4-2-5 Defense

[Savvy]

I am using this in my new dynasty, building up Rice's program based on speed using Florida's spread option and a 4-2-5 defense.

However, I've never used this defensive scheme before in NCAA 11 and notice a lot of holes in my zone coverage and QBs having ample time to throw even with blitz packages.

I have two questions:

1) What are the most effective plays in this playbook and in which formations are they found?

2) Are my problems more based on the terrible ratings Rice's defensive players have rather than poor play selection?

[BlastX21]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

Having been a 4-2-5 user for a while, I can tell you that its a specialty playbook. It will shut down spread options and spread run attacks in general, and strongly limit regular options. It struggles against pro style teams that run the ball a majority of the time and against pass heavy spread teams.

In real life, the 4-2-5 shuts down spread passing attacks too, but not on this game. If your opponent comes out in a 4 WR set, the AI is flawed in a way to where you will likely see a linebacker who is supposed to be covering a WR deep inside the box rather than on top of his man, leaving him wide open. So, if your opponent comes out in 4 or 5 WR set, you should pick a dime formation and not 4-2-5. That should help a lot if you're giving up big gains in the air.

The 4-2-5 struggles against outside runs because there are so many guys in the box. If you predict an outside run, then spread your linebackers and pick a play that has a QB spy or DE contain. (There are TONS of plays that have those).

As for your question, I personally find most plays to be equally effective. The Pinch Blitz does stand out. If you can guess the direction of the run and blitz in that direction you will shut it down. It also works great at getting pressure. Other than that, most plays are equally effective in my experience.

I would also say that you're probably struggling a little bit because of Rice's skill, but if you try out these tips you should be alright.

[KennyLSU]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

I ran the 4-2-5 for a while but I kept getting burned by pro-style offenses as Blast mentioned. I have since moved to a 3-3-5 and haven't looked back. The array of zone and man blitzes is unmatched. Plus you have a 3-4 package.

[redicular]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

I ran the 4-2-5 for a while but I kept getting burned by pro-style offenses as Blast mentioned. I have since moved to a 3-3-5 and haven't looked back. The array of zone and man blitzes is unmatched. Plus you have a 3-4 package.

Actually thinking of going the other direction, 4-2-5 is weak vs power running true, but 3-3-5 is just DESTROYED by it, and I just got invited to the Big 10. Look at Michigan's D this year to see what happens when you bring a 3-3-5 up against Wisconsin and tOSU.

[lil_taul]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

i have no problem running the 4 2 5. especially on a blitz, it really gets after the qb, big time.... in my dynasty, i held 2 teams to zero points this season

[l3ulvl]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

I've never tried the 4-2-5, but I'm curious if anyone has tried the 2-4-5 formation? I know it's not an entire scheme by itself, but I'm wonder what sort of success anyone is having with it out of the nickel. I feel if you choose it anticipating a pass, like on a 3rd and long, you will get gashed by a run, especially a draw. Otherwise I get some good results against pass plays.

[playguitar90]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

I've never tried the 4-2-5, but I'm curious if anyone has tried the 2-4-5 formation? I know it's not an entire scheme by itself, but I'm wonder what sort of success anyone is having with it out of the nickel. I feel if you choose it anticipating a pass, like on a 3rd and long, you will get gashed by a run, especially a draw. Otherwise I get some good results against pass plays.

I use it on passing downs when im in a 34 scheme because I like the rush it provides. It is pretty weak vs run but it's not too bad. Not so much that theyll pick up the 3rd and long with it. I really love the rush it provides over 4DL nickel with a 34 (unless I do formation subs, it generates NO rush) or 335 Nickel because I don't feel like I get the same kind of rush from the OLBs.

[the veteran]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

Actually thinking of going the other direction, 4-2-5 is weak vs power running true, but 3-3-5 is just DESTROYED by it, and I just got invited to the Big 10. Look at Michigan's D this year to see what happens when you bring a 3-3-5 up against Wisconsin and tOSU.

Perhaps in real life but not in this game. The only time I have every gotten ran on using 335 is versus a drastically superior (A+ vs C) team. If you know the right defenses to call 335 can shut the run game down completely.

[Scrapps]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

I've been using a 4-3 since the game came out. However, in one of my o/d's, due to a lack of linebacker talent, I'm considering switching to the 4-2-5. But, I don't really know anything about how this defense works. Its basic principles and whatnot. I would assume the attributes of your front four remain the same. But, not sure what kind of skills I would be looking for in LB's and DB's when filling out my depth chart. I would appreciate any and all insight. Also, wouldn't this defense have the tendency to get chewed up with the run?

[BlastX21]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

I've been using a 4-3 since the game came out. However, in one of my o/d's, due to a lack of linebacker talent, I'm considering switching to the 4-2-5. But, I don't really know anything about how this defense works. Its basic principles and whatnot. I would assume the attributes of your front four remain the same. But, not sure what kind of skills I would be looking for in LB's and DB's when filling out my depth chart. I would appreciate any and all insight. Also, wouldn't this defense have the tendency to get chewed up with the run?

It is weak against under center running games, yes. Thats why many people felt Wisconsin had a advantage over TCU offensively. You wont give up any big gains up the middle, but the outside is very easy to exploit. Thats why your linebackers need to be run stoppers, and fast if possible. Pass defense shouldnt be much of an issue with the exotic blitzes and 5 DB's helping you out.

[CObra-la]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

It is weak against under center running games, yes. Thats why many people felt Wisconsin had a advantage over TCU offensively. You wont give up any big gains up the middle, but the outside is very easy to exploit. Thats why your linebackers need to be run stoppers, and fast if possible. Pass defense shouldnt be much of an issue with the exotic blitzes and 5 DB's helping you out.

Essentially the 4-2-5 is the 4-4 defense that teams like Washington and Virginia Tech ran in the their heydays of the late 90s when a lot of teams offense was based on the prostyle 2-back running attack.

I dont understand how people thought that TCU was at a disadvantage vs Wisconsin when their main play, Cover 2 "Robber" was built to handle the 2back+TE running game, but providing 8 in the box and run support coming from the FS who's playing a robber coverage over the #2 reciever (either the TE or slot reciever)

Vs the Undercenter running game against 21 personnel, the ideal play is 4-4 2 Deep, This is your Cover 2 "Robber" play. To set up this play, the only adjustment to make is to shift the DL to the strongside of the offenses formation. You'll need to user the FS and follow the "Robber" Rules you should also be on the look out for the play action pass from the I-formation if you successfully stop the run. Your Corners are covering the deep halves of the field to and if you follow the Robber rules correctly you'll be covering the #2.

Now, Schematically the discrepancies I've found with the 4-2-5 are:

- There's no 2 high safety base look that 4-2-5 teams usually stem into. If you research the 4-4/4-2-5 like I have you'll find that Washington and VTech's "G" Defense was ran out for base formations. The 4-4, the 46 and and 4-3 Over look. The Bear is your 46 look but there is no base 2-high safety look that the 4-3 Over provides. I've substituted the Nickel Strong as my 2-deep safety look.

- One of the base plays thats need from the 2-high safety look is 2 Press Man (or Quarters)

- There should be a Cover 2 "Robber" play from all of the base 4-2-5 looks and also the Bear. Its funny, because the 3-3-5 uses the same principles but it has the plays in their base look. Dont believe me? check Cover 2 MLB Spy. Schematically the same play, The CBs have the deep half the SS/OLBs have the flat and ILBS are in the intermediate zones. the 4-2-5 is missing these plays and they are needed.

As for what Blastx21 said. Yes if your opponent goes into Trips, 4WR and 5WR sets for the whole game its not recommended to stay in the base look. There are ways to handle Trips and 2x2 reciever looks, the same way a real life 4-2-5 team would but they are complicated, takes some practice and you have to depend on the Defensive AI of a player you're not usering to do something that its not programed to do.

This is a really exotic defense that I hope gets fleshed out a bit better in the next version of NCAA so it can be ran with the same effectiveness that the 4-3 or 3-4 is ran from. I'll step of my soapbox and stop rambling but if you guys would like, I'll post some of my favorite blitzes from the playbook.

[Scrapps]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

Essentially the 4-2-5 is the 4-4 defense that teams like Washington and Virginia Tech ran in the their heydays of the late 90s when a lot of teams offense was based on the prostyle 2-back running attack.

I dont understand how people thought that TCU was at a disadvantage vs Wisconsin when their main play, Cover 2 "Robber" was built to handle the 2back+TE running game, but providing 8 in the box and run support coming from the FS who's playing a robber coverage over the #2 reciever (either the TE or slot reciever)

Vs the Undercenter running game against 21 personnel, the ideal play is 4-4 2 Deep, This is your Cover 2 "Robber" play. To set up this play, the only adjustment to make is to shift the DL to the strongside of the offenses formation. You'll need to user the FS and follow the "Robber" Rules you should also be on the look out for the play action pass from the I-formation if you successfully stop the run. Your Corners are covering the deep halves of the field to and if you follow the Robber rules correctly you'll be covering the #2.

Now, Schematically the discrepancies I've found with the 4-2-5 are:

- There's no 2 high safety base look that 4-2-5 teams usually stem into. If you research the 4-4/4-2-5 like I have you'll find that Washington and VTech's "G" Defense was ran out for base formations. The 4-4, the 46 and and 4-3 Over look. The Bear is your 46 look but there is no base 2-high safety look that the 4-3 Over provides. I've substituted the Nickel Strong as my 2-deep safety look.

- One of the base plays thats need from the 2-high safety look is 2 Press Man (or Quarters)

- There should be a Cover 2 "Robber" play from all of the base 4-2-5 looks and also the Bear. Its funny, because the 3-3-5 uses the same principles but it has the plays in their base look. Dont believe me? check Cover 2 MLB Spy. Schematically the same play, The CBs have the deep half the SS/OLBs have the flat and ILBS are in the intermediate zones. the 4-2-5 is missing these plays and they are needed.

As for what Blastx21 said. Yes if your opponent goes into Trips, 4WR and 5WR sets for the whole game its not recommended to stay in the base look. There are ways to handle Trips and 2x2 reciever looks, the same way a real life 4-2-5 team would but they are complicated, takes some practice and you have to depend on the Defensive AI of a player you're not usering to do something that its not programed to do.

This is a really exotic defense that I hope gets fleshed out a bit better in the next version of NCAA so it can be ran with the same effectiveness that the 4-3 or 3-4 is ran from. I'll step of my soapbox and stop rambling but if you guys would like, I'll post some of my favorite blitzes from the playbook.

Sure, if you wouldn't mind. Or, you can pm me if you like. I'm leaning heavily towards switching to this D, and would like to know all I can prior to doing so. Thanks.

[Savvy]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

I think my problem is just that I don't know which plays are effective. Every time I call a play that appears to have a solid coverage or blitz package, one of my guys who is supposed to be in the flat or covering a receiver is sitting behind the D-linemen.


I know this playbook is predicated on disguising coverages, but the lackluster effort EA put forth leaves a lot of problems. Please let us know some of the remotely effective plays or any blitzes or coverages where I don't have 30 yard holes in my coverage.

[CObra-la]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

Sure, if you wouldn't mind. Or, you can pm me if you like. I'm leaning heavily towards switching to this D, and would like to know all I can prior to doing so. Thanks.

My blitz package basically consist of a couple of overloads that I like to use in certain situations.

Vs Singleback looks I like using 4-2-5 Normal Crash 3. Its basically the Middle Blitz that everybody likes to use with Zone Coverage behind it. Make sure you use normal because the alignment of the DLine and Lbers are important.

- Spread the line
- Pinch the LBs and move them into the A Gaps

Only thing is it leaves you susceptible to the intermediate throws over the middle and to the sideline.

Another Blitz I like to use is one is one of TCUs, the Bullets Thunder Cop 0 Blitz. The base play is either 4-2-5 Normal Crash Gold or Nickel Strong - Under Smoke. These are cover 0 plays so you dont have anyone deep if one of your guys is beat deep.

TCU's "Cop" call, calls for one of the DEs to go into man coverage on the TE. Which you'll need if you go with the Under Smoke play because it only provides 4 in coverage. You can send this blitz from either side just make sure that you have the DE covering the TE.

From the Normal - Crash Gold, You can use one of your formation packages, LB Pass Rush and put them in DE spot. Which will give you a better coverage person on the TE.

- Group Blitz your LBers
- Put the DE in M/M coverage on the TE

I think my problem is just that I don't know which plays are effective. Every time I call a play that appears to have a solid coverage or blitz package, one of my guys who is supposed to be in the flat or covering a receiver is sitting behind the D-linemen.


I know this playbook is predicated on disguising coverages, but the lackluster effort EA put forth leaves a lot of problems. Please let us know some of the remotely effective plays or any blitzes or coverages where I don't have 30 yard holes in my coverage.

Your main coverages from the base package will be forms of Cover 1 and Cover 3 being that you have a single high safety shell (also due to the missing 2-high shell that I talked about before). If you want to go into a cover 2, i suggest either Cover 4 or manually adjusting the depth of the SS with the deep 1/2 responsibility to give that look. But, stay away from man coverage out of your base packages because of the discrepancy with the man coverage. You can play Cover 2 "Robber" From Cover 3 just pinch your safeties and user the FS.

Also dont be afraid to use your Nickel and Dime Packages. On passing down if the ball is on the hash I call Nickel Normal CB Fox Blitz and make sure that the CB is blitzing from the hash. If you have a receiver over on that side that you're worried about you can take the Safety and put him in M/M coverage on the WR.

Alot of the same concepts from the 4-2-5 can be used in the 4-3

[BlastX21]

Re: 4-2-5 Defense

How should I go about stopping the outside run from under center? I use the 4-2-5 frequently and find this is the on thing I have consistent trouble with. It seems like everybody always gets blocked.