Question of the Day
So Donnie Fricks has bested James Yasko again.
Now, I do want to take a moment to let you know that most of you disappointed the old coach just a bit by letting the simple detail of whether or not you knew the people involved in the question limit your ability to choose an answer. C'mon people. Life consists in two things--choice and commitment. That being said (by Kierkegaard, not me), sometimes our choices don't come with all the necessary information, or even all of the information we would like to have going into decision time.
Nevertheless, on to today's question:
Which defensive scheme do you think is most effective against an I-formation counter to the strong side?
A. 4-3 zone cover two
B. 4-4 man strongside blitz
C. 3-4 man weakside blitz
D. Nickel quarter halves QB spy
Explain your answer.
posted by adam at 10:17 AM
3 Comments:
A. 4-3 zone cover two
B. 4-4 man strongside blitz
C. 3-4 man weakside blitz
D. Nickel quarter halves QB spy
Naturally, I think people would assume that the 4-4 man strongside blitz would be the idea. But if you're running a counter i'm assuming the guard and center are pulling, so if you have them man-man on a LB, the LB's will have to make the tackle cause if they don't the running could cut back and the other side of the field would be open.
I'd prolly opt for the Nickel halves QB spy because with a S/CB spying the QB he's not really accountable in the offenses blocking scheme. So it's much easier (in my opinion) for a S/CB to get to the ball then it is for a LB going aganist the guard. By the time the guard got there, the S would have already made the play.
I could be wrong but just my opinion...
January 03, 2006 2:25 PM
lol, thoughts?
January 04, 2006 5:35 PM
okay, so here you go:
Actually, you are right about the strong side blitz being the wrong call, but not simply because blocking accounts for them, but usually the 4-4 blitz package is a pass blitz package and your Line Backers would therefore overpursue even if they cam unblocked.
Unfortunately the Nickle is the wrong option as well. What happens is the counter ends up going to the weak side of the play, thereby leaving the SS, NB, and WLB (not to mention weak-side DE and CB) completely out of the play by formation alone. If the offense has a WR and TE out there and the OT stays for backside protection, then that only weliminates 3 offensive players to 5 defensive players. This means that the pulling guard and the fullback have an easy shot at both the SLB and the FS. If the WR on the strong side came into motion and pulled his WR over to the Weakside, it's even worse news, but even if he didn't that leaves man on man blocking and then some as the strong side guard is the escort for the HB who didn't have to make anyone miss. ouch.
Actually the 43 Zone cover two is not a terrible defense but does run the risk of dropping your linebackers out of the actual play, but does defend against the big gainer by the same route. If all stay home and keep their heads up, then it could limit the play to a humble gain.
I think the best option here is the 3-4 man with a weakside blitz. First it forces the OLine to block downfield in space. Second your weakside blitz makes your backside Tackle have to immediately pull out of the play. This leaves the DE on that side available to hit the HB in the backfield, unless the FB picks him up, or the guard stops pulling to circle back ( the latter is highly unlikely) The NT eats up the C and the MLB1 gets to pursue untouched, beacuse the TE had to block the SLB, and the puilling G had to block the MLB2. Also, the Fullback has to That leaves the HB and a pulling G against the DE, SS, FS, and MLB1. I like those odds.
Wish I could diagram it for you.
Way to think your choice through though. I like the bravery in the call.
January 05, 2006 12:16 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home