Why do we play so much off-coverage?

[snackdaddy]

I have a feeling if the run defense tightens up the pass defense will tighten up too. Seems like they're more comfortable in obvious passing situations. Tighten up that run defense and I'll bet that top 5 defense will show up.

 

[RamDino]

For years teams have used this type of defense against up... press coverage, 10 man fronts, etc, and dared us to pass, and we couldn't get the ball downfield. Many teams just shut us down completely. I would think that with our pass rush, now might be a good time to take away their three-step drop passes and stop making quarterbacks like Kirk Cousins look like all-stars. That said... I do believe in their current strategy. Fisher is very conservative and does not like giving up the big play. I worry about the run defense though... Washington made us look silly at times.

 

[Prime Time]

2. Make the offense put together 11-14 play drives to score on you

Of course this also allows the opposing team to use up the clock, wear down your defense, and keep your own offense off the field.

 

[SuperMan28]

It does work well if you are tackling well and don't allow more than 3-4 yards. Off coverage on third and shorts are what confuse me.

 

[…..]

I think we need to wrap our minds around the fact that we do not have a top 5 defense.

We have top 5 defensive personell, thats no doubt in my mind. But it seems we have a 20th ranked defensive scheme.

If we can produce the sacks and force the mistakes and create the turnovers, then we're good. We attempt to do all that while making pedestrian quarterbacks look like Dan Marino, make average running backs post numbers like Eric Dickerson, and make bad offenses look good. All in the effort to hopefully cause mistakes. I'm not sure I like that philosophy right now.

But we're 2 games in...we'll see how it all shakes out.

Only the Rams can win a game 34-31 and come out of it with praise being heaped on the defense. Mindboggling.

 

[snackdaddy]

Of course this also allows the opposing team to use up the clock, wear down your defense, and keep your own offense off the field.

Yeah, our offense don't need that help. They do a pretty good job of staying off the field themselves.

 

[-X-]

It does work well if you are tackling well and don't allow more than 3-4 yards. Off coverage on third and shorts are what confuse me.

You mean like this?

Because that resulted in this:
Check out how the defensive alignment (and presnap look) changed with a stunt and forced the throw.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF4NQx6mL4Y

 

[yrba1]

Only the Rams can win a game 34-31 and come out of it with praise being heaped on the defense. Mindboggling.

The Rams defense only gave up 8 points against the Seahawks. The bulk of their points came from 3 FGs, a special teams TD, and a fumble six.

 

[FrankenRam]

When you bring as much pressure (blitzes) as Williams is known to, you are risking giving up the home run by playing press coverage.

The concept is to force them to get to ball out fast. Underneath and fly to the ball. This is the very foundation of his defense. They work on it more than any other facet of their defense.

If you play press coverage and are isolated in man coverage, all it takes is one missed chuck at the line of scrimmage and the QB throws a quick fade and its bye bye.

Whether you agree with the the concept or not, this is the reason they do it. Completions are not the thing that matters. It's closing on the receiver and tackling that is the key to limiting the damage. When they went on their run last year over the last 8 games of the season, they didn't change the design, they improved (dramatically) their tackling.

You force them to throw underneath and jump the route. Johnson already has one INT from this design. And Jenkins is one of the best at it. It's also where they miss Gaines. As he may have been the best of the CBs at reading and closing on the receiver.

More often than not, the are going to be in some sort of zone coverage when they utilize this concept. So playing tight "in your face" coverage is asking for trouble. It's nothing more that "risk vs. reward".

I've not been able to see much of either of the first 2 games this year, but what befuddled me about the off coverage last year was that the corners would line up ~10 yds off the LOS, and then backpedal from there once the ball was snapped.

 

[OldSchool]

You mean like this?

Those are the alignments that give most of us fits 3rd and 4 and we see 3 guys in coverage 7 yards off the line. Granted that play ended in an INT but they don't all end that way. It's sometimes interesting to look at the results over the course of the season. We Rams fans probably would think we were gashed by big plays last year, I know that was my perception. But looking at the stats we gave up 44 plays of 20+ yards last year tied for 27th fewest of 32 in the league (worst was Philly with 72) and we only gave up 8 of 40+, Denver had the fewest at 4 and Philly again was worst with 18. I think it's the perception we see looking at 3rd and 4 like this screenshot and we always see guys 10 yards off. It creates an image in our mind which isn't always accurate when we look at the big picture.

 

[-X-]

Those are the alignments that give most of us fits 3rd and 4 and we see 3 guys in coverage 7 yards off the line. Granted that play ended in an INT but they don't all end that way.

This is true. But it's always the objective.

 

[snackdaddy]

Those are the alignments that give most of us fits 3rd and 4 and we see 3 guys in coverage 7 yards off the line. Granted that play ended in an INT but they don't all end that way. It's sometimes interesting to look at the results over the course of the season. We Rams fans probably would think we were gashed by big plays last year, I know that was my perception. But looking at the stats we gave up 44 plays of 20+ yards last year tied for 27th fewest of 32 in the league (worst was Philly with 72) and we only gave up 8 of 40+, Denver had the fewest at 4 and Philly again was worst with 18. I think it's the perception we see looking at 3rd and 4 like this screenshot and we always see guys 10 yards off. It creates an image in our mind which isn't always accurate when we look at the big picture.

Yeah, on that play Tru read it, broke quickly on it and made an athletic play. Good job on his part. But I have seen some plays where they backpedal so much the receiver just stops and turns around. At the point its just pitch and catch for the QB and WR. My guess is when that happens the offense adjusts and has their receivers turn quickly when the see the defender backpedaling. On the other hand, the defender can dupe them into that and make a play on the ball. I guess its all about recognizing things quickly.

 

[Prime Time]

The Rams defense only gave up 8 points against the Seahawks. The bulk of their points came from 3 FGs, a special teams TD, and a fumble six.

The 9 points on field goals also count against the D because they allowed them to get close enough. Still, I get your point.

 

[…..]

The 9 points on field goals also count against the D because they allowed them to get close enough. Still, I get your point.

The Rams defense only gave up 8 points against the Seahawks. The bulk of their points came from 3 FGs, a special teams TD, and a fumble six.

Thats fair. Coupled with Prime Times reply.

Despite that, we can and do make teams look great running up and down the field on us. Appearently we are content to give up huge yardage in exchange for a great red zone/TD efficiency rating.

 

[HometownBoy]

The 9 points on field goals also count against the D because they allowed them to get close enough. Still, I get your point.

Yeah, but still, that's only 17 points. That's definitely a praise worthy effort.

Also I take one of those field goals away because it was more set up by the botched snap between Barnes and Foles than the D. Not much you can do when you come in with the O already on your 38.

 

[…..]

My point is not so much that our defense sucks....

The point I'm making is that we will not be a top 5 defense, despite having great players, because of the type of defense we run. If you want to disregard the Seattle example as a poor example, I'm okay with that.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

When you bring as much pressure (blitzes) as Williams is known to, you are risking giving up the home run by playing press coverage.

The concept is to force them to get to ball out fast. Underneath and fly to the ball. This is the very foundation of his defense. They work on it more than any other facet of their defense.

If you play press coverage and are isolated in man coverage, all it takes is one missed chuck at the line of scrimmage and the QB throws a quick fade and its bye bye.

Whether you agree with the the concept or not, this is the reason they do it. Completions are not the thing that matters. It's closing on the receiver and tackling that is the key to limiting the damage. When they went on their run last year over the last 8 games of the season, they didn't change the design, they improved (dramatically) their tackling.

You force them to throw underneath and jump the route. Johnson already has one INT from this design. And Jenkins is one of the best at it. It's also where they miss Gaines. As he may have been the best of the CBs at reading and closing on the receiver.

More often than not, the are going to be in some sort of zone coverage when they utilize this concept. So playing tight "in your face" coverage is asking for trouble. It's nothing more that "risk vs. reward".

I get all that but do they have to play so far back? If it is third and 8 why are the Corners 12 yards off? That is a guaranteed first down. Shouldn't down and distance determine how far off the ball they play?

 

[yrba1]

Although Williams's scheme helps get the DBs eyes on the QB with those cushions. It would be nice if we mix it up more with press coverage against WRs while our pass rushers have enough time to rush the QB

 

[SuperMan28]

Nic

You mean like this?

Because that resulted in this:
Check out how the defensive alignment (and presnap look) changed with a stunt and forced the throw.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF4NQx6mL4Y

Nice example of when it worked. But for every one good play like that, it seems there are three where teams just run a quick slant to the slot man and converge the third and short rather easily. Our guys just gotta get better at what they do.

Is it just me or did we play wayyy faster week one than week 2?? Turf in WAS a home field advantage for the Redskins? I think yes.

 

[-X-]

Nice example of when it worked. But for every one good play like that, it seems there are three where teams just run a quick slant to the slot man and converge the third and short rather easily. Our guys just gotta get better at what they do.

Is it just me or did we play wayyy faster week one than week 2?? Turf in WAS a home field advantage for the Redskins? I think yes.

Yes, they do play WAY faster at home. It's something other analysts have mentioned too.