Defensive coverage schemes

[BillsIsrael]

Not very knowledgeable in subtleties of defensive schemes - just read this wiki entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_defense_in_American_football which helped me a bit. My questions to those who played or coached football - is there a concept similar to basketballs "box and 1" - basically having zone coverage by 6 defenders and one corner plays man to man. This way we get the advantages of man-to-man on the offense's top weapon and he gets double teamed to which ever zone he's in so he can never really pick the soft part of the zone.

[HoofHearted]

Yes, basically every zone concept has scenarios where you will end up being man on a receiver. None of these situations are anything like what you are trying to compare to the box and 1 in basketball. It is possible to replicate the concept though, but you have to lose a guy somewhere else (defensive line) in order to do it.

[Simon]

You can have mixed coverages, which typically might be man coverage underneath and zones over the top.

Or you can flip your corners to make sure the CB you want is on the WR you want him covering (i.e. Tre White chasing Davante Adams to the other side of the field at times).

But trying to run an effective zone while pulling one of your guys to man somebody up is probably going to compromise your defense in a way that makes it not worth it. Just too many people to cover on too many parts of the field to do it efficiently, imo.

[HoofHearted]

55 minutes ago, Simon said:

You can have mixed coverages, which typically might be man coverage underneath and zones over the top.

Or you can flip your corners to make sure the CB you want is on the WR you want him covering (i.e. Tre White chasing Davante Adams to the other side of the field at times).

But trying to run an effective zone while pulling one of your guys to man somebody up is probably going to compromise your defense in a way that makes it not worth it. Just too many people to cover on too many parts of the field to do it efficiently, imo.

It's done all the time.

[Simon]

1 hour ago, HoofHearted said:

It is possible to replicate the concept though, but you have to lose a guy somewhere else (defensive line) in order to do it.

 

17 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

It's done all the time.

 

Pick one

[HoofHearted]

2 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

 

Pick one

The top quote is referring to the OPs box and 1 comment. That is not done all the time.

 

The second quote is referring to being able to play man in zone concepts other than the two man situation which you suggested. It's done all the time.

[Buffalo716]

4 hours ago, BillsIsrael said:

Not very knowledgeable in subtleties of defensive schemes - just read this wiki entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_defense_in_American_football which helped me a bit. My questions to those who played or coached football - is there a concept similar to basketballs "box and 1" - basically having zone coverage by 6 defenders and one corner plays man to man. This way we get the advantages of man-to-man on the offense's top weapon and he gets double teamed to which ever zone he's in so he can never really pick the soft part of the zone.

Yes it is... There are many combination coverages where half the field can be zone.. and the other half man

 

Or 3/4 zone and 1 guy in man depending on formation 

 

You could also have something called a palms look... Where You are pre-snap cover 4

 

But depending on the x receiver's route and the tight ends route.. it bumps the Play-to man principles.. with the safety taking the x and CB taking the outbreaking route

Edited September 27, 2023 by Buffalo716

[Simon]

Just now, HoofHearted said:

The top quote is referring to the OPs box and 1 comment. That is not done all the time.

 

The second quote is referring to being able to play man in zone concepts other than the two man situation which you suggested. It's done all the time.

 

I wasn't being clear I guess.

I was also saying (or trying to) that pulling a defender from somewhere to run a box and 1 (a tent and 1?) is probably going to compromise your defense.

[HoofHearted]

8 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

I wasn't being clear I guess.

I was also saying (or trying to) that pulling a defender from somewhere to run a box and 1 (a tent and 1?) is probably going to compromise your defense.

No doubt. You'd be playing with a light box and would have to completely change the way we fit things to accommodate the missing body. You'd basically have to end up playing it like a 3-3 stack.

10 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

Yes it is... There are many combination coverages where half the field can be zone.. and the other half man

 

Or 3/4 zone and 1 guy in man depending on formation 

 

You could also have something called a palms look... Where You are pre-snap cover 4

 

But depending on the x receiver's route and the tight ends route.. it bumps the Play-to man principles.. with the safety taking the x and CB taking the outbreaking route

Not just palms, there's pattern match variations of every coverage.

Edited September 27, 2023 by HoofHearted

[Buffalo716]

3 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

No doubt. You'd be playing with a light box and would have to completely change the way we fit things to accommodate the missing body.

Not just palms, there's pattern match variations of every coverage.

Absolutely but palms is almost specifically cover 4 match which Sean has run 

[HoofHearted]

Just now, Buffalo716 said:

Absolutely but palms is almost specifically cover 4 match which Sean has run 

It is specifically cover 4. We've also run variations of match 3 quite a bit.

[Simon]

22 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

No doubt. You'd be playing with a light box and would have to completely change the way we fit things to accommodate the missing body. You'd basically have to end up playing it like a 3-3 stack.

 

Probably some places you could get away with it but at this level I think these co-ordinators would munch your lunch real quick.

[BillsIsrael]

Thanks for all the replies - basically I got 2 a basic answers
1. It's done all the time - where man-to man is mixed with zone  - part of the files is man-to-man and part of the field is zone etc...
2. It's not really done - since it would leave the zone with only 6 men and more exploitable 
My thoughts were maybe using this concept to slow down Hill on Sunday by having him man-to -man all day long with a second defender always in the area as part of the zone to help

[GunnerBill]

Yea there are lots of ways of running comination coverage mixing man and zone. Belichick is someone who has classicly done it a lot. As others have said above the Bills have done it some with McDermott / Frazier too 

[vincec]

I assume this question is coming from musing about how the Bills D might play Miami and Tyreek Hill. Yes, NFL defenses will sometimes lock a premier CB (say Darell Revis) on the opponent’s best WR and play man /zone with the rest depending on the call. But who could the Bills possibly put on Hill that would have any hope of staying with him 1v1? Honestly, that goes for Waddle as well.
 

Belichick, as mentioned above, is well know for putting his best CB on the opponent’s second best WR and then bracketing the best one with two players. But the bills have never done this, as far as I’m aware, so I’d be expecting a variety of zones on Sunday.

Edited September 27, 2023 by vincec

[boyst]

a vey big concern for me is compromising any scheme we have to allow open lanes for the running backs to his a second level.

 

Achain and Mostert are very fast and shifty. they can 1-1 beat our DB's. if they penetrate through the DL they're going to break a run off and we will not catch them.

 

this was something i brought up and i think it was hoof hearted had asked about. a cover 2 will leave us exposed to have our slow CB's attacking across the field and uphill to the running back.

 

per hoof or whoever we haven't been running cover2 as much this year. and in the raiders game i definitely did notice that. i couldn't see enough vs. the jets (which was atypical considering rapp being in the box often) and vs. the redskins i didn't get a chacne to see it much.

 

a cover3 or 4 could press what seems like man coverage against the the outside WR.

[HoofHearted]

8 hours ago, BillsIsrael said:

Thanks for all the replies - basically I got 2 a basic answers
1. It's done all the time - where man-to man is mixed with zone  - part of the files is man-to-man and part of the field is zone etc...
2. It's not really done - since it would leave the zone with only 6 men and more exploitable 
My thoughts were maybe using this concept to slow down Hill on Sunday by having him man-to -man all day long with a second defender always in the area as part of the zone to help

Speaking to your specific scenario of running something similar to the box and 1 concept - it's not something that can be done all game long.

 

Generally speaking in regards to football coverages there are multiple ways to be able to man a receiver out of zone coverages that don't involve pulling a player out of the front. Hope that clears things up for you.

[HoofHearted]

3 hours ago, boyst said:

this was something i brought up and i think it was hoof hearted had asked about. a cover 2 will leave us exposed to have our slow CB's attacking across the field and uphill to the running back.

 

a cover3 or 4 could press what seems like man coverage against the the outside WR.

I still don't know what you mean by this. Corners won't chase crossers in 2.

 

I assume we'll likely Cloud whichever side Tyreek is on and play Quarters to the other when we want to sit in coverage. If they get into 3x1 sets with Tyreek at 2 or 3 we'll likely lock our Corner on #1 and play Cloud to the interior two receivers. This guarantees we always have help over the top on him. If we want to bring 5 man pressures we'll roll 3. I don't see us playing much man outside of the redzone unless we're in 2 Man.

Edited September 27, 2023 by HoofHearted

[HoofHearted]

On 9/27/2023 at 10:08 AM, HoofHearted said:

I still don't know what you mean by this. Corners won't chase crossers in 2.

 

I assume we'll likely Cloud whichever side Tyreek is on and play Quarters to the other when we want to sit in coverage. If they get into 3x1 sets with Tyreek at 2 or 3 we'll likely lock our Corner on #1 and play Cloud to the interior two receivers. This guarantees we always have help over the top on him. If we want to bring 5 man pressures we'll roll 3. I don't see us playing much man outside of the redzone unless we're in 2 Man.

Cover 1, I'm ready to enter contract negotiations whenever you are 😉.

[MAJBobby]

Here is what Bills ran alot of against Miami.

 

Palms or Cathy coverage concepts. 

 

https://www.xandolabs.com/the-lab/defense/coverage/two-high-coverage-structures/palms-and-cathy-coverage-adjustments-to-open-sets/

 

https://steelersdepot.com/2017/05/film-room-keith-butlers-palms-coverage/

 

https://throwdeeppublishing.com/blogs/news/one-coverage-that-solves-a-ton-of-problems

Edited October 2, 2023 by MAJBobby