Why "the cushion" is a great idea...

[mitchellvii]

 

 

As I read the OP and the thread I was struck by two things--one was old hat and the other kind of fresh.

 

The old hat thing was the fact we have a large number of x's and o's guys on this site that help get the more deeply-detailed football knowledge out there (though everyone is still human when it comes to opinions lol).

 

The fresh thing was how cool it was you start this kind of thread as a newbie, at potential risk to your ego  ,  and stayed with it, drawing more full explanations to your questions. It's a great way to discuss the team and share knowledge and I always wished we had more people ask such questions in threads.

 

Love seeing stuff like this first thing in my morning ES review. 

 

Thank you.  Can I get some anti-warning points for when I say something really stupid at a later date?

[WarpathHitchhiker]

Warpath,

 

While I appreciate your reasoned analysis, the point is it simply does not work.  Here is the painful truth:

 

 

You don't get much worse than last.  I think maybe the cushion needs some pushin.

Yep.  Not saying we are great or anything, just giving my .02 on why you may see it.  What's scary is that if we didn't end up implementing Has' plan our pass defense might have been worse.  I think we had a bend but don't break defense which relied on turnovers.  In the first half of the season we bent, then broke.  In the second half (and I definitely don't have the stats to back this up so I may be wrong), I think we bent, broke less, and created more turnovers. 

 

Like you, I too hope things change with our Defense. 

[mitchellvii]

Yep.  Not saying we are great or anything, just giving my .02 on why you may see it.  What's scary is that if we didn't end up implementing Has' plan our pass defense might have been worse.

 

Coming in last place that may have been metaphysically impossible

[darrelgreenie]

But honestly, the thing that grinds me the most is when we only have to stop............ Why blitz on that play?  Just cover.  Or we go the other way and rush only 3 so the QB has all day.  I mean seriously,  how does that happen?  Just cover.

If your honestly asking the question regarding why a defense sends pressure in 3rd and very long (+10) situation I can tell you the reason is time. 'Zero' pressure allow the DC to control the amount of time the QB has to throw-----> this limits the depth of the routes the receivers run------->which ensures the defense is not beaten by the the throw. Time is the one factor that if successfully limited can ensure a 'stop' against a pass play.

 

But, enough of my preaching.

Read these:

http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2010/07/nebraska-pressure-7-man-blitz_6823.html

 

BO PELLINI-

On a personal note, I would like to add that even though being a "defensive-guy"

and being a coordinator who is not big on man-to-man, that if you do not have a

Cover 0 check blitz in your package, you are really missing out. It can be

installed within minutes, disguised from any look, and provides a 'cheap' answer

during a game that falls outside your game plan. I would certainly encourage any

defensive staff member to look at the 'check-blitz' not as a way of life, but as

something up your sleeve to before your first game. It is a great way to jump

start your defense into winning conversion downs and build the confidence in the

team in the early stages of the season.

 

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Coaching-up-Cover-0.html

[mitchellvii]

But darrelgreenie,

 

We were dead last in the NFL on stopping 3rd down conversions last year and we blitzed a lot on 3rd down conversions.  How is this a good idea?  Either it is a bad defense or we are horrible at a great defense.

 

My point is, we seem to stop people quite well on 1st and 2nd down when we don't blitz, then get our a***es handed to us on 3rd when we do.  So why not just keep doing what we did on 1st and 2nd downs as it was clearly working?  Just cover, play football and stop with the fancy stuff.

[darrelgreenie]

But darrelgreenie,

 

We were dead last in the NFL on stopping 3rd down conversions last year and we blitzed a lot on 3rd down conversions.  How is this a good idea?

Not sure I follow. I'm not sure what you're talking about when you ask 'how is this  a good idea'?

And who said it was a good idea?

I was answering your question regarding why a defense sends pressure on 3rd and very long situations.

 

Either it is a bad defense or we are horrible at a great defense.

 

My point is, we seem to stop people quite well on 1st and 2nd down when we don't blitz, then get our a***es handed to us on 3rd when we do. So why not just keep doing what we did on 1st and 2nd downs as it was clearly working?

You are equating one defense (zero blitz or cover 3) to the entire defensive package.

 Our defense contains literally hundreds of more calls then Cover 3 and Zero blitz.

 

  Just cover, play football and stop with the fancy stuff.

 Only if it were so simple. If you break it down to basic Xs and Os pressure is the better answer to creating pass stops then coverage.

A good pass beats good coverage. A pass that is never thrown or thrown short  or thrown under duress cannot beat you. That is the aim of pressure

 

BTW-Did you read Bo Pellini or Matt Bowen's articles?

[RandyHolt]

One thing about blitzing on 3rd and it failing.  

 

It takes its toll on QB's. They know you are coming. Orakpo and Kerrigan, over and over.

 

Late® in the game, maybe hit a few times earlier, they are quick to throw one on the potential game winning drive. #ThinkRomo

 

Looking at the big picture, when Haslet dialed up the pressure week after week, starting after the bye week versus Philly, we won games. Even though we had become predictable, he used players to their strengths and got after QB's and dictated the game's outcome, versus laying off and hoping that rookie QB handed us the game. 

[mitchellvii]

But we were dead last on 3rd down conversions. Dead. Last.  One cannot get worse than last place.  How many times did we have a 14+ point lead in the second half only to see us squeak out a win or lose at the end?

 

Hopefully things will change this year but I am not optimistic.  We keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

 

Our defense won few games for us last year.  We simply outscored people.

 

** Regardless, I am satisfied with the purpose of my thread, to learn the football rational for what appears on the surface to be insanity to the uneducated fan (me).  I appreciate all of the input but after all is said and done and based upon results, I must conclude "the cushion" is still insane.

[WarpathHitchhiker]

But we were dead last on 3rd down conversions. Dead. Last.  One cannot get worse than last place.  How many times did we have a 14+ point lead in the second half only to see us squeak out a win or lose at the end?

 

Hopefully things will change this year but I am not optimistic.  We keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

 

Our defense won few games for us last year.  We simply outscored people.

 

** Regardless, I am satisfied with the purpose of my thread, to learn the football rational for what appears on the surface to be insanity to the uneducated fan (me).  I appreciate all of the input but after all is said and done and based upon results, I must conclude "the cushion" is still insane.

 

You're crediting the failure of our defense to the scheme, not the players.  Your stance needs to be reversed.  Skill wise, we had probably the worst secondary unit in the league.  After the bye, our scheme was changed to include more blitzes.  We benefited and it's obvious that we did so.  Chalking up our last place defense on third down to "playing cushion coverage" is a naive way of looking at things.  Without specific examples of cushion coverage this whole thread is kind of just a strawman argument. 

 

The real question we should be addressing here is "why were we so poor on third down?"  I think the answer lies in personnel just as much, if not more, than in our scheme. 

[mitchellvii]

You're crediting the failure of our defense to the scheme, not the players.  Your stance needs to be reversed.  Skill wise, we had probably the worst secondary unit in the league.  After the bye, our scheme was changed to include more blitzes.  We benefited and it's obvious that we did so.  Chalking up our last place defense on third down to "playing cushion coverage" is a naive way of looking at things.  Without specific examples of cushion coverage this whole thread is kind of just a strawman argument. 

 

The real question we should be addressing here is "why were we so poor on third down?"  I think the answer lies in personnel just as much, if not more, than in our scheme. 

 

This thread is at risk of becoming argumentative.  Not my intent.

 

By the way, simply because someone disagrees with you does not make them naive.  Perhaps your point of view is incorrect while this "naive" person has seen through the x's and o's to a simpler truth?  If the current scheme is as powerful as suggested, we truly must have the worst personnel in the league to do so poorly with it.  Then one has to ask how the worst personnel in the league are so successful on 1st and 2nd down?

 

The scheme, the players, whatever, last place is last place.  Since we have largely the same players as before and we do not wish to be last place again, I suggest we change the scheme.  While cushions and 3rd down blitzes may be brilliant strategies on paper, we clearly do not do it well.  What we do on 1st and 2nd down seems to work.  Let's try that instead.

[WarpathHitchhiker]

This thread is at risk of becoming argumentative.  Not my intent.

 

By the way, simply because someone disagrees with you does not make them naive.  Perhaps your point of view is incorrect while this "naive" person has seen through the x's and o's to a simpler truth?  If the current scheme is as powerful as suggested, we truly must have the worst personnel in the league to do so poorly with it.  Then one has to ask how the worst personnel in the league are so successful on 1st and 2nd down?

 

The scheme, the players, whatever, last place is last place.  Since we have largely the same players as before and we do not wish to be last place again, I suggest we change the scheme.  While cushions and 3rd down blitzes may be brilliant strategies on paper, we clearly do not do it well.  What we do on 1st and 2nd down seems to work.  Let's try that instead.

Just quoting the definition of naive: showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgement.  By your own admission, you fit the bill.

 

I'm not trying to flame you or anything man, chill. 

 

I don't think we have the best personnel, and I also don't think we have the best scheme.  Attributing our failures to one simple coverage which we probably don't use nearly as much as it would appear to the naked eye, is...fill in the blank.  I won't say naive.

 

I agree with you.  Third down percentage on D needs to get better.  There is no excuse (whether it be scheme, personnel, cushion, etc)for being dead last in that category.  Hopefully our healthy and new pieces can change that. 

 

Hail

 

Edit: doing what we do on 1st and 2nd down really isn't feasible.  The percentage of run on 1st and 2nd down is substantially higher than it is on 3rd down.  Also, how do you quantify success on 1st and 2nd down?  If the opponent gains 9 yards on first down, then incomplete pass or 0 yard rush gain on 2nd, we are forced into a 3rd and short.  Opponent 3rd down conversion percentage goes up when they convert on 3rd and short, but really the success of those three plays came on 1st.

 

There really are many factors that go into this.  Perhaps a better barometer for success other than 3rd down conversion is breakdown of down and distance related to 3rd down.  If our percentage is significantly higher than the league in 3rd and medium-long, we have bigger problems than the same being said for 3rd and short. 

[mitchellvii]

Just quoting the definition of naive: showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgement.  By your own admission, you fit the bill.

 

Lol, lack of experience, perhaps, lack of wisdom or judgement?  Hardly.  If your intent is not to flame people, don't throw around terms like naive.  Just sayin.

 

My point is that our opponents are constantly in 3rd and long so our 1st and 2nd down defense is working well.  It just seems odd to watch us play amazing shut down defense on 1st and 2nd only to give up the 3rd and 10 with ease over and over again while blitzing and giving huge cushions to receivers.  Same personnel, different scheme.  Logic says blame the scheme.

 

Anyway, doesn't matter. We will just have to agree to disagree.  You say it is a sound defense with bad personnel, I say it is a terrible scheme because it takes successful personnel on 1st and 2nd down and makes them fail on 3rd.  The Redskins coaches don't give a damn what we think here anyway so we'll have to leave it at that. 

[Puma Kane]

The cushion does not work when the corner is 10 yards back on 3rd and short and the LBs aren't getting to their areas of responsibility.

Curl routes, kill us. Square outs, kill us, Screens plays, kill us yet Haslett keeps calling it. I can see on my screen what Haslett is calling.

Heck, as soon as a play is called by the offensive coordinator, they are alreay planning plays for the new set of downs and that ain't right.

What I miss when Greg Williams paced the sidelines, is he would have our corners back off and when the clock was almost wound down, he would have the corners drop down and jam. Disguising was key. I miss the 3 and outs back in the days.

He's here and we have to deal with him but Haslett is not the guy.

[Jumbo]

mitchellvii

Lol, lack of experience, perhaps, lack of wisdom or judgement?  Hardly.  If your intent is not to flame people, don't throw around terms like naive.  Just sayin.

 

 

 

And now, after my earlier compliment, it's time to advise you that you're in no position to make those kind of comments on what flies here and what doesn't. So don't.   

 

All that's been said is perfectly allowable to date by rules. Whether you're a dupe acct we're allowing to "try again", or an actual newbie, you're being regarded as a newbie at this point. My suggestion would be to just learn the rules, post accordingly, and enjoy. Leave the moderating to the staff.

 

When you become more familiar with the turf, then you can help us, like we ask all savvy members to do, in politely guiding others to compliance when they wander. 

[SB17]

My thoughts only:

 

When the scheme is executed as planned, it results in Rob Jackson (or other LB) picking off a pass by Tony Romo sits to pee intended for the RB coming out of the backfield.

 

I, personally, don't care a lot for giving that much of a cushion to opposing teams' receivers.

 

IIRC, at mid-season, the Redskins were on pace to set an all-time NFL record for most passing yards allowed in one year.  If the cushion coverage scheme was implemented 100% of the time (or for a large majority of the time), I would say that up to our bye week it could be considered a colossal failure, but I do not know how often it was used (I'm also a fan, not as much of an X's and O's person, having never played football myself).

 

The fact that we were dead last (according to previous posters) in 3rd down efficiency does not bode well for the scheme, if the scheme was used almost exclusively on 3rd downs (again, I do not know if that was the case).

 

However, after the bye week, it seems as though the defense actually improved, and so it would be interesting to compare the numbers pre-bye vs. post-bye to see if this actually was the case (I believe, at least for total passing yards allowed, it was the case; I don't know, though, for 3rd down efficiency whether we improved or not).

 

In the end, I don't like the scheme, but I believe that Jim Haslett became more wise as to how to implement the scheme with the players he had.  It's scary to think that no matter how large a lead we have, that we can never feel comfortable until the game is over and we have won.  Two games come to mind:  When we played the Saints last year (1st game of the regular season), we had a surprising lead at halftme and then were up 33-17 with 6:42 left in the 4th quarter and let the game get as close as 40-32.  The other game was the Turkey Day game in Dallas when we were 28-3 at halftime and had to hold our breath near the end of the game.  These kind of games should not happen; when we have those types of games, we need to put teams away.

[mitchellvii]

The cushion does not work when the corner is 10 yards back on 3rd and short and the LBs aren't getting to their areas of responsibility.

Curl routes, kill us. Square outs, kill us, Screens plays, kill us yet Haslett keeps calling it. I can see on my screen what Haslett is calling.

Heck, as soon as a play is called by the offensive coordinator, they are alreay planning plays for the new set of downs and that ain't right.

What I miss when Greg Williams paced the sidelines, is he would have our corners back off and when the clock was almost wound down, he would have the corners drop down and jam. Disguising was key. I miss the 3 and outs back in the days.

He's here and we have to deal with him but Haslett is not the guy .

 

I agree.

[mitchellvii]

As a sideline to the thinking in this thread, have any other fans noticed that our defense seems to play quite well until the moment we score at which point they completely collapse and give up an easy TD?  Same with special teams.  How often have we scored only to give up a big play on the ensuing kickoff?

 

At times it seems as if our coaching staff is embarrassed to beat the crap out of an opponent.  One thing I always have admired about the Patriots.  It is never enough for them to beat you, they want to destroy you and make your children cry.

[darrelgreenie]

BTW, my comments are just my perspective.  As I said, just a fan.  Don't know much about football.  No matter how it seems to me, if it is working let's stay with it by all means, but do you think in our case it is working?  Maybe we should stick with that on 1st and 2nd down but cover tighter on 3rd or goal line situations?

Cover 3 w/ the cushion is not 'our' defense. Its just one call within our gameplan.

 

So I can't really answer your question because I don't know if you're talking about whether (a) does our defense as whole works or ( does our Cover 3 with a cushion work?

[RandyHolt]

I agree if there is anything to defensive aggressiveness stats related to wins, a study done pre bye / post bye is worth a look. 

 

I believe our defense improved once we started getting after QB's and offenses. It was simply by being aggressive. Asking a Madieu to read is dumb. Players like him, let him attack. And that is what Haslet did.

 

If the stats do not tell the full story, the wins do. A defense that is not aggressive is not one to be feared. Without fear to face, players are comfortable and get in a groove.

 

We have all seen it. Once a QB gets rattled, things change. Some QB's just pack it in to try to regroup for next week. 

 

A QB can convert a few 3rd and longs on us, but if we are getting a helmet on his chin when he does so, I think its less likely he will succeed trying to do the same come the 4th quarter. 

 

Opening the door for a review of 4th quarter 3rd and long conversions, pre and post bye. 

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

The basic coverages you are talking about is Cover 3. I don't want to preach too much so i'll give me quick thoughts then post diagrams that include breakdowns of Cover 3 assignments.

 

Cover 3 is one of the more popular defensive looks for 34 teams the Steelers and other LeBeau variants have run this defense and run it quite effectively for years.

 

Its a balanced defense Run and Pass.

 

Its easy to switch roles on defense which makes it easy to disguise blitz looks.

 

The defense is not designed to stop certain routes. For those shorter routes the aim is to force a short throw and rally to make the tackle. The defense is more predicated on pressure rather then coverage for the shorter routes.

 

 

Cover 3

 

 

All of this sweet disguise if fine and dandy but you still gotta have a pass rush...

[MartinC]

All of this sweet disguise if fine and dandy but you still gotta have a pass rush...

Assuming we can keep people healthy that's actually the one area of our defense I feel most confident about this year. I think Rak, Kerrigan and Jenkins will be on the field in nickel situations and we can get very creative with who stands, who has their hand in the dirt and zone blitz packages using the Cover 3 shell DG was diagramming.

[mitchellvii]

I'm curious.  Which NFL defenses are the highest ranked?  The basic smash-mouth-eat-your-young types or the fancy-gimmicky-always-trying-to-fool-you types?

 

The problem with constantly trying to fool the other team is you often end up fooling yourself and being out of position.  Wouldn't we be better off with giving our players less to remember and just executing?  Sort of the "Here's what we are going to do and you can't stop us" approach?

 

Face it, these guys are out there getting the snot banged out of them every play and half the time they are probably woozy from the last hit.  Does it really make sense to have such complex schemes?

[NoCalMike]

I believe in a 3-4 scheme, the linebackers are tasked with helping in the short to intermediate zone. 

Say on a 3rd & 4, the cornerback is 8 yards off the line in case they are going for a homerun, and the linebacker is supposed to cover a curl or slant route to break up the pass or stop the WR short of the 1st down.

 

Really I think Haslett is calling the coverages based on the personnel we have on defense.  DeAngelo Hall isn't going to have success jamming a WR at the line, he will probably get bumped off and then automatically be 2-3 steps behind a WR which spells a lot more disaster then say a WR catching the ball in front of him for a 4-5 yard gain.

 

The thing people have to remember is just because a team runs a certain kind of base defense, doesn't mean they run that on every play.  There will be times you see the secondary come up to press in certain situations, or back off even deeper in others.

 

I am not so much worried with what the team's base defense is, as to how Haslet has the team prepared for specific down/yards to go situations.

 

Also, those short routes on 3rd down, the slants and curls a big key to stopping those is the pass rush.  Every defense in the league regardless of the base they run is predicated on having a successful pass rush, especially on 3rd downs.

 

Doesn't matter how good or poor the secondary is on paper, without a decent pass rush they won't be covering WRs/TEs for a long time unless the QB is under some kind of duress.

 

Those 3rd and under 5 situations.  Those are all about TIMING.  If you get a good pass rush, those throws are made early or at a target's ankles/knees or sailed behind them or over their head. This is why Orakpo is so valuable to our Pass rush even if he is not necessarily getting sacks.  Collpasing the pocket in those situations is extremely important. you throw the timing of a QB/Target off and it results in 4th down or in Romo sits to pee's situation, a turnover.

[mitchellvii]

Well, we can't get much worse than worst.

 

It seems our personnel do a fine job of stopping teams on 1st and 2nd down.  It's just on 3rd down when all the pain happens and it's 3rd down when Haslett likes to get fancy.  Coincidence?

[paloosa]

There are a lot of explanations to why they do it but for the life of me it rarely works. Haslett's defense is too predictable and doesn't confue anyone. Playing 8-10 yards off the line of scrimmage is all about not giving up the big play. If that is the case then why did we give up a bomb to Victor Cruz during our first meeting against the Giants? If playing 8-10 yards of the line is to prevent that then someone forgot to tell the secondary that. It is also to keep the play in front of them to make the tackle before the reach the 1st down especially in 3rd and long. But that doesn't happen either. This team was last in amount of 3rd downs it gave up which was tied with Minnesota last year. We gave up 59 3rd and long plays. That is a lot in a season. So give all the explanations and excuses why they play that far off but it doesn't make any rhyme or reason why it is done 80% of the time. Bump and run is a lost art in the NFL.