All things defense

[Zim489]

3 hours ago, Forever A Redskin said:

I don't understand how the same defense from two years ago, with way more talent wouldn't return to form.

Take a look at the QBs they played in 2020 over that like 10 week run in the middle of the year. Big ben was the best Qb they played. It was abysmal. 

1 hour ago, Mooka said:

 

We overrated the talent. Our D got torched by most of the good offenses/QBs we faced 

 

Despite our D-Line of first rounders we don't even have a single double-digit sack guy on the roster. 

 

Our offense has to produce and allow the D to make plays. 

It needs to be an Dline that forces 3 step drops 80% of the passing snaps. Jam the line. If the Dline cant get pressure the entire though process of this team and its make up needs to change 

[Koolblue13]

We also need an offense that can put points up quickly and in chunks, so the D can just pin their ears back. Playing with a lead makes a world of difference.

[Zim489]

 

[Forever A Redskin]

I'm gonna get B&G shirts made up that says WHO'S THE BUFFALO NICKEL???  In bold on the front.

[ultravin]

you think we'll see sweat, allen, mathis, payne, young in plays together?  if we had an elite secondary, those 5 can take care of business!

 

[Koolblue13]

9 hours ago, ultravin said:

you think we'll see sweat, allen, mathis, payne, young in plays together?  if we had an elite secondary, those 5 can take care of business!

 

We started trying to do that pretty often last year, so yes. I think so, especially since our LBers aren't hot.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

We started trying to do that pretty often last year, so yes. I think so, especially since our LBers aren't hot.

Yeah, they like the 5-2 front, and they do drop either Young or Sweat at times in a "zone blitz" type of look.

 

They also used a 5-1-5 at times, with 5 DL, 1 LB, and then the "big nickel".  Theory being, the 5 DL + extra safety should be fine against the run, but they also have 5 DBs on the field to help with pass coverage.

 

It's a wrinkle I hadn't seen elsewhere, and I kindof like it.  

[Going Commando]

On 5/15/2022 at 10:30 PM, ultravin said:

you think we'll see sweat, allen, mathis, payne, young in plays together?  if we had an elite secondary, those 5 can take care of business!

 

 

I can see why you'd do that to fit the run, but not for pass defense.  The point of having Chase, Sweat, and Allen is to be able to generate pressure with four man rushes.

[Zim489]

this is shaping up to be a disaster 

[skinsfan93]

The thing I worry about Holcomb playing the MIKE is his durability. He’s already had some concussions and he isn’t the biggest linebacker amd sometimes gets swallowed up by bigger guards.
 

Yes he has the speed and football smarts for the position. However if he’s out a game or two here and there, we’re then stuck with David Mayo which is not ideal. I sure hope one of the undrafted rookies steps up. 

[Zim489]

I have major questions about his ability in coverage. The most important aspect for modern football. If youre LBs are easily lost in coverage the QB can make the easiest throws over the middle and pick up chunk yards all day long

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Eh, we’ll see how this plays out.  
 

They used a 3 LB set on 60 total plays last year.

 

They’re mostly in nickel, either traditional or “big.”

 

Holcomb was going to be on the field in Nickel anyway.  So I don’t know how much his role really changes.

 

The bigger question is how will Davis progress and can he be counted in to play next to Holcomb in nickel.  If not, then there is a gaping hole.  If yes, that’s good. 
 

I’m not terribly worried about the 60 snaps they play a season with 3 LBs.  
 

The several thousand they play with 2 LBs, now that has my attention. 

[Zim489]

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

They used a 3 LB set on 60 total plays last year.

 

They’re mostly in nickel, either traditional or “big.”

Is that because they didnt have 3 good LBs? Or do they just prefer that? Honestly I dont see them with 1 good LB. Certainly not 3 starter quality. 

[ultravin]

what they need to do is that secondary needs accountability.  too many blown plays, out of position, blah blah blah.  JDR needs to be more creative with his defense.  He's getting killed out there with younger offensive minds, like Kellen Moore of Dallas, Serriani of the Eagles, etc etc.  it's like those young bucks are using plays from madden and while JDR is still using Tecmo bowl plays.  lol. 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

48 minutes ago, ultravin said:

what they need to do is that secondary needs accountability.  too many blown plays, out of position, blah blah blah.  JDR needs to be more creative with his defense.  He's getting killed out there with younger offensive minds, like Kellen Moore of Dallas, Serriani of the Eagles, etc etc.  it's like those young bucks are using plays from madden and while JDR is still using Tecmo bowl plays.  lol. 

 

I have been critical of JDR plenty.  But I think he actually has been somewhat creative.

 

I personally don’t think that was the issue.  
 

I think the biggest issue is they completely busted up the secondary fir no real reason.  
 

Flipping Darby for WJIII, basically benching Kurl for Collins, moving Fuller inside and playing St. Juice outside until he got hurt, inserting McCain….

 

They completely blew up what was working, and destroyed the chemistry.  They also played Collins out of position, and didn't play their best safety in Kurl. 
 

I think those issues are much more at issue than creativity.

 

And I also think they couldn’t be as creative because they couldn’t even do the easy stuff well. 
 

I expect a huge step forward this year because most of the same players are back.  And they were starting to get it last year.

 

 

 

 

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, Zim489 said:

Is that because they didnt have 3 good LBs? Or do they just prefer that? Honestly I dont see them with 1 good LB. Certainly not 3 starter quality. 

That’s a good question, but I think it’s safe to say they really like the 3 safety combination against 11 personnel because it provides them with an extra run stopper but also allows them to have another DB on the field to defend the pass.  
 

I think they go with that on downs where it’s not a known passing situation (1st and 10, 2nd and 4 to 7, 3rd and 2 to 4), but if it’s a known passing situation they go straight nickel with 3 CBs..

 

Again this assumes 11 personnel.  
 

If it’s 12 personnel, they typically match with base.  But teams don’t use a lot of 12 personnel anymore, which is why you see so much nickel, whether it be 3 CBs or 3 DBs…

[Zim489]

Personally the better your LBs are the more they can play vs 11 personnel. In true passing downs you can swap to nickel and the extra CB. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

25 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

Personally the better your LBs are the more they can play vs 11 personnel. In true passing downs you can swap to nickel and the extra CB. 

You really don’t want any Lb against a slot WR in today’s NFL.  
 

Offenses are so creative now they will find a way to get a receiver matched up on a LB and it’s over.  
 

Then the commentator screams “how did (WR) get matched up on (WR?)”. 
 

And everybody would be calling for Jack’s head.  
 

The trend is to match 11 personnel with some form of nickel.  And the “big nickel” is kidof rhe compromise because it’s a safety who can (in theory) cover a WR better than a LB, but also can run fit better than a CB.

 

It makes sense from an X’s and O’s perspective.  
 

The key is having the right guys who can do it.  
 

And I think my theory is, if you know you’re going to need “that guy” who plays the 11th defender, sortof a hybrid LB/Safety, I don’t care what position it’s called.  
 

If you can have a Lb who has enough speed to do it, great.  If it’s a safety, fine.  If it’s a tweener who has no real position, i don’t care. 
 

I do think they were hoping Davis could fill the role when they drafted him.  He had the athletic traits to do it.  But he would need to take a huge step up on the recognition side to be able to do it. 

Edited May 19, 2022 by Voice_of_Reason

[Zim489]

3 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

You really don’t want any Lb against a slot WR in today’s NFL.

More and more zone coverage in todays nfl.

[Voice_of_Reason]

8 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

More and more zone coverage in todays nfl.

WR against a LB in zone is a mismatch. 
 

It will draw the read immediately from a good QB and you’re giving up chunk yardage underneath all day.

 

Which is why more and more you see teams go to some form of nickel agajbay 11 personnel.

 

In fact, and I’ll grant you I don’t watch every NFL game, but just to my eyes, I can’t recall a team that really sticks in base when the opponent goes to 11.  I think almost all go to nickel to match.

 

I just googled a few defenses that were well coordinated:

 

Dallas was in nickel 78% of the snaps

Buffalo 90%

Colt 79%
 

I can’t find the 2021 number, but according to Football Outsiders, the league average for nickel in 2020 was 60%, up from 55% in 2019.  Base was played 24%, dime 14% the remaining was goal line or big.

 

So it’s not just an “us” trend, it’s a league thing.  The trend is definitely to move towards nickel whenever opponents are in 11.  
 

Base being played only 24% league wide is a clear indication the LB position  is less valuable. 

[Thinking Skins]

9 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

WR against a LB in zone is a mismatch. 

I don't think this is an absolute statement. You put a top WR against a mid LB and yeah, you put an OK WR against a top LB and the defense has got a chance. You put a crappy WR (particularly one whose hands are suspect or is afraid of getting hit) and you just have to light him up as the ball arrives (the way Everett was doing in 2020 after Collins went down). Everett is a S and not a LB but its the same theory. 

 

The problem is that the better teams are lining up with now 3 and sometimes 4 really good WRs, but the bad teams (or at least bad passing offenses) are still lining up with 1 maybe 2 good WRs and then somebody who you can cover with an athletic LB. I think about the Ravens or the Eagles in this light. But if we're going against GB or KC or Oakland or Minnesota or Buffalo or some of the top QBs, I think their QBs are another part of the story because they can deliver almost any ball to anybody almost anywhere and have the ability to embarrass a LB. That said, some of these same QBs can have accuracy issues and you see the LB make a pic 6 like Holcomb did against Dallas last year. 

[SkinsFTW]

22 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

I’m not terribly worried about the 60 snaps they play a season with 3 LBs.  
 

The several thousand they play with 2 LBs, now that has my attention. 

 

It's only several thousand because they give up 15+ on almost every 3rd and 10+. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

6 hours ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

It's only several thousand because they give up 15+ on almost every 3rd and 10+. 

Well, there is that.  Yes.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

14 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

I don't think this is an absolute statement. You put a top WR against a mid LB and yeah, you put an OK WR against a top LB and the defense has got a chance. You put a crappy WR (particularly one whose hands are suspect or is afraid of getting hit) and you just have to light him up as the ball arrives (the way Everett was doing in 2020 after Collins went down). Everett is a S and not a LB but its the same theory. 

 

The problem is that the better teams are lining up with now 3 and sometimes 4 really good WRs, but the bad teams (or at least bad passing offenses) are still lining up with 1 maybe 2 good WRs and then somebody who you can cover with an athletic LB. I think about the Ravens or the Eagles in this light. But if we're going against GB or KC or Oakland or Minnesota or Buffalo or some of the top QBs, I think their QBs are another part of the story because they can deliver almost any ball to anybody almost anywhere and have the ability to embarrass a LB. That said, some of these same QBs can have accuracy issues and you see the LB make a pic 6 like Holcomb did against Dallas last year. 

Ok that’s fair.  But a lot more teams have a 3rd WR who can actually play.  And the problem with having a LB on a WR is there is almost always a speed advantage to the WR.  If they make one good move, they’re wide open and running away from the LB

 

Sure, it’s possible for an athletic LB to cover a WR for some short period of time.  
 

But the flip side is, if you’re playing zone with a LB, the offense can slip their outside guys, and better WRs into that zone, and then it is a mismatch.  
 

For us, even though you had nobody apart from McLaurin last year, if you could get him matched up on a LB in zone, I’ll take my chances with Terry all day.  And if you’re playing a zone with 3 LBs, (which is what we were discussing), a good OC can figure out how to get that matchup, even in game.  

[Zim489]

16 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

I don't think this is an absolute statement. You put a top WR against a mid LB and yeah, you put an OK WR against a top LB and the defense has got a chance. You put a crappy WR (particularly one whose hands are suspect or is afraid of getting hit) and you just have to light him up as the ball arrives (the way Everett was doing in 2020 after Collins went down). Everett is a S and not a LB but its the same theory. 

 

The problem is that the better teams are lining up with now 3 and sometimes 4 really good WRs, but the bad teams (or at least bad passing offenses) are still lining up with 1 maybe 2 good WRs and then somebody who you can cover with an athletic LB. I think about the Ravens or the Eagles in this light. But if we're going against GB or KC or Oakland or Minnesota or Buffalo or some of the top QBs, I think their QBs are another part of the story because they can deliver almost any ball to anybody almost anywhere and have the ability to embarrass a LB. That said, some of these same QBs can have accuracy issues and you see the LB make a pic 6 like Holcomb did against Dallas last year. 

But if this is the situation and they are putting 4 good WRs out there they are passing the ball and you have zero reason for a Buffalo. Just put out your other CB. 
 

I obviously don’t have an issue with Nickel. I have an issue with a Buffalo nickel being used as an argument instead of 3CBs or base. 

Edited May 20, 2022 by Zim489