For thinkers and strategists only! I've been thinking about a new "base" defensive front seven modeled on the 34. It's kind of outlandish, and is an inversion of premises on the DL. OK here's the normal alignment: OLB..ILB....ILB..OLB ....DE....NT....DE.... And here's the one I've been thinking of: OLB..ILB....ILB..OLB ....NT...DT....NT.... To be specific, in order to see this thing not in the abstract: Pace..Harris..Barton..BT ...Jenkins..Ellis..Cody... Terrence Cody is the tackle for Alabama, a monster. 6'5" 365. 2010 draft. Or lets take a player more commonly known, Vince Wilfork. Pace..Harris..Barton..BT ...Jenkins..Ellis..Wilfork... How do you attack this defense from a philosophical standpoint? You run up the middle? Well, the nose tackles are still controlling two gaps, as in the normal 34. But now they're controlling the A and B gaps to either side. They are playing on the nose of the offensive guard, between a 2-tech and a 3-tech, lets say a 2.5 tech. They can play in ant one of these - the 2, 2.5, or 3 techs. They can pinch upfield to shade the OG trying evade him inside. However now you have two mammoth guys controlling the outside of the center point. Not only that but unlike in a 43, the 34 has two ILBs stepping into the A or B gaps. Yes, the NG, Ellis, is playing a 0 or 1 tech, but that IMO is a red herring. Any runs up the middle will be such a mad pile up that you're talking about a 3 yard gain at the most. And a bounce to the outside is a bounce way outside, around a 360 lb Nose Tackle, into a 275 lb OLB... You run off tackle or pitch it outside? The tackle flanked outside controlling the B gap will push upfield to cut down lateral movement, including pulling Guards, and the contain man, the OLB will pinch to contain or blow up the play. Remember the NT is going to be much stronger at the POA and be harder to move than a normal DE. Obviously they may need to be "longer" NTs like Jenkins that are not 6'1" guys with short arms, although I am not sure. They still need to maintain leverage and must be able to keep the OL hands off their pads. The advantage of this defensive posture is that it creates via what I call tandemization, an exponential increase in leverage. The sheer weight and power being brought to bear on the OL, although the DL is setting a trap with potentially a gap shooting DT or DE lined up at 0 or 1 tech over Center, paralyzes the OL into trying desperately to stretch the field laterally. I think that is the point of this defense. The middle is a red herring. An OL will not find much success attacking up the middle. Not with two mountains over Guard, shading outside or, more likely, inside, and with two ILBs ready to attack, in a layer right behind them. This isn't even getting creative with this Front 7. There's a lot to say as far as stunting and alignment on passing downs. And run blitzes on running downs. The Offense will be forced to try misdirection and trap plays and to try wild stretch plays and the like. What does the armchair Defensive Coordinator in you think about this?
So all you need for this strategy is Kris Jenkins and Vince Wilfork. Sounds reasonable. Without top tier NT's I think this strategy fails across the board. Even with Jenks and Wilfork, the big men get worn down a lot easier than a standard DE would. Consistently attacking the perimeter would probably wear them down a lot quicker than if they were playing NT. The C gap requires one to cover more ground than the A or B gaps. Over the course of a game your talking about asking very large mammals to cover much more real estate than they're conditioned to. The DE is going to be getting physically abused inside. That will quickly wear him down. If anything, I'd prefer to do with 3 NT's instead of putting DE inside. Interesting idea, but without extraordinary athletes (better than Jenx and Wilfork) at both DE positions I don't see it working out over the course of a game or especially a season. If used very occasional and with the right athletes maybe it would cause problems during a game. I wouldn't mind seeing an attempt at it. I don't think the Jets could do it with there current personnel very often with success though. It would have to be used in run situations and/or against statue like QBs though. In pass situations with at least one OLB in coverage the QB would have an easy scramble to the opposite side of the rushing OLB. That's my drunken take.
Fair enough. But Wilfork is a FA after this year. All it would take is the balls to go out and do something like this and play the to Mountain Men in the same DL at the same time. BY the way, the DE/DT in the middle has never been so well protected by two NTs on either flank. It isn't the same situation as a NT getting the same abuse with two DEs on either flank...
tackles often move outside on rushing downs and ends move inside on passing downs. On running downs, you want one thing, on passing downs, another.
sounds like you need a lot of depth at NT as the big guys can't play every snap... and where's the pass rush in the spread? you have OLB's covering, and you have NT's rushing, or do you sub in DE"s on pass plays?
Forget about signing Wilfork. The Jets have around $1 Million in cap space right now, I think a little below. My main concern with your strategy is endurance over the course of a game and season. Used sparingly in the right situations I can see it being useful but never as a base defense.
I understand the concept but you would alspo need to have some fast ilb to contain the cutbacks that would be available on the pitches and tosses to the outside . the NTs are lining up on the guards which means occasionally the tackle will get a one on one chance with the olb. No matter how good your olbs are, the other teams tackles are getting paid to play as well so if the nt cant hit the tackle on the sweep toss or pitch it could be a big gain. I like the formation but it needs some work, good thinking. I think one of the mlbs would have to be a david harris and the other like an undersized mlb/ oversized safety someone with speed to lead the way almost like running a 3-3-1-4 if that makes any sense _______(FS)__________(combo(ss/mlb)_________(SS) _________(OLB/DE)____(MLB/hard hitter)_____(OLB) (CB)_____________(NT)____(DE)____(NT)______________(CB) 1) De is responsible for 1 on 1 with center (0 tech) will create great pass rush up the middle if you have a tall guy can block passing lanes and stop moble qbs from running up the gut. 2) Mlb is responsible for both a gaps a guy like harris should be able to take care of this easily 3) NT is lining up over guard so responsible for B gap but also crashing in on a gap when a run (2 1/2 tech like you said) 4) OLB/DE is responsible for the 5 gap or outside. basically cracking the tackle every play 5) this allows your playmaker ss/mlb like a vilma guy to move around freely. taking over on cutback lanes and utilizing his speed and tackling skills. 6) with all these holes almost covered, the safeties can now have their view of the field and come in on the outside runs and patrolling the outside in general because the mlb/ss has the middle 3rd of the field and is fast enough to cover tes and wrs over the deep middle (posts) -basically the mlb is a gap stuffer who loves taking on guards and fbs. hes your crazy smashmouth lb. (baitman from replacements) -the combo guy is a tackling machine whos fast and agile see cato june, younger derrick brooks, lofa tatupu, jon vilma, patrick willis, demorrio williams or a john lynch maybe. this guy will probably be racking up 15 tackles a game. -if you think about it there are alot of these guys in the draft great tacklers with speed but are just undersized lbs who weigh 220 215 that no one knows what to do with. maybe im crazy cuz its 230 but i think this could work
I agree that it's tough to find dominant monster NTs, and that it'd be hard to have similar backups to spell them. I disagree that the DE would get abused inside for the reason that the DE is a 'DT' in this alignment and he'd go one on one with a center seeing how two NTs each take a G and T. If you could ever get suitable personnel for this I'm sure someone would put it to work because that is going to win the trench battle often. Too bad it's just really hard to find NTs that can move at the required size these days.
Run a middle screen all day. Let the big men in, they won't be able to get back and chase a RB. By that time the LB's have moved onto other coverage responsibilities. Interesting concept though.
thats why my concept works, the mlb will help taking on the blocks and your combo guy can come in and make the stop.
the 34 isn't a gap-shooting penetration defense as far as the line is concerned. the line's role is gap integrity and making it's "fits". the DL won't be let in, because they aren't shooting gaps...they are maintaining discipline........sorry.
i understand you totally the 3 dlineman are simple pushing the o lineman back rather than trying to get around them. more of a total bull rush almost, but in a conservative matter so they arent caught out of position
in a pure read and react 34 like we run, the DL doesn't bull rush....they maintain discipline. the pass rushers bull rush and whatever...the OLBs....
Since we constantly opt to drop our LBers back in coverage, then we would have no pass rush whatsoever. QBs will have all day to pass and find an open target. If we decided to blitz the OLBs to create a pass rush - then the flats are wide open. This defense would shut down the run completely - but make our pass defense even worse.
First off, nice to see some inteligent Footballtalk here. It?s been a while. I think the Concept has some potential, I said before, that I would love to see what a 34 DL of Haynsworth-Jenkins-Ngata could do. But that?s not quite the same thing, that you are talking here. Ngata and Haynsworth are exeptionally quick and mobile for their Size, which would make this one run pretty much like a normal 34. What you are trying to do ist to simply overpower the OL on the outside and force them to put extra guys on those big bodys, which would create a lot of open space and lanes for the DE/DT and the LBs to come up big. But I see some big problems, because they are just lacking speed. From a OC perspective, here?s what I would do: 1. Run it right at those big guys. Sounds strange, but if you think about it, It?ll probably work. One play to use, would be a simple Blast. I would leave the backside NT and the backside OLB unblocked, he?s not quick enough to make that play, and I get an additional blocker. From a simple I-Formation, the blocking would be Backside-OT-> ILB; Backside-OG->DT/DE; C->ILB; Playside-OG and Playside-OT->Doubleteam on the NT; TE->OLB; I then have a OL on both ILB and the FB is free to either help with the NT or help the TE with the OLB. The RB can either squeeze throu inside the C or he can bouce it outside. If the backside NT is quick enough and makes the tackle, the first time i run it, I just stend the FB out there, he doesn?t have a chance, but it should buy enough time for the RB to get throu. Another play to run it at them is the Blast, where the Backside-OG will pull over and kick out the NT, or at least seal the edge, for the RB to slip throu the 3/4-Hole. As another way to run the Ball, I would simply take advantage of their lack of mobility, with Draws and Sweeps. In the passinggame, Screens, Rollouts and Bootlegs will be a big problem. And you can basically completely forget about Zone-Blitzing (not that Sutton would know what that is, thou). to summ it up, in the NFL, the lack of speed from the DE position, which would come with your sceme will kill you. The other problem is, that those guys will wear down pretty fast, especially when keept on their Heels with Draws, Screens and Boots. And the D will probably break down in the 4th quater on a regular basis.
Ok, I see the point but pose this question. If the front 3 are maintaining their position, are you always sending the 2 outside LB's? This would work into the German guy's strategy of running a draw play with no one on the outside corners after the LB's come in.
And you would need both NTs to be able to stay on the field for a large portion fo every game. Because as soon as one is taken out, and replaced with anything but a powerful NT who can control two gaps, you have a huge weakness on one side of the D. Additionally, NTs are able to control two inside gaps all the time, but don't think that controlling a gap between C & G is the same as controlling a gap between G & T. Tackles are taller, stronger and heavier, and usually much better at extending their arms and controlling the movement of a defensive player. Any team with a big, powerful T is going to dog this defense, as if even one NT fails to control two gaps, the middle comes WIDE open. Also, a pulling G and an outside running play would probably give this D fits as well, as NTs don't get up field as quickly as DEs, which means, given the T slows the Nt down, the RB can attack the line earlier, and have more space to make a move, sometimes with a G one-on-one with the OLB. One more point is that DEs just aren't built to play NT. Take a 6'5 285lb guy like Shaun Ellis and put him in the middle, and what do you get? A whole lot of cut blocks, and not enormous piles because of his lac of power. You marginalize his speed, and his passrushing technique by putting him on the inside. It's an interesting idea, but there are just too many ways in which it can fail...
