Showing posts with label Rex Ryan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rex Ryan. Show all posts

Defensive Line Play in the 46 Nickel


Well, after using the 46 Nickel for a couple of seasons now, I'm getting my stuff together and preparing some manuals. The first one is the defensive line (DL) manual. Defensive line play is critical in any defense, so the 46 is no different. One unique thing about the 46 is the defensive line play. For most that haven't watched Rex Ryan's video entitled "Coaching Football's 46 Defense", you are missing out on defensive line play. Before I dive into the "how", I'm going to go to the why, which will result in us strolling down memory lane a bit.



As some of you know, I went to the 46 out of pure desparation two years ago. The top reason I used the 46, was the defensive line play I learned from Rex Ryan. Ryan's method of teaching and reacting to blocking schemes fits lesser athletic and lesser talented DL. Two years ago if you would have looked up "lesser athletic and lesser talented DL" in the dictionary, a picture of my front four would have been in there! Needless to say, we needed something to help us out, and in this case scheme was our answer. So now that you see the "why", let's look at the "how".

Speaking of history and memory lane, for those that know me, they know I'm a big Miami 4-3 guy. It's the defense I cut my teeth with. The technique I was brought up on, was pure block down, step down (BDSD), and to this day BDSD is still a large part of my teaching when it comes to defensive line. The problem with some of the basic fundamentals of defensive line play in the Miami 4-3 is that it does take some athleticism to do some of the things being asked of these players. For most of my career I've had those guys, however at my last stop, and where I'm currently at, we are devoid of anything remotely close to what I'd call an athlete on our defensive lines. Basically, we are "space eaters" that are good at getting in the way of things, rather than getting off a block and making a play. So, enter in Rex Ryan's teaching on how to play DL!



I have always taught, there are four blocks that a DL has to react to and they are:

  1. Base block
  2. Reach block
  3. Down block
  4. Pass block 
Ryan does not do this, he teaches two very simple rules.  Don't get reached, and don't allow the jump-through (known by most as the scoop block).  So in essence he's taken the system I (and many others) learned and cut it in half.  Yes, I know pass blocking is the same for both, but that's a whole different topic.  Ryan lumps the base block and the reach block together, cutting the teaching down for both.  The down block is also treated like the scoop block, so no new teaching there either.  Ryan refers to this as "generic coaching".  What this means for those that are DL coaches, is you teach only a couple of sound reactions to blocks, and it has to do with basically the direction of the OL the DL aligns over.  You really cannot ask for a more simplified system. 

In 2009 this is just what we needed, as we were not good enough to react to four different blocks, yet we could master the two that Ryan taught.  The reads weren't the problem though, as much as the movements themselves.  Ryan teaches simpler, more effective movements and reactions to blocks, than some of the older, more traditional schemes do. 

Ryan goes further in his discussion on dividing blocks into two categories, rule blocks and reacitonary blocks.  The reach, scoop, and double team fall into the rule block category, while the fold, trap and pass blocks fall into reactionary blocks.  The reactions to all these blocks is still only 2 movements, which is the basis for the simplicity behind the way Ryan teaches his defensive linemen.  This worked perfectly for us, because we felt our DL could handle having their movements, basically cut in half.



Probably the most eye-opening of Ryan's teaching methods is his famous "hips to the hole" reaction.  Many schemes, such as the one we were teaching, focus on the DL's head and hand placement.  Ryan teaches the hips to the hole method of defeating the reach block and double team.  What this means, it that instead of the traditional teaching of "run with your gap" (the DL's gap moves with a reach block, so he must run to maintain it), Ryan teaches to swing the hips in the direction of the reach, thereby gaining leverage on the blocker and filling the gap with the DL body.  The traditional method, has the DL use a push-pull technique attempting to run with the blocker and keeping the DL's head in the gap, with the hips trailing behind.  When you look at it, the OL has all the leverage because the DL only has his head an one arm to stop the OL, whereas with Ryan's method, the DL is using all of his body and both arms to styme the OL and keep the gap from widening.  Again, the game and technique boil down to simple physics!  Sure, a good DL should be able to run with his gap, maintaining leverage, but after teaching both, with sub-par athletes at the DL position, I can tell you, Ryan's method is much better for those suffering from the LOFT syndrome (Lack of Freakin' Talent). 



The double team only gets tweaked ever so slightly, and that is by having the DL overexaggerate the swinging of the hips into the OL that is attempting to overtake him.  This stalemates double teams, because of physics once again.  The DL makes himself wider, thereby creating a larger "clot" in the gap, which is tougher to move than if he were to drop and try to make a pile.  Plus, if he drops to make a pile, you are trading one for two, not what you want on defense.  This method of defeating the double team also kills the combo block.  Looking at your typical three technique, if they are trying to combo and get an OL on the LB, the DL prevents this by grabbing one of the OL and swinging the hips into the other.  The hips, force the trailing OL to have to go around the DL, thereby losing blocking leverage on the scraping LB.  This is where the technique paid off for us.  We were getting our LB's killed on combo blocks because our guys were trying to be penetrators (which we taught), and once we switched our undersized LB's were able to fly to the football. 



To defeat the scoop blocking scheme is not all that much different than the reach block, as again, the DL is using simple physics against the blocker.  The DL shoots the hands into the OL as he feels the scoop block working away from him, he simply latches on to the OL and utilizes a push-pull technique which does one of two things.  First it slows the blocker's momentum down, which is a key element to scoop blocking (just watch Georgia Tech's OL).  This keeps the blocker from being able to gain leverage on a scraping LB.  The other thing it does, is prevent the DL from being cut, and frees up the DL to chase the play. 

These techniques are very easy to teach, but at the heart and soul of both techniques is the hand play of the DL.  I think hand play for DL is an extremely underrated technique.  Looking back, you will see the hand placement of the DL is critical.  When defeating the reach, it is imperative that the DL punch his hands into the near shoulder and sternum of the OL so as to styme the OL's movment so the DL can swing the hips and gain leverage.  If there is no punch, the momentum of the blocker is not stopped and the hips cannot be swung into the gap.  The jump through utilizes the hand placement even more so.  The DL must again, shoot the hands, so as to slow the momentup of the scoop blocker, and then be able to pull himself by and behind the blocker. 



I know that sounds quite complicated, but it's not.  To be honest neither style of DL technique will work with poor hand placement.  This is why I say, hand placement and proper punch technique are often overlooked and undertaught. 

The reactionary blocks are even simpler than the rule blocks.  Ryan states there is basically no wrong way to play these.  I had a hard time wrapping my head around this concept because my entire coaching career I'd been schooled in one thought of DL play.  But when you watch the techniques on the video and he describes the various methods of defeating these reactionary blocks, it really opens your eyes.  What it means to the DL coach is, let your guys play.  I think all coaches at some point in their careers are guilty of "overcoaching".  Ryan, I'm sure, has fell prey to this too, and has seen the light, as against the reactionary blocks he just lets his guys play.  This really makes teaching the DL simple, but at the same time, is highly effective.  A good example of this is the outside fold block on a three technique.  There are two very simple ways to attack this scheme.  The DL, if quick enough, can get off the ball and get in the hip pocket of the puller, thereby putting himself right in the gap being attacked.  Nothing wrong with that!  Now, say your DL is a bit of a bulkier guy (like ours were), there's nothing wrong with the DL "chipping" or clubbing across the face of the down block either.  This puts the DL right back into the gap where the offense is attacking.  As you can see, the two methods are equally effective, and since Ryan let's his guys play it, the players are playing to their abilities and not being forced into a scheme that they cannot execute.

Some of the other basic philosophies of the 46 DL are very similar to other defenses I've read about.  Ryan does not elaborate much on stances, other than the DL should be comfortable and able to move laterally.  Ryan does talk about using short choppy explosive steps rather than big steps in order for the DL to keep his balance.  One topic Ryan states is the abiltiy of the defender to neurtralize the blocker.  He does not ask his DL to create a new LOS, but rather maintain the LOS, which can be seen in the clips.  This maintenance of the LOS, means the LB's are free runners and able to attack open windows in the offense. 





When we made the jump to the 46 Nickel, the DL play was the top reason we made the switch.  The results were immediate, in one week we made a huge turnaround in our DL play, and the film grades showed.  Obviously there are some other nuainces to DL play in the 46, but the heart and soul is the technique shown here.  I never knew much about these until I bought Rex Ryan's book on the 46, as well as the DVD.  Both of these are must buys for anybody learning about playing the 46 defense.



Well, the offseason has begun.  Coaches are tweaking offenses, and defenses and players are hitting the weight rooms.  This is not a time to be standing still!  Recruiting is also in full swing, do your seniors a favor and work your tail off for them, just like they did for you.  You never know just how much that means to your players.  Hope everyone is off to a great New Year. 



Duece

P.S.- I need some good punt block info.  If anyone is willing to share, please, hit me up!!!


Eating My Words...


One part of being a good coach is learning to eat your words.  I had put a post out a while back where I was discussing all the nuances of the position of the strong safety (SS) in the 46 defense.  Well, I have to say, I have significantly shifted my perspective from where is was just months ago.  Here is the original post for those that haven't read it.  I think it wise to do so before proceeding with this article.

The proving grounds, or the field as it's called in football, has a way of humbling even the smartest of coaches when it comes to implementing something...this is no different.  Last season at the varsity level, I ran the 46 Nickel with 4-2 personnel and had some success with it.  We got into the front as an adjustment with no personnel substitutions whatsoever.  It was simple, it worked and the kids liked it.  Enter this season now as a junior high defensive coordinator and I simply install things the way we did last year with the exception that we are 3-3 personnel now instead.  As I'm working this look in the first few weeks of practice, I'm noticing we are struggling with some of our adjustments and we never can seem to keep the tight end (TE) covered.  Well, when I sat down and looked at what I was doing, I had realized the error of my ways.  Let's go back now and look at the different philosophies of the position of the SS in the 46 defense.



Original Position of SS in 46 Bear Defense Under Buddy Ryan


SS is now in 7 technique.  This alignment was used by Boston College.

SS position outside the TE, this is how Rex Ryan currently runs the 46 defense.
 

As most know, the defense got its name from famous SS, Doug Plank who had jersey number 46 when playing for the Chicago Bears back in the mid-80's.  Coach Buddy Ryan played Plank over the weakside tackle against 2 back teams that employed a TE.  The SS was the adjuster in the defense from this position.  As time moved on, people began to move the SS around.  Even Buddy's son Rex, has changed the original position of the SS in the defense.  Rex puts the SS outside the TE when aligning.  He feels this keeps the SS's alignment consistent and allows the SS to see his adjustments quicker.  This is what I originally advocated, and I'm sure with the NFL talent that Ryan has, along with the large amount of time given to coaches to work with their players at the NFL level, Ryan has little to no trouble teaching his system.  However, at my level, where we get a grand total of six hours (if we're lucky) of practice per week before gameday, things need to be quite simpler.  So, I opted to move to the alignment I found in a Boston College defensive playbook.  The defense they ran was based out of the 3-4 and simply put the SS inside the TE as the seven technique.  I had my doubts about this alignment, but since then I've seen just how much teaching I've eliminated by doing so, and have quickly come to enjoy this new alignment (and subsequent corrections in my playbook). 




As you can see, remove the TE and the "box" players remain the same with the SS as the 7 technique.
 
One thing to point out though, NONE of our opponents have run with a TE so far this season.  We are in a "spread to run" league where everybody feels they are Appalachian State or Urban Meyer, so we see very little TE sets.  So this basically translates my defense into a double eagle nickel package, with two outside safeties (OSS's) taking the brunt of the adjustments in our man coverage scheme (ok, it's just cover 1).  Anyhow, the OLB's in my defense (shown as S and R in the diagrams) only have to learn a couple of techniques, where before, my OLB to the TE side had to learn how to cover a TE man to man from the seven technique position.  The SS had to learn the OLB's job was well as learning how to cover displaced receivers man to man.  This led to a lot of overlapping teaching, but too much of a job description for both positions.  So, by moving the SS inside to the seven technique, I effectively eliminated any teaching time teaching him how to force, play boot, reverse, cutback (BRC) on runs away and simply had to teach him to cover a TE man to man from the seven technique, as well as man coverage on displaced receivers.  The OLB's job was made simpler too by teaching him one consistent alignment.  I align my guys one yard outside the EMOL, and keep it at that.  Now they play quicker, faster and with less of a thought process, which is EXACTLY what I as a coach strive for.



Play Faster!!!!

So, as I'm writing you this, I'm eating my words on my original stance on the position of the SS in the 46.  I think all three philosophies have merit, however, when applied "to grass", I like Boston College's version for the simplicity it presents in teaching the concepts based on what player's jobs are.  Ok, so hopefully I didn't steer anybody in a direction they are cussing me for, but if I did, shoot me an email and we can talk.  Otherwise, enjoy and gloat in the joy of me eating my previous words.



Well the grind is on, as most of us are entering mid-season.  I need some help, especially from youth coaches.  We are struggling to keep our practices from being a grind to the kids, and we need something fun and "lifting" to do in practice.  If you have any ideas please shoot me an email at footballislifeblog@yahoo.com .  Any information would be greatly appreciated.  Keep working fellas, keep your eyes on that prize!

Duece

The Strong Safety in the 46 Bear and 46 Nickel Defenses


As some of you know, from a previous post, I had some success (I do use that term relatively) with the 46 Nickel this past season.  Since using this defense, I have been enamored with finding out more information on its father, the Bear 46.  I have dug high and low and have come up with some very good resources, that have led me to some very insightful research.  The one thing that sticks out in my mind is the placement of the strong safety in this defense.  I will not go in to history here much, but as a lot of you know one of the key elements to Buddy Ryan's historic 85' Chicago Bears' Defense was the play of strong safety, Doug Plank.  With this position being so critical to the defense, it had me wondering why there were so many variations on the placement of this player.  It is hard to find any information on the 46, that has the strong safety in the same position.  So I thought a post about the pros and con's of the alignments of the strong safety were necessary.  I will also shed light, as I usually do, on what I did, and why I did it, so hopefully you can make an informative choice when placing such a critical player.



Early Years...The Beginning
Buddy Ryan's original position for the strong safety (SS) was at the weak side 40 technique.  There's much argument as to why Ryan put the SS here, however there is no doubt that this early alignment has since been challenged.  I can only speculate, but because the SS was in the box to the weak side, it allowed him to adjust to communicate with the linebackers (LB's) easier when and where he was adjusting to.  I'm sure there are other more concrete reasons why Doug Plank was placed in the weak side 40 technique, but for the purpose of this article, I will simply look at the pros and the cons of the alignment.



Pros
The Pros of the alignment are, in my opinion, very slim, as I did not utilize this alignment (well I sorta did since it WAS a safety for me, however it was NOT my SS, it was my WS).  The pros are as follows:
  • SS is in good position to communicate his adjustment/assignment to middle linebacker (MLB) who can then adjust the front accordingly (Jayhawk adjustment).
  • SS is in good position to walk out and cover a displaced #2 to the weak side.
  • SS is in good position to defend the run, and is well protected by the Nose, weak 3 technique and the wide nine technique defensive end.
Cons
  • SS is in poor position to see adjustment threat to the weak side, or handle motion away from the backfield to the strong side of the formation.
  • SS is not typically a run first defender, yet is aligned in the box, and such schemes as Power O, or Power G can exploit a weak run defender on the weak side of the defense.
  • SS has more to learn from this position.  His skill set is as follows:
    • Read and react to keys like a LB.
    • Cover receivers man to man.
    • Drop off in zone coverage.
    • Blitz from depth.


Strong Safety as the Seven Technique
The latter point will be argued in other sections of the article.  Basically, Buddy Ryan's traditional alignment is fine, but I think there have been other methods proven to be slightly more economically in their placement of the strong safety.  The first I will discuss, is one method I found in an old video about Boston College's version of the 46.  At one time, apparently BC ran their version of the 46 with 3-4 personnel.  BC placed the SS in the seven technique position, normally occupied by the Charlie LB (weakside linebacker) in Buddy Ryan's original scheme.  I will now take a look at some of the pros and cons of the SS being in the seven technique alignment.

Pros
  • Only one defender has to learn a new skill set, all 10 others play skill sets related to their original scheme.
  • SS is used to covering a defender man to man, whereas not all LB's are.  SS does not have to learn new skill set, and neither does LB.
  • SS can use quickness on LOS to beat slower, bulkier offensive linemen when blitzing.
Cons
  • SS still not in good position to get to adjustment assignments or adjust to motion.
  • SS must learn new assignment when facing the option (normally has pitch or alley assignment, now must take quarterback fitting inside the load block).
  • SS is usually undersized when compared to the LB being at the seven technique position.  This weakness can take its toll on strong side C gap runs as the SS is usually at a physical disadvantage to a tight end (TE) or offensive tackle (OT).
  • In zone coverage SS will drop to an inside zone, he does not normally drop to.  This puts more teaching time into teaching the SS additional zone drops from his normal assignment.

Boston College's 3-4 Version of the 46

The idea behind what Boston College is simple, only change one player and the rest of the defense can align and get after the offense.  I like it, but the idea of having a defensive back (DB) standing in the C gap, did not particularly sit well with  me.  So I looked at some schemes that had the SS set outside the TE to the strong side.  This fit very well with my 4-2-5 scheme as our SS was asked to play up and around the LOS on numerous occasions.  Now, let's look at the pros and cons of aligning our SS outside the TE to the strong side.



Base 4-2-5 Alignment



4-2-5 Version of the 46

Pros
  • SS only has to learn one new skill set, that of the outside rush.  Since we were 4-2-5 and ran TCU's Smoke Blitz, this was an easy install for me.
  • SS can easily get to his assignment of being the adjuster to the strong side, and can easily chase motion away from the backfield.
  • SS can drop off and cover an outside zone, which was his normal coverage responsibility in the 4-2-5.
  • Because of the SS being involved in blitzes in the original 4-2 scheme, he could also easily be taught blitz games coupled with the strong side LB to confuse the offense. 
  • SS in good position to defend the pitch on option, another carry over from his normal option assignments in the base defense.
  • No new reads or reactions need to be taught.
Cons
  • Further displacement from the box makes communication of adjustments more difficult.

I know, I'm biased, but I'm showing exactly what I did when looking at adding the 46 as a package to my defense last season.  I felt what I did "fit" what we were doing as a base defense, and allowed us to get into the 46 with little to no new teaching. 

The SS is a very important part of the 46 defense, and his placement is still up to your preference.  To be honest, no single way is correct or better, it's all in how you coach it up.  Just remember there are pros and cons to your decision, and that's why I posted this article.  For more information, check out my first post on the 46 Nickel, and go to by Scribd site and download some very good information!  Hope this helped, and I'm going to keep researching one of football's ultimate pressure defenses, the 46!!!


I do things MY way...


Duece

The 46 Nickle



How I came upon this defense is quite saddening looking back at the dismal performance we put up on defense this past season.  However, as with anything in life, it's all about the experiences!  This dismal experience allowed me to run and know a defense that up until last August I knew very little about.  The great 46 Defense was made popular by the 1985 Chicago Bears and a staple of any defensive coordinator (DC) in the NFL with the last name Ryan.  I won't dig into the history of the 46, there are plenty of books and postings on message boards out there to keep you buzzed for days on the 46's history.  What I'm going to talk about, is the adaptation of the 46 to the 46 Nickel, and how I used it to stop the bleeding on a defense that gave up over 800 yards of total offense in the first 3 games of last season.  Yes...we were THAT bad! 



Last year at a Nike Coach of the Year Clinic, I was perusing the books and DVD tables looking for what I could find to add to my library (and piss my wife off in the process spending money we didn't have).  I came across a book entitled Coaching Football's 46 Defense by Ryan and Walker.  I had always wanted to learn more about this defense, especially if I ever became an offensive coordinator (OC) so I could better learn how to attack it.  Up to that point, as an OC, DC or an assistant coach I had only seen the 46 on TV clips from 1985 Bear highlights.  I knew absolutely nothing about the defense other than it was named after Doug Plank the strong safety (SS) for the Bears that played for the infamous Buddy Ryan.  I knew it was an aggressive attacking style of defense, but that is where my knowledge of the defense ended.  Anyhow, as with most things, it was a book on the bottom of my stack of reading, and I never got around to it before the season.  Anyhow, after our second game, a disheartening 27-25 overtime (OT) loss and giving up an amazing 411 yards of offense, I had had enough!  I began looking into what I could do, asking the experts on message boards, digging up old phone numbers of DC's long retired.  Our major problem on defense was two-fold, we had no defensive linemen (DL) that could consistently demand a double team, and young linebackers (LB's) who were struggling getting off of blocks.  The kids were trying hard, but the DL was out manned and our LB corps consisted of defensive back (DB)/defensive end (DE) converts and some young under aggressive sophomores...uggh.  I knew staying in our base 4-2 look was not going to do well, and I had to find something and quick!  One of our offensive coaches suggested running the double eagle, to which I my answer was "how the hell do we get to the double eagle from the 4-2-5?".  However he got the gears in my head working, and I remembered my book on the 46!  By that time is was too late, and we were having to go out on another Friday night with our base 40 nickel defense, and we gave up 313 yards of total offense and 41 points...ouch!



After the drubbing, I went home, drank a couple of beers and began reading.  Once the sun came up, I was sure the 46 was the defense for us!  However, I was concerned how I was going to get us into the 46 from the 4-2's base front.  That's when I found a very good excerpt in a book titled Defending the Spread Offense.  There was a section in there on the 46 Nickle, oh how the wheels were turning now!  My mind was racing, and I was going on 0 hours sleep since game time and was in bad need of a Red Bull!  After getting my caffeine fix going and a chew of tobacco, the grease pen began to fly, and here's what I came up with.









To start, I will give you some of our nomenclature so you can better understand our base defense.  Here is a positon by position description of each defender in our defense.

A- Anchor; strong side defensive end, plays in a 7 or 5 technique depending on the presence of a tight end (TE).
R- Rover; weak side defensive end, same alignment rules as the Anchor.
T- Tackle; Normally the 3 technique.
N- Nose; Normally the 1 technique.
S- Sam; Strongside LB.
M- Mike; Weakside LB.
$- Spur; SS.
W- Whip; Weak safety (WS).
F- Free safety (FS).
C- Cornerback



Base 4-2 alignment vs. 2 backs


4-2-5 to Bear


I looked at tons of videos on Boston College's 46 look out of the 3-4 and Virginia Tech's 44/46 defense and the two books I had, and the final alignment I came up with was this.

The front would simply kick down to put the Anchor into the 3 technique on the strongside.  The Tackle would move to the 0 technique over the center, and the nose would move to a weak 3 technique.  The Rover, would stand up and move out to what we called a "ghost 9" technique, or outside shade of an imaginary TE.  All of these were not out of the realm of what these positions were asked to do, especially the Anchor, Tackle and Nose.  The secondary and LB corps would move to the strong side of the formation in the following manner.  The Spur, was the loose 9 technique outside the TE.  The Sam LB would walk down on the line of scrimmage (LOS) into a 7 technique.  The Mike LB would move over to a strong side 40 technique over the strong tackle and the Whip would come into the box as a 40 technique LB to the weak side of the defense.  Now, I only had a week to put this in, so I had to move quickly and whatever I did HAD to be simple and adjust easily.  I decided we would play Cover 1 only, and hope for the best.  I had young, but very athletic corners and a ball hawk FS so I felt we could do this. 



Our rules were for the DL were simple, we used Rex Ryan's defensive line techniques described in the book of not allowing the jump through block and getting the DL's "hips to the hole" (entire other post on this technique, I won't go into detail).  At first, we slanted our 0 technique based on the call (Bear strong/weak) and this worked quite well.  Later, we moved to 2-gapping him, by making no call and having read the block of the center.  The Rover was the toughest one to teach, as in our base 4-2 he had to adhere to the laws of block down step down (BDSD), but now found himself the force player to the defense's weak side.  This took some coaching, but fortunately for us, our DL coach was an old 50 guy and had no problems dusting off his 50 DE coaching manual! 



Our LB's and outside safeties (OSS) worked in tandem, with the OSS's being the adjuster to their respective sides (the secondary was not divorced in our Bear front).  With this we were able to adapt and adjust with little to no problems.  For the Sam LB, things were easy, if there was a TE present, align in a 7 technique and cover him man to man.  If there was not a TE, he had to listen to the Mike and the Spur.  If the Spur gave an "I'm out" call, that mean the Spur was involved in coverage (slot receiver) and that the Sam would have to be the force player, so the Sam would align in a "ghost 9" and play force.  If a TE was present the Sam gave a "banjo" call to the Mike LB.  The banjo call told the Mike he had the TE on inside and vertical routes, and the Sam had the TE if he attempted to cross the Sam's face.  Whoever was not involved in the coverage on the TE, took the back out of the backfield to their side.  To the weak side, if the Whip made an "I'm out" call, then the Mike had to acknowledge how many backs were in the backfield.  If there were 2 backs in the backfield, he made a "Jayhawk" call and that slid the Sam backer back into a 40 technique.  If there was only 1 back in the backfield, this call did not need to be made, and the Mike moved to a 00 technique over the center.  If both the Spur and the Whip gave "I'm out" calls, then the Mike simply moved to a 00 technique over the center.  This sliding movement by the LB's allowed us to keep the numbers in the box we needed to properly defend the run, be in man coverage and still have to viable force players on the LOS at any time, vs. any formation the offense could present. 



46 Nickel vs. Twins Strong


Jayhawk front vs twins weak


46 Nickel vs. 11 personnel 2x2



46 Nickel vs. 11 personnel Trips Closed



46 Nickel vs. 10 personnel 2x2

46 Nickel vs. 10 personnel 3x1

Coverage for the LB's was simple as well.  They were in man coverage on the 1st back to their side.  If both backs flowed to 1 side or the other, we were in what we termed "flow" coverage.   Flow coverage told the LB to flow to take the 1st back out to his side and the LB opposite of flow to take the 2nd back out.  LB's auto blitzed if their RB did not run a route.  We basically told them "find a window and go" to keep it as simple as possible.  Later we added a blitz or two, but for the most part we were attacking every single play.
The secondary kept a very simple principle in that the Spur and Whip were always the adjusters.  The only time we did not ask them to adjust was against twins closed sets, and then we just played corners over.  Playing corners over allowed the front to stay the same to twins closed and keep it's normal alignment/assignment rules in place.  The FS was always free unless the offense came out in an empty set, and he then became the final adjuster taking #3 to the 3x2 side of empty.  If an offense came out in trips open, the FS would give a "help" call.  A "help" call in my defense tells the OSS away from the trips side to come over to the trips side and "help".  The adjusting safety would cover the #3 receiver in a trips formation.  This adjustment rule also held true vs. empty 4x1 looks as well.


46 Nickel vs. Empty


Flow Coverage



Auto blitz vs. RB block

So there you have it!  The birth of Duece's 46 Nickel (not really mine, but it sounded good anyway)!  Now, there were some other specifics that we had to iron out, such as what do you do against bunch sets?  We played a version of Cover 1 called "banjo", where the OSS to the bunch side played the #2 receiver man and did not let him off the LOS.  The corner and other safety (or other corner in the case of a bunch closed look) would then "banjo" the #1 and #3 receiver's based on their releases.  We did not see this look much, but actually had to put this adjustment in at halftime of our 1st game running the defense (nothing like a little on-the-field adjustment in the heat of battle). 

So I know what you are thinking!  Duece, you committed the cardinal sin as a DC by changing schemes in the middle of the season.  Yes and no though.  A lot of the techniques being taught were very similar, if not the exact same.  We had been playing some Cover 1 and corners over, so there was nothing new there, and with our Bullets blitz scheme our LB's were familiar with covering running backs.  The major changes came in the play of the Sam LB, the Anchor, Tackle Nose and Rover.  That 1st week we really concentrated on getting those guys reps, and we came out and had our best defensive game of the season.  We faced a team averaging over 300 yards rushing per game and held them to 189, and gave up only 26 yards passing!  I was very impressed and the kids had a lot of fun running the new more aggressive style of defense.



Some of the weaknesses we found were that the being in man coverage the entire time lends you to mismatches.  Even though our corners were athletic one was 5'5" and the other was 5'7", this came to light in a couple of games, but hey...75% of pass defense is pass rush, so I blame it on the DL!  The other glaring weakness was the fact the 46 is not the greatest of defenses vs. the triple option if you stay in man coverage.  We moved to a coverage we called "2 roll" which is a moving way of playing Robber coverage and did pretty well against ourselves (Flexbone) in practice.  If I was basing out of this front, that is definitely how I would play the option is with the 2 Roll coverage.





Bear vs. Flexbone


One unique item we found was the utilization of the FS in man free coverage.  With the FS being free, you could do a lot with him in your game plan.  We found we could double an opponent's best receiver, or place him to the field side of the offense and give us an extra man there, or simply place him back deep and let him "roam" around.  I honestly believe this was the top selling point in the 46 Nickel for me.  The FS could be used as an adjuster or extra defender wherever needed.  This seemed to keep OC's guessing too as to where we were going to put him.   We moved the FS around based on the levels of the defense and simply gave a number call tagged to the front such as Bear 1.  One put the FS on the DL level either to the strong side or to the field.  Often times teams would motion the wide receiver down inside to crack the Spur on sweep plays.  By putting the FS on the LOS, now they had to crack him AND try to block the Spur.  The offense was simply outnumbered.  We would tag the call with a "2" to tell the FS too align at LB depth either over center, or to the field depending on where the ball was.  This gave the defense an aggressive 9-in-the-box look and dared opposing OC's to throw.  If we tagged the call with a 3, the FS went deep, way deep, sometimes as deep as 20 yards depending on down and distance.  We did this in obvious passing situations or against teams that like to run the post route.  If we tagged the call with "double" and a letter such as Y, then the FS would help double the Y receiver.  The FS was always deep help in the times that we doubled. 



FS in a 1 alignment

FS in a 2 alignment
Bear Double "Z"


 
Now mind you, all of the above was built in to the defense over time, however most was not used.  We did put the FS in a 1 alignment and a 3 alignment some, but we used the double call a TON.  Our FS was a tall lanky kid and when we saw a mismatch with our "toy" corners, we could simply call in "double" from the sidelines and the FS slid over to that side and helped out.  All of these calls led to the adaptability and aggressiveness of the defense.  If you are not happy with man to man, in your face aggressive defense, this is not the answer for you.  More often than not, I err on the side of caution, but I gambled this one time and it really payed off for us.  We even got to where we could mix in some 46 with our normal base stuff to use as a short yardage defense.  The flexibility of using nickel personnel is the key to the success of this defense, and the success we saw out of it last season.



Are there other ways to run the 46?  Sure, there are numerous ways to get into the alignment.  Some coaches I talked to stood up the strong side end, and had him play man coverage on the TE.  When they did this, the kept the 3 technique in place and moved the Mike LB down over the center in a 0 technique.  Great adjustment, I just felt our Mike wasn't suited for it.  Boston College, out of their 3-4, will move the SS to where our Sam aligns and let him play man coverage from there.  This allows them to kick their DE down to a 3 technique (something they do in their double eagle and under fronts anyway) and the outside linebacker (OLB) to that side can align in the 9 technique and do what he normally does out of their base 3-4 look.  However you do it is up to, I wanted to share what I came up with and why I did it the way I did.



Boston College's 3-4 Bear

My methodology was simple, our Anchor, Tackle and Nose were very very similar players, with the Anchor being the most athletic, the Tackle being the immovable object and the nose being the "fly" in the ointment.  All 3 had the body size to play down inside in the 3, 0, 3 look of the 46.  The Rover was the most athletic of all our DL, so he would have no trouble being the force player with some reps, and he had 0 coverage responsibilities and was free to rush from a stand up position.  The Sam, we felt, could be very aggressive inside, and we did not really rep an individual coverage technique with him, yet we gave him a simple effective rule "don't let the TE off the LOS".  Our kids got this, and it worked!  They could be aggressive because they knew they had FS help behind them.  We felt by keeping the Spur and the Whip as our adjusters we kept the shceme in the spirit of the 4-2-5 we ran for our base defense.  This allowed these kids to showcase their talents of being aggressive coverage guys that could also blitz off the edge or play inside the box.  Both of these players by alignment were protected very well, as the Spur could play in space off the edge, and the Whip had a 3 technique inside of him and a 9 technique outside of him as well.  All of these were factors in our decision of how to align our pieces of the 4-2 into the 46. 


Go here to download VT's 44/46 defense from 1998!


Again, as with all my posts, this is not to say my method is the best, I'm simply sharing tactics that I used and how I came to them for you guys to use.  I hope they give some insight and can help you defensively in the future.   The video below is some clips of us using the defense this past season.  As you can see we were not the most physically intimidating team, however the Bear can make life miserable for teams trying to make a living running the football.




Duece