5-2-4 Defense

#1
Spent Fuel

Spent Fuel

Radioactive
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
266
Likes
28
#1
Why does Chavis almost always put one outside linebacker up on the line of scrimmage at one end (unless it is 3rd and long)? If the other team runs the ball the other way, it takes away the back side LB because he is caught on the line. And, if they run at him, he is an easy pick-up for the TE and leaves a big hole at the LB level. I think this set-up makes the other team's job easier. When Ark State ran the spread draw out of the shotgun at the linebacker on the line, the back just went inside and Mayo was blocked and the back ran free for twenty yards.
 
#2
#2
IMO, for whatever reason, Chavis wants the QB to think the OLB is rushing the passer.
 
#4
#4
If you are going to run the 5-2, it is better to have 3 DT's and 2 DE's, instead of pulling a LB up.
 
#5
#5
yah, chavis is sneaky sneaky,,,,,? :pirate: to me i think if hes gonnna make the QB think hes being rushed, how would use some other looks beside the same OLB being lined up in that one slot, or maybe if hes gonna show it, actually bring the pressure. i personally think need the 5-man line, because passers are tearing the defensive secondary apart because there isnt hardly any pressure getting there. but then again im not getting paid to blow it so,,,, yah
 
#6
#6
I could see it useful becaue ideally it dictates where the run has to go...however, when tackling is an issue, its kinda a moot point
 
#7
#7
As many teams that are using 4 and 5 WR sets, I think a 4-2-5 or a 3-3-5 is the defense of the future.

I think a team needs a good DB/OLB who can do both when they play a spread option team. I guess McKenzie is making that transtion for UT.
 
#8
#8
What happened to the blitz up the middle? Remember the '01 UT/ Florida game when the defense was moving all over the place before the snap and confusing the QB? The LB's would rush up to the line then drop back and now they are too predictable.
 
#9
#9
jkell24 said:
What happened to the blitz up the middle? Remember the '01 UT/ Florida game when the defense was moving all over the place before the snap and confusing the QB? The LB's would rush up to the line then drop back and now they are too predictable.
Click to expand...

good old days when people were AFRAID of us :the_finger:
 
#10
#10
jkell24 said:
Remember the '01 UT/ Florida game when the defense was moving all over the place before the snap and confusing the QB? The LB's would rush up to the line then drop back and now they are too predictable.
Click to expand...

Everything works better when you have two future 1st round draft picks at DT.
 
#13
#13
jkell24 said:
What happened to the blitz up the middle? Remember the '01 UT/ Florida game when the defense was moving all over the place before the snap and confusing the QB? The LB's would rush up to the line then drop back and now they are too predictable.
Click to expand...

It depends on who the QB is. If he's a pocket passer, and isn't gonna get away from you, then that kind of defense can wreak havoc. If there's a mobile qb back there, or they're running some sort of spread-option, then you have to stay back on your man, can't afford to be caught out of position.

That defense might work ok against Georgia, maybe Bama, but against Ky, and carolina, it might not be as effective, since the qb can just get away.

Throw in the fact our DT's aren't getting much pressure, and it's just not going to be as effective.
 
#14
#14
Chavis is still running a 4-3 defense, obviously because there's 3 lb's. A 5-2 is 3 dt's, 2 de's. The intent is to disguise coverages/blitzes of the lb's. By showing blitz on one side, the qb might think that only 2 lb's are dropping in coverage. Or, you drop the lb showing blitz and blitz another lb.

Now of course, that's the intent, doesn't mean we do it or that's how it always plays out.
 
#15
#15
oklavol said:
As many teams that are using 4 and 5 WR sets, I think a 4-2-5 or a 3-3-5 is the defense of the future.

I think a team needs a good DB/OLB who can do both when they play a spread option team. I guess McKenzie is making that transtion for UT.
Click to expand...

This year's UF game, when our lackluster defense was successful, it was while running the 3-3-5. Of course we are Tennessee, and as soon as we saw a successful pattern emerging, we changed.
 
#16
#16
jwells said:
It depends on who the QB is. If he's a pocket passer, and isn't gonna get away from you, then that kind of defense can wreak havoc. If there's a mobile qb back there, or they're running some sort of spread-option, then you have to stay back on your man, can't afford to be caught out of position.

That defense might work ok against Georgia, maybe Bama, but against Ky, and carolina, it might not be as effective, since the qb can just get away.

Throw in the fact our DT's aren't getting much pressure, and it's just not going to be as effective.
Click to expand...

If there is a mobile QB, you can just use you DE's to contain the outside.
 
#17
#17
awebb7 said:
This year's UF game, when our lackluster defense was successful, it was while running the 3-3-5. Of course we are Tennessee, and as soon as we saw a successful pattern emerging, we changed.
Click to expand...

Fulmer/Chavis are resistant to change plus they hadn't had a week to study the film first.
 
#18
#18
why did we ever get away from the moving D-line. where we had two down and two or three moving in and out of the line. When we've done that it really worked, in 2005 we did a lot, and a few times last year. Is it a personnel problem?
 
#19
#19
the 4-3 with the lb over the end is the 4-3 over and under. depending on the side the TE is on is which side the flood to. and the only time the teams run the other way is when they run off tackle weak-side. it works more than it fails and john chavis is still a great d coordinator!!
 
#20
#20
7IlikeOrange7 said:
the 4-3 with the lb over the end is the 4-3 over and under. depending on the side the TE is on is which side the flood to. and the only time the teams run the other way is when they run off tackle weak-side. it works more than it fails and john chavis is still a great d coordinator!!
Click to expand...

IMO 75% of the plays are run to the wide side of the field, regardless if the OLB is playing up on the line of scrimmage. They are running where they have the most room.
 
#21
#21
Spent Fuel said:
Why does Chavis almost always put one outside linebacker up on the line of scrimmage at one end (unless it is 3rd and long)? If the other team runs the ball the other way, it takes away the back side LB because he is caught on the line. And, if they run at him, he is an easy pick-up for the TE and leaves a big hole at the LB level. I think this set-up makes the other team's job easier. When Ark State ran the spread draw out of the shotgun at the linebacker on the line, the back just went inside and Mayo was blocked and the back ran free for twenty yards.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about?
That defense worked GREAT for my playstation EA Sports NCAA 2000 team!!
 
#22
#22
Here is two examples of how this alignment hurt us in the Ark. State Game:

1) Ark. State lines up in the spread with one back and one TE. Rico lines up on the line over the TE. Ball is given to the back with a forward hand-off and runs toward Rico's side. Rico rushes up field and is easliy blocked by the TE. The ASU guard and tackle block our tackle and end and the center gets to Mayo. The back breaks the line and is free to run 20 yards. If Rico was back the TE would have a tougher block to stop Rico before he got to the back, instead Rico takes himself out of the play.

2) I formation. Rico lines up over the TE on the line. Ark State runs the ball away from Rico. The ASU tackle and guard block our end and tackle, center gets to Mayo (happens quite a lot), the FB takes our Karl (no surprise) and the back runs to daylight. Rico mean while takes a few steps up field while the play runs away and stops. If he was back he could get the backside tackle pretty easy before the ASU off-side tackle or TE could get to him.

I just think we line up like this way to much and the other teams can easily plan for this and run all over us. The proof is in the stats.
 
#23
#23
If Im not mistaken, the weakside LB is always cheating up to get a stop on a potential running play to the weak side. Strong side should have to play back a little to cover the TE.
 
#24
#24
Spent Fuel said:
Here is two examples of how this alignment hurt us in the Ark. State Game:

1) Ark. State lines up in the spread with one back and one TE. Rico lines up on the line over the TE. Ball is given to the back with a forward hand-off and runs toward Rico's side. Rico rushes up field and is easliy blocked by the TE. The ASU guard and tackle block our tackle and end and the center gets to Mayo. The back breaks the line and is free to run 20 yards. If Rico was back the TE would have a tougher block to stop Rico before he got to the back, instead Rico takes himself out of the play.

2) I formation. Rico lines up over the TE on the line. Ark State runs the ball away from Rico. The ASU tackle and guard block our end and tackle, center gets to Mayo (happens quite a lot), the FB takes our Karl (no surprise) and the back runs to daylight. Rico mean while takes a few steps up field while the play runs away and stops. If he was back he could get the backside tackle pretty easy before the ASU off-side tackle or TE could get to him.

I just think we line up like this way to much and the other teams can easily plan for this and run all over us. The proof is in the stats.
Click to expand...

That's all based on the assumption that if Rico had gotten to the ball carrier he would have made the tackle.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top