PDA

View Full Version : Bucs Tampa-Two defense gets deep six


Vinny
04-22-2009, 01:40 PM
The Tampa2 defense was such a good defensive design for Tampa Bay it created a legacy of coaches coaching that style of defense. One may tend to forget who designed the modern day defense we call the Tampa2 (its really a cover3 defense)...perhaps they should call it the Monte2 defense since Tampa ran it for the last time, last season. I think we will be using this style of defense quite a bit next year with the way the personnel is shaping up and the way Ray Rhodes has designed his defenses in the past (they were zone heavy forcing you to dink and dunk).

This move isn't as jolting as Denver's recent decision to trade quarterback Jay Cutler. But it does represent a bold offseason step made by another 32-year-old head coach trying to blaze a different trail than his predecessors.

Since the mid-1990s, Tampa Bay's defense has deployed a zone-coverage scheme that emphasized quickness over power. The Bucs frustrated quarterbacks, who were forced to dink-and-dunk because long completions were hard to come by, especially when defensive linemen Simeon Rice and Warren Sapp were bringing heavy pressure. Brooks — a future Hall of Fame selection as an outside linebacker — and five-time Pro Bowl cornerback Ronde Barber also thrived under former coordinator Monte Kiffin. Tampa Bay fielded the NFL's ninth-ranked defense in 2008, marking its 11th top 10 finish in the past 12 years.

The Bucs became so synonymous with the system that it was called the "Tampa-Two," even when teams like Indianapolis and Chicago were running it.

Yet when Kiffin left at season's end to join his son Lane at the University of Tennessee, the Tampa-Two went with him. Instead of hiring someone with familiarity running that style, Morris added a replacement whose scheme is predicated upon press coverage and larger defensive tackles with different gap responsibilities.

So is this just change for change's sake? Morris says no.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9429938/Bucs-Tampa-Two-defense-gets-deep-six

bah007
04-22-2009, 02:27 PM
I wouldn't be surprised to see us run some Tampa Two this year.

If anyone wants more information on the Tampa Two I wrote a research paper on it for a football coaching class I am taking this semester.

It's a very solid defense but it requires your defensive linemen to get pressure on the QB without help from blitzes (we aren't quite there yet).

Your LB's all have to be good in coverage (Cato June signing), especially the WILL. MIKE has to be able to make his reads quickly so he doesn't get beat downfield by TE's.

DB's all have to be good open field tacklers. It's okay to sacrifice some speed in the back four if you can get some guys that can play the ball and make tackles (this screams Malcolm Jenkins, Jairus Byrd, or Victor Harris in the draft).

The Pencil Neck
04-23-2009, 01:37 AM
Haven't we run some Tampa-2 the past couple of years? That's why you sometimes see Demeco sprinting back to cover his deep zone. That's one reason why we wanted to be able rush our 4 down linemen and get pressure without blitzing. That's part of the reason why we wanted our two safeties to be somewhat interchangeable.

We weren't dedicated to it like some teams but we have run it.

At least, I thought we did.

playa465
04-23-2009, 10:59 AM
For some reason I never really liked the Tampa 2(cover 2 variation) defense. The bend don't break method just irks me. Two things that kill the Tampa 2 is the draw play and a good TE....the reason being is that the middle of the field can be left open when the MLB has to drop deeper than he normally would and the DEs usually have wider flows b/c they are heavily depended on to disrupt passing plays...you must have a group of LBs who can cover and are solid run supporters (which is no easy task). The safeties in this defense better be good ball hawks b/c if the pressure doesn't get the passer WRs running up the sideline will get open.

bah007
04-23-2009, 11:12 AM
Haven't we run some Tampa-2 the past couple of years? That's why you sometimes see Demeco sprinting back to cover his deep zone. That's one reason why we wanted to be able rush our 4 down linemen and get pressure without blitzing. That's part of the reason why we wanted our two safeties to be somewhat interchangeable.

We weren't dedicated to it like some teams but we have run it.

At least, I thought we did.

I'm pretty sure we've used it a few times.

Everybody in the pros runs variations of it now and then.

I think it's a solid coverage shell, but there is less than a handful of teams in the league that can run it consistently and maintain good results. It is just too dependent on your players' abilities.

RipTraxx
04-23-2009, 05:58 PM
I love the Tampa 2. I actually think we could use it here some (not that should or would). Its predicated on quick 1 gap DTs which we have. An edge rusher, and a VERY good MLB which he def got because he has to cover so much ground.

76Texan
04-24-2009, 03:43 AM
The thing is, even though it was called a bend-and-don't break, the Bucs did well in both scoring and yardage allowed over the years.

They had tweaked the scheme, which was what I said I'd like to study further... on how they use their LBs (and safeties.)
Cato June in Indy. Cato with the Bucs.
The Colts after Cato.
The Bucs before Cato...

A bunch of game films, don't know if I can get to it all.

Bah, I am quite interested in your paper.