Zone D vs Man

[Tical21]

We're a zone team, get used to it. Sherman is better in zone, Shead is WAYYYYYY better in zone. Kam needs to be taken off the field if he is going to have to cover in man. KJ is far better in zone than man. Kam isn't a cover-2 safety. He needs to live in the box. Putting him in a cover-2 is negating all the best parts of him. Running cover-2 with Sherman negates his best parts. We're going to let teams dump it underneath, and we're going to hit.

We're going to have to play a little less base cover-3 on 3rd downs and in 4th quarters, but our personnel is cover-3 personnel, and they will be playing roles not suited for their skills if they play much of anything else.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The cover 3 is normally fine. We are currently without THE GUY that normally can call out what an offense is trying to do in Kam. What's absolutely true though, is that the cover 3 defense is inherently weak against the short pass. When Kam is in there, he helps mitigate that due to his understanding of offensive formations and angles. Cover 3 still has that weakness though.

Kam is the key, when he was at the top of his game our cover three was devastating.

Our cover 3 is also predicated on the corner opposite Sherman not needing Earl's help. Which along with Kam has been very inconsistent since Browner and Maxwell left.

These two things are the main reason teams have had success against our zone as of late. If Kam can regain his form and someone can play well opposite Sherm then the cover 3 will return to it's dominant ways. If not? Then you're going to see more of what we saw at the end of last year..............lots of man to man with Sherman following the #1 receiver.

 

[Ozzy]

I'm torn as well. We are the #1 scoring defense 4 years running so obviously whatever we're doing works. We blew a ton of 4th quarter leads but I think that had more to do with injuries to key personnel then it did the actual zone. I have to give Pete the benefit of the doubt on this one. Pretty good stuff discussed above so thanks to everyone for sharing.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

The cover 3 is normally fine. We are currently without THE GUY that normally can call out what an offense is trying to do in Kam. What's absolutely true though, is that the cover 3 defense is inherently weak against the short pass. When Kam is in there, he helps mitigate that due to his understanding of offensive formations and angles. Cover 3 still has that weakness though.

Don't be a fan or not a fan of zone though. Zones have different emphasis and try to accomplish different things. We run 3 deep, 4 short, thus putting emphasis on deep coverage, which concedes some short passes. If you're worried about short passes, you go cover 2 where you have 5 short zones and only 2 deep. We don't run it that often, but we could if we so choose.

One of the problems with man coverage is that if one of your guys loses, then he's running a lot more free if he can get some RAC. Often you still have two safeties over the top or at least one, but they still have to track that and get there.

Every defense has it's weakness, we just don't varry a lot.

Speaking of variation, the cover 3 has quite a few variants in it's own.

All last game we went with the same exact cover 3 each time. Both the MLB and WLB were in short zones. We have other styles where Kam will come up and take Wright's short zone (my favorite) and Wright will bail to the flat. There are robber coverages where the safeties disguise swapping deep for short or deep for flat. This is where you'll see Kam bail deep and Earl come up short. There are also some others, but most revolve around Kam being able to play mulitple zones, from deep to short to flat. He's he real cog, IMO.

One thing about man coverage is that if an offense identifies man coverage, particularly with pre snap motion, you'll start to see rub routes that you just can't stop. Vets like Brady eat it alive.

There is always a kryptonite. I'd like to see better, more appropriate mixture of play calling based on down and distance, but I thought Richard had a lot of learning to do last year. When inside the 10 or there abouts, I'd like to see more cover 2. That Cincy game last year was proof of it. Kam or Wright releases the TE in their short zone and the FS or CB is too far away to get there and they get two TDs. The spacing for the red zone is better for cover 2, IMO. However, if you make a habit of it, other teams will adjust...such as running a play where you send your slot on a post pattern between the safeties and send your wideouts on flag routes away from those same two safeties, They'll have to choose and they can't cover all 3.

There's always a weakness.

Great post!

 

[lukerguy]

The problem, as I see it is the pass rush has diminished from the days where we had Clem as our LEO, Avril, Bennett, and a speciality interior rusher like McDonald. We also had a much better rotation back then. Avril actually was more of a part time guy. He would come in on rushing downs and seemed more fresh to me.

We are still getting tons of 3rd and longs and 3rd and goals but failing to get to QB as quick as we used to.

 

[justafan]

There are a lot of great posts in this thread and its hard to argue with any of them.But its almost impossible for me to call for a change in the schemes PC runs.He built a defense that can stand up with the best of all time.

None of the great defenses of all time have accomplisheed what they have considering the rule changes , emphasis on holding, safety and even laying hands on a WR during coverage.

Unfortunately we have been beaten in a lot of heartbreaking ways but they have been beaten playing their base D,man,blitzing and prevent.

I love defensive games but in this day and age you just dont have any true shut down defensive schemes.

 

[seabowl]

Did anybody notice if we played more man vs the Fins than in other games? I know the pass rush helped a bunch.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Did anybody notice if we played more man vs the Fins than in other games? I know the pass rush helped a bunch.

That's the key of playing the cover 3, pass rush has to get home.............with 4, not blizting. Which opens up those seams and holes in the zone coverage for WR's to find space.

D-line played a great game Sunday, as did the rest of the defense (other than Earl).

 

[seabowl]

It was witnessed by all once again that playing zone D kills us a lot of the time. Guys were wide open and Ryan was picking us apart. FYI I'm not even counting the plays where we missed Kam. What is the damn hesitancy to play man D?

 

[NINEster]

It was witnessed by all once again that playing zone D kills us a lot of the time. Guys were wide open and Ryan was picking us apart. FYI I'm not even counting the plays where we missed Kam. What is the damn hesitancy to play man D?

Steve Young used to say that he and the Niner offense used to love seeing man coverage. If you had all the pieces (QB, WR talent, coaching) it is usually an advantage for the offense.

Teams like the '80s Giants DC'd by Belichick used Cover 2 zone and disrupted the timing, and it worked really well.

One weakness to man coverage I see is that it's very simple. I'd imagine you never flummox a Kaepernick quite as bad running man coverage as opposed to zone. Teams mostly played cover 2 man against Kap in 2012, and with the nice matchup advantages he had in personnel, he could just let it rip with great success.

Good QBs can beat man as well. The general premise of why teams couldn't play man successfully against Peyton Manning in his prime was that receivers can get open quicker as opposed to zone defenses.

Of course they can't do it all the time, but enough so that it's not worth the risk in the modern day NFL with the rules set up the way they are.

I know nobody does defense like Carroll, but Vic Fangio in his SF days had pattern match coverage down pretty well. It was a great combination of zone/man coverage, where you show zone but then transition to man. Very sophisticated system that got better each year as the players learned it more and more. Has growing pains weaknesses, but it was impressive getting interceptions on Drew Brees when the pass rush was less than stellar.

I'd imagine with an all pro secondary it would have been ridiculous. Alas we'll never ever know what could have been, thanks Trent.

Alas, many different ways of skinning a cat. The Seahawk coaching staff knows what's best. There's no forest for the trees here that the fans see that they don't, IMO.

 

[seabowl]

Again the zone D we were playing on third downs was killing us. Also why would you play a zone D at the goal line? It makes no sense. See the the second to the Bills scored where Taylor threw to a wide open receiver. I just don't get it.

 

[seabowl]

Again the zone D was in effect and let them move the ball in the first half. I hate that D especially when our DB's play 10 yards off the line and let guys get wide open.

 

[seabowl]

Original post was from August. The problem was evident even before the season started.

 

[Thepeelsessions]

Good bump for reflection. Looks like a lot of us were justified for being worried back in August

 

[semiahmoo]

Good bump for reflection. Looks like a lot of us were justified for being worried back in August

YUP! The all is well pretenders just don't get it.

Trouble is trouble, and you spotted it months ago.

Our Hawks need a shake-up.

 

[seabowl]

Good bump for reflection. Looks like a lot of us were justified for being worried back in August

Yes and it was not only this year as we had problems with zone last year too.

 

[justafan]

The cover 3 is normally fine. We are currently without THE GUY that normally can call out what an offense is trying to do in Kam. What's absolutely true though, is that the cover 3 defense is inherently weak against the short pass. When Kam is in there, he helps mitigate that due to his understanding of offensive formations and angles. Cover 3 still has that weakness though.

Don't be a fan or not a fan of zone though. Zones have different emphasis and try to accomplish different things. We run 3 deep, 4 short, thus putting emphasis on deep coverage, which concedes some short passes. If you're worried about short passes, you go cover 2 where you have 5 short zones and only 2 deep. We don't run it that often, but we could if we so choose.

One of the problems with man coverage is that if one of your guys loses, then he's running a lot more free if he can get some RAC. Often you still have two safeties over the top or at least one, but they still have to track that and get there.

Every defense has it's weakness, we just don't varry a lot.

Speaking of variation, the cover 3 has quite a few variants in it's own.

All last game we went with the same exact cover 3 each time. Both the MLB and WLB were in short zones. We have other styles where Kam will come up and take Wright's short zone (my favorite) and Wright will bail to the flat. There are robber coverages where the safeties disguise swapping deep for short or deep for flat. This is where you'll see Kam bail deep and Earl come up short. There are also some others, but most revolve around Kam being able to play mulitple zones, from deep to short to flat. He's he real cog, IMO.

One thing about man coverage is that if an offense identifies man coverage, particularly with pre snap motion, you'll start to see rub routes that you just can't stop. Vets like Brady eat it alive.

There is always a kryptonite. I'd like to see better, more appropriate mixture of play calling based on down and distance, but I thought Richard had a lot of learning to do last year. When inside the 10 or there abouts, I'd like to see more cover 2. That Cincy game last year was proof of it. Kam or Wright releases the TE in their short zone and the FS or CB is too far away to get there and they get two TDs. The spacing for the red zone is better for cover 2, IMO. However, if you make a habit of it, other teams will adjust...such as running a play where you send your slot on a post pattern between the safeties and send your wideouts on flag routes away from those same two safeties, They'll have to choose and they can't cover all 3.

There's always a weakness.

Great post.I wish playing better defense was as easy as man vs zone.

 

[blkhwk]

When the rule emphasis on illegal contact started, or defense started to suffer. We now bail way more than we jam at the LOS.