Is Cover-2 Defense Becoming Outdated? Farrar and Megatron Weigh In

Good find!

Let me add a little to it…

… One of the things that always bothers me about Bears fans calling the C2/T2 “outdated” is that they fail to recognize the underachieving players that have manned the system for the Bears for the past 4-5 years.

The C2 is your classic 2 over the top, 5 underneath, and 4 rushing defense; while your T2 is more or less your 3 over the top, 4-under defense with the MLB running with any inside vertical seam to create a 3-deep look that we would see in Cover 3.

For the past 4 (maybe 5) year, the Bears have either dealt with unmotivated (Tommie Harris), underachieving (DEs— Ogunleye?), injured (Urlacher and/or Mike Brown), or unskilled (i.e.— the secondary for the most part) players at the key positions within the system. Think of the dominance of the 2005 team with a 2nd year C2/T2 system in place and no QB or offense whatsoever in rookie Kyle Orton and Co. (the running game was a must, so it’s hard to say that there was anything else the team could rely on).

The base idea of the system is pretty simple…

… Drop seven into coverage and let your four man rush force the ball to come out with pressure — allowing the defense to rally to the football, make a tackle and get off the field. That’s why Chicago paid big money for DE Julius Peppers, the Colts rely on Dwight Freeney and the Vikings can play coverage with the pressure of Jared Allen.

What’s difficult is finding “the right personnel” to man the key positions within it. Remember— this system started in the college ranks to stop the spread offenses that were coming more and more apparent.

Key positions that are ESSENTIAL to the defense working good are:

MLB— He has to be able to run with that inside vertical throughout the route and only at the throw will he get safety help.

CBs— The corners must force an inside release where the receiver is in FRONT of the CB or in between him and the LBsor the safeties will have to widen off their landmarks, which opens holes in the deep half (This has been part of the problem with a aging Peanut Tillman and a oft-confused Danieal Manning backing him up). Plus, they have to sink deep enough to protect the safety on the 7-route that can hit the hole in the defense (another area of concern for not having the right safeties for so many years).

Outside LBs— Think Lance Briggs impact. Football Insiders has Briggs ranked as one of the top LBs in pass coverage in the NFL for his ability to read the QBs eyes and formation and adjust his zone to get underneath the play enough to make plays on the ball (i.e.— interceptions or deflections). Being able to read the coverage and make sure tackles are what’s needed from your LBs on both sides of the ball. Especially the Sam who typically lines up with the TE.

Look at these positions and you can see that for the past 4 years, the Bears have been lacking in talent and key personnel. I don’t think its the system as much as it’s the talent on the field. This is why it was a hard case for Jerry Angelo to (possibly) put blame on Smith for the lackings of the team in 2009. There was no talent on either side of the ball and the side that Angelo DID draft for…

… Was still unable to compete with teams in a system that had shown PROVEN success from within (2005, 2006) and without (SB champs Bucs & Colts).

not even sure if its justified I just like the 3-4 a lot.

Our CB seem to have consistantly failed at properly redirecting the WR, and to make it even worse we’ve never really saw fit to committ to a bump at the line to slow down the development of the play giving the front four even less time to make a play.

Basically, you’d like to see some converage sacks now and then running zone defense and I don’t think I’ve seen one in three years. Even worse, you’d like to get some impatient interceptions, and there have been relatively few of those in the past few years as well.

We’re doing a poor job at every single aspect of the defense, except usually making the tackle and generating FF, but even that has been hit and miss.

Now I have a better understanding of the cover-3, and why Megatron wants to go up against it this Sunday. Great info all the way around.

Theme of the day: any pro scheme will be successful with great players.

That our coach wouldnt force the scheme on the talent, but rather use individual talents to their fullest in an evolved scheme. There has to be change. Change as players get older. Change as players are replaced or lost. No two players are the same, so the scheme must evolve to utilize the new additions strength to their fullest.
Just saying.

but whatever defense we like to use on 3rd and long…we need to change that one.

Also, saying the defense isn’t working because the players aren’t good enough for it to succeed is a coaching failure on multiple levels. Failure to find/draft/coach players that can make the defense successful and inability to adjust to cover for those deficiencies. Considering defense (and cover/tampa two specifically) is all Lovie and Angelo are known for those failures don’t speak too well of their abilities or the Bears’ vision in keeping them employed.

That’s all they covered in the past, just 2.

Every scheme is only as good as the players who execute it.

As I’ve been saying on WCG for nearly a year, JA is awful at evaluating talent, and Lovie is equally inept at developing players.

Scheme becomes secondary when you put round pegs in square holes. Examples – D. Manning, Igunleye, C. Williams (RT last year mostly), D. Hester.

You can’t make ground beef into Filet Mignon. BUT, you can do the opposite. How many examples of cut players/traded players having phenominal success elswhere (Post Bears) do we need (or the Ownership need) before the real problem becomes apparent??

Anyone?