The Five Spoke Secondary Part III

In this segment on the Five Spoke Secondary Posts, I'll delve into the blitz strategy that one can institute using TCU's blitz scheme as a template.  Now, a lot of this IS NOT what TCU does, but IS some thing that myself and other coaches have done in the past when utilizing the 4-2-5 defense.

The Basics

To review the coverage aspects of TCU's blitz coverage scheme, simply known as Cover 0, we need to review the rules and the adaptations that TCU has in adapting their coverages to fit their blitz scheme.  The rules in TCU's Cover 0 are very simple and are as follows:

The scheme is completely based upon match ups.  Generally speaking, in college football, unless the tight end you are covering is Gronkowski, then there's no need to waste a corner here in that match up.  So, vs. closed sets (twins closed, or trips closed) then the corner to the nub side will simply "flip" over to the other side and cover the other "number one" receiver in the count.  An illustration of the count system is shown below.

Typical Count System

Count System vs. Twins Closed

Count System vs. Trips Closed

As you can see from the illustrations above, this count system is adapted to the Cover 0 scheme to keep corners covering receivers, and linebacker (LB)/safety types covering tight ends (TE's) and running backs (RB's).  One thing missing from the list of rules is the diagnosing of the position of the number two receiver.  In general, the Strong Safety (SS) and Weak Safety (WS) will have the number two receiver to their respective side, outside the tackles.  If no number two receiver outside the tackles, then they are deemed as "free".  The Free Safety (FS) will handle the number three receiver outside of the tackle box, and if there isn't a number three receiver outside the tackle box, then the FS is listed as "free".  The Read Side LB, will have the number three receiver inside the tackle box and the Away Side LB will have the number two receiver inside the tackle box to his side.

Now, as we know, somebody is blitzing, so there won't be seven defenders involved in coverage.  As is the case with  most six man pressures, there will be five guys in coverage.  The FS is generally the adjuster when it comes to blitzing in this scheme, however this isn't always the case.  There are also some calls when a defender, by alignment, does not have good leverage on who he is supposed to cover (as is the case when the SS is asked to cover an attached TE).  In this case, the SS and FS can "banjo" the TE, so long as the FS is not covering somewhere else for another blitzer (think Bullets vs. two back sets for instance).  The LB's also have some calls and rules that help them distinguish who is covering who, but for this post, I am just concerned with the fact that you know the basics.

Banjo concept

Blitz Coverage

Now that the basic rules have been established a quick review of some basic man blitzes from the 4-2-5 is listed below:

• Bullets- Both LB's blitzing.  This means all five defensive backs (DB's) will be involved in the coverage (although the coverage is not just limited to the DB's, the defensive line (DL) can also be involved by adding certain calls).
• Smokes/Lions- One or both of the outside safeties (OSS's) are blitzing.  In this case, the LB's, and the FS would be involved in coverage along with the Corners.  If tagged, a DL could also be involved.
• Dogs- An OSS and a LB are blitzing to one side of the formation.  Now, both Corners, the FS, a LB and the OSS not blitzing are part of the coverage.
• Bullets Thunder- This means an OSS, and both LB's are blitzing.  Now a DL must be added into the coverage mix along with the OSS not blitzing, the Corners and the FS.
• Mob- Here, both OSS's are blitzing (if they can by rule) and the LB's are blitzing.  The DL, the FS and the Corners are all now part of the coverage.

Again, this is just the basics.  I know TCU does this, and Boise State does that, etc., but this is just meant to be a review.  I strongly suggest going to Cripes! Get Back to Fundamentals or to Blitzology to get a better understanding of each individual blitz if you aren't familiar with them already.

For this post, I'm focusing mainly on the secondary and how it handles blitzing one of its own.  Bullets are not a major factor, because the five "cover guys" are doing just what they do best...cover.  What I'm more concerned with are when one, or both of the OSS's are involved in a blitz.  

To understand the blitz coverage, one needs to review the second post in this series about alignment.  Your blitz attack, should mirror your base defense against the offense you are facing.  To drastically alter your alignment just to blitz is to tip off exactly what you are trying to do to the offense.  When blitzing members of the secondary (mainly Dogs and Smokes) there are a variety of ways to tag the blitz as to know who and where the blitz is going to be coming from.  These tags are critical when matching the blitz up to base alignments.  Let's take a look at each series of blitzes involving a member of the secondary to  understand who this system works.

Smokes

As mentioned above, Smokes are a safety blitz, by either one or both of the OSS's.  Smokes can be tagged Wide, Short, Thunder or Lightning.  A wide call indicates that the safety to the wide side of the field will be blitzing.  A short call would be just the opposite.  Thunder indicates the safety to run strength will be blitzing, while Lightning is the opposite tag, meaning the safety away from run strength would blitz.  A Double Smoke call would indicate that both safeties are blitzing.

Coverage, when blitzing a DB has to be set up in a way that no man is left open.  One unique thing I noticed when learning this defense is that TCU rarely checks out of blitz.  If a cover guy is needed to cover instead of blitz, he covers and someone else will blitz for him.  For instance, if a Double Smoke is called vs. a 2x2 set, then one of the safeties, by rule, cannot blitz because you have a match up issue with an inside LB (ILB) covering a speedy wide receiver (WR).  This situation is where one of the safeties will make a "switch" call.  What switch does is put the DB in coverage and lets the ILB take the responsibility of blitzing.

Where the flexibility of the defense comes into play is clearly evident with the switch call.  I'll add to this even further.  I faced a very dangerous RB  in the past that was as deadly running the ball as he was catching it out of the backfield.  During that week, we changed the Smoke scheme up to where we ended up with the FS coming down into the box to cover the RB and both ILB's ran the Smoke, instead of the safeties.  This is illustrated below.

What this allowed us to do was keep a six man pressure on, and keep our best coverage options in place.  The reason we didn't simply call it Moe and Woe (in TCU terms this is Mike off Edge and Will off Edge, although I think TCU calls their ILB's Mike and Sam) was that sometimes they would line up said good RB as a slot receiver and bring in their backup.  In that case, we didn't want to switch both sides, only the side this player was on.  Again, you can see the flexibility of the defense.  Our guys were simply trained, that when this player (who wore jersey number 21) aligned in the slot, that safety covered and gave a switch call.  Everyone else simply ran Double Smoke.

If this would've been to the other side of the defense, we had our FS cover number 21, and ran the exact same look.  The reason for this is simple, despite the fact our SS is labeled as a safety is only in name.  This player, generally has been more LB than safety.  In the theme of keeping the best match ups possible, our FS was a better cover player than our SS, so we let the SS run the Smoke, and the FS would cover number 21.  My main point here is to not get caught up in what TCU does, but understand the basic concept and the dynamics of the scheme.

Dogs

As I discussed earlier, Dogs are both a Bullet and a Smoke to one side of the formation.  Dogs are similar to Smokes in that they can be called Wide and Short, as well as Strong and Weak.  One common problem with Dogs, is that of coverage.  The FS has to cover for the blitzing OSS, whereas the opposite OSS may be asked to come across the formation and handle a third receiving threat.  This was never more evident that when TCU faced Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl a few years back.  The play that sealed the game was a Dog blitz run into a Trips formation.  The problem with Dogs is if the WS doesn't get over in time to cover the number three receiver out of these formations.  I've alluded to this in other posts on TCU's blitz scheme.

In the above example, the "Frog" Dog is a Dog blitz run to the side of the offset RB (in this example it would be called Frog Dogs C in TCU terminology).  As we can see the blitz coverage rules hold up, with the FS covering for the blitzing SS and the WS handling the number two receiver outside the tackle box.  The away side LB would have the RB.  Now, the away side LB doesn't have very good leverage here, so the blitz would more than likely be tagged with something such as a "peel" call so that there would be flare control on the RB.  No matter, the basics are pretty much covered.  Against a trips set, things would shake out as follows:

Again, all of this is just the basics.  The FS covers for the blitzer, but must signal to the WS to cover the number three receiver to the read side.  The away side LB will take the RB.  Again, TCU utilizes some other calls that assist the LB that isn't blitzing in his coverage on the RB.

Where the flexibility comes into play is with something I encountered back in 2013.  I had two prototypical deep safeties.  Long, rangy, and both ball hawks.  Both were pretty good in coverage, and did a decent job of coming downhill and playing in the box when needed to.  My problem was my SS.  My SS was a young man, of tremendous heart and character, but extremely small stature, and minimal athletic ability to be labeled a "DB".  His coverage skills were poor, but he had a knack for getting to the football.  His 5'5" 165 pound frame didn't lend him well to playing inside the box, because as soon as an offensive lineman (OL), got his hands on him he was finished.  Where this young man really excelled was when we brought him off the edge, these same OL, couldn't block him.  His quickness and lateral change of direction speed in tight areas made him a nightmare to block.  To add to this, my WS was almost the complete opposite.  When he blitzed him, he was easily picked up, and quite simply put, didn't care anything at all about being blitzed.  Don't get me wrong, he was smart, and was a master at keeping the away side coverage aligned and in the proper call, but he just didn't have that knack for getting after a ball carrier, or QB when being blitzed.  What would end up happening to us, is we'd get into a blitz, and by alignment or motion, it would end up being the WS getting blitzed and not the SS.  This caused us some grief early on, until discussing the subject with a good friend, shed some light on the flexibility of the scheme.

This was pretty much my SS

What my friend and I came up with is what I later coined "Scottie" blitzes.  Since my SS's name was Scottie, I named it after him!  What a Scottie tag did was tell my SS no matter what the blitz was (Smoke or Dog) he was running the blitz.  For instance, if we wanted to bring a blitz from the boundary, the SS (Scottie) simply switched with our WS and ran the blitz.  The WS would become the safety away from the blitz and cover.  The FS would travel with Scottie and would cover the number two receiver to the side the blitz was being run to.  We had Scottie Dogs and Scottie Smokes, but all of them were consistent.  It was quite simple to teach, and even easier to execute as it actually gave the players less to  think about.  My FS, who could be absent-minded at times, simply had to follow Scottie, and cover the number two receiver outside of the tackles.  My WS, who was very intelligent simply covered the number two receiver outside the tackle box away from the blitz.  A good illustration in the differences between the two blitzes is shown below with a Frog Dog.  Normally, to a trips set with the RB set weak, the weak side LB and WS would blitz this formation and the SS and FS would cover number two and number three, respective, to the trips side.  Well, if we were running a Scottie Frog Dog, then our SS simply went to the side of the RB and blitzed, whereas the WS replaced him, covering the number two receiver into the trips side.

What this little tactic did to our blitz scheme was actually twofold.  First, it put our best blitzer doing what he did best, blitz.  It also kept him from being in coverage, where he was, quite simply put, a liability.  Secondly, this made blitzing our WS EVEN BETTER.  Yes, you read that right.  Teams would scheme us, and figure out who our blitz guy was and so we were seeing them adjust protection in the direction of "Scottie".  Well, we'd Dog or Smoke away from Scottie every now and then and those blitzes hit pay dirt over 95 percent of the time that season.  Even though we weren't sending our best blitzer, it's easy to blitz when a team doesn't think your blitzing!

Conclusion

Again, as with the other posts in this series, one can see you don't have to run the 4-2-5 verbatim to what they do in Fort Worth.  The general idea behind Gary Patterson's scheme is so much more than just being able to call "Field G Army Wide Dogs B Silver".  It's the ability to pigeon-hole your players into what fits them the best within the defense.  Had I just simply stuck to what TCU did in 2013, we wouldn't have been anywhere near as good of a defense.  If there is one thing that you should take away from these posts, it is the age-old football axiom of "Think Players, not Plays".  This used to be an offensive point of wisdom, passed from one offensive coordinator to the next, however it can also be adapted to the defensive side of the football.  Don't ask your players to be something they are not.  My Scottie, was not a DB, as he struggled with man-to-man coverage, despite us doing one-on-ones' on a daily basis.  What he could do, was be the most disruptive little "fly-in-the-ointment" when we blitzed him.  Flip that around and the same could be said for our WS.  He wasn't going to do well if we blitzed him, yet, he was very solid in coverage.  Again, adapting the scheme to fit your players is the common theme or thread that needs to be taken away from these posts.  Hopefully I was able get you to understand that in just three posts!

Duece

Small Plug to Blitzology

So glad to see Blitzology get back in the writing game.  If you've never visited this site, it's sick!  Great blitzes, that are in great detail with all the fine tuning you need to add these blitzes to your defense.  I have used several that are found on his site, and highly recommend if you are looking for something pressure-oriented, to go there.  I love the detailed work, no stone left un-turned feel you get when reading the posts.  It's almost like some sort of do-it-yourself manual on blitzing.  The blitzes are described in great detail, with position-specific assignments, as well as adjustments and checks.  Check out Blitzology today guys, if you haven't you'll be impressed.

Since I'm doing a plug, gotta keep my other guys in the loop.

Blog Roll
Blitzology
Coach Hoover-this ol' boy can eat some ribs...oh yeah, he has sweet blog too!
Compete in All Things- hasn't posted in awhile, but has some good tidbits on there.
Cripes!  Get Back to Fundamentals-The Holy Grail of football blogs.
Direct Snap Football- good single wing stuff here.
Kickology- wanna know more about the kicking game, kickers and punters?  Go here!
Smart Football- how can you not visit a site called Smart Football???
Strong Football- kinda the same reason for this site as Smart Football!  Good site with TONS of info.
The 3 Back Option Football Blogspot-Coach Iannucci is a triple option guru.
Coach Fore's Blog- good all-around football and coaching blog.  Got my shield punt from this guy!
Coach Vint- Hell, I need to visit this site more.  Lots of good info. here.
Play Fast Football- good defensive site.
Coach Bird- kind of a smorgasboard of info. on Coach Bird's site.
Coach and Coordinator- well rounded site with good resources.
Life After Football-good philosophical site.
You Can Do More-loved his posts on defensive game planning.

Great sites you should check out.  These are all free!  Beats staying in a crappy hotel for a crappy clinic!  Take care, gotta get back to off season workouts and those flexbone posts!!!

Later dudes...

Duece

Reflections-2014 Season

Pretty much how I feel about this season...

Well, the playoffs have escaped us, and what started out as the makings of a good season...
...have spiraled to an out-of-control whirlwind ride that has myself and the coaching staff wondering, basically "What the hell just happened?".  It was one of those seasons, high hopes, fair amount of returners coming back, some good looking, fresh new faces, and then BAM!, the injury bug hit.  Couple that with suspensions, and some crazy off the field stuff, and what looked bright and sunny, immediately clouded over and rained...then poured.  Anyhow, the beautiful thing about the game of football is that it's a teacher, sometimes a cold-blooded teacher, but nonetheless an educator.  Seasons like this are good to reflect on once the agony of defeat and dismay have evaporated into the cool fall air.  I'd like to share with you several things I've learned, and plan to either discontinue doing, or build upon for the future.  Hopefully posts like this will keep you from making a similar mistake, or maybe you can find something that I did that will help your team.  If anything, this post may help me from drinking an entire bottle of Jack Daniels, as you all know, writing is how I relax.

Get Rid of Cancers Early
I'll start with a negative here.  We had some this season, and boy did they inflict some mental damage, early, and often.  Our head man gave them way too many chances in my opinion, but hey, when you're just a passenger aboard the ship, you don't always have a hand in it's course.  We had two guys who really, for lack of a better word were horses-asses.  The kids, no doubt were our best athletes, and worst citizens.  They were a constant black mark on the program from the spring practices on.  It was actually a relief once they were finally removed from the team, but damage from guys like that cuts deep, and can easily divide a team that may have had shaky leadership from the jump.  I really saw us get separated by this issue, and I hope in the future that the head coach takes this into account, as I'm sure these guys will return next season as both were underclassmen.  I think had we removed these guys early in the season, some of things we faced as a team would've been a bit easier to handle.  Hostilities would've remained low and focus would've been more crisp.  Again, just my opinion, but if you have a bad attitude, quite frankly you cannot play for me.  I just don't have time for bad attitudes.  Maybe it's a short-coming in my ability to coach, but I'm getting old enough now, quite frankly, I don't give a rats ass.  Show up, work to get better and love every minute you're in that uniform, and you'll play for me.  I'll find a place for you.

Potential is the Worst Word a Football Coach can use
We've all done it.  We've all said it.  "Man that guy's got the potential to be a real star".  Thoughts like these, kill a coach, and blind him in his ability to fairly evaluate a player.  Potential will also keep a coach hanging on to a player who isn't "fitting the bill" because the player should be able to perform better than he really is.  Case in point, I had a safety, that if I ranked them on potential, was hands down number one.  Best athlete of all the safeties, and probably second or third best in the entire secondary.  Kid wouldn't do it.  He just couldn't grasp some of the things he was asked to do at DB, and then when it came down to "nut-cutting time" he just went in a shell.  Now, we worked with him (he's just a sophomore) and he came around, but never did he live up to his "hype".  I think eventually he will be a real player, but had we played him just based on "potential", things might have been real bad in the back end of our defense.

The face of "potential"

My MLB from the start of the season, had tremendous "potential" (see there's that word again), but could not handle being the "center of attention" in the defense.  This young man would've been better as an OLB or DE where he wasn't the "man in the middle".  However, based on potential and things I was seeing in practice he started four games before finally quitting due to frustration.  I blame myself on that one, because later on the kid simply said he didn't like making the calls and the strength calls because it put him as the center of attention.  This is the type of kid that only wears gray shirts so he doesn't stand out in a crowd.  Don't get me wrong, he'll rip your damn head off in LB drills, or in a team session.  When asked to bark out checks or signals, he quickly got frustrated and went into a shell, began to play worse, and then got frustrated.  The worse he played, the more frustrated he got.  That one's on me for not nailing down the problem from the get-go, and not evaluating the young man on his game day performance.  Great kid, and more than likely will be back next season (he too was a sophomore), but, we lost an entire season that he could have been developing and getting better.  Had I stepped back and realized the young man's struggle as well as talking to him before he quit, I could have addressed the problem and made some adjustments.  Lesson learned.

My Defensive Plan was as Solid as it has Ever Been
I have to toot my own horn here.  I haven't felt this good about my defense in quite some time.  Now I'm not talking about players, I'm talking about scheme.  I've gone back to my roots and am running the 4-3, albeit a bastardized version of the 4-2-5 at times.  I have stolen all my line movements from TCU, fronts and coverages from Michigan State and coupled them with some long-time blitzes I've had and borrowed from many many seasons at the helm of the defense.  What it amounted to, was being the unit on the field that kept us in every game we were in.  The unfortunate fact is that we had zero offense and eventually succumbed to our opponents, but I received numerous compliments on the defensive play.  I really took this off season to package things and couple things together in a manner that made sense to the kids, was easy to teach, and each step further into the defensive teaching built on the last.  Like I said, I'm patting myself on the back here for this one, because my efforts paid off.  I've literally never blitzed or stunted as much as I did this season.  Just a ballpark figure of some games I've already got data on, we blitzed roughly 70 percent of the time, and had at least some sort of defensive movement (stunt, blitz or both) on over 85% of our defensive snaps.  That's just a 3 game sample I took from the beginning, middle and end of our season today on Hudl.  I ran the 4-3 like many coaches run a 3-3.  The idea though was to blitz or stunt with a purpose, and put our players in a position to make a play.  We had a lot of young guys on defense, even though there are several seniors, they were backups last season, so they had very little playing experience.  They struggled reading and making the base reads, so we needed an answer and stunting and blitzing was it.  We also did not live and die by the blitz like many folks think you have to.  We gave up our share of big plays, but I'd be willing to bet we gave up as many big plays in base defense as we did when we blitzed, percentage-wise of course.

My favorite blitz from this season

Schematically we were your typical 4-3 Over front.  I did not run any Under front this season as I did not have that "Sam" backer you need to manhandle a TE, and we rarely saw any 2 back sets.  We played a few front variations and did run a front that had the Sam LB on the LOS, but pretty much when you saw us, we were the good ol' Over front.

One thing I did that really helped keep teaching and confusion down, is what TCU calls "fist".  For me, it meant that in base defense (no blitz called), the Sam LB (my most athletic of the 3, and the best "cover guy" of the 3) went to passing strength, while the Will (usually my best tackler) went to the weak side of the coverage.  The front, and the MLB aligned based on whatever we so chose to do.  I was able to set my front by tight (to the 3 man surface), split (away from the 3 man surface), field, boundary, to (to the offset back) or away (away from the offset back).  This made us very multiple, yet allowed us to keep things simple.  The fist adjustment, used only vs 1 back teams, kept the teaching simple as well, most notably when running Solo coverage.  Since the LB away from pass strength in Solo has the RB man to man, the fist adjustment allowed this to be the same guy every time.  So if we were setting the strength to the offset RB vs. a 1 back gun team, then we would actually have the Will LB and the three technique set to the same side vs. a trips open look.  I know what many are thinking, but if you two gap your ends, there are absolutely no bubbles.  Surprisingly enough, we did not do ANY TGOG?!  I was shocked, but then when I looked back, what made this happen was the ability we had in our secondary.  When we faced teams that were what I call "Spread to Run", we simple adjusted the secondary to play Bronco Coverage.  To remind folks, Bronco is just a Quarters adjustment (some folks call this coverage "Combo") where the corner is MEG (man everywhere he goes) and the safety has the number two receiver vertical or out.  I usually press the corners, but it can also be played from off.  The safeties tighten down from 10 yards deep to about six, depending on the situation.  Anyhow, I'm rambling, what this does is allow you to keep seven in the box.  That makes it tough to run against.  It also keeps those OLB's inside the tackle box against 2x2 and 3x1 looks that usually require the removing of a LB from the box.  This allows you to defend all the offense is doing with seven dedicated run defenders.  Obviously, if you don't have the guys on the outside to match up, this isn't the answer, and TGOG would be a much better answer.

Fist vs. 3x1

I'm going to delve into my blitz scheme as things go further along with the off season, however I do want to leave you with a "teaser".  We literally taught our MLB 1 blitz, and our OLB's 3 blitzes, and were able to run 17 different blitz calls.  Add this along with our stunts (almost verbatim to what TCU runs), and you've got what looks like a vast playbook, but is really the simple teaching of just a few concepts.  Once packaged together we became quite a force, and as mentioned, really kept our team in several games.  Like I said, I plan on doing some posts on this, because I really took the time this off season to develop and "nail down" my scheme into some simple, easy-to-teach concepts to allow us to play faster than we had been.

There were some holes though.  I just posted something on the Huey board about Quarters coverage, as I'm trying to pair down what we do in the back end of our defense.  We played a "zoned" version of Quarters this past season (basically the corner would come off late on the wheel route to help the OLB who was carrying it through the flat).  Our adjustment to quick game and keeping the OLB's closer to the box was to play TCU's Bronco coverage, which worked pretty darn well.  We used three trips adjustments, Solo, MSU"s "Midpoints" with Quarters to the single receiver side, and Midpoints with Cover Two Man to the single receiver side.  We played only a small amount of Cover 3, and tons of Cover 0.  I really want to get this pressed corner back in Quarters look down pat.  I think it would translate well to what we do elsewhere, such as how much Cover 0 we ran, and we pressed when we played Bronco.  I think it would drastically reduce the amount of teaching time we have to give our corners, and let us focus more on the safeties.  I think once I get the back end of the defense shored up I might have a pretty sound scheme on my hands.  I finally feel like when I'm out there I have all the answers to what I'm seeing and what I might see.  That, my friends, is a darn good feeling as a DC.

Being in the Booth Wasn't as Bad as I Thought it Would be
I called all of our games from the box, and let me tell you, it was actually a joy.  I could see things easy, I could see problems as they were developing, and with such a good handle on my scheme and players, it made things very easy to fix.  Some drawbacks were the young guy I used to signal things in messed up some signals early on, and he didn't really care to be doing what he was doing.  Later, he got used to it, and it worked out quite well.  The lack of having me down on the sideline, at times, was an issue.  I couldn't get in their ears and chew on them when they needed it, and I couldn't reassure as well from up in the box, however I did put several players on the headsets to talk to them about things, and it seemed to work just fine.  Another drawback was not being in the middle of what was going on with player rotation and changes sometimes caused some confusion, but not to the point that I felt it was detrimental.  We had some issues as a staff, but I think those issues would have been there whether I was on the field or in the box.

Being able to see things was the greatest advantage.  I made a comment to one of the other coaches when he asked me if I liked being up there, I told him it was like playing a real live game of NCAA football.  He laughed, but in all honesty, that's what it was.  You could see the personnel grouping change, you had your call sheet right in front of you, and it was quite simple to make your calls.  You also didn't have to worry about some slap dick JV coach that wasn't prepared trying to relay information to you, which is a major issue for us because we have such low coaching numbers.  I get wrapped up in the game, and the emotions that run wild on the sidelines, so being up in the booth, kept me cool, calm and collected.  I really hope to continue this trend of being in the box, although on the road there were times when it royally sucked to be on top of the booth rather than inside of it.  What the heck though, you take the good with the bad right?

All Coaches Have Got to be on the Same Page
When I was a head coach, I never felt this was an issue.  Now that I'm an assistant, no words could ever be spoken truer.  Tough seasons, like this year, really bring out the best and worst in some individuals.  Coaches are no exception.  We had some issues this season, that really didn't lead to our demise, but they darn sure didn't help it either.  If I ever go back to being a head coach (highly unlikely), I plan on making sure that the Indians know who the chief is, and know exactly what he wants done, and how he wants it done.

We had some issues with some assistant coaches, who made adjustments down on the field without letting me know.  This kind of crap really bothers me.  What bothers me even more is the fact that on some occasions, the coaches were telling the kids to do something from the week, or even several weeks before.  One instance comes to mind was we were playing a seven technique when we got a TE from one opponent this year, well our base rule is to play a nine.  I felt a seven would help us defend what our opponent was trying to do when they ran with a TE (they only did this maybe 30 percent of the time).  Anyhow, I noticed several times we were in a nine technique on runs that gutted us, only to find out our DE coach had told the kid to play a nine.  Confronting the coach in meetings yielded the fact I hated to hear, and that was, "Well, a nine technique is what we always line up in against a TE?!".  Yes, but if you'd read the scouting report and game plan you'd have seen our adjustment based on what we were going to face.  Anyhow, I'm beginning to ramble and my blood beginning to boil.  You cannot ask your players to be on the same page if the coaches aren't, and in my opinion, this lack of control on the "upper end" of a football program, leads to bigger issues down the line.  I'm certainly hoping we can get this corrected, as I know I don't plan on dealing with it any more.

Have Fun
I took the mentality this season, that no matter the results, no matter the outcome, I was going to make it a point to have fun.  For the most, part, I stuck true to this axiom.  I had my moments, especially late in the season, but for the most part I did have fun.  The interaction with the kids is what I focused on the most.  I've never done this, so for me this was a big step.  The players have always been super important to me, however I've always been known as a scheme coach, a grinder, a worker bee of sorts.  I've never been one to be labeled "fun" or "loosey-goosey".  This season I made it a point to step back at times, and just let loose, joking with players, or simply just chatting with a young man about something other than football.  I think it made me closer with them, allowed me to bond with some guys I might not otherwise have done had I had my nose stuck against a computer screen all season long.  It really gave me great insight to what our players were experiencing off the field.  This is something I would have never done in the past, as it took away from game prep.  Being looser, and choosing to open up and have some fun with the players, I think has allowed me to become a better coach.  I have a greater understanding of what our guys are thinking, and what some of them are going through once they leave the practice field.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing something that gives you greater insight into your players lives.  After all, the game of football is only a short time in their lives, the lessons learned are what last a lifetime.  Us as coaches, only get a short time to make an impact on these lives, so we need to cherish every moment we get to do that, and I really feel I took a major step forward in this area of my coaching.

You are Only as Good as Your Last Man
I had a coach tell me this one time, and I never knew what he meant.  Well after the injuries we had this season, I know exactly what he meant.  When the race was over, there were only five guys on our defense that were there at the beginning.  One of these was a cancer that was removed from the team, two others were removed for rule violations (can't speak of them here, but guys close to me know what we went through, and it was pretty crazy to say the least).  The rest were not just injuries, but season-ending injuries.  In all, we had a team total of seven season ending injuries, all to starters.  Add that along with eight players (five of which were starters) who were removed from the team or quit, and that spells disaster.  By the end of the season the starting lineups were as follows:

1. NG, and both DE's finished season, DT did not
2. MLB only LB to make it through the season
3. FS only DB to make it through the season

The offense may have been hit worse.  All five of the OL were gone, for one reason or the other by the end of the season.  In our last game we started three guys that played junior varsity at the start of the year.  We ended the season with four wide receivers, and one tailback.  I'm not sure I've EVER been a part of something like this, but it absolutely got to where you dreaded Mondays, because of either getting hit with bad news from the doctor, or bad news from the administration.

Yep!

I try to find the silver lining in all of this, and what it boils down to is that we actually ended up with a decent secondary, most of which will be back next season.  We ended up using some rotation guys to fill some holes, and I think we also found a guy that's going to be a pretty good DE, once we get him headed in the right direction.  Other than that though, there is no silver lining.  Getting guys ready to play is always a week in and week out issue, however it seemed like we were patching things together EVERY week, especially after about week four or five.  So, when you think you've got it bad, just take your finger and scroll down your depth chart to the bottom.  If you've still got guys ahead of your worst players in every position, you're still doing good.  When those guys are starting, the whiskey can't flow fast enough!!!

No Matter How Bad it Gets, Keep Working

Steve Spurrier used to always comment "Just keep playing guys", and what he's basically saying is that if you quit, you never know what the outcome could've been.  When you quit, you will know EXACTLY what the outcome will be and it'll be that you lose!  As I've written before, Spurrier is a guy I've idolized my entire coaching career, and his words are so true.  I remember years ago, when he was at Florida, he lost a tough game (I think it may have been the Tennessee game which turned out to be his last game in The Swamp), but when asked what happened in the game, we simply replied "We ran out of time".  What I'm beating around the bush on here is, as a coach, you set the direction of your unit, or team.  When things go bad, and you quit printing scouting reports, or you quit doing EDD's, or whatever it is that bad coaches do in bad seasons, you set a precedent for your players to quit too.  I rolled my sleeves up every weekend and broke down film, did scouting reports etc. only to have a coaching staff  "slough off" when the writing was on the wall, so to speak (It wasn't all of them, but there were a lot of guys on our staff that threw the towel in pretty early). This pains me to no end as a coach, because I know as a player, I'd want my coaches doing everything they could to help us get a win.  What bothers me even more, is how can you let the kids down like that?  I overheard one coach stating the the kids had quit, once they knew we weren't going to be in the playoffs.  I had felt a bit of this too, however I think it's in every athlete's nature to want to compete to win, so I don't buy in to that kind of talk.  What had happened is a majority of the coaching staff had quit once the grim realization had set in that we were not going to the playoffs.  Kids can sense this kinda stuff, and are good at identifying it.  They don't want to be at practice anymore than they have to, so when you, as a coach, show up and aren't doing the same things you were doing in week one of the season, shame on you.  I had one of my LB's ask me "Coach, why are we still doing block destruction drills?".  This was in the second-to-the last week of the season, to which I let him know, because we had so many young guys struggling at getting off blocks when I watched film.  To that young man, what we were doing was pointless, and he even stated as much, saying that since the playoffs weren't attainable, there was no reason to get better.  Well, I had to stop the drill, as to me, there's always room for improvement.  I told the young man, that the contrary was really the case for us.  We were so bad, that the only way to go from where we were was up, but that we couldn't improve if we didn't keep working.  He shrugged it off, but after practice he came back over to me and told me he had thought about our conversation, and he knew I was right.  He also thanked me for never giving up.  He was one of our seniors too, not necessarily a leader, but easily a guy the younger ones looked up to.  The problem was, this type of leadership was only being done by a few coaches.  That is the sad part about all of it.  If you ever get that feeling, you've got to do whatever it takes to push on.  In all reality, it is your duty to do so.  We are all going to have tough seasons, or rough patches we go through, just realize the young men you are coaching are not only looking up to you during the good times, they are watching in the bad times too.

What Does the Future Hold?

Great Scott, where has the time gone?!

I wish I knew!  There is a part of me that desperately wants to stay on here and get things turned around and corrected, but there's also a part of me that knows, our administration is going to put a monkey wrench into our rebuilding plans.  I'm also uncomfortable with some of the guys I coach with, and this is never a good thing.  We have some guys on staff I don't feel I can trust, and others I just plain don't get along with.  Now, I don't let my work suffer for it, nor do I allow differences to bleed over onto the practice or game fields.  However, it's not easy coaching with guys that you feel you have to look over your back to make sure they aren't putting a knife into it.  I'm hoping our head coach is making some staff changes in the off season that will be worth our while, but if not, I may try to get in somewhere else.  I don't have many options, but I could also take some time off, as I haven't taken a season off since I started coaching back in 1997.  But, with that being said, I sure like the way my side of the ball was handled this past season, and I think there are some positives to build on, but a lot of what goes on here has to run through some pretty political filters, so we'll just have to see what happens.

Maybe politics ain't so bad...

Good news for the readers is that I'm back to blogging.  If you read a tweet I made earlier (you can follow me on Twitter @FballIsLifeBlog), I have given up on writing my book on the Flexbone offense.  I've never been one for charging folks for stuff, and I think with what little money coaches make, that money should go to their families instead of other coaches pockets.  Well, you guys are going to get the book for free.  If you are a defensive coach, you're going to have to wait for a while because there are going to be SEVERAL posts dealing with the Flexbone and the triple option coming up.  I'll keep you defensive guys satisfied though as we roll on, and I'll get my blitz post out before spring ball opens up.  

For those of you that have the luxury of making the playoffs, DO NOT take a minute of it for granted.  Savor the moment, relish it, and realize just how special it is.  Good luck in the second season and go get that ring!!!

Duece

Man or Zone Blitz, That is the Question...

I actually get this a lot, and to be honest, it is a very fair question.  For most of us who've gotten into coaching in the past 20 years, the zone blitz was the newest and latest and greatest thing when it come "en vogue".  I have run both during my tenure as a defensive coach, and I thought I'd weigh in on the two schemes so that readers might get an idea of what they are looking, especially when trying to adapt higher level schemes to play at the high school level.

Some History
I actually started out my defensive career with zone blitzes.  I worked for a DC that absolutely did not blitz.  This guy almost couldn't stand to blitz.  From him I learned that defensive football ain't all about running guys here and there and everywhere putting your guys in "high risk" situations as he called it.  It was about making the offense uncomfortable in what they were trying to do.  In my opinion, this is exactly what defensive coaches should be trying to attain.  Anyhow, I found some pretty cool zone blitz stuff and presented it to him, and he really liked it.  The idea, back then, was that you could blitz and still have all 11 eyes on the football.  We already ran the four-spoke rotating secondary, so using a sky or "skiff" player (seam-curl-flat) wasn't too big of an issue for us.  We were also in our infancy in pattern reading coverages, so that wasn't too hard to adapt to the three deep, three under zone many zone blitz teams were presenting at the time.  So, we went for it.  Now we were like most, we had our patented NCAA blitz we used a large majority of the time and a few others.  As time went on, and I became a DC, I kept the zone blitz package in the scheme, even adapting it to fit a three man line and so forth.  Then I ran across the 57 page playbook from TCU that many, many people have perused through over the past several seasons.  What I noticed, no zone blitz?  I thought, "How is this possible in today's game?".  The further I delved into the TCU defense, the more and more I liked the ultimate simplicity of the Cover 0 scheme.  See, having cut my teeth on the zone blitz, I was afraid of being "pure man", because as all the clinic speakers say "We don't have the athletes to do that".  Well, I was THAT guy!  I always felt I didn't have the athletes to "man up" with other teams.

I had an epiphany one fall week when we were to face a district rival.  Now this foe, was a team we did not even belong on the field with, however, for some reason, we were a thorn in their side.  We had nothing that season.  TONS of injuries had plagued us, we had JV kids moved up to varsity and quite simply were very, very inexperienced.  Well, I uncorked the man blitzes on the team we were facing.  I did so, mainly because my freshman and sophomore linebackers didn't read so well, but also I wanted to see how we'd take the fight to somebody.  Instead of being reactive, we went proactive.  I wish the story had a happy ending, however it does have a silver lining.  We lost by 16, however, I'm pretty sure it would've been worse had we not done what we did.  The kicker of the whole thing was the score was 22-6.  Our opponent was averaging close to 42 points per game coming into that game.  We held them to their lowest output of the regular season (they went on to be the regional runner-ups that year).  Anyhow, what I liked is how easily the blitzes adjusted to what we were seeing.  This was a spread team that would get into some two back stuff as well. To keep run fits working, zone blitzes need quite a bit of adjustment, especially between who is the hole dropper and who is the skiff player.  We constantly had miscommunication between these two positions.  It could've been poor coaching, but I think it was basically a simpler system was needed.  The man blitz provided that.  Well, I got let go after only dabbling in man blitzes, for a year, and ended up at a junior high coaching seventh and eighth graders.  Anyhow, after my two year sabbatical with the younger guys, I came back and have implemented a man blitz scheme where I'm currently at.  With all this said, I'm going to show you the two schemes as well as the pros and the con's of each, and then give you my heart-of-heart talks on what I feel works best at the high school level.

The Zone Blitz
I'm not going to go to in-depth with zone blitzes, but most know that you are sending four to five players into designated gaps, while generally dropping into a three-by-three zone, or a two-by-four zone (although there are teams that are using less droppers and more rushers and getting away with it).  Again, this is purely a generalization.  The most simplest of the zone blitzes is the timeless NCAA blitz.  It is a deception blitz that slants the DL in one direction, and then brings two rushers in the C and D gaps away from the slant.  The DE (or sometimes OLB) in the direction of the slant will usually drop, and in most cases becomes the weak side "skiff" dropper.  The remaining LB is the hole dropper and to the blitz side a safety rolls down to be the strong side "skiff" dropper.  The remaining DB's rotate into a three deep zone.  Pretty simple stuff.

Benefits of Zone Blitzing

• The benefits of zone blitzing are that you can generally get 11 hats to the ball if the ball breaks the LOS.  You rarely end up with defenders with their eyes to the back of the ball, not seeing what's going on.  
• Many zone blitzes are very option sound, and also because a defender cannot be "run off" as they can in man schemes, if the option does break, the damages can be limited.
• It's match up zone, a lot of folks have been doing this for years, so the scheme fits right along with what they already do.  
• You can even spot drop it in high school and get away with it for the most part.  So if you are spot drop team, zone blitzing can be an easily added package as well.
• The possibilities are endless.  Drop both DE's and bring all three LB's.  Roll a safety into the hole while blitzing the MLB from the Over front, you name it, with zone blitzing it can be done, to a degree.
• Less confident players seem to feel a bit more comfortable with it, in that they don't necessarily feel like they are on an island.  Since the deep zone guys are basically MOD (man only deep) defenders, they don't have the same pressure a a MEG (man everywhere he goes) defender does.  You basically take away half of the routes they will see (or more) and now they are limited to defending deeper breaking routes, which if you are already zone, this is what they see 90 percent of the time anyways.
• Blitzes are easy to set up.  They can be brought by run strength, pass strength, right or left, and field and boundary.

Drawbacks to Zone Blitzing

• Dropping a DL into a poor match up.
• i.e. having a DL have to be the SCF player vs. a speedy slot.
• Dropping a DL to the field
• Many times these zone blitzes are field/boundary, so sometimes in certain situations, you end up with a DL as the SCF player having to drop to the field.  That is a long way to go, even for a DE.
• Match up issues in general.
• There will be times you end up with a DL on a receiver and a LB on a RB.  This is an adjustment that will have to added to the overall scheme
• A large amount of schematic adjustments
• There are certain formations (seems like 11 and 12 personnel cause a lot of these issues) that need to be accounted for as not necessarily fitting to the blitz.  In other words, you have to build in adjustments.  These adjustments add "weight" to your scheme (i.e. more for your players to have to remember).
• Due to adjustments, the overall scheme is reduced.  What this means is you can only run a few of these to be effective.  Due to not only having to teach the base scheme, you now have to teach the adjustments as well.

Now, I know Manny Diaz has had a ton of success zone blitzing, as has Michigan State and Nebraska to name a few.  However, I'm talking about high school football here.  I zone blitzed for eight seasons, and all the while some of it was good, the more and more folks saw these blitzes, the more they lost their "luster".

Benefits of Man Blitzing

• Coverage rules are simple and concise.
• Motion to new formation or change of strength (COS) does not really effect.
• Match up issues can be handled via switching of blitzers assignments (think TCU's switch call).
• Can bring as many blitzers as needed vs certain sets.
• All gaps and all men accounted for without the use of numerous adjustments
• Man is usually played somewhat tighter than zone, forcing QB's to make near-perfect throws.

Drawbacks to Man Blitzing

• It is man, one slip up, one misread or poorly timed break on an out-and-up and it can be six points.
• Not all eyes on the ball, if a big run breaks, it can do some serious damage.
• In some schemes, rushers must account for the backs and the QB draw, with younger, over-eager players this can often be overlooked, thereby allowing the screen and draw game to hurt the blitz.
• Pick routes, or "rub routes" can often cause defenders to collide, thereby leaving an offensive player open with nobody back deep to help.
• Not necessarily an advised scheme to attack the option.  Again, with not all 11 eyes on the football, certain run support players can be "run off" leaving the defense with a soft flank, or weak on the interior.

In My Opinion

I have gravitated toward the man blitz for the simple reason stated above that man is usually played somewhat tighter than zone, and forces high school QB's to make very good throws.  I have played both a three-by-three and two-by-four zone scheme and had QB's make throws on us, however most of the completions we get vs. man, is if a defender slips or utilizes poor technique etc.  Even the colleges and the NFL teams are gravitating to more man to man schemes when they zone blitz, as evidenced by a resurgence in Cover 1.  I mean, let's face it, offenses have evolved and pretty much all of them have at least one hot route, or check down concept built in to them anymore.  The idea here is get the QB to hold the ball longer, or to disguise the look in a way to get the QB or OC to change the play into something you know they're going to run (again, from film study).

In all, I've just seen more payoff with the man blitzes than I have with zone.  I'm not advocating that you switch, I'm just giving a personal account of what my experience has led me to do.  

Here's some older posts on blitzing, and links to good sites with blitz information:

Blitzes from Football is Life

Cripes! Get Back to Fundamentals Blitz Posts

Blitzology, need I say more!

Coach Hoover's site

Blitzes from Compete in All Things

Some 3-5 stuff from Hit'em Hard

RUNCODHIT's blitzes

Student of the Game

Enjoy!

Duece

Some General Thoughts on Defending Spread Tempo Offenses

Well, now that the bowl season is finally over, and I have almost completely overdosed on watching games, I must say I do have some thoughts on what I have seen defensively.  Now mind you, this is purely observational, and not stitch of what I'm talking about or illustrating has been confirmed with film, so basically this post is me bullshitting with you over a couple of beers at the local pub.  Now that we got that out of the way, let's look at my thoughts on what I viewed over the bowl season.

1. There is no, and will never be any, substitute for fundamentals.  The teams that did the best job on defense not only tackled well, but tackled well in space.  They fought off blocks, reacted well to schemes, made reads and utilized very good footwork and technique.  The biggest skills by far is coverage footwork and transition and tackling.  
1. Tackling- The spread schemes have an inordinate amount of ways to get players out-leveraged, out-flanked, and just generally in a bad position to defend whatever play is being run at them.  The packaged plays concept, along with multiple formations, reads and options being utilized has made many a great athlete look silly whiffing at air.  Good teams tackle, but great teams tackle with a purpose...EVEN IN JANUARY.  I don't give a damn what time of year it is, you must tackle.  I do tackling drills everyday during the season up until about games five or six, then I taper off, but even if I'm in the playoffs we are tackling once a week and still doing form/fit drills everyday.  The hardest thing to recreate as a defensive coach is open field tackling, but it MUST be done if facing these types of offenses on a regular basis.
2. Coverage footwork- The good teams have not just had spectacular athletes in the secondary, they've had great technicians in the secondary.  A DB has got to be a master at his craft.  This was no more evident in the BCS National Championship Game where Chris Davis in the beginning of the game used poor footwork on underneath routes to allow a couple of easy first downs.  Later, Davis (yes, I'm being critical of him) made huge error in the way he played the ball, receiver and the route on the pass interference call that led to him making the most critical error of the game (which had nothing to do with fundamentals).  On the goal line, playing in man coverage Davis aligns head up, yes HEAD UP on Kelvin Benjamin and allowed the big 6'5" receiver to body him up on a slant route in the end zone for the game winning touchdown.  Facing spread attacks requires that DB's have meticulous footwork and they must be able to play the ball in the air well.  This was never more evident than vs. one of the best defensive back coaches in the country than Nick Saban himself.  Saban's DB's time and time again found themselves in poor position because of poor technique.  Now, I will agree, there were some mismatches.  As one person put it, some teams just don't match up well against others.  May not mean one is better than the other, but the end result is the same.  The match up issues led to technique breakdown, and well, you see what you got.  The same could be said of Texas A&M's DB's or Baylor's.  
2. Schematically, I honestly feel man to man coverage HAS to make a major return to college football.  I know "living" in man, is not for the faint of heart, but even the match up zone coverage gurus are going the way of pure man on even their zone pressures.  Three-by-three zone blitzes are going back to the old grass roots man free blitzes of yesteryear, but with better eye control and leverage setup in the general attack of the blitz itself (blitzes must really be option centered now or spread option offenses can seriously gash your defense).  Man free and Cover Two Man have to make a comeback, at least until the time being.  I mean, hell, let's be honest, even Saban's version of Cover 3 (Rip/Liz) is basically man free.  Man to man cuts down on the amount of open grass receivers are allowed to attack, and not going pure cover zero all-out man allows you to have a match up problem with help over the top or trailing help underneath.  
3. Zone coverage is not dead however, but must be disguised, which leads me to my next point that the defenses intentions MUST be disguised.  From blitzes to stunts, to coverages, EVERYTHING must not appear as it seems.  The QB is not the only cat you have to fool either, the offensive lineman are the keys you must really fool.  I'm really surprised at the lack of amount of stemming you see defenses doing these days.  Stemming is easy and can be added to any call.  Regardless of tempo, most offenses at least take a second to look over the defense pre-snap, this is when you shift, then shift again.  Build in good hard fast rules too for when caught in a shift.  I always tell my guys when caught, keep working to your gap, don't stop and smell the roses and more importantly DON'T PANIC!!!  Disguise is a must because offenses have become so successful at reading a defenses' intentions and then changing the play, gashing the defense, aligning quickly and doing it again.  This disguise can help slow down the up-tempo schemes of today by making the offense have to reset or "re-audible".  

That moment when you realize this was a poor disguise...

1. More to elaborate on disguise, one thing I liked was how Missouri would show 1 high coverage, then rotate pre-snap to 2 deep, or even, rotate the deep safety down and down safety deep.  I was amazed watching a defender, aligned 5-6 yards off the ball, bailing before the snap to become the MOF defender.  Some of the coverages looked like zone, but some were also man free as well.  I thought the idea very ingenious because you rarely see one high, MOFC coverages morphing to two high, or better yet, rotating much in the way a four-spoke secondary would.  These types of adjustments must be made.  In other words, make the unordianry, ordinary.
1. Obviously pressure must be a consideration when facing these types of offenses.  I think pressure for pressure's sake is not a good mantra however.  I think you have to the standard stuff of evaluating protection schemes, QB strengths when pressured versus when not pressured, run pressures versus both gap and zone schemes etc.  The no huddle presents some issues with pressures in that they must be simple, so they can be signaled in quickly.  These pressure packages must be dynamic so they can adapt to the myriad of formations, shifts and motions that your players may see.  Making your pressure packages multiple, but simple is key.  A backside twist added to a field dog blitz is an easy adjustment, but must be communicated and taught as such.  I think being able to "tweak" a pressure with such nuances is very important in being able to give an offense multiple pressure looks throughout the course of the game.
2. Anti-pressure is another schematic theme that I think defensive coordinators, especially at the high school level should embrace.  Several years back I was facing a very good running QB, with some highly talented receivers (one is entering this year's NFL draft).  We had no answer in our base 4-3 package.  I stole an idea from good ol' Gus Malzahn and utilized a three man front where I simply changed out our 3 technique for another linebacker and played my traditional Mike linebacker about 8 yards deep so he could drop down the middle in a Tampa 2 look.  We went into that game with 4 pressures, 3 zone and 1 man.  We were a 24 point underdog and only lost by 11, confusing the hell out of our opponent with this look.  Now we ended up down by 21 at the half, because as the score got further out of hand, I kept bringing more and more pressure, which led to mistakes, and our players feeling like they needed to press.  In the second half, I called a man blitz, our safety slipped covering a dig route and we were down by 28.  After that I simply quit blitzing and dropped eight into coverage.  On the first possession they threw a pick that led to us scoring.  Second possession we forced the first punt of the night.  The less we pressured, the worse their QB played.  What was happening was we were reducing the size and number of windows this young man had to throw through.  What he began to do then was tuck and run when he got nervous about throwing a pick.  So we quit rushing our Nose, and let him and the stacked Tackle spy the QB.  This made things more and more frustrating leading to two more second half turnovers.  My point is this, don't always think you have to put the pressure on the QB by rushing him.  Sometimes it's better to put the pressure in front of him with coverage and a minimal rush.  I've actually done this more than once, and had it work quite well on more than one occasion.  I think DC's don't need to get caught up in drawing up these wide arrays of blitzes that send safeties and drop tackles etc. just for the sake of trying to sack the QB.  If you are having trouble getting to him, my answer would be, then make him have trouble finding anyone who is open.  What bigger waste of a player than having five offensive linemen blocking two or three defensive linemen, while the other eight or nine players are in coverage, confusing the QB?  I know it's contrarian, but think about it, once I made the leap, the dropping eight or nine has been a part of my spread defense package ever since.

3 man front 4-3 personnel Tampa 2 coverage

1. Also to note, this past season, because we had kids that were so new to doing what I was asking them to do, I kept it quite simple.  If we added a "drop" call to any coverage call, that told the tackle (three technique) to drop on passing plays to the low hole zone.  Allowed us to play coverage with our Mike linebacker a bit different, and also allowed us to play our quarters scheme with an extra underneath zone defender allowing the outside linebackers to get to the flats quicker.  Again, just thoughts on paper, but knowing some body's tried them and had success with them sure helps.  

Drop call given to 3 technique

1. Brophy had mentioned this before, but developing simple defensive concepts that can be communicated effectively and quickly are going to become more and more the norm in at least college football.  I think high school coaches have a bit of time on their side before we see the tempo of the college game, but it looms in the very near future.  None of this was more evident than when Alabama played Oklahoma.  Oklahoma, who throughout the year had done some tempo, wasn't anywhere near the Oregon's or Texas A&M's in terms of playing speed or number of plays, however with the break, and what Stoops knew about Saban's defense, they obviously worked on it and exploited it.  I may make a bold prediction here, but Saban's days may be numbered due to his inability to adapt.  He's had two years now of dealing with both Texas A&M and Ole Miss, both of which operate at high speeds and he's had trouble with these.  That's because Saban, like all of us, likes to be right.  Many a master craftsman wants his hands in everything, and it takes those of us who pride on using our minds to stop our opponent to a dark place when we have to rely only on fundamentals.  However, that is where the game is headed.  Fundamentals, who at some point in the collegiate game had taken a back seat to scheme, will now prevail (as it should).  If Saban doesn't adapt, as other college coaches, it could get ugly for them and ugly in a hurry (no pun intended).  Saban himself, along with Will Muschamp have already talked about scrapping their time eating offenses for the more glamorous no huddle, speed-in-space, up-tempo offenses.  
1. Where this takes defenses is they are going to have to educate the signal callers on the field even more so than before.  The signal callers are going to have to work in a way that they are essentially the coordinator on the field and get the defense in the right front and coverage in a very short amount of time.  The problem with this, as with defensive football in general is that it is reactive, where the offense is proactive.  Sure they have to snap the ball, but even if they aren't right all the time, a short throw to a great athlete that's well covered can still turn into six points.  The defense has this to worry about, and then having said short throw (could be a run, just using the short throw as an example), NOT be covered due to a bad pre-snap read, and it also turns into six.  This is where the teaching responsibility lies with the coordinators and their ability to put their scheme inside the head of a 20 year old.  In the case of high school, sometimes that guy may only be 15!  

What I drew on a napkin from Missouri game, no DVR, so may not be 100% accurate, but you get the gist.  

These are just some of my general notes I've basically jotted down in my phone, or on a napkin as bowl season unraveled before our eyes this season.  I think we could easily be five to six years off before defenses really "catch up", and I use that term lightly because defensive football is behind the eight ball already as the game is designed to be entertaining, and a nine to seven ballgame isn't really appealing to the average fan.  I also agree with Brophy on his new standards of measuring what a good defensive outing will be in the near future.  I think the time is gone where you see shutouts, or very low scoring affairs.  For those of us who are "defensive minded" this may be an issue, but it's like anything else, you either adapt, or you die.  

I'm thinking very seriously about working on a collaborative effort to look at this more closely.  I have contacted a couple of other bloggers about this, as I think it was our readers would want, and could greatly use.  If you have any suggestions or comments, shoot me an email or hit me up on Twitter @FootballIsLifeBlog.  Hope everyone had a great holiday, and is ready to hit the off-season in full stride!

Duece