Dr. Zonelove, or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Blitz

[Hubbs]

With the acquisition of the dancin’-est sack artist since Warren “Badunkadunk” Sapp, we’ve suddenly transformed our defensive line from a run-stuffing unit that occasionally pressures the quarterback to one of the best pass-rushing groups in the NFC. Naturally, with his background in the ubiquitous Cover 2, Greg Blache must have chortled with joy when he heard about yesterday’s trade, and gone galumphing back to his old Chicago playbook. After all, the Redskins had finally put together a line capable of generating enough pressure to successfully run a two-deep scheme – so why not do so?

The answer lies with the seven guys playing behind Taylor & Co. As much as the prodigious pass rushers of the league’s best Cover 2 defenses have been hyped up in recent years, the scheme relies on more than just getting to the quarterback in three seconds or less. The middle linebacker, for example, has a huge responsibility – one London Fletcher is ill-suited for. As the Cover 2 spread throughout the league with the success of the Bucs, offenses responded by finding bigger, faster, and stronger tight ends to attack the traditional weakness of the Tampa design – the deep middle. To prevent this, the middle linebacker is supposed to cover any receiving threat that attacks that area of the field. Some, like Brian Urlacher, are very good at this task, because they’re fast enough to keep up with the Jason Wittens of the world, and also big enough to compete with the ball. London Fletcher, for all his fantastic qualities, is neither. He was fast enough a few years ago, but doesn’t quite have that top gear anymore. And he simply isn’t tall enough to go up for balls against tight ends who routinely have half a foot on him. London is best used close to the line of scrimmage, allowing his superb instincts to stop any attacks on the first five-ten yards past it.

HH’s mancrush, Reed Doughty, is another glaring hole in the Cover 2. He played very well in the box last year, but was lost the few times he was forced into deep coverage. Doughty simply isn’t that type of safety, and would be constantly attacked by opposing offenses if used to cover a deep half of the field. Moreover, his supposed competition, Stuart Schweigert, is a below-average player at best. He’s only a superior option to Doughty for the Cover 2 in the way that Sam Brownback is a superior option to Sarge for a gay pride speech. Relying upon either Doughty or Schweigert to defend the deep ball is creating a hole in our defense that need not exist.

Also, let’s not forget that one of the primary strengths of our defense the past few seasons has been stopping the run; not surprisingly, our worst performance in that area was in 2006, when we ran the Cover 2 much more frequently than we did in 2005 or 2007. Presumably, reverting to using the Cover 2 as our primary defense in 2008 would result in a similar dropoff, if not worse – let’s not forget that our linebacking corps has injury problems of its own right now. We also don’t know how well Jason Taylor is going to play the run in Daniels’ position.

Before the Taylor trade, this defense was built for a blitz-heavy Cover 1 scheme in every single way. Now, this defense is built for a blitz-heavy Cover 1 scheme with the added benefit of excellent pass rushers up front. Consider, for a moment, our secondary – even assuming that Carlos Rogers will take the traditional two years to fully recover from an ACL tear, and therefore not be very effective this season, we have one of the best collections of cornerbacks in the conference. Shawn Springs and Fred Smoot are an excellent tandem, and the winner of the Leigh Torrence/Justin Tryon camp battle should be an above-average nickel back. More importantly, we have a safety in LaRon Landry who is uniquely talented when it comes to the necessary speed and size for roaming center field and reacting to deep attacks from sideline to sideline. Putting Springs, Smoot, and Torrence in man coverage with Landry providing help over top will ultimately result in fewer deep completions than keeping two safeties back in a deep zone.

With Landry back in the Cover 1, everyone’s favorite University of Northern Colorado alum will be freed up to do what he does best – stay near the line and punish any back dumb enough to run towards a guy named “Doughty.” London Fletcher will also be more effective against the run, because draw plays against the Cover 2 would cause him to start running backwards to cover the tight end, only to have to change direction five yards too late to try to stop the back. And the blitzes themselves will be more effective with Taylor on the line, because even if they’re successfully picked up, the number of rushers means that 2006’s DPOY is most likely facing only a single blocker – which means he’ll quickly make his way to the quarterback.

I know Greg Blache is very tempted by the Cover 2 right now. He has the line to use it, a line he didn’t have 24 hours ago. But this defense is still not built for that philosophy, and implementing it will cause more harm than good. Don’t do it, Greg. Get creative and blitz for four quarters. Your defense will thank you for it.

[FanboyOf91]

Nice read with some very good points. Worth thinking over as the preseason develops.

[Morneblade]

Blache isnt a blitzer though. That was Williams. Still, we're a better defense than we were 24 hours ago.

[fnkdctr(007)]

Wow good points i hope we continue to mix it up

[Roger.Staubach]

Good job on this and I couldn't agree more.

[Oldskool]

I know Greg Blache is very tempted by the Cover 2 right now. He has the line to use it, a line he didn’t have 24 hours ago. But this defense is still not built for that philosophy, and implementing it will cause more harm than good. Don’t do it, Greg. Get creative and blitz for four quarters. Your defense will thank you for it.

The cover 2 in this defense was the brainchild of the fevered mind of Gregg (the extra G is for genius) Williams. He insisted on running the cover 2 when we were absolutely ill suited to do so.

Fletcher has a height disadvantage for roaming the center of the field.

Doughty really is more of a close to the LoS player than a roaming safety.

Carlos Rogers is not a zone cover CB

And most importantly, our D-line (previous to 7/20/08) was not able to apply pressure with 4 down lineman.

These are all serious impediments to running a successful scheme.

As I said last year, we are better off Cover 0 and Cover 1 style defenses. This is only made more clear now that we have 2 DE's that cause mismatches and more O-lineman being occupied.

[Hubbs]

The cover 2 in this defense was the brainchild of the fevered mind of Gregg (the extra G is for genius) Williams. He insisted on running the cover 2 when we were absolutely ill suited to do so.

Yeah, I didn't mean any of the Cover 2 we've run here when I mentioned Blache's background. I meant his time as Chicago's defensive coordinator, where he was known as a Cover 2 guy.

[SkinSince87]

I wonder if they considered Carlos as a safety until he is back 100%

[Oldskool]

Yeah, I didn't mean any of the Cover 2 we've run here when I mentioned Blache's background. I meant his time as Chicago's defensive coordinator, where he was known as a Cover 2 guy.

Sadly Blanche loves the cover 2. Hopefully he lacks the arrogance that Williams had and can see that this team is ill suited to run it as we stand defensively.

[tone_dubbz]

Blache is infamous for running the cover 2. Lets hope he changes his ways and starts coming up with some new blitz packages.

[NewAgeSkins]

wow, you'd think that with 13,377 posts on a redskins messageboard, you'd be able to spell his name correctly... (***** hint: lose the "n" *****)

[Oldskool]

wow, you'd think that with 13,377 posts on a redskins messageboard, you'd be able to spell his name correctly... (***** hint: lose the "n" *****)

Wow you'd think with 230 something posts, you'd be seasoned enough to bring something to the discussion that was relevant.

I suppose not. :doh:

[redman]

Also, let’s not forget that one of the primary strengths of our defense the past few seasons has been stopping the run; not surprisingly, our worst performance in that area was in 2006, when we ran the Cover 2 much more frequently than we did in 2005 or 2007. Presumably, reverting to using the Cover 2 as our primary defense in 2008 would result in a similar dropoff, if not worse – let’s not forget that our linebacking corps has injury problems of its own right now. We also don’t know how well Jason Taylor is going to play the run in Daniels’ position.

The rest of your post is fine, but I have to take issue with this. The problems we had in 2006 - indeed, the whole reason to start using the Cover-2 at all in the middle of that season - had to do with injuries, not with a scheme. We were decimated and weren't stopping much of anything, and we were getting killed with big passing plays downfield. The solution was to address the Achilles heel which were those big pass plays, which consequently led to a weakened run defense. It didn't help, of course, that we usually were behind, and consequently our opponents were running the ball down our throat anyway to kill the clock at the end of the game.

Anyway, using 2006 as some sort of measuring stick isn't valid here.

[Morneblade]

The cover 2 in this defense was the brainchild of the fevered mind of Gregg (the extra G is for genius) Williams. He insisted on running the cover 2 when we were absolutely ill suited to do so.



I actually think Blache was more responsible for it than Williams. Blache ran the hell our of it in Chicago, and I dont dont remember Williams every running it in Tenn. or Buffalo.

[Oldskool]

I actually think Blache was more responsible for it than Williams. Blache ran the hell our of it in Chicago, and I dont dont remember Williams every running it in Tenn. or Buffalo.

As the D-coord, it was his say as to what defense was being played. Therefore he gets the blame for it. :D

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I'll be pulling what little hair I still have out if we sit back and play Cover 2 this season. The only chance this team has to win is based on this defense acting like Norse raiders encountering an undefended monestary along the English coastline.

[Hubbs]

The rest of your post is fine, but I have to take issue with this. The problems we had in 2006 - indeed, the whole reason to start using the Cover-2 at all in the middle of that season - had to do with injuries, not with a scheme. We were decimated and weren't stopping much of anything, and we were getting killed with big passing plays downfield. The solution was to address the Achilles heel which were those big pass plays, which consequently led to a weakened run defense. It didn't help, of course, that we usually were behind, and consequently our opponents were running the ball down our throat anyway to kill the clock at the end of the game.

Anyway, using 2006 as some sort of measuring stick isn't valid here.

I disagree, and one part of your post gives it away - you said we started using the Cover 2 in "the middle" of the 2006 season. We didn't. We were clinging to it from day one. It was the reason we lost our opener against the Vikings - remember how they converted virtually every third down with a deep throw down the middle? It was because we ran a Cover 2 the whole game. Gregg became enamored with it for whatever reason, and it brought down every facet of our defense.

The very few times he reverted to a man-to-man Cover 1 or Cover 0, we miraculously pulled strong defensive performances out of nowhere, including shutting down what was the league's #1 offense at the time, New Orleans.

[Hubbs]

I'll be pulling what little hair I still have out if we sit back and play Cover 2 this season. The only chance this team has to win is based on this defense acting like Norse raiders encountering an undefended monestary along the English coastline.

I was temporarily bald after the 2006 season. Nothing is more frustrating than watching us run the same ineffective defense over and over and over and over again.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I was temporarily bald after the 2006 season. Nothing is more frustrating than watching us run the same ineffective defense over and over and over and over again.

Yes there is something more frustrating than that.....

Watching an ineffective offense go 3 and out after that ineffective defense has allowed the other team to march down the field for a TD.

BTW - Get ready to see it again in 2008-09.

[Hubbs]

Yes there is something more frustrating than that.....

Watching an ineffective offense go 3 and out after that ineffective defense has allowed the other team to march down the field for a TD.

BTW - Get ready to see it again in 2008-09.

Let me guess - assuming the worst about nearly every part of the team?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Let me guess - assuming the worst about nearly every part of the team?


No. Realizing that your assumptions about how bad the team is don't even do justice to how bad they really are.

[thesubmittedone]

Very nice read, and it shows you put plenty of thought into it.


But I disagree with your fundamental point and thesis.

Greg Blache has said he'll do whatever the personnel he has dictates him to do. He specifically said he will not be tied down to any scheme. If Fletcher can be the Cover 2 middle LB and Reed Doughty improves enough to become a good enough deep safety, then he'll use it until it doesn't work.

Not to take away from your very well thought out thread, but we really have nothing to go on besides that. You've made a thread with a thesis that is nothing more than an assumption at best and an ill-advised misunderstanding at worst.

I'd still like to thank you for a quality thread though. You, my friend, are awarded five stars simply for thinking things through. I wish most of us here could say the same thing about 90% of the threads they start.

[Morneblade]

Let me guess - assuming the worst about nearly every part of the team?

No, he assumes the worst about every part of the team, not "nearly" all of it. :D

[Morneblade]

As the D-coord, it was his say as to what defense was being played. Therefore he gets the blame for it. :D

Normally I would 100% agree. But then I heard that Blache was calling about 60% of the defensive plays last year.

[Hubbs]

But I disagree with your fundamental point and thesis.

Greg Blache has said he'll do whatever the personnel he has dictates him to do. He specifically said he will not be tied down to any scheme. If Fletcher can be the Cover 2 middle LB and Reed Doughty improves enough to become a good enough deep safety, then he'll use it until it doesn't work.

Not to take away from your very well thought out thread, but we really have nothing to go on besides that. You've made a thread with a thesis that is nothing more than an assumption at best and an ill-advised misunderstanding at worst.

To quote the skull-chasing Dr. Jones, I've heard that bedtime story before.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

No, he assumes the worst about every part of the team, not "nearly" all of it. :D

In the last decade and a half I've been completely and totally correct in doing so; as evidenced by the lack of a fourth Lombardi Trophy.

[Hubbs]

In the last decade and a half I've been completely and totally correct in doing so; as evidenced by the lack of a fourth Lombardi Trophy.

"Completely and totally correct" is a slight overstatement; being the 7th-best team in the league, for example, does not equate to being a horrible team.

[Morneblade]

In the last decade and a half I've been completely and totally correct in doing so; as evidenced by the lack of a fourth Lombardi Trophy.

Incorrect. If we had gone 0-16 for the last 15 years, you'd have a serious point. Even if we had finished dead last every year, but still managed to win a few games perseason, you'd have a point.

But when you're even "average" and winning about as much as your loosing, your not doing EVERYTHING wrong. Your doing about 50% right.

Did you ever play sports MSF?

[NewCliche21]

Great points, and I think that a Cover One defense = win for us. I loved it last year.

[Oldskool]

Normally I would 100% agree. But then I heard that Blache was calling about 60% of the defensive plays last year.

His name was on the door, he had the title. That makes him responsible.

I believe that and 11 men on the field during the Bills game ensured his departure from DC.

Either way, I hope we stick with a cover 1 defense this year.

[Morneblade]

His name was on the door, he had the title. That makes him responsible.

I believe that and 11 men on the field during the Bills game ensured his departure from DC.

Either way, I hope we stick with a cover 1 defense this year.

I'd like to see more man to man, personally.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

"Completely and totally correct" is a slight overstatement; being the 7th-best team in the league, for example, does not equate to being a horrible team.

We will have to respectfully disagree on that.


Incorrect. If we had gone 0-16 for the last 15 years, you'd have a serious point. Even if we had finished dead last every year, but still managed to win a few games perseason, you'd have a point.

My point is that the players, coaches, and fans of 31 NFL teams waste a year of their careers/lives every year.


But when you even "average" and winning about as much as your loosing, your not doing EVERYTHING wrong.

Did you ever play sports MSF?

Yes I did play sports, for a little while as a kid. Very poorly in fact because I have very little athletic ability. That's where I learned a whole lot about losing. I learned that I'd rather not play than lose. I tried out for the football team in high school and that ended with a right knee injury just before I would have been cut. I ended up doing all the score-keeping and statistical work for the high school football and baseball teams. It took me to a state championship game in football (we got slaughtered), and got me a state championship ring for baseball. Taught me a little about the difference between Winning and losing. Something that I've never forgotten.

[jferraro]

We will have to respectfully disagree on that.



My point is that the players, coaches, and fans of 31 NFL teams waste a year of their careers/lives every year.



Yes I did play sports, for a little while as a kid. Very poorly in fact because I have very little athletic ability. That's where I learned a whole lot about losing. I learned that I'd rather not play than lose. I tried out for the football team in high school and that ended with a right knee injury just before I would have been cut. I ended up doing all the score-keeping and statistical work for the high school football and baseball teams. It took me to a state championship game in football (we got slaughtered), and got me a state championship ring for baseball. Taught me a little about the difference between Winning and losing. Something that I've never forgotten.


this just got weird

[Oldskool]

I'd like to see more man to man, personally.

Cover 1 basically is man to man with the FS out playing center field. That is, as much as I understand of it :D

The LB's SS and CB's all line close to the LoS to either blitz or to handle a specific receiving threat.

[kingofdaroad99]

In my opinion cover 1 forces the issue, while in cover 2 your waiting for the offense to make a mistake and then capitalize on it. I prefer the cover 0 and cover 1 no matter who the personell is.

[ArmchairRedskin]

Nice thread, but I really gotta give you props on the title. Nicely done, Hubbs.

[Hubbs]

His name was on the door, he had the title. That makes him responsible.

I believe that and 11 men on the field during the Bills game ensured his departure from DC.

Either way, I hope we stick with a cover 1 defense this year.

I think you might have switched from Blache to Williams within your post.

[Morneblade]

Yes I did play sports, for a little while as a kid. Very poorly in fact because I have very little athletic ability. That's where I learned a whole lot about losing. I learned that I'd rather not play than lose. I tried out for the football team in high school and that ended with a right knee injury just before I would have been cut. I ended up doing all the score-keeping and statistical work for the high school football and baseball teams. It took me to a state championship game in football (we got slaughtered), and got me a state championship ring for baseball. Taught me a little about the difference between Winning and losing. Something that I've never forgotten.

That is what I remembered, but I wanted to make sure. I'm not sure what you seemed to pick up on about winning and loosing, but I'm glad I have a slightly different outlook on it. I played several sports in high school and a couple in college, but after 1 shoulder and 2 back injuries I learned that when all is said and done....

It's just a game. The actual importance of anything anyone does on the field equates to nothing in the real world. Play hard, play clean and give 110%, but it's not life or death. It's a game. It's supposed to be fun. And if you play to the best of your abilities, win or loose, you have nothing to be ashamed of.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

That is what I remembered, but I wanted to make sure. I'm not sure what you seemed to pick up on about winning and loosing, but I'm glad I have a slightly different outlook on it. I played several sports in high school and a couple in college, but after 1 shoulder and 2 back injuries I learned that when all is said and done....

It's just a game. The actual importance of anything anyone does on the field equates to nothing in the real world. Play hard, play clean and give 110%, but it's not life or death. It's a game. It's supposed to be fun. And if you play to the best of your abilities, win or loose, you have nothing to be ashamed of.

See, to me it's not just a game. Maybe it's because I have so little natural athletic talent. Maybe it's because I was on some of the worst youth soccer and little league teams in the history of sports. Maybe it's because my two younger brothers are so athletically gifted (both played soccer on the collegiate level). A lot of it probably has to do with my "control" issues. Whatever combination of things it is, I learned at a young age that losing sucks. Especially when it's pretty much what happens every time you try something. Most especially when you're losing to your brothers who are two and three years younger than you every time as well. Eventually you learn that it's better to just not play than to run that risk of losing again. It's even carried over into my adult life with my hobbies and interests. If I don't pick something up quickly, I just quit it. I don't see the point.

To me sports are not about fun. That's why I'd never coach kids even though it's been suggested to me in the past (baseball). To me they're as serious as a heart attack and with my temper I run the risk of blowing up every time I turn a sporting event on or go to see one in person.

[shzaskinsfn]

Mass....get yourself some professional help

[Peregrine]

Actually, I think Blache will use the cover 2, and use it well.

But thats not because hes going to run it every play. Very few defenses can be successful running the same look every play. The whole cover-1 vs cover-2 arguement is moot, because we will be switching between them, and other schemes in any given game. We will mix up the blitzes, the looks, the zones, the man to man. Its how successful defenses work, confusion.

[Morneblade]

Actually, I think Blache will use the cover 2, and use it well.

But thats not because hes going to run it every play. Very few defenses can be successful running the same look every play. The whole cover-1 vs cover-2 arguement is moot, because we will be switching between them, and other schemes in any given game. We will mix up the blitzes, the looks, the zones, the man to man. Its how successful defenses work, confusion.

I think it's best to play to your player's skills, and not mix it up just to mix it up. We dont look good in cover 2

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Mass....get yourself some professional help

Been tried in the past. Didn't work. Wouldn't work now. So it's a moot point.

[Hubbs]

Actually, I think Blache will use the cover 2, and use it well.

But thats not because hes going to run it every play. Very few defenses can be successful running the same look every play. The whole cover-1 vs cover-2 arguement is moot, because we will be switching between them, and other schemes in any given game. We will mix up the blitzes, the looks, the zones, the man to man. Its how successful defenses work, confusion.

Mixing it up is fine. I'm afraid of a repeat of 2006 - I think you underestimate how often we did, in fact, run the Cover 2 over and over again. I specifically watched for it because it was driving me absolutely insane.

[Hubbs]

Well, this game has me worried.

I think we need to rename the Cover 2 "Smalls," because it's killing me.