Your Thoughts on the Cover 2 - Page 4

'Hamas' Jenkins · 01-08-2007, 07:51 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 fucked.

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.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 01-08-2007, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

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, 08:57 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, 10:28 PM

Sorry but you're wrong. The Philly defensive line is VERY talented.

**cdcox** · 01-08-2007, 10:46 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** · 01-09-2007, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC-TBB

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.

DaWolf · 01-09-2007, 12:38 AM

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, 01:11 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, 06:41 AM

Like it now but I'd love it with two REAL DT's...

ck_IN · 01-09-2007, 09:14 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, 09:20 AM

I wonder if the Buckeye fans like the cover 2 this morning.

dj56dt58 · 01-09-2007, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

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, 09:28 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, 02:24 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, 02:57 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, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

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.

View Poll Results: What do you think about the Cover 2
Love it	3	4.35%
Hate it	17	24.64%
I like it but don't love it	25	36.23%
I don't like it, but I don't hate it	18	26.09%
Gaz	6	8.70%
Voters: 69. You may not vote on this poll

01-08-2007, 07:51 AM
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7129572	Your Thoughts on the Cover 2 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 fucked. 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.
Posts: 75,083

01-08-2007, 08:57 PM	#47
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7129572	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. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 75,083

01-08-2007, 10:28 PM	#48
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $8069900	Sorry but you're wrong. The Philly defensive line is VERY talented.
Posts: 104,482

01-08-2007, 10:46 PM	#49
cdcox www.nfl-forecast.com Join Date: Sep 2000 Casino cash: $-648231	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.
Posts: 46,037

01-09-2007, 12:38 AM	#51
DaWolf Cry havoc... Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10007725	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...
Posts: 6,798

01-09-2007, 01:11 AM	#52
RedThat Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Earth Casino cash: $10004900	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.
Posts: 6,666

01-09-2007, 09:14 AM	#54
ck_IN Feels so good. Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	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. __________________ As sweet as Tupelo Honey
Posts: 2,718

01-09-2007, 09:20 AM	#55
Chiefnj MVP Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Willis, Harris and Davis. Casino cash: $10004900	I wonder if the Buckeye fans like the cover 2 this morning. __________________ "I always tell (the assistant coaches), 'Make it simple, 'cause I'm stupid,'" Edwards said. "This ain't computer football." Herm Edwards, 3-20-07 Q: Herm, back on December 25th you were asked if Trent Green was your starter going into next season and you said, ‘yeah, why wouldn’t he be?’ Have you changed your mind on that? EDWARDS: No, I have not.” (1-11-07)
Posts: 6,811

01-09-2007, 09:28 AM	#57
Chiefs_Fan Starter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: St. Charles County Casino cash: $9229900	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!
Posts: 387

01-09-2007, 02:24 PM	#58
Chris Meck MVP Join Date: May 2001 Location: midtown KC Casino cash: $-1455090	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
Posts: 19,485

01-09-2007, 02:57 PM	#59
Mr. Laz Don't Tease Me Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: KS Casino cash: $11047037	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. __________________
Posts: 95,626