PDA

View Full Version : Your Thoughts on the Cover 2


'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 06:51 AM
I hate it.

I hated it in Tampa, and I hate it here. I can't imagine a worse scheme for any defensive coordinator to design. It's not a "scheme" at all, basically it says--go make a play. It's the easiest defense to exploit for weak-armed quarterbacks (due to the soft middle). The Cover 2 requires so much talent to work correctly that unless you are coaching the NFC Pro Bowl roster, you're f*cked.

I'm also infuriated by the fact that we are implementing a system that does not fit the talents of our players. We don't have Cover 2 LBs, and we don't have Cover 2 DT's.

Look at the difference between the Bears D and the Philly D. Philly can switch out nearly anyone and their defense still gets it done. The Bears lose Tommy Harris and Mike Brown and now they are a sieve.

KC-TBB
01-08-2007, 06:53 AM
No...but I believe we have a Head Coach that is going to stubbornly stick to whatever he likes...no matter if it works or not.

Silock
01-08-2007, 07:04 AM
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the system provided you have the players to run it. We need to upgrade the DTs and LBs aside from DJ. So, that's at least 4 players needed in the offseason to really run it like it needs to be (maybe 3 if Keyaron Fox can learn to tackle and take Bell's spot).

Skip Towne
01-08-2007, 07:07 AM
The Spinner is much more entertaining.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 07:22 AM
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the system provided you have the players to run it.

John Lynch, Derrick Brooks, Warren Sapp, a young Booger McFarland, Ronde Barber, Simeon Rice....

Brian Urlacher, Mike Brown, Nathan Vasher, Tommie Harris, Lance Briggs, Alex Brown....

Do you realize how much talent you need to make this scheme *work*??

morphius
01-08-2007, 07:23 AM
I didn't mind it this week, because we actually played up on the WR and occasionally even attempted some bumping. But lining 10 yards off of the guy is awful no matter how you do it.

Silock
01-08-2007, 07:28 AM
John Lynch, Derrick Brooks, Warren Sapp, a young Booger McFarland, Ronde Barber, Simeon Rice....

Brian Urlacher, Mike Brown, Nathan Vasher, Tommie Harris, Lance Briggs, Alex Brown....

Do you realize how much talent you need to make this scheme *work*??

Yeah, I get it, and we have talent. DJ, Hali, Allen, Page, Pollard, Surtain, Law... that's 7 of the 11 players you need. Yes, we'll need some fresh blood on the corners within the next 2 years, but Law and Surtain are more than capable of starting and playing well provided we get a decent pass rush out of our front 4 on a consistent basis.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 07:31 AM
Yeah, I get it, and we have talent. DJ, Hali, Allen, Page, Pollard, Surtain, Law... that's 7 of the 11 players you need. Yes, we'll need some fresh blood on the corners within the next 2 years, but Law and Surtain are more than capable of starting and playing well provided we get a decent pass rush out of our front 4 on a consistent basis.

And given DJ's speed in blitzing situations , Bell's proven ability to rush the quarterback (but liability in coverage), and Law and Surtain's ability to man up against a WR, wouldn't it stand to reason that this team is constructed to play a man-blitzing scheme so that the DT's don't cause us to get gashed in the passing game??

trndobrd
01-08-2007, 08:38 AM
And given DJ's speed in blitzing situations , Bell's proven ability to rush the quarterback (but liability in coverage), and Law and Surtain's ability to man up against a WR, wouldn't it stand to reason that this team is constructed to play a man-blitzing scheme so that the DT's don't cause us to get gashed in the passing game??


But Herm runs a cover-2 defense.

HonestChieffan
01-08-2007, 08:42 AM
It works if you have the players but to use Cover 2 regardless is insane. Thats Herms problem...he bought the system but no speakers. Herm would buy dvds and no player, hold em up to the light and say he can see the movie.

FringeNC
01-08-2007, 08:56 AM
I hate it.

I hated it in Tampa, and I hate it here. I can't imagine a worse scheme for any defensive coordinator to design. It's not a "scheme" at all, basically it says--go make a play. It's the easiest defense to exploit for weak-armed quarterbacks (due to the soft middle). The Cover 2 requires so much talent to work correctly that unless you are coaching the NFC Pro Bowl roster, you're f*cked.

I'm also infuriated by the fact that we are implementing a system that does not fit the talents of our players. We don't have Cover 2 LBs, and we don't have Cover 2 DT's.

Look at the difference between the Bears D and the Philly D. Philly can switch out nearly anyone and their defense still gets it done. The Bears lose Tommy Harris and Mike Brown and now they are a sieve.

It was designed to stop yards after catch for West Coast offenses. To a large degree, WCO do rely on that. It just leaves the middle of the field to wide open. Cover-2 defenses look really good when the DTs get pressure. If they don't, you get Indianapolis, who only look good against teams that don't use playbooks.

Extra Point
01-08-2007, 09:17 AM
Defensive schemes are down-and-yardage dependent. The cover 2 is great for 1st downs. This weekend, Indy got a whole ton of them! It should be renamed "Five out, slant in!"

htismaqe
01-08-2007, 09:36 AM
I LOVE zone defense.

The problem is that zone defense requires INTELLIGENCE and DISCIPLINE, and we don't have it.

I personally hate Gunther's blitz scheme...it's smoke and mirrors.

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 09:37 AM
Best defensive scheme we've had in years. And it showed in the playoffs.

We get a defensive tackle and an outside linebacker and we'll get this rocket ship goin' up!

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 09:39 AM
The problem is that zone defense requires INTELLIGENCE and DISCIPLINE, and we don't have it.
.

Getting rid of Wesley and Bell will make a big difference...and probably Lenny Walls, too.

KCJohnny
01-08-2007, 09:39 AM
No...but I believe we have a Head Coach that is going to stubbornly stick to whatever he likes...no matter if it works or not.

That's what DV did in 2001 with Ramifization. Maybe it will be gangbusters in '08... :shrug:

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 09:40 AM
Law would get completely abused in a man-coverage scheme BTW.

htismaqe
01-08-2007, 09:53 AM
Getting rid of Wesley and Bell will make a big difference...and probably Lenny Walls, too.

We're gonna go through some growing pains with Pollard and Page, but it's time to put them in. Show Sammy the bench and Wesley the door...

el borracho
01-08-2007, 09:55 AM
As we played it, I'm not a fan. With an exceptional front four, we would all be fans. We need at least 2 DTs to make this thing go.

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 09:56 AM
We're gonna go through some growing pains with Pollard and Page, but it's time to put them in. Show Sammy the bench and Wesley the door...

I agree 100%, although Knight would be a good backup.

el borracho
01-08-2007, 09:59 AM
Getting rid of Wesley and Bell will make a big difference...and probably Lenny Walls, too.
Really, you were unhappy with Walls' performance? I thought he was a huuuuge upgrade over Sapp.

htismaqe
01-08-2007, 10:00 AM
I agree 100%, although Knight would be a good backup.

That's why I said show him the bench.

Chiefnj
01-08-2007, 10:21 AM
I don't mind Wesley. He still likes to hit. Get some pressure up front and all of the players in the secondary will look better. Let Wesley, Page and Pollard all fight it out for the two starting spots.

Bowser
01-08-2007, 10:40 AM
I agree 100%, although Knight would be a good backup.

He's be on kick/punt coverage, then. Does he still have the speed to pull it off?

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 10:46 AM
He's be on kick/punt coverage, then. Does he still have the speed to pull it off?

Knight's been on the kick coverage team all year I think.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 11:25 AM
As we played it, I'm not a fan. With an exceptional front four, we would all be fans. We need at least 2 DTs to make this thing go.

Look at Philly's front four. They aren't nearly as talented as the Chiefs, nor are their linebackers. The difference is that their scheme works with the strength of their D, a strong secondary. Ours exacerbates our greatest weakness, the DTs, MLB and idiot FS.

B_Ambuehl
01-08-2007, 12:28 PM
The cover 2 requires a good front 7 and makes up for a weak secondary. The man on man scheme requires good front 4 and back 4...take your pick really.

The funny thing is our personnel this year was much better suited to run Gun's blitz happy scheme.

Fishpicker
01-08-2007, 01:49 PM
I like the Tampa 2 but we play that as the base defense way too often. It works best when you mix it up with blitzes. Gun and co. got into the habit of playing Tampa 2 by default during the second halves of a lot of football games this year. I think we're married to this defense for as long as we start the Law/Surtain tandem

I think one of the major problems we had this year was the CBs ran a bit too far with the WRs and we wound up with gaping holes in the flat/sideliness. (possibly due to the CBs not fully trusting the safeties to help over the top.) ala Cleveland Browns

The safeties weren't out of position as much as in previous years yet Wesley and Knight do not have adequate footspeed to cover half the field. this is especially true when they are brought down in to the box for run support. I hope a changing of the guard can improve our deep zone coverage. Pollard and Page will experience some growing pains but we should let them learn on the job for the sake of 2008. If we scheme correctly those 2 should show some immediate dividends.

so in short I think our secondary can get by while we retool our interior defense over the next 2 years. But by then we will need to upgrade both corners.

Mecca
01-08-2007, 01:53 PM
It takes ungodly talent to run a cover 2 in this day an age......or your the Colts on defense.

Hell USC runs in it college but they probably have as much talent back there as NFL teams and PC has a much more blitzing style cover 2 than we do....maybe Herm should take some notes from them.

petegz28
01-08-2007, 01:53 PM
You have a good down 4 and the cover 2 can work fine.

cyborgtable
01-08-2007, 02:46 PM
This probably isn't new to most of you but the cover two is a defense predicated on speed, pure speed. It wants to create penetration with its quick defensive lineman blowing up running plays in the backfield forcing the runner to juke and dance while the rest of the defense swarms to him without him being able to escape. It is great if you have a quick front four, don't have to be great just quick. The corners are supposed to bump and take the quick passes away while the d-line applies pressure, it is a great system when run correctly and you can blitz from it effectively as well if you have scouted your opponents passing game well enough. Finally, it really shouldn't be called the "Tampa 2" because its original use was the steel curtain of the Steelers superbowl teams

Simplex3
01-08-2007, 02:48 PM
I hate all "systems" with a passion. You should design your s**t to work with the guys you have that year.

cyborgtable
01-08-2007, 02:52 PM
Constantly designing after your players will leave you without a goal to achieve player wise, knowing a system and wanting to implement it are a good thing to do but you must alter it to the talent you have and get your players. KC didn't bump enough to get the cover two to work and the DT's weren't good enough at pash rushing to make it work either.

Silock
01-08-2007, 04:20 PM
And given DJ's speed in blitzing situations , Bell's proven ability to rush the quarterback (but liability in coverage), and Law and Surtain's ability to man up against a WR, wouldn't it stand to reason that this team is constructed to play a man-blitzing scheme so that the DT's don't cause us to get gashed in the passing game??

I don't think Bell will be here next year.

But the addition of two good, young safeties should say something.

Silock
01-08-2007, 04:21 PM
I hate all "systems" with a passion. You should design your s**t to work with the guys you have that year.

Learning a new system every year is BAD. Consistency is good.

suds79
01-08-2007, 04:23 PM
No preference. I think if the players are good enough, they'll make almost any system look good.

DTLB58
01-08-2007, 05:15 PM
I ABSOLUTELY hate it ever time I see one of our corners just let the WR run by him and the pass is completed between the CB and the safety, stupid,stupid,stupid! It's like the QB is just playing catch with the freaking WR.

To easy, It should NOT be that easy in the NFL to catch a pass. The D scheme is soft and it sucks.

IMO any D scheme or coordinator that is not having DJ rush the QB more is not right! We all saw the hit DJ put on Plummer last year, that man has to meet the opposing QB's much more often. DJ's talents are being wasted in this D.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 05:43 PM
I ABSOLUTELY hate it ever time I see one of our corners just let the WR run by him and the pass is completed between the CB and the safety, stupid,stupid,stupid! It's like the QB is just playing catch with the freaking WR.

To easy, It should NOT be that easy in the NFL to catch a pass. The D scheme is soft and it sucks.

IMO any D scheme or coordinator that is not having DJ rush the QB more is not right! We all saw the hit DJ put on Plummer last year, that man has to meet the opposing QB's much more often. DJ's talents are being wasted in this D.

It has too many weaknesses that can easily be exploited by even average offenses. Have a TE run a flag route while your strong side WR runs a deep out and see what happens---and that's on the f*cking outside, the supposed strength of the D. Any QB who is decent on his intermediate throws will eviscerate a Tampa 2.

Personally, I think Mecca's adulation of Coach Fredo is misplaced, but his assertion that you need an ungodly amount of talent to run the Tampa 2 is correct.

What Tampa 2 team this year didn't have a glaring deficiency in either pass or run D this year? The answer: none...even the Bears w/ Harris and Brown were susceptible to the run.

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 05:55 PM
We all saw the hit DJ put on Plummer last year, that man has to meet the opposing QB's much more often. DJ's talents are being wasted in this D.

ROFL

That's hilarious, considering DJ had 4.5 sacks this year and 2 last year.

htismaqe
01-08-2007, 06:03 PM
Look at Philly's front four. They aren't nearly as talented as the Chiefs, nor are their linebackers. The difference is that their scheme works with the strength of their D, a strong secondary. Ours exacerbates our greatest weakness, the DTs, MLB and idiot FS.

Patterson at DT is more talented than all of our DT's, starters and backups, put together.

htismaqe
01-08-2007, 06:06 PM
This idea that DJ is being wasted if he's not blitzing the QB is just sad...

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 06:23 PM
Patterson at DT is more talented than all of our DT's, starters and backups, put together.

So are the stray hairs on my taint.

Their D-line is subpar as a unit. Kearse is wildly overrated, always injured, and one dimensional when healthy. They have a lot of holes on the line, but can still get it done.

Mecca
01-08-2007, 06:24 PM
Look at Philly's front four. They aren't nearly as talented as the Chiefs, nor are their linebackers. The difference is that their scheme works with the strength of their D, a strong secondary. Ours exacerbates our greatest weakness, the DTs, MLB and idiot FS.

You don't really think this do you......

Phillys Dline includes...Darren Howard, Trent Cole, Mike Patterson, Broderick Bunkley, Jerome McDougle, Darwin Walker and Lajuan Ramsey.....that's a ton of first round picks and a ton of talent. Bunkley doesn't even start for him and everyone on this board would have loved to have had him in last years draft.

Then you throw in Kearse and it's a very deep talented unit.

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 06:25 PM
Subpar as a unit?

They have two outstanding defensive tackles and Darren Howard is AT LEAST Hali's equal at DE. Trent Cole is vastly underrated.

Count Zarth
01-08-2007, 06:26 PM
You don't really think this do you......

Phillys Dline includes...Darren Howard, Trent Cole, Mike Patterson, Broderick Bunkley, Jerome McDougle, Darwin Walker and Lajuan Ramsey.....that's a ton of first round picks and a ton of talent. Bunkley doesn't even start for him and everyone on this board would have loved to have had him in last years draft.

Then you throw in Kearse and it's a very deep talented unit.

Bingo!

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 07:50 PM
You don't really think this do you......

Phillys Dline includes...Darren Howard, Trent Cole, Mike Patterson, Broderick Bunkley, Jerome McDougle, Darwin Walker and Lajuan Ramsey.....that's a ton of first round picks and a ton of talent. Bunkley doesn't even start for him and everyone on this board would have loved to have had him in last years draft.

Then you throw in Kearse and it's a very deep talented unit.


Did you see their run defense this year...at all? I mean, at all?

By your logic, shouldn't our D-Line have been awesome when Sims Freeman Downing and Siavii were here, since we had a #6 overall and two other 2nd rounders (since a ton of 1st rounders is apparently what matters judging from the tone of your post)??

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-08-2007, 07:57 PM
FWIW, Cole 5th Round, Patterson USC guy (I'm sure you're objective), Howard 2nd Rounder and a solid, but not a great player by any means, Bunkley was drafted based on his bench #s, Walker was a third rounder, Ramsey is another USC guy (6th rounder), and McDougle has worse career numbers than Ryan Sims, a tackle per game, and 3 sacks in 4 years.

There is little depth there, and not much talent. All the #1's have either been busts (McDougal), are unproven (Bunkley), or are always hurt and are 1 dimensional (Kearse).

At least the Chiefs have DTs who are decent against the run.

htismaqe
01-08-2007, 09:28 PM
Sorry but you're wrong. The Philly defensive line is VERY talented.

cdcox
01-08-2007, 09:46 PM
I like it in the redzone. Once you get down there, a zone becomes very effective because that gap between the corner and the deep safety shrinks to zero with the short field. In the middle of the field, I'd prefer a scheme that challenges the offense a little more.

TinyEvel
01-08-2007, 11:33 PM
No...but I believe we have a Head Coach that is going to stubbornly stick to whatever he likes...no matter if it works or not.

Sadly, frustatingly, I think you're right. :banghead:

DaWolf
01-08-2007, 11:38 PM
Uhh, it's better than GRob's "spinner" d?

Honestly, any defense can look good with talent. It's when you don't have talent that the scheme comes into play big time to try and hide those deficiencies. We didn't really see a pure cover-2 this year because, well, we don't have the personnel to play a solid pure cover-2. So it was a hybrid.

I really don't care about what defense we run as long as it stops opponents and creates turnovers...

RedThat
01-09-2007, 12:11 AM
I dont mind the scheme because it's a very sound scheme and it increases the defense chances of preventing the BIG play. The only thing I dont like about it, is, it's not an aggresive style of defense.

I just think if you look at our defense as a whole, we build it totally opposite of how a cover 2 is supposed to built. We have 2 good corners, 2 good defensive ends, and a good OLB.

But you really have to have a good line to make a cover 2 bode well, and also a good MLB, and safeties. I think that the biggest problem with our defense. We dont have a strong middle. Thats something REALLY essential if you want to run a cover 2 defense.

If we can build the middle of our defense, you'll see the cover 2 scheme at its best.

Rausch
01-09-2007, 05:41 AM
Like it now but I'd love it with two REAL DT's...

ck_IN
01-09-2007, 08:14 AM
Actually the cover 2 is a defense thats supposed to hide a lack of talent at certain positions.

It requires a good front 4, at least one hard hitting LB and a ground covering safety. The CBs can be average since they get safety help be design and the MLB has to be fast and able to pass cover. The SOLB only has to funnel the play back inside and keep contain on the edge.

Our problem is that we're built for more of a man to man pressure style of D. We have entirely the wrong people for this style of D.

I'm not a fan of the defense since it can be toasted by a TE or slot WR running a deep post however it's not the worst D scheme in the world.

Chiefnj
01-09-2007, 08:20 AM
I wonder if the Buckeye fans like the cover 2 this morning.

dj56dt58
01-09-2007, 08:24 AM
Sorry but you're wrong. The Philly defensive line is VERY talented.
Talent doesn't mean shit without the desire to utilize it. Ryan Sims is talented or he wouldn't be in the NFL, and he wouldn't have been playing in division 1. It's the desire to continue to improve that separates great players from fat worthless lazy pieces of shit like Sims

Chiefs_Fan
01-09-2007, 08:28 AM
We should give it another year. Get some players more players that can run it and we'll be fine.

It really worked pretty well for a new system in the first year!

Chris Meck
01-09-2007, 01:24 PM
I don't think we have entirely the wrong personnel, just inferior personnel in a few spots.

I believe that to run a cover 2 effectively, you MUST have a strong front four. We have 2, at DE, but not a single strong DT. Reed and Edwards are depth guys, not starters, and Sims is a BUST of Trezelle Jenkins' sized proportions.

For the record, you pretty much need a strong front four to run any defense effectively.

You also need fast, agile LB'ers; we have one for sure in DJ, and really probably 2 with Mitchell. Bell is a terrible cover 2 backer and is really suited only as a blitzbacker in a 4-3. That's what Gun wanted him for, and the reason he's here-but that was a system ago. We've changed systems 4 times in 6 years; which leaves you with a hodgpodge of personnel. We're pretty close, though, really, to having the right type of guys to run this one. In my opinion, we should stick with it.

We need two quick, disruptive DT's, and one OLB. We need to start Pollard and Page at S. Reed, Edwards, and Wilkerson need to be rotational players only, and should not all be on the field at the same time.

I disagree that a good QB can just pick apart a cover 2 that is run correctly; the middle of the field is difficult to read and as long as you have a consistent pass rush a QB will make mistakes. Hell, Manning had a rough time of OURS, and it's been well noted that we're lacking in the personnel.

Chris

Mr. Laz
01-09-2007, 01:57 PM
i think it's curious that we picked the cover 2 defense because the key pieces of that scheme we haven't been able to draft ... the DT.

a powerful defensive line and rangy safeties ... the very things we lack and we pick that scheme to run.

ouch


hopefully Herm will be better at spotting talent along the defensive line.

Mecca
01-09-2007, 01:57 PM
i think it's curious that we picked the cover 2 defense because the key pieces of that scheme we have been able to draft ... the DT.

a powerful defensive line and rangy safeties ... the very things we lack and we pick that scheme to run.

ouch


hopefully Herm will be better at spotting talent along the defensive line.

It's because CP had to hire Herm and Herm is stubborn about running "his defense". He tried to run it in NY when they had 3-4 players.

HemiEd
01-09-2007, 02:14 PM
Did you see their run defense this year...at all? I mean, at all?

By your logic, shouldn't our D-Line have been awesome when Sims Freeman Downing and Siavii were here, since we had a #6 overall and two other 2nd rounders (since a ton of 1st rounders is apparently what matters judging from the tone of your post)??


You need to get with the Chiefs Planet lexicon. If the Chiefs draft them they are bad and over rated. If someone else drafts them they are great. (or something like that)

KCJohnny
01-09-2007, 02:21 PM
You need to get with the Chiefs Planet lexicon. If the Chiefs draft them they are bad and over rated. If someone else drafts them they are great. (or something like that)

Its not a lexicon; its the PPL.
:D

J Diddy
01-09-2007, 02:25 PM
i think it's curious that we picked the cover 2 defense because the key pieces of that scheme we haven't been able to draft ... the DT.

a powerful defensive line and rangy safeties ... the very things we lack and we pick that scheme to run.

ouch


hopefully Herm will be better at spotting talent along the defensive line.

What are you talking about?

There is no greater talent available then our own "Jelly Doughnut" Sims and Eric "overachiever for a year that leads him to guaranteed contract for life" Hicks

Chief Faithful
01-09-2007, 02:34 PM
When the Chiefs run the Cover 2 as well as it was run in Tampa 5 years ago then I will love it.

I was encouraged by how the defense performed against the Colts. Put a couple top notch DT's on the line and the defense will be impressive.

Easy 6
01-09-2007, 03:42 PM
There is nothing wrong with the Tampa2, even missing some key guys our 2 had manning rolling his eyes & talking to himself. The goal line stand we gave'em was brilliant.

This 2 we run is very close to being perfectly functional.

Allen - No words necessary

Hali - Guy was only a rook, just WAIT!!!

DJ - Things change DRASTICALLY without him.

Page - Needs to work on tackling, other than that he's well on his way.

Pollard - provided he continues to learn the scheme.

Law - He proved his worth in my eyes, just has to be used correctly.

Kawika - Laugh if you want, but Gun has faith in him for a reason. He's learning yet another system too. He's also quite fast for a MLB, anyone remember him running down the seam with moss. He will get better.

Surtain - My $$$ says he will be better in 07, he was learning a new scheme as well.

So when you break it down like that, the only glaring hole is at DT, raise your hand if you DONT think we will find one???

htismaqe
01-09-2007, 04:50 PM
Talent doesn't mean shit without the desire to utilize it. Ryan Sims is talented or he wouldn't be in the NFL, and he wouldn't have been playing in division 1. It's the desire to continue to improve that separates great players from fat worthless lazy pieces of shit like Sims

The Eagles have both talent AND desire. See Mike Patterson.