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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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

[Carlton Bailey]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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.

I'm tired of seeing our LBs drop back at the snap, a little more aggressiveness would be nice.

[duhbilz]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

I hate the 3-4.

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

[duhbilz]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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

[North_Coast]

Re: This defensive scheme is a pain in the butt

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.