Cover 2 in KC?

Ralphy Boy · 12-26-2004, 07:35 PM

Before last week's game, on KCFX, I think it was Mitch H, said something to the effect that because of the new enforcement of the 5 yard rule, KC should consider employing the Cover 2 scheme, pointing to Tampa & their Cover 2 being the #1 rated D against the pass.

You can't argue with his statement and after hearing it I gave it some thought and it does appear that some changes have already been made, with possibly more to come. Benny Sapp has gotten more PT lately & McCleon is back to starting. Bartee seems to have lost quite a bit of his PT to Sapp, so his days appear numbered. Typically it's smaller CB's like McCleon & Sapp who excel in that type of scheme so their increased PT could be a signal of changes in the philosophy of our D.

Thoughts?

Some food for thought; I was looking at some stats and found this interesting, we have allowed a league high 4,221 yards passing this season for 281.4 yards, however we only allowed a 59.9 completion % which is good for the #13 ranking. Our passing yards allowed per attempt are 8.6 compared to the next closest, Oakland at 8.21.
I'm not an expert by an stretch and really don't know, but that sounds to me like our CB's haven't been getting the safety help they need deep. DV has pointed out in the past that we allow too many big plays, which we all say "No $h!t" to, but I think our #1 issue is safety.

FringeNC · 12-26-2004, 07:41 PM

GR ran the cover-2. Indy, the D that we have shredded twice in the last year, runs the cover-2.

It's a scheme. It doesn't work miracles. We tried it with this group, and it failed.

Hammock Parties · 12-26-2004, 07:41 PM

Nein. The #1 issue is still corner. Yes the safeties haven't played well (TREAT OTHER PEOPLE THE WAY THAT YOU WANT TO BE TREATED). But the corners have been in man coverage and got roasted. That ain't the safeties problems.

If we can get a stud at LDE and Siavii can beat out Sims in training camp next year, a Cover 2 would work well (provided we ALSO get someone to play linebacker opposite Fujita). The main thing is getting a good pass rush from the front 4 in cover 2. It worked well in Tampa Bay because Simeon Rice and Warren Sapp were awesome.

Ralphy Boy · 12-26-2004, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoatCheese

Nein. The #1 issue is still corner. Yes the safeties haven't played well (TREAT OTHER PEOPLE THE WAY THAT YOU WANT TO BE TREATED). But the corners have been in man coverage and got roasted. That ain't the safeties problems.

If we can get a stud at LDE and Siavii can beat out Sims in training camp next year, a Cover 2 would work well (provided we ALSO get someone to play linebacker opposite Fujita). The main thing is getting a good pass rush from the front 4 in cover 2. It worked well in Tampa Bay because Simeon Rice and Warren Sapp were awesome.

Maybe we shouldn't be playing "man coverage" if our CB's aren't effective at it. Maybe if they had safety help, they wouldn't be getting roasted.

Regarding Tampa, Sapp isn't there this year and they as a team have only 5 more sacks than us. We are #7 in sacks on the season, Thanks Jared Allen.

Scary thought, I wonder how GR's scheme would have done THIS YEAR, given the new enforcement of the rule.

**Rausch** · 12-26-2004, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralphy Boy

Maybe we shouldn't be playing "man coverage" if our CB's aren't effective at it. Maybe if they had safety help, they wouldn't be getting roasted.

Maybe if we got better corners, who CAN play man coverage we'll do fine.

DV got the players he wanted, to fit his offense, his way. Gun should do the same...

WilliamTheIrish · 12-26-2004, 08:26 PM

Don't forget that Tampa has Derek Brooks. A LB that runs faster than any CB on our roster.

He gets into that underneath coverage pretty quick.

Chiefs Pantalones · 12-26-2004, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

Maybe if we got better corners, who CAN play man coverage we'll do fine.

DV got the players he wanted, to fit his offense, his way. Gun should do the same...

agree

Chief Faithful · 12-27-2004, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilliamTheIrish

Don't forget that Tampa has Derek Brooks. A LB that runs faster than any CB on our roster.

He gets into that underneath coverage pretty quick.

Excellent point, the cover 2 does require above average speed and skill at MLB. Mitchell has the speed, but not the skill. Maz has the skill, but not the speed.

Second, the Chiefs need better performance at safety, corner, and pass rush to be effective at cover 2. Cover 2 is a defense that is good if the talent is top notch. If not it is a defense prone to give up big plays. Bottom line, the Chiefs do not have enough talent on defense to play cover 2.

Personally, I really like what Gun is accomplishing on defense. It has been slow, but they are getting better every week. Even Mitchell is improving. Give Gun more time and he will improve the defense. Forget the Cover 2 crap, which was a mainstay of the Robinson debacle.

Mr. Laz · 12-27-2004, 11:27 AM

Robinson tried to run zone coverage almost his entire time here. It failed miserably.

either nobody knows how to teach zone techniques or our players just suck.

Warfield is definately not a zone type guy

Calcountry · 12-27-2004, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralphy Boy

Before last week's game, on KCFX, I think it was Mitch H, said something to the effect that because of the new enforcement of the 5 yard rule, KC should consider employing the Cover 2 scheme, pointing to Tampa & their Cover 2 being the #1 rated D against the pass.

You can't argue with his statement and after hearing it I gave it some thought and it does appear that some changes have already been made, with possibly more to come. Benny Sapp has gotten more PT lately & McCleon is back to starting. Bartee seems to have lost quite a bit of his PT to Sapp, so his days appear numbered. Typically it's smaller CB's like McCleon & Sapp who excel in that type of scheme so their increased PT could be a signal of changes in the philosophy of our D.

Thoughts?

Some food for thought; I was looking at some stats and found this interesting, we have allowed a league high 4,221 yards passing this season for 281.4 yards, however we only allowed a 59.9 completion % which is good for the #13 ranking. Our passing yards allowed per attempt are 8.6 compared to the next closest, Oakland at 8.21.
I'm not an expert by an stretch and really don't know, but that sounds to me like our CB's haven't been getting the safety help they need deep. DV has pointed out in the past that we allow too many big plays, which we all say "No $h!t" to, but I think our #1 issue is safety.

I agree, on at least one of the plays v the Raiders, the camera caught just how far out of position our safety was. Funny, I don't even know the foos name.

htismaqe · 12-27-2004, 11:50 AM

6 in one, one-half dozen in the other...

Cover 2 works just fine, if you have the personnel for it.

Man or cover-1 works just fine, if you have the personnel for it.

The problem is that we don't have the personnel for EITHER. Our safeties suck and can't play cover 2. Our cornerbacks suck and can't play man.

Besides, who cares who ranks #1 against the pass? The only thing that matters is where you rank against the run.

Mr. Laz · 12-27-2004, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Besides, who cares who ranks #1 against the pass? The only thing that matters is where you rank against the run.

i hope that's sarcasm...

Chief Faithful · 12-27-2004, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

6 in one, one-half dozen in the other...

Cover 2 works just fine, if you have the personnel for it.

Man or cover-1 works just fine, if you have the personnel for it.

The problem is that we don't have the personnel for EITHER. Our safeties suck and can't play cover 2. Our cornerbacks suck and can't play man.

Besides, who cares who ranks #1 against the pass? The only thing that matters is where you rank against the run.

Agreed. Any way you dice it the Chiefs need help in the secondary more than any positions.

Calcountry · 12-27-2004, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

Maybe if we got better corners, who CAN play man coverage we'll do fine.

DV got the players he wanted, to fit his offense, his way. Gun should do the same...

Now if Al Saunders can just stop making stupid calls at critical times.

Was I the only one that thought we should have ran the ball with 2:40 to go and it 3rd and 4???

No, we pass, and Trent fumbles.

Chief Faithful · 12-27-2004, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunnytrdr

Now if Al Saunders can just stop making stupid calls at critical times.

Was I the only one that thought we should have ran the ball with 2:40 to go and it 3rd and 4???

No, we pass, and Trent fumbles.

No, your not alone, but that is what you get with an agressive offensive minded team. We have seen many successful pass plays in critical positions with Trent at the helm so I'm not going to question the play calling. Al Saunders has proved to be outstanding.

I don't miss the days of 3 yards and a cloud of dust with Jimmy Raye.

12-26-2004, 07:35 PM
Ralphy Boy MVP Join Date: Aug 2001 Casino cash: $10004900	Cover 2 in KC? Before last week's game, on KCFX, I think it was Mitch H, said something to the effect that because of the new enforcement of the 5 yard rule, KC should consider employing the Cover 2 scheme, pointing to Tampa & their Cover 2 being the #1 rated D against the pass. You can't argue with his statement and after hearing it I gave it some thought and it does appear that some changes have already been made, with possibly more to come. Benny Sapp has gotten more PT lately & McCleon is back to starting. Bartee seems to have lost quite a bit of his PT to Sapp, so his days appear numbered. Typically it's smaller CB's like McCleon & Sapp who excel in that type of scheme so their increased PT could be a signal of changes in the philosophy of our D. Thoughts? Some food for thought; I was looking at some stats and found this interesting, we have allowed a league high 4,221 yards passing this season for 281.4 yards, however we only allowed a 59.9 completion % which is good for the #13 ranking. Our passing yards allowed per attempt are 8.6 compared to the next closest, Oakland at 8.21. I'm not an expert by an stretch and really don't know, but that sounds to me like our CB's haven't been getting the safety help they need deep. DV has pointed out in the past that we allow too many big plays, which we all say "No $h!t" to, but I think our #1 issue is safety.
Posts: 5,088

12-26-2004, 07:41 PM	#2
FringeNC MVP Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: NC Casino cash: $1536014	GR ran the cover-2. Indy, the D that we have shredded twice in the last year, runs the cover-2. It's a scheme. It doesn't work miracles. We tried it with this group, and it failed.
Posts: 10,173

12-26-2004, 07:41 PM	#3
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4430478	Nein. The #1 issue is still corner. Yes the safeties haven't played well (TREAT OTHER PEOPLE THE WAY THAT YOU WANT TO BE TREATED). But the corners have been in man coverage and got roasted. That ain't the safeties problems. If we can get a stud at LDE and Siavii can beat out Sims in training camp next year, a Cover 2 would work well (provided we ALSO get someone to play linebacker opposite Fujita). The main thing is getting a good pass rush from the front 4 in cover 2. It worked well in Tampa Bay because Simeon Rice and Warren Sapp were awesome. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,667

12-26-2004, 08:26 PM	#6
WilliamTheIrish Champion Golfer Of The Year Join Date: Aug 2001 Casino cash: $5800607	Don't forget that Tampa has Derek Brooks. A LB that runs faster than any CB on our roster. He gets into that underneath coverage pretty quick.
Posts: 34,659

12-27-2004, 11:27 AM	#9
Mr. Laz Don't Tease Me Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: KS Casino cash: $11047037	Robinson tried to run zone coverage almost his entire time here. It failed miserably. either nobody knows how to teach zone techniques or our players just suck. Warfield is definately not a zone type guy __________________
Posts: 95,626

12-27-2004, 11:50 AM	#11
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	6 in one, one-half dozen in the other... Cover 2 works just fine, if you have the personnel for it. Man or cover-1 works just fine, if you have the personnel for it. The problem is that we don't have the personnel for EITHER. Our safeties suck and can't play cover 2. Our cornerbacks suck and can't play man. Besides, who cares who ranks #1 against the pass? The only thing that matters is where you rank against the run.
Posts: 100,022