Can someone please explain the way the DB's were aligned against the Jets?

[OpIv37]

Sorry for not posting this sooner but I haven't been on the comp much the past two days and this is too long to post from my phone.

I noticed the DB's were very Jauron-like: playing way too far off the line. For example, if it was 2nd and 5, the CB's were 5 yards off the line and the S's were 7 yards off the line.

There was one play in particular where I think it was a 3rd and 7. They had two WR's lined up to McCown's left. The Bills CB had the outside man and was playing off him but just inside the line of gain. The S had the inside man and was playing PAST the line of gain. I thought- " this is easy- slant to the outside man." Sure enough, when the ball was snapped, the Bills' S backpedaled even further, the inside man rubbed the Bills' CB and it was an easy slant for the first down since the S had taken himself out of the play. And that was the most blatant but it was far from the only time that something equally obvious happened.

Now, I have no football training whatsoever. I do like reading/watching stuff about X's and O's and I've learned a lot from people who actually played and know the game better than I do, but I'm a novice at best. If I can sit on my couch and find the holes in the coverage (after consuming several alcoholic beverages, no less), you can be damn sure the Jets' offensive players and coaches saw it.

This level of predictability is simply inexcusable.

[Ingtar33]

there are a lot of reasons for backing off like that. depends on the coverage. in our scheme, it's usually a sign of a cover 3 or 4 being called; or as I saw a few times, a softer man coverage with a 1 deep safety on a blitz play. There are reasons why a defense would back it's CBs off. In the case of a blitz where everyone is playing man, the lack of deep help being a good enough reason to back up the coverage a bit. In the Tampa2 the goal is to "bend" not break. which means we'll usually give that 7-10 yard completion all game long, and if the other team can win that way then they pretty much deserve it, as the defense is really only looking to capitalize on the mistakes of the offense.

and you're right, it does look obvious before the snap how you'd play it as an offense. And it is obvious. Because it is exactly the type of play our defense wants them to take. Sometimes you give the offense things in order to do other things. in most cases you give the offense some small gains in order to prevent deeper ones. or in a 2 minute drill you give the offense the middle of the field because you want the clock to run. there are times your goal isn't to prevent the first down but prevent the big play in the event your blitz doesn't get there.

[Thurmal]

My theory is that the coaches know this defense is a bit undermanned talentwise and are concentrating on not giving up the big play, while coaching the players to strip, tip passes, etc, in hopes of getting some turnovers while living under the "bend-but-don't break" philosophy. To their credit, it has worked surprisingly well, but it was only a matter of time before those +/- turnover differentials starting adjusting towards the mean.

[kishoph]

The pass defense will certainly be put to a test in the next 4 games with Brees, Rivers, Smith and Brady being the opposing QB's. It doesn't help that the pass rush has been pretty much nonexistent (with or without Dareus), Hughes has been the only threat IMO. I think Leslie Frazier needs to start putting together some blitzes to get some heat on QB's, the problem with that is Brees, Rivers and Brady are all very good against the blitz. Something has to be fixed, or the next 4 weeks could get ugly for the Bills pass defense.

[Pinkerton Security]

My theory is that the coaches know this defense is a bit undermanned talentwise and are concentrating on not giving up the big play, while coaching the players to strip, tip passes, etc, in hopes of getting some turnovers while living under the "bend-but-don't break" philosophy. To their credit, it has worked surprisingly well, but it was only a matter of time before those +/- turnover differentials starting adjusting towards the mean.

Our tackling was piss-poor in this game because, since we've had such success in causing turnovers, everyone was out there trying to play the hero and cause a fumble instead of wrapping up the ball carrier.

[Ingtar33]

To their credit, it has worked surprisingly well, but it was only a matter of time before those +/- turnover differentials starting adjusting towards the mean.

the +- turnover ratio is actually controllable to an extent.

see while defensive turnover can be amped up a bit by smart play (being schemed into the right position) it can also be amped up by sure tackling, holding up the player and actively stripping the ball. That doesn't mean they'll always come, just that the chances are higher if you work for it.

As for offensive turnovers, they almost always come when a team is playing from behind and forcing it. it's rare an offense will carelessly turn the ball over when they're not trying to gain extra yards. So simply playing with a lead will reduce the offensive turnovers. We've been playing with a lot of leads, or generally in a lot of close games where we aren't really pressured to perform on the offensive side of the ball. so turnovers haven't been a huge thing for our offense. Combined with a QB who protects the ball and a RB who rarely fumbles anyway and you get our low turnover numbers

While temporary trends do develop, I see this team doing a lot of the things which will yield a large turnover margin; so I don't think it's a fluke.

[OpIv37]

there are a lot of reasons for backing off like that. depends on the coverage. in our scheme, it's usually a sign of a cover 3 or 4 being called; or as I saw a few times, a softer man coverage with a 1 deep safety on a blitz play. There are reasons why a defense would back it's CBs off. In the case of a blitz where everyone is playing man, the lack of deep help being a good enough reason to back up the coverage a bit. In the Tampa2 the goal is to "bend" not break. which means we'll usually give that 7-10 yard completion all game long, and if the other team can win that way then they pretty much deserve it, as the defense is really only looking to capitalize on the mistakes of the offense.

and you're right, it does look obvious before the snap how you'd play it as an offense. And it is obvious. Because it is exactly the type of play our defense wants them to take. Sometimes you give the offense things in order to do other things. in most cases you give the offense some small gains in order to prevent deeper ones. or in a 2 minute drill you give the offense the middle of the field because you want the clock to run. there are times your goal isn't to prevent the first down but prevent the big play in the event your blitz doesn't get there.
I get minimizing big plays, but I don't get basically giving them first downs and allowing them to move the ball, especially since I believe we were already behind at that point.

[Ingtar33]

I get minimizing big plays, but I don't get basically giving them first downs and allowing them to move the ball, especially since I believe we were already behind at that point.

I know a few of the times our corners backed off were because a blitz was called and there was no overtop help. Of course the blitzes didn't get there, and the Jets were able to make the play for the first down consistently. Its the type of play the jets didn't make in week1.

[Wally The Barber]

The Bills are clearly playing a prevent defense

They suck