Originally Posted by Grid
from a "logical" point of view (and I use that term lightly).. wouldnt this mean that we are kind of making it easy on the opponent?
If we line up in a vanilla defense every time..we are not forcing them to play to our strengths..we are telling them "run whatever play you want to".
Im not saying that this is an altogether bad thing.. but it seems like we need to do more than just mask our defense.
I mean..if we are going to make the opponent unable to read what our defense is doing, then we need to capitalize on that by causing turnovers. That is the only benefit we can really get from playing a vanilla look...
Seems we need to be a bit more fiendish with our coverages.
OR i might be tired.
We're not making things easy on the opponent.
We line up vanilla but that doesn't mean we necessarily play the same thing every time. I mean, that's the point. We line up the same way and then based on the call and the reads, we change the coverages. Sometimes we play a 2-deep zone, sometimes we play man-under, sometimes we play other zones, sometimes we play straight man, sometimes we blitz, sometimes we zone blitz. The idea is to not give away what coverage you're using.
Other teams try to disguise their defense by showing all sorts of different movement. We try to disguise our defense MAINLY by not showing our blitzes or our coverages via our alignment although we do fake blitzes as well.
But the players have to make the plays. They have to really disguise the defense. And it would really help if we got more pressure up front.