Is Playing Zone D Causing Problems?

[sportmentary2012]

I don't want to blame The Roc for all 42 of BC's points and I am wondering if someone with better insight than me can tell if the Blue were playing a soft zone coverage against B.C. except for the first TD where The Roc was clearly beaten by a receiver running a good route.
Are the db's too slow to play man to man? The zone d and lack of rush is killing us. However, the d did get 2 stops at the end of the game that gave the Blue a shot at tying the game at the end.
Thoughts??

[wbbfan]

Our coverage schemes over all are poor imo. Our use of loffler in the box soo much leaving him out of position to cover, or having him man cover a slot from the S spot, The too deep zone/very loose match zone, its all not good. We give up first down yardage on 2nd down, even 2nd and fairly long. 

Zone it self isnt bad, if you blitz you are pretty much pushed into playing a zone or match scheme, or have no deep help. 

In general though I dont like our system on O or D. The D drives me nuts though. 

[JuranBoldenRules]

Playing man to man in this era of PI and IC isn't going to fly.  

Thr Bombers are playing mostly a match zone with cover 2 safeties, two guys covering a deep half of the field and everyone else watching a specific receiver or back as well as flowing to the ball.  That's a very simple description.  It changes up when they blitz and based on offensive alignment, 3 man rush they run cover 3 on long passing downs.

I didn't think they played horrible.  Lulay hit some lucky heaves in the first half.  He didn't do much in the second half until the scoring drives after our offense didn't get a first down in six possessions.

[JuranBoldenRules]

3 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Our coverage schemes over all are poor imo. Our use of loffler in the box soo much leaving him out of position to cover, or having him man cover a slot from the S spot, The too deep zone/very loose match zone, its all not good. We give up first down yardage on 2nd down, even 2nd and fairly long. 

Zone it self isnt bad, if you blitz you are pretty much pushed into playing a zone or match scheme, or have no deep help. 

In general though I dont like our system on O or D. The D drives me nuts though. 

I'm more disappointed in Loffler when he's actually playing a more traditional safety.  If he gets caught in coverage we are screwed and he's been struggling at taking good angles at guys running in the open field from deep.

He needs a more aggressive role where he's attacking and has less ground to cover/decisions to make IMO.  They should just make him the WIL full time already and use someone with better cover skills as a safety.

[sportmentary2012]

25 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Playing man to man in this era of PI and IC isn't going to fly.  

Thr Bombers are playing mostly a match zone with cover 2 safeties, two guys covering a deep half of the field and everyone else watching a specific receiver or back as well as flowing to the ball.  That's a very simple description.  It changes up when they blitz and based on offensive alignment, 3 man rush they run cover 3 on long passing downs.

I didn't think they played horrible.  Lulay hit some lucky heaves in the first half.  He didn't do much in the second half until the scoring drives after our offense didn't get a first down in six possessions.

Thanks to all of you  for the insight.

I am curious though on 2nd and short why they can't play man instead of the zone? They are more likely to get called for PI on deep balls not a 5 yard throw. It really irks me to see how easily most teams convert on 2nd and short by passing against us whereas the Bombers offence  seem to be the kings of the 2 and out right now. It is still early and at least they compete and have a chance to win most games unlike the pre-MOS era.

 

[JuranBoldenRules]

2 minutes ago, sportmentary2012 said:

Thanks to all of you  for the insight.

I am curious though on 2nd and short why they can't play man instead of the zone? They are more likely to get called for PI on deep balls not a 5 yard throw. It really irks me to see how easily most teams convert on 2nd and short by passing against us whereas the Bombers offence  seem to be the kings of the 2 and out right now. It is still early and at least they compete and have a chance to win most games unlike the pre-MOS era.

 

Well the offense doesn't execute...

It kind of depends what you're looking at.  If it's second and five from the opposite 40 you aren't going to come up and try to cover everyone off the line because the QB is going to read that and then throw over it for a big play.  They do play shorter zones and alternate running some pretty aggressive fronts and dropping guys out to disrupt timing and reads, that's often the most effective way now with the way PI is.

You have to kind of think of plays in the larger context of the game not just that down or even drive.

[wbbfan]

7 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

I'm more disappointed in Loffler when he's actually playing a more traditional safety.  If he gets caught in coverage we are screwed and he's been struggling at taking good angles at guys running in the open field from deep.

He needs a more aggressive role where he's attacking and has less ground to cover/decisions to make IMO.  They should just make him the WIL full time already and use someone with better cover skills as a safety.

Its not that he doesnt fill that in the box role out very well, he would be fantastic for a MLB role similar to the tampa 2 mlbers in the states. A deep drop guy who can rush etc. But with our loose coverage we gotta have that deep cover help. Even if its rotated. 

Hes certainly a guy who benefits from playing a mid field type of role, run around and make plays. But to really make the most of that wed have to move him or change a lot. 

[pigseye]

8 hours ago, sportmentary2012 said:

I don't want to blame The Roc for all 42 of BC's points and I am wondering if someone with better insight than me can tell if the Blue were playing a soft zone coverage against B.C. except for the first TD where The Roc was clearly beaten by a receiver running a good route.
Are the db's too slow to play man to man? The zone d and lack of rush is killing us. However, the d did get 2 stops at the end of the game that gave the Blue a shot at tying the game at the end.
Thoughts??

To play a man defense well you need talented cornerbacks and linebackers that are athletically capable of dropping back in coverage. You're leaving cornerbacks alone on an island so they need to have enough speed to make sure that they won't be burned down field, but they also need to be physical enough to play bump-and-run and to tackle receivers after the catch. The Bombers don't have the personnel with all their injuries. 

If you have a weak/slow secondary, a zone defense helps to cover some weaknesses. It's much easier to prevent a speedy receiver from going down field since there's a second level of coverage over the top, defenses don't have to worry as much about mismatches, a linebacker guarding a running back for example, and there's much less to react to, not as much concern about reacting to potential double moves, for instance.

As for usage, it generally depends more on the personnel than on the situation. A coach isn't going to (shouldn't) be throwing a defensive strategy out there that hurts his team more than another, even if it is, situationally appropriate.