Thommy30w said:

FullyERicht said:

Thommy30w said:

When Monte Kiffin coached at USC, one of the radio guys (Petros) said the Tampa 2 wouldnt work in college because the hash marks are different than the pros. I am pretty sure we played this defense when Randy was our DC but it was a disaster at USC with one of the guys who helped invent the defense running it. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

We did not play it at all. In fact the Tampa-2 and the "Miami" 4-3 have a lot less in common than you would think.

Randy's base was 4-3 Cover 2 man under. There are differences with that defense as well.

Click to expand...

Cool. I always thought we just played cover 2 like Tampa. I was always puzzled why it worked for us and not USC. Now I know its a different defense.

Click to expand...

RiDLer80 said:

I have the same concern about our safeties in a cover-2 scheme. I don't think they're that rangy. I too worry about them on the back end. I know Richt specifically mentioned the Miami 4-3, cover-2, but to help cover for our safeties I'd like to see us run more quarters coverage. Similar to what Narduzzi did at Michigan State.

Here's an excerpt about their defense from Grantland:

Down after down, Michigan State lines up in what looks like the same basic, predictable front, with apparently the same coverage behind it: a “4-3 Over” front paired with “Quarters,” which is also known as “Cover 4.”2 The 4-3 Over is the oldest and most straightforward front in football, and it’s exactly what fans think of when they hear “4-3,” as it features four defensive linemen and three linebackers behind them. Quarters or Cover 4 coverage is a little trickier. While it’s a zone coverage, it doesn’t merely call for four defenders to drop to a deep zone, as the name might seem to imply. It’s played with considerably more nuance, particularly at Michigan State.

At a 2009 coaching clinic, Dantonio described Quarters as “tight-man in a zone coverage with good run support that self-adjusts to various formations and routes.” The key part is “self-adjusts to various formations and routes,” because MSU’s Quarters isn’t so much a single coverage or defense as it is a set of principles that allows the Spartans to handle just about anything an offense tries.3

MSU’s scheme depends on the safeties, who have to make the most adjustments. They begin much closer to the line than most teams’ safeties, usually around eight or nine yards deep, and, numbering the offense’s eligible receivers from the outside in, they look through the no. 2 receiver to the offensive line for their initial keys. If the no. 2 receiver runs past that eight-ish yard mark, he belongs to the safety in what’s essentially man-to-man coverage. But if that receiver runs a short route inside or outside, the safety passes him off to the linebackers helping underneath and becomes a “robber” player, keying the no. 1 receiver and the quarterback while trying to intercept any throws to the inside.

Full Article

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Cats3x said:

RiDLer80 said:

I have the same concern about our safeties in a cover-2 scheme. I don't think they're that rangy. I too worry about them on the back end. I know Richt specifically mentioned the Miami 4-3, cover-2, but to help cover for our safeties I'd like to see us run more quarters coverage. Similar to what Narduzzi did at Michigan State.

Here's an excerpt about their defense from Grantland:

Down after down, Michigan State lines up in what looks like the same basic, predictable front, with apparently the same coverage behind it: a “4-3 Over” front paired with “Quarters,” which is also known as “Cover 4.”2 The 4-3 Over is the oldest and most straightforward front in football, and it’s exactly what fans think of when they hear “4-3,” as it features four defensive linemen and three linebackers behind them. Quarters or Cover 4 coverage is a little trickier. While it’s a zone coverage, it doesn’t merely call for four defenders to drop to a deep zone, as the name might seem to imply. It’s played with considerably more nuance, particularly at Michigan State.

At a 2009 coaching clinic, Dantonio described Quarters as “tight-man in a zone coverage with good run support that self-adjusts to various formations and routes.” The key part is “self-adjusts to various formations and routes,” because MSU’s Quarters isn’t so much a single coverage or defense as it is a set of principles that allows the Spartans to handle just about anything an offense tries.3

MSU’s scheme depends on the safeties, who have to make the most adjustments. They begin much closer to the line than most teams’ safeties, usually around eight or nine yards deep, and, numbering the offense’s eligible receivers from the outside in, they look through the no. 2 receiver to the offensive line for their initial keys. If the no. 2 receiver runs past that eight-ish yard mark, he belongs to the safety in what’s essentially man-to-man coverage. But if that receiver runs a short route inside or outside, the safety passes him off to the linebackers helping underneath and becomes a “robber” player, keying the no. 1 receiver and the quarterback while trying to intercept any throws to the inside.

Full Article

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

For Miami to play any two high shell, the eye discipline in the secondary has to be better. It must not have been stressed with the last staff (surprise, I know). Lots of times people came wide open, due to coverage busts. 2 high doesn't need to be as rangy as a middle of the field defender (Cover 1/3) any more because of route reading.

If Michigan State can do it, Miami has the guys to do it as well. Just need better coaching.

Click to expand...

FullyERicht said:

Thommy30w said:

FullyERicht said:

Thommy30w said:

When Monte Kiffin coached at USC, one of the radio guys (Petros) said the Tampa 2 wouldnt work in college because the hash marks are different than the pros. I am pretty sure we played this defense when Randy was our DC but it was a disaster at USC with one of the guys who helped invent the defense running it. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

We did not play it at all. In fact the Tampa-2 and the "Miami" 4-3 have a lot less in common than you would think.

Randy's base was 4-3 Cover 2 man under. There are differences with that defense as well.

Click to expand...

Cool. I always thought we just played cover 2 like Tampa. I was always puzzled why it worked for us and not USC. Now I know its a different defense.

Click to expand...

Well Randy's defense was essentially grown out of the JJ defense. He learned it as the LB coach for the Dolphins under Wanstache and Jim Bates. If anyone remembers those early 2000s Phins defenses, that was what he ran at UM.

Obviously man coverage was the base, with two deep safeties. They played a matchup man coverage as well, so reading the releases of the receivers to determine which guy is yours m/m. The other major difference was how the runs fits work. In order to play man with 2 deep, your force player can't be the corner or the safety.

But they played pattern match "sink" cover 2 and sometimes Cover 1 also.

Click to expand...

Cats3x said:

RiDLer80 said:

I have the same concern about our safeties in a cover-2 scheme. I don't think they're that rangy. I too worry about them on the back end. I know Richt specifically mentioned the Miami 4-3, cover-2, but to help cover for our safeties I'd like to see us run more quarters coverage. Similar to what Narduzzi did at Michigan State.

Here's an excerpt about their defense from Grantland:

Down after down, Michigan State lines up in what looks like the same basic, predictable front, with apparently the same coverage behind it: a “4-3 Over” front paired with “Quarters,” which is also known as “Cover 4.”2 The 4-3 Over is the oldest and most straightforward front in football, and it’s exactly what fans think of when they hear “4-3,” as it features four defensive linemen and three linebackers behind them. Quarters or Cover 4 coverage is a little trickier. While it’s a zone coverage, it doesn’t merely call for four defenders to drop to a deep zone, as the name might seem to imply. It’s played with considerably more nuance, particularly at Michigan State.

At a 2009 coaching clinic, Dantonio described Quarters as “tight-man in a zone coverage with good run support that self-adjusts to various formations and routes.” The key part is “self-adjusts to various formations and routes,” because MSU’s Quarters isn’t so much a single coverage or defense as it is a set of principles that allows the Spartans to handle just about anything an offense tries.3

MSU’s scheme depends on the safeties, who have to make the most adjustments. They begin much closer to the line than most teams’ safeties, usually around eight or nine yards deep, and, numbering the offense’s eligible receivers from the outside in, they look through the no. 2 receiver to the offensive line for their initial keys. If the no. 2 receiver runs past that eight-ish yard mark, he belongs to the safety in what’s essentially man-to-man coverage. But if that receiver runs a short route inside or outside, the safety passes him off to the linebackers helping underneath and becomes a “robber” player, keying the no. 1 receiver and the quarterback while trying to intercept any throws to the inside.

Full Article

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

For Miami to play any two high shell, the eye discipline in the secondary has to be better. It must not have been stressed with the last staff (surprise, I know). Lots of times people came wide open, due to coverage busts. 2 high doesn't need to be as rangy as a middle of the field defender (Cover 1/3) any more because of route reading.

If Michigan State can do it, Miami has the guys to do it as well. Just need better coaching.

Click to expand...

Cats3x said:

RiDLer80 said:

I have the same concern about our safeties in a cover-2 scheme. I don't think they're that rangy. I too worry about them on the back end. I know Richt specifically mentioned the Miami 4-3, cover-2, but to help cover for our safeties I'd like to see us run more quarters coverage. Similar to what Narduzzi did at Michigan State.

Here's an excerpt about their defense from Grantland:

Down after down, Michigan State lines up in what looks like the same basic, predictable front, with apparently the same coverage behind it: a “4-3 Over” front paired with “Quarters,” which is also known as “Cover 4.”2 The 4-3 Over is the oldest and most straightforward front in football, and it’s exactly what fans think of when they hear “4-3,” as it features four defensive linemen and three linebackers behind them. Quarters or Cover 4 coverage is a little trickier. While it’s a zone coverage, it doesn’t merely call for four defenders to drop to a deep zone, as the name might seem to imply. It’s played with considerably more nuance, particularly at Michigan State.

At a 2009 coaching clinic, Dantonio described Quarters as “tight-man in a zone coverage with good run support that self-adjusts to various formations and routes.” The key part is “self-adjusts to various formations and routes,” because MSU’s Quarters isn’t so much a single coverage or defense as it is a set of principles that allows the Spartans to handle just about anything an offense tries.3

MSU’s scheme depends on the safeties, who have to make the most adjustments. They begin much closer to the line than most teams’ safeties, usually around eight or nine yards deep, and, numbering the offense’s eligible receivers from the outside in, they look through the no. 2 receiver to the offensive line for their initial keys. If the no. 2 receiver runs past that eight-ish yard mark, he belongs to the safety in what’s essentially man-to-man coverage. But if that receiver runs a short route inside or outside, the safety passes him off to the linebackers helping underneath and becomes a “robber” player, keying the no. 1 receiver and the quarterback while trying to intercept any throws to the inside.

Full Article

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

For Miami to play any two high shell, the eye discipline in the secondary has to be better. It must not have been stressed with the last staff (surprise, I know). Lots of times people came wide open, due to coverage busts. 2 high doesn't need to be as rangy as a middle of the field defender (Cover 1/3) any more because of route reading.

If Michigan State can do it, Miami has the guys to do it as well. Just need better coaching.

Click to expand...