Colts
Season Totals: 42 attempts, 6.21 YPA, 45.24 Forced INC%, 1 TD, 3 INTs

pretty darn good. Though he did miss time so he did not see many balls thrown his way.

I'd love to see the Colts have a more dominating defense instead of a passive bend but dont' break one.

Bethea is great in coverage. Sanders is pretty good too.

You don't really need to replace the whole defense. Just get a linebacker or two that can blitz and maybe an elite corner. And a great DT no matter what scheme they play.

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by Exonerated

You don't really need to replace the whole defense. Just get a linebacker or two that can blitz and maybe an elite corner. And a great DT no matter what scheme they play.

That's hardly all they need to make the switch.

Not to mention Elite CB's and Great DT's are the 2 hardest positions to find outside of franchise QB.

[kcarr]

I think if we assume they could stick with their safeties, they would need 2 OLBs. Speaking of tough guys to find, elite pass rushers aren't easy to come by and ones who can play LB as well are going to be really tough with all these teams moving to 3-4. Also, their tiny DEs will get ran over in a 3-4 even more than they do in a 4-3 so those would need replaced as well but those are a little easier. Add in the good NT and at least one elite corner and did someone on here really say they needed to add an offensive weapon as well? Why not just cut the entire team and start over

[Dice]

Quote: Originally Posted by steveo

I am not a fan of the "Tampa 2" as it is easy to exploit if one is patient. This scheme is IMO the reason why indy hasn't been more successful in the playoffs which really comes back to Dungy not ever adapting and being out coached.

As with any defense you need the right personel. The "Tampa 2" only works if your D-Line alone can bring major heat from the middle and outside. Because the coverage has holes up the middle but if your lineman is in the face of the QB he shouldn't have time to read it and either get sacked or forced to throw with pressure in his face and cause a fumble or INT. That's why the Bucs were so good with it because they had Sapp and Rice.

I don't think it's all of Dungy's fault that Indy didn't win more championships. Despite the fact that he did have a Simeon Rice type end with Dwight Freeney, he never had that DT that caused havoc like Warren Sapp. Which is why his Tampa 2 in Indy never fully worked like it did in Tampa Bay. That falls on the GM.