This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

[mchurchfie]

You have to have a special type player for the DL? Two gap and three gap D-Linemen? It makes it pretty limiting with who we can bring in. It seems like we've passed on some good players because of it. Is it really worth it?

[Philagape]

We've let go of some good players because of it.

[Carlton Bailey]

After one year of running it, I hate the Tampa 2. Too bad we don't run the 3-4, where you're actually allowed to have a good D-tackle.

[raphael120]

Some people adapt the scheme to the personnel, like in Pittsburgh. Tomlin came in and is sticking with the 3-4.

Some people try to make the personnel adapt the scheme.

Jauron came in and changed things to the Tampa 2, which at the time, we had absolutely NO players that fit that scheme. Our LB's were NOT fast, our starting safeties at the time were not good Cover 2 safeties. When you thinka bout it, we changed to Tampa 2, and we had to get rid of ALL of our players on defense to fit that Tampa-2 style. The only hold overs are Crowell, Schobel, McGee and Denney. We got rid of more than half of our defense just to fit this new scheme.

We have yet to see dividends and until we do, I think it was a horrible move. Maybe if they came in and saw we had the talent in place to succeed in the cover 2, fine. But to come in and say, hey we're doing it this way and oh by the way, we have to scrap half of our players to make this shift....I just don't know about that kind of battle plan.

Last year the agrument can be made that we had less than half of the right people in place for both of the new schemes, offensively and defensively.

[DraftBoy]

Personally I like a different variation of the Cover 2 which is more aggressive (i cant remeber which College team is running it right now) I think we too often use our LB's in pass coverage and are not aggressive enough in our pass and run blitzes. We need to switch things up. I like Fewell as a coach I just hope he has more in his bag of tricks, id like to see more zone blitzes, corner blitzes, safety blitzes, and stunts.

[OpIv37]

I've said it before and I've said it again- this D requires the perfect circumstances for it to work.

It works in Chicago because they have the PERFECT personnel (or had- we'll see how well they do without Tank- Walker is a good fit for the system but not nearly the athlete that Tank is).

It works in Indy because they have the offense to keep the D off the field and force opposing offenses to pass, which plays into the strength of the D.

In Buffalo, we have neither the personnel nor the offensive firepower to force opponents to pass.

[OpIv37]

Personally I like a different variation of the Cover 2 which is more aggressive (i cant remeber which College team is running it right now) I think we too often use our LB's in pass coverage and are not aggressive enough in our pass and run blitzes. We need to switch things up. I like Fewell as a coach I just hope he has more in his bag of tricks, id like to see more zone blitzes, corner blitzes, safety blitzes, and stunts.

it's a good theory but in the last pre season game, there were tons of holes in the 2 deep zone even when we weren't blitzing, so our guys would have to get much better about being in position before we can start running blitzes.

[DraftBoy]

it's a good theory but in the last pre season game, there were tons of holes in the 2 deep zone even when we weren't blitzing, so our guys would have to get much better about being in position before we can start running blitzes.


If your good at blitzing the holes dont have time to develop, one reason holes emerge in the Cover 2 is bc the QB can sit back all day and wait for a receiver to get open. I didnt see the game so I dont know if that happened, but Im watching it live tonight so Ill have a better idea about where your coming from.

[mchurchfie]

I think we too often use our LB's in pass coverage and are not aggressive enough in our pass and run blitzes. We need to switch things up. I like Fewell as a coach I just hope he has more in his bag of tricks, id like to see more zone blitzes, corner blitzes, safety blitzes, and stunts.
:bf1: I'm tired of seeing our LBs drop back at the snap, a little more aggressiveness would be nice.

[duhbilz]

You have to have a special type player for the DL? Two gap and three gap D-Linemen? It makes it pretty limiting with who we can bring in. It seems like we've passed on some good players because of it. Is it really worth it?

I agree, if you have smart, fast interior linemen that would make a big difference. As McFarland in Indy or Tommie Harris in Chicago would attest. The Bills by adding Posluszny sure goes a long ways in helping them with run defense especially anything that goes laterally, but he still needs a guy like the two just mentioned to help his cause, by forcing things outside. However it is real tough to be efficient against the run in the Tampa 2, it just is.

[raphael120]

The opposing offense I think will have plenty of time to pass, almost all the time UNLESS we do blitz a LB.

Our ends either overpersue and get knocked out of the play altogether, OR they just get blocked out of the play.

Our DT's just get blocked and pushed back.

The weakness in the DT is going to trickle and affect the WHOLE defense.

Now if it was the other way around and say, we had the good pass rushing d-line, we could get by on having lesser talent at CB and even LB to an extent because the QB would be making bad decisions or just getting knocked around half the time.

But since our weakness IS the D-Line, our LB's have to overcompensate, which they will be hard pressed to do and I think is a tall order to fill with such a young, inexperienced group. It's also something that the CB's have to deal with too because instead of only having to cover their WR for say, 2-3 seconds, they have to cover them for more than 5 sometimes and it gets exponentially harder to cover a WR the more time you give the WR to adjust and find the open zones. Same issue with the safeties.

[Earthquake Enyart]

I hate the 3-4.

Give the guys a little time to adjust. We'll be fine.

[duhbilz]

I hate the 3-4.

Give the guys a little time to adjust. We'll be fine.
I think the passing D will only get better, but the run D will always be a bit suspect cause of the size along the Dline in the Tampa 2, small fast Dlinemen against big fat Olinemen. Passing, especially passing that's a good matchup, running it's not a good match.

[Earthquake Enyart]

Once everyone learns to play their gap, the run D will get way better.

[North_Coast]

We got rid of more than half of our defense just to fit this new scheme.


Did Jauron dismantle a Top Ten defense to install the cover2?

Since the 2005 defense was close to the very worst in the league and had a lot of older players, why would a new coach want to keep the system or the players around?

As much as everybody whines about how bad last year's D was, in it's first year, with a vanful of rookies starting or rotating, it was better that 2005's.

[raphael120]

Did Jauron dismantle a Top Ten defense to install the cover2?

Since the 2005 defense was close to the very worst in the league and had a lot of older players, why would a new coach want to keep the system or the players around?

As much as everybody whines about how bad last year's D was, in it's first year, with a vanful of rookies starting or rotating, it was better that 2005's.

Man, everything in 2005 was bad.

I admit that yeah Jauron didn't dismantle an awesome defense, but if you're going to install an cover 2 defense, you need to do a little bit better than having a key piece to making the cover 2 work, that 1 gap DT, to be a career backup in Triplett. They've hit and miss with a handful of players now at that position and I doubt it'll be settled until we pick a first round DT in next years draft.

A first round DT that is not a reach.

[madness]

Teams in the NFL and in college have been using it succesfully for years without the perfect personnel.


Tampa 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_2) refers to a style of defense played by the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_Bay_Buccaneers) and implemented by its coaches, Tony Dungy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Dungy), Lovie Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovie_Smith), and Monte Kiffin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Kiffin), in recent years. Because of its success it has become popular with many professional and college teams. It blends the Cover 2 and Cover 3 defenses by having two defensive backs, usually the safeties, in deep coverage on either side of the field, and a middle linebacker covering the medium to deep middle. Its benefit over the Cover 2 is that the sidelines and middle of the field are better protected against deep threats, with the drawback being a larger open area in the short middle of the field underneath the middle linebacker. Its benefit over the Cover 3 is that it only dedicates two defensive backs to deep coverage rather than three, allowing for better protection against short outside routes.


Cover 2 defense is nothing new in the coaching community. It has merely become a fad on TV to mention it since so many teams use it in some form or other.


The cover 2 is excellent against multiple-formation offenses, crossing pass patterns, vertical passes and teams that employ the West Coast offense--almost every offense in the country. Defensively, it's easier to disrupt receivers on their release off the line, and the alignment assists defensive backs in disguising their coverages. Miami has used the cover 2 for years; in 2001 it led the nation in scoring defense, largely because it gave up very few big plays--thanks to good old cover 2.

Is the Cover 2 and any version of it perfect?


Just like any defense however, Cover 2 is not without its soft spots. It is vulnerable to giving up small chucks of yardage on a consistent basis if well executed by the offense.

If a QB is given an extra 2-3 seconds he'll be able to attack the soft spots in any defense. Pressure from the front four is always the key in any defense but even more so in the Cover 2 because there usually isn't a big blitz package integrated with it.

As DraftBoy mentioned, Fewell likes to mix in a little aggressiveness into his version of the Tampa 2.

[madness]

Some people adapt the scheme to the personnel, like in Pittsburgh. Tomlin came in and is sticking with the 3-4.

Some people try to make the personnel adapt the scheme.

Jauron came in and changed things to the Tampa 2, which at the time, we had absolutely NO players that fit that scheme. Our LB's were NOT fast, our starting safeties at the time were not good Cover 2 safeties. When you thinka bout it, we changed to Tampa 2, and we had to get rid of ALL of our players on defense to fit that Tampa-2 style. The only hold overs are Crowell, Schobel, McGee and Denney. We got rid of more than half of our defense just to fit this new scheme.

We have yet to see dividends and until we do, I think it was a horrible move. Maybe if they came in and saw we had the talent in place to succeed in the cover 2, fine. But to come in and say, hey we're doing it this way and oh by the way, we have to scrap half of our players to make this shift....I just don't know about that kind of battle plan.

Last year the agrument can be made that we had less than half of the right people in place for both of the new schemes, offensively and defensively.

Tomlin will have his 4-3 version in a few years with the right personnel. He would have to make too many changes to that roster and my have decided he had the players to run the 3-4 until then.


Evidence shows that in today's NFL, a 4-3 Cover 2 works better. The personnel is much easier to find. For the 3-4, you need a big space-eating run-stuffing nose tackle, which is hard to come by. You need pass-rushing OLBs, often converted smallish DEs, and sometimes these experiments fail. And you need cornerbacks who are great at man coverage. The WR-friendly rule changes in recent years have made such skill sets rare.

[mchurchfie]

Pittsburgh has always had a pretty awesome 3-4 defense, why fix what isn't broke.

[Philagape]

San Diego's doing pretty good with a 3-4 too, not to mention the Pats

[Philagape]

And how's the team the Tampa 2 was named after doing? Not so good

[Mad Bomber]

You have to have a special type player for the DL? Two gap and three gap D-Linemen? It makes it pretty limiting with who we can bring in. It seems like we've passed on some good players because of it. Is it really worth it?
Pat Williams and/or Sam Adams in the middle of this D line would solve a lot of problems with this D. F**k the "scheme"...give me BULK.

[Philagape]

Success comes from having the right players, not the right scheme. Therefore, the priority should be to get the right players and use a scheme that fits them, not vice versa.

[OpIv37]

Pat Williams and/or Sam Adams in the middle of this D line would solve a lot of problems with this D. F**k the "scheme"...give me BULK.

you know, this post just made me think:

The reason we have smallish DT's in the Tampa 2 is because they're supposed to shoot the gaps to disrupt running plays and pressure the passer. Well our DT's don't do that effectively.

So, as long as we're not getting through the gaps, why WOULDN'T we want guys who are at least big enough to push the line and stop the run?

The DT's we have may be the prototypical ones for the system on paper, but the actual results are much different?

[mchurchfie]

Pat Williams and/or Sam Adams in the middle of this D line would solve a lot of problems with this D. F**k the "scheme"...give me BULK.
:hi5:
:fat::fat::fat::fat:

[RedEyE]

The scheme works well in threory but like someone else pointed out you have to have just the right players to implment it. IMO, Buffalo fills the roster well, but just not quite well enough.

For the most part, you need quick, versatile, disciplined players that can and will flock to the ball with urgency. The Bills current secondary seems to fit that nicely, and the LBs are actually not to far off that mark either as long as Poz moves ahead of DiGiorgio on the depth chart. The problem is, as we all know, that the defensive line needs to be persistant in stopping the run by covering the gaps and applying pass pressure at the precise momement.

If the front can contain, then the second tier needs only to allow everything underneath and protect the deep side of the field. Let's face it, a good QB can and will beat this simple zone. Allowing everything underneath might help teams march down field, but once getting into the red zone, the defensive open zones shrink and takes a bit away from the opposing offense.

The problem is that I don't get the feeling that this DL is capable of handling that kind of work load. I think they'll get beat up front forcing the SS and the LBs to step into the box, opening a steady arsenal of deep play action missles to litter the deep side of the field.

Unfortunetly, I feel the Bills O is going to have to match point for point shoot outs to stay in games this season. And, I actually perdict this Bills run defense to be worse then last season.

A trade or signing for a decent NT should have been made by now.

[Earthquake Enyart]

Fletch couldn't fill a gap or make the tackle.

[mchurchfie]

Fletch couldn't fill a gap or make the tackle.:hi5: He probably has a small Johnson too.

[shelby]

:rofl: Hater!

[raphael120]

Tomlin will have his 4-3 version in a few years with the right personnel. He would have to make too many changes to that roster and my have decided he had the players to run the 3-4 until then.

If big NT's are hard to come by, and smallish DT's are easy to come by...how come we don't have at least ONE starting calibre DT? I think both are hard to come by, you can be any fat dude (Tim Anderson) and suck at DT, and you can be any smallish DT (Triplett) and STILL not be good enough to impact anything.

[madness]

Fletch couldn't fill a gap or make the tackle.

Washington Redskins: Coaches say new linebacker London Fletcher-Baker reminds them a lot of former Bills linebacker London Fletcher, only older and slower

[justasportsfan]

You have to have a special type player for the DL? Two gap and three gap D-Linemen? It makes it pretty limiting with who we can bring in. It seems like we've passed on some good players because of it. Is it really worth it?
I've always loved Wade's D. Too bad when it was here, we didn't have an O to compliment it.

[mikemac2001]

I think the scheme can be very effective with the right players but i feel that is like any team. if you have a blitzing team you want CB's who can handle one on one. if your doing a 3-4 you want agile lb's who can attack at diff spots.

i like the tampa 2 tho, if you look at what teams have run it alot have succeeded with the right players

[raphael120]

I've always loved Wade's D. Too bad when it was here, we didn't have an O to compliment it.

Definitely wondering how Wade's going to put his mark on the Cowboys defense this year.

[justasportsfan]

Definitely wondering how Wade's going to put his mark on the Cowboys defense this year.


Bills vs. Cowboys in the sb next year.

Because Ralph is the owner of the bills, we'd probably lose it. :ill:

[baalworship]

The cover 2 is extremely frustrating to watch as a fan because it is a bend but don't break defense.

The good news is that is can also be very frustrating for the other team to have to chip and chip and chip without making a mistake in order to score a touchdown. As much as I think our personnel doesn't match the prototypical players for the scheme last year or now the results were a LOT better than I could have hoped for.


The biggest defensive stat for me to judge a team's quality is points per game.

2006 Buffalo Bills:

Team Defense
(sorted by points allowed)

|------ PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----|
PT CMP ATT YD YPP TD INT RSH YD YPR TD
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore Ravens 201 278 509 3429 6.7 16 28 367 1214 3.3 5
New England Patriots 237 294 518 3484 6.7 10 22 388 1507 3.9 11
Chicago Bears 255 328 581 3388 5.8 18 24 402 1590 4.0 7
Jacksonville Jaguars 274 294 523 3278 6.3 12 20 420 1460 3.5 14
Miami Dolphins 283 278 498 3275 6.6 22 8 461 1618 3.5 7
New York Jets 295 317 533 3452 6.5 19 16 453 2084 4.6 14
San Diego Chargers 303 307 538 3563 6.6 19 16 386 1613 4.2 13
Denver Broncos 305 326 538 3612 6.7 13 17 446 1813 4.1 13
Carolina Panthers 305 291 501 3265 6.5 22 14 449 1737 3.9 10
Buffalo Bills 311 325 514 3284 6.4 18 13 476 2254 4.7 14

Top 10 defense last year! And I know some will focus on yards given up where we ranked a much more pedestrian 19th in yards allowed.

I favor points per game as more indicative of great defenses because the great defensive minds are more focused on the end result than the yards.

New England Patriots:

Defensive Ranking:

Points Per game Yards Allowed

2006 2nd 6th
2005 17th 25th
2004 2nd 9th
2003 1st 7th

What is even more amazing is the players leading this Bills team to a top 10 ranking:

Aaron Schobel and Chris Kelsay at end (Pro-Bowler and decent DE on other side)
Larry Triplett and Kyle Williams starting at DT one veteran and a 5th round rookie
London Fletcher, Angelo Crowell, and Keith Ellison : Good players but nothing to write home about

Nate Clements and Terrence McGee at corner (One star CB and a mediocre one)
Donte Whitner and Ko Simpson 2 talented but ROOKIE safeties.

All in all I can't see what more you guys expected from the cover 2 scheme.

[Philagape]

All in all I can't see what more you guys expected from the cover 2 scheme.

Get the other team off the field so our team can score. Several opponents' late drives last year (Indy and Tennessee come to mind) resulted in little or no points but won the game because they ate up the clock. END RESULT.

Bending but not breaking means nothing if the bending takes a looooonnnnnnnng time.

[baalworship]

Your point only strengthens my argument. Our offense was terrible last year at ball control or staying on the field and improvement in that area will only help the D.

Was I happy with last years D? No, but the scheme was not the problem. We just need better players, especially at DT .

[Philagape]

Your point only strengthens my argument. Our offense was terrible last year at ball control or staying on the field and improvement in that area will only help the D.

Was I happy with last years D? No, but the scheme was not the problem. We just need better players, especially at DT .

You just agreed with my point, that the D isn't good enough. If a defense needs the offense to help that much, it sucks.

[justasportsfan]

Bending but not breaking means nothing if the bending takes a looooonnnnnnnng time.
and you don't have a Manning and a high powered O to score with the time left.

I'd rather have Wades D but I can't say that we've busted using the cover 2. We've only had it for one year. Even Wade didn't build his D in San Diego overnight.


Lovie Smiths Chicago was ranked 21 in his first year w/ the bears. We were 18 last year so it's too early to say we busted w/ the cover 2.

[Mad Bomber]

you know, this post just made me think:

The reason we have smallish DT's in the Tampa 2 is because they're supposed to shoot the gaps to disrupt running plays and pressure the passer. Well our DT's don't do that effectively.

So, as long as we're not getting through the gaps, why WOULDN'T we want guys who are at least big enough to push the line and stop the run?

The DT's we have may be the prototypical ones for the system on paper, but the actual results are much different?
Op, don't hurt yourself.... j/k

When we let Fat Pat go, our D went down the drain.

We need some big, STRONG DTs....not big, fat weak DTs like Timmy boy (I hate Anderson like I hate the stomach flu...)

Think about when we had DTs like Ted Washington, Fat Pat and Sam Adams....
We had some of the best overall Ds in the league.

I have NO confidence in our current D line...

[baalworship]

You just agreed with my point, that the D isn't good enough. If a defense needs the offense to help that much, it sucks.


My point was that the defensive scheme did well for the personnel. This thread's theme is that the cover 2 scheme needs perfection or is hard to run which I refuted.

I was happy with the scheme's performance but want a talent infusion...as do all team's fans.

[Philagape]

and you don't have a Manning and a high powered O to score with the time left.

How much time did Indy leave us? Oh yeah, NONE. Same with the first Pats game.
I don't think even Manning could pull that off.

[Philagape]

My point was that the defensive scheme did well for the personnel. This thread's theme is that the cover 2 scheme needs perfection or is hard to run which I refuted.

You did no such thing. I showed how it failed.


I was happy with the scheme's performance but want a talent infusion...as do all team's fans.


Was I happy with last years D? No

Make up your mind.

[justasportsfan]

How much time did Indy leave us? Oh yeah, NONE. Same with the first Pats game.
I don't think even Manning could pull that off.

I was agreeing with you :rolleyes:

[Philagape]

I was agreeing with you :rolleyes:

Sorry, the idea of you agreeing with criticism caused a short circuit.

[justasportsfan]

Op, don't hurt yourself.... j/k

When we let Fat Pat go, our D went down the drain.

..
I wonder if Dick Lebeau moving back to Pitts had anything to do with that too. The D actually played better when we brought him in.

[justasportsfan]

Sorry, the idea of you agreeing with criticism caused a short circuit.
I never have a problem with criticism, I do have a problem when people tell us 'YOU're WRONG' when talking about the future. ;)

[baalworship]

You did no such thing. I showed how it failed.





Make up your mind.


I did. Liked the scheme but thought the players need an upgrade. How is this so hard to understand?!

[Philagape]

I did. Liked the scheme but thought the players need an upgrade. How is this so hard to understand?!

When you say you were happy with the scheme's performance, what else does that mean? To say a scheme would succeed with better players says nothing about the scheme because that's true of any scheme, which is my point all along. Success is about having the right players, not the scheme.

[DraftBoy]

We simply lack the personnel imo at two key positions to make this D flourish and thats CB and DT. If we had one good DT to step up and consistently get into the pocket and two good-avg CB's who can cover (I dont buy the Cover 2 doesnt need good CBs garbage) then we could use alot more blitzes to be aggressive and also not worry about our defense getting torched through the air.

[baalworship]

Agreed. A real monster DT and another solid cover corner and suddenly the scheme doesn't look so bad.