Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Texans Defense Switching To Tampa 2?

Texan JBZ

Texan JBZ

Da Sip's Finest
This is a thread I've been meaning to post ever since they signed Cato June, Buster Davis, and Shaun Cody. It seems to me that Frank Bush's approach will be tailored around a 4-3 Multiple/Tampa 2 scheme. It makes all the sense in the world. June thrived in the system while in Indy. Tampa Bay had him playing the strong side which did not fit what he does well. That is why his production dropped sharply. Both Davis and Cody know the scheme well also, with Davis learning in Indy under Dungy and Cody in Detroit under Marinelli.

My theory fits what they've been talking about all offseason in creating a more aggressive, get up the field approach to defense. The Tampa 2 is perfect for this. That is why draft picks like Connor Barwin, Glover Quin, and Troy Nolan make a ton of sense to me. Barwin can get after the QB off of the edge. Quin and Nolan aren't blazers, but they're smart and above average tacklers. Amobi Okoye will thrive in this type of scheme because it will allow him to shoot the gaps. Bennett will also do better in this type of defense because it allows him to use his size to play physical against WRs which is his strength. It's just my opinion, but don't be surprised if we see the defense playing a lot of Tampa 2 next season.
 
Its possible, however i think Bush, Kubiak, or Smith would've mentioned it before.....

While affective...the tampa 2 isnt necessarily aggressive.
 
RipTraxx said:
Its possible, however i think Bush, Kubiak, or Smith would've mentioned it before.....

While affective...the tampa 2 isnt necessarily aggressive.
Click to expand...

That's not true. The Tampa 2 isn't aggressive as far as blitzing, but it is very aggressive as far as pressuring the QB with the front four. That's why drafting a guy like Connor Barwin makes sense, because pressuring the QB is his specialty.
 
Texan JBZ said:
That's not true. The Tampa 2 isn't aggressive as far as blitzing, but it is very aggressive as far as pressuring the QB with the front four. That's why drafting a guy like Connor Barwin makes sense, because pressuring the QB is his specialty.
Click to expand...

by agressive i meant blitzing i shoulda been clearer.....i know what you mean tho.
 
Their personnel moves would make a lot more sense if they were moving to a Tampa 2(Indy 2 since Tampa is dumping it?). Glover Quin is a poor man corner, but an aggressive play maker in zone coverage.
 
We may play SOME Tampa 2. BUT, if we try to go mostly Tampa 2, we will have just wasted the main strength of our 1st round pick. And that would almost mean that we would have the equivalent of 2 GREAT free safeties covering 1/2 of the ball field. Last time I looked we don't even have one free safety we would bet the farm on. Ain't gonna happen.:cool:
 
Fox said:
The Tampa 2 scheme sounds like an improvement over the Give-up-lots-of-yards-and-points scheme we've been employing the past couple seasons.
Click to expand...
They said it was a kind of "bend but don't break" defense but I think it was more of a "bend and get ****ed".

CloakNNNdagger said:
We may play SOME Tampa 2. BUT, if we try to go mostly Tampa 2, we will have just wasted the main strength of our 1st round pick. And that would almost mean that we would have the equivalent of 2 GREAT free safeties covering 1/2 of the ball field. Last time I looked we don't even have one free safety we would bet the farm on. Ain't gonna happen.:cool:
Click to expand...
That's my thinking. I think it will be a hybrid kind of 4-3 where we impliment a lot of different approches. The main being aggressiveness/athletecism/versatility/speed etc. did we hear those words enough the past few days?
As for the safety... I hope Troy Nolan develops into that kind of FS! I know it may be wishful thinking but look at our FO's success in 6th/7th rounders so far! :whip:
 
I dunno about full blown tampa 2 but Looks like we're looking like we could continue to move away from more man up coverage to zone in the secondary. Makes sense with the personnel we have and what we've added.

I hope the new additions on defense help us dictate the LOS rather than hold it like in Dick's read, react and give up a ton of yardage scheme.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
We may play SOME Tampa 2. BUT, if we try to go mostly Tampa 2, we will have just wasted the main strength of our 1st round pick. And that would almost mean that we would have the equivalent of 2 GREAT free safeties covering 1/2 of the ball field. Last time I looked we don't even have one free safety we would bet the farm on. Ain't gonna happen.:cool:
Click to expand...

Well put....Cush doesnt fit the mold of a Tampa 2 OLB.
 
I just want a good defense. Shoot, I'll even settle for average. Just give us something better than what we've had in the past.
 
RipTraxx said:
Well put....Cush doesnt fit the mold of a Tampa 2 OLB.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. He may not be a prototype Tampa 2 OLB, but his abilities do lend itself to the SAM position in a 43 Tampa 2.

I do agree that he would be better in a different scheme, but I think he would still be successful in a Tampa 2.

Adibi is pretty close to the prototype WILL in a Tampa 2. June is as well.
 
Ole Miss Texan said:
They said it was a kind of "bend but don't break" defense but I think it was more of a "bend and get ****ed".


That's my thinking. I think it will be a hybrid kind of 4-3 where we impliment a lot of different approches. The main being aggressiveness/athletecism/versatility/speed etc. did we hear those words enough the past few days?
As for the safety... I hope Troy Nolan develops into that kind of FS! I know it may be wishful thinking but look at our FO's success in 6th/7th rounders so far! :whip:
Click to expand...

These are integral approaches to the Tampa 2 defense.

Vinny started a thread similar to this one before the draft and I have to admit that the way we drafted on defense has sorta convinced me that we will play a significant amount of Tampa 2.
 
Yeah, you're refering to the "zone dog" look. I can't see us running it full time b/c we're a 4-3 defense & we don't have the FS's just yet. But you're right, with Smithiak placing emphasis on versatility in the draft with Cushing & Barwin as well as the speedy lb's we already had, we could certainly flash it for a couple of series' a game.

I think Kubiak gave bush a chance to showcase this look last year during that run of games we won beginning with Cleveland when our defense "miraculously" started putting it together at the end.
 
The read and react defense was a bore and a pain to watch sometimes, but we never really got burned by a big play, at least from what I can remember. Now, going to an aggresive, high pressure defense, we are opening the door for teams to get more long plays on us, but that is a risk I'm willing to take in order to increase the chance of sacks/QB pressure's/INTs instead of offenses walking through us.

With that said, I am excited to see how we implement and execute running a Cover-2. I think we have the players up front to be able to do this in certain situations, but it all depends on our secondary and playing smart in the system.
 
Pretty nice analysis, however it works out. We are definitely getting the talent and high motor players to run some interesting schemes and blitz packages. I can see us doing a Steelers type of blitz package by coming from just about anywhere on any down and distance. Yeah, I know they're 3-4 and were 4-3, but, on paper, we have the raw talent to do that now. Maybe even do a Patriots style hybrid. I absolutely cannot wait for TC. DAMN the offseason!!!!
 
A common misconception is that you need great safeties to play a Tampa 2. You don't.

Great safeties help any scheme but they aren't integral to the Tampa 2 because it is basically a Cover 3 shell. You need smart safeties who can diagnose routes quickly and make plays on the ball, but they don't necessarily have to be fast or playmaking ball hawks.

You need to have CB's that can tackle in the open field (Robinson and Bennett).

You need OLB's that excel in coverage (Adibi and June).

You need DT's that can shoot gaps and collapse the pocket (Okoye and Cody).

You need DE's that can consistently put pressure on the QB (Mario and Barwin?).

The key is the MLB. Ours is pretty good.
 
If so we should of drafted Victor Harris. I dont beleive we are though. The kind of defensive back we have been looking for the last couple of years are the exact opposite of what the Tampa 2 calls for right?
 
TexanSam said:
I just want a good defense. Shoot, I'll even settle for average. Just give us something better than what we've had in the past.
Click to expand...

Can we just get back to something like 2002? How pathetic is that? They ranked 16th with an offense that rocks would be offended by being sucked in relation to. With just a non-shite O, that D would have been around 10th. Something just approaching that, PUHLEEZE, and we will be playing New England for play-offs or home field advantage. Top half D with a top 5 O should get you a long way (and let's remember Denver will not be top 10 O next year, much less #2).
 
Maybe we will throw in a lil "46" from the Buddy Ryan days.
 
pbat488 said:
The read and react defense was a bore and a pain to watch sometimes, but we never really got burned by a big play, at least from what I can remember. Now, going to an aggresive, high pressure defense, we are opening the door for teams to get more long plays on us, but that is a risk I'm willing to take in order to increase the chance of sacks/QB pressure's/INTs instead of offenses walking through us.
Click to expand...

You don't remember Calvin Johnson going deep against us? You don't remember those two huge plays against the Wildcatting Dolphins? I'm sure if we put our minds to it, we can probably come up with a couple more. :)

With that said, I am excited to see how we implement and execute running a Cover-2. I think we have the players up front to be able to do this in certain situations, but it all depends on our secondary and playing smart in the system.
Click to expand...

I thought we were talking about Tampa-2... which is a Cover-3. Although, I think most defense now incorporate a lot of different looks: cover-2, cover-3, cover-1, etc.
 
whiskeyrbl said:
Maybe we will throw in a lil "46" from the Buddy Ryan days.
Click to expand...
If that was the plan, Bush certainly kept it under wrap.
I sent in that question. Remember that live chat? Mine was among the earliest questions. He didn't answer it, but went round and about when answering others... we're gonna play aggressive blah blah blah...

Maybe he felt it was too early to dwelve on all the nuances, that he would have to wait and see what kind of players we can get in the draft...
 
Well, all I know about it is they can't double everyone. Somebody s going to be covered one on one when they rush the passer.

the first two picks told me that we are coming. And we realy don't care how you block it. They generate any rush at all, It's going to be amazing how good our average DBs become. Good thread in September would be how many sacks in '09. So how many sacks did the '85 bears generate that year ?

Mario doesn't get injured.....Okoye makes any kind of leap at all.....we're going to cruise by thirty pretty quickly. JMHO.
 
bah007 said:
A common misconception is that you need great safeties to play a Tampa 2. You don't.

Great safeties help any scheme but they aren't integral to the Tampa 2 because it is basically a Cover 3 shell. You need smart safeties who can diagnose routes quickly and make plays on the ball, but they don't necessarily have to be fast or playmaking ball hawks.

You need to have CB's that can tackle in the open field (Robinson and Bennett).

You need OLB's that excel in coverage (Adibi and June).

You need DT's that can shoot gaps and collapse the pocket (Okoye and Cody).

You need DE's that can consistently put pressure on the QB (Mario and Barwin?).

The key is the MLB. Ours is pretty good.
Click to expand...

I can't agree with this argument. In the Cover 3, Demeco would be expected to drop back most of the time, and not infrequently deep...........and the safeties are both expected to cover a vast varanda. They have to be able to turn on the jets when called upon to cover that amount of ground.
 
bah007 said:
A common misconception is that you need great safeties to play a Tampa 2. You don't.

Great safeties help any scheme but they aren't integral to the Tampa 2 because it is basically a Cover 3 shell. You need smart safeties who can diagnose routes quickly and make plays on the ball, but they don't necessarily have to be fast or playmaking ball hawks.
Click to expand...

CloakNNNdagger said:
I can't agree with this argument. In the Cover 3, Demeco would be expected to drop back most of the time, and not infrequently deep...........and the safeties are both expected to cover a vast varanda. They have to be able to turn on the jets when called upon to cover that amount of ground.
Click to expand...

Actually, bah007 is exactly correct on this one. I played in this scheme at Troy, and neither one of our safeties were 4.4 guys. They were smart and had good range, but weren't track stars by no means. You have to realize that the Safeties in a Tampa 2 are already lined up pretty deep already pre-snap. He's right about them diagnosing routes quickly because there is a hole in the Tampa 2 outside of the numbers over the top of the OLB and CB. Ball skills are more important than speed for a Tampa 2 Safety.
 
Texan JBZ said:
Actually, bah007 is exactly correct on this one. I played in this scheme at Troy, and neither one of our safeties were 4.4 guys. They were smart and had good range, but weren't track stars by no means. You have to realize that the Safeties in a Tampa 2 are already lined up pretty deep already pre-snap. He's right about them diagnosing routes quickly because there is a hole in the Tampa 2 outside of the numbers over the top of the OLB and CB. Ball skills are more important than speed for a Tampa 2 Safety.
Click to expand...

Because of the "holes," in the pros, the safeties tend to play closer in. They can't be slow. Those that are will continually be made to pay on post plays.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Because of the "holes," in the pros, the safeties tend to play closer in. They can't be slow. Those that are will continually be made to pay on post plays.
Click to expand...

I think you are thinking more of Cover 2 than Tampa 2.

John Lynch rarely got beat in Tampa Bay and nobody would confuse him with a track star.
 
I've been wanting to study these schemes.
I read that the Tampa2 had been tweaked all the time.

How it was married with the under front.

How sometimes, instead of lining up the OLB as a 9T, outside the TE, they would switch him over to the weakside.

How they sometimes bring the safety up as a 9T instead of the OLB.

How they play 8 in the box.

How they shift into a penetrating front on passing downs, etc.

Of course, I'm still a long way from home, but it's fascinating to the say the least!
 
76Texan said:
I've been wanting to study these schemes.
I read that the Tampa2 had been tweaked all the time.

How it was married with the under front.

How sometimes, instead of lining up the OLB as a 9T, outside the TE, they would switch him over to the weakside.

How they sometimes bring the safety up as a 9T instead of the OLB.

How they play 8 in the box.

How they shift into a penetrating front on passing downs, etc.

Of course, I'm still a long way from home, but it's fascinating to the say the least!
Click to expand...

Safeties are critical to the success of a Tampa 2 scheme. They have to be above average tacklers because they are constantly involved in the running gun. The Tampa 2 is a disciplined, gap control style defense. It's made to maintain gap integrity on both strong-side and weak side running plays to spill runners over the top to the MLB (strong side) or the Safety (weak side). Also, it's very important that the Safeties are interchangeable.
 
Texan JBZ said:
Safeties are critical to the success of a Tampa 2 scheme. They have to be above average tacklers because they are constantly involved in the running gun. The Tampa 2 is a disciplined, gap control style defense. It's made to maintain gap integrity on both strong-side and weak side running plays to spill runners over the top to the MLB (strong side) or the Safety (weak side). Also, it's very important that the Safeties are interchangeable.
Click to expand...
I've read that they had tweaked it to funnel the plays to the WILL at times.
I haven't really dig deep into the game films though!
 
76Texan said:
I've read that they had tweaked it to funnel the plays to the WILL at times.
I haven't really dig deep into the game films though!
Click to expand...

For example, in the 4-3 under front.
The SAM (let's say Cushing) is outside the TE, turning the play in.
Antonio Smith is checked by the RT.
TJ penetrates the strong side A gap. He will be checked by either the RG or the C, let's say the C.
The RG will come up and take on Demeco.
Mario sets the right edge, with the LT checking him.
Okoye penetrates the B gap weakside, checked by the LG.
That would leave Adibi (the WILL) to make the play on the RB coming up the middle.

That would be one scenario, right?
 
But you're right. If there's also a FB who takes on the WILL, then the weakside safety would have to come up to make the play, wouldn't he?
 
Fox said:
The Tampa 2 scheme sounds like an improvement over the Give-up-lots-of-yards-and-points scheme we've been employing the past couple seasons.
Click to expand...


That's "The Houston 30" for those of you not familiar with the technical terms. It's basically shorthand for "Houston gives up 30 points a game playing this mess".

I would gladly trade the Houston 30 for the Tampa 2.
 
Texan JBZ said:
Safeties are critical to the success of a Tampa 2 scheme. They have to be above average tacklers because they are constantly involved in the running gun. The Tampa 2 is a disciplined, gap control style defense. It's made to maintain gap integrity on both strong-side and weak side running plays to spill runners over the top to the MLB (strong side) or the Safety (weak side). Also, it's very important that the Safeties are interchangeable.
Click to expand...
agreed...The Tampa2 has what almost amounts to 4 safeties and no pure cover corners (a little exaggeration but tampa2 CB's play much like a FS plays - facing the qb while working a zone area. Currently we basically have interchangeable safeties, a prototype Tampa2 Will and Mike penciled in as starters. Getting the speed edge rusher early in the draft is also something we would need to run this. Everyone needs to remember that Ray Rhodes has always preferred playing in cover 2 and 3 in his past. Fans at other fan bases have been critical of his bend but not break defenses when they weren't going well.
 
Vinny said:
agreed...The Tampa2 has what almost amounts to 4 safeties and no pure cover corners (a little exaggeration but tampa2 CB's play much like a FS plays - facing the qb while working a zone area. Currently we basically have interchangeable safeties, a prototype Tampa2 Will and Mike penciled in as starters. Getting the speed edge rusher early in the draft is also something we would need to run this. Everyone needs to remember that Ray Rhodes has always preferred playing in cover 2 and 3 in his past. Fans at other fan bases have been critical of his bend but not break defenses when they weren't going well.
Click to expand...

I think the Buccs had been doing it a little different lately.

What I notice is that they sometimes they would bring Cato June up to the strong side. His assignment would be to stand up the TE in run situation. And if the TE releases, he's to follow the TE. Maybe we can call it box and one?

In other instances, they would bring him up to the weak side.
Here, he will key on the RB.
If it's a run play, he will pursue the RB.
If the RB slides out to the flat, or ventures up for a screen pass, he would follow the guy just the same.

I imagine that explains why June didn't have as many tackles with the Buccs.
Taking away the short routes, what it amounts to, is what I saw.
 
76Texan said:
I think the Buccs had been doing it a little different lately.

What I notice is that they sometimes they would bring Cato June up to the strong side. His assignment would be to stand up the TE in run situation. And if the TE releases, he's to follow the TE. Maybe we can call it box and one?

In other instances, they would bring him up to the weak side.
Here, he will key on the RB.
If it's a run play, he will pursue the RB.
If the RB slides out to the flat, or ventures up for a screen pass, he would follow the guy just the same.

I imagine that explains why June didn't have as many tackles with the Buccs.
Taking away the short routes, what it amounts to, is what I saw.
Click to expand...

no matter what defense you run as a base you will make adjustments and game plan around the teams you face.
 
OK I am not did not read the entire thread, so I apologize upfront if this was posted already.

Instead of the Texans switching to the Tampa 2, I believe we are going to more of 4-3 Under defense. That is the defense that Pete Carroll runs at USC, it also the defense that comes from Monty Kiffin. They are brothers so to speak.

Read more here

I have included some a brief history of the defense from Pete Carroll.
I am an example of a person who got zeroed into a philosophy early. I went to Arkansas many years ago to work for Lou Holtz. Monte Kiffin was his defensive coordinator. He had just come over from Nebraska to take that job. He is now of course the defensive coordinator for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and is one of the best coaches that has ever lived. Under Monte I was a part time coach in the secondary at Arkansas.
Monte ran what is known in coaching circles as the 4-3 under defense. That was his base defense that he had developed and perfected at Nebraska as a gap control defense to stop the run and pressure the passer. That was the first time I started to get hold of something that had a philosophy to it. I started to grow with this defense. After all the years I’ve been in football I’ve never coached anything but the 4-3 under defense. So I know this defense inside and out. I know the good side of the defense and I know the problems and weaknesses of this defense. I run it with one gap principles but can also make it work with some two gap principles.
Click to expand...

When you look at the team attempted hire of Marinelli, and the actually signing and drafting of Cushing, this all makes sense.
 
painekiller said:
OK I am not did not read the entire thread, so I apologize upfront if this was posted already.

Instead of the Texans switching to the Tampa 2, I believe we are going to more of 4-3 Under defense. That is the defense that Pete Carroll runs at USC, it also the defense that comes from Monty Kiffin. They are brothers so to speak.

Read more here

I have included some a brief history of the defense from Pete Carroll.


When you look at the team attempted hire of Marinelli, and the actually signing and drafting of Cushing, this all makes sense.
Click to expand...

You can play 4-3 under with cover 2 principles. Cover 2 is primarily about what the back-end players are doing, though the MLB is also involved in covering the deep middle.

Tampa 2 is played by a lot of teams in the NFL, but not exclusively. Even Monte Kiffin last year in Tampa had his defense in Tampa 2 only a fraction of the total snaps, and it was not the primary coverage scheme that he used last year.

I'm certainly no expert on what Frank Bush likes to do schematically, but I guarantee that he will employ a wide range of coverages this year, including cover 0 (man to man coverage), cover 1, cover 2, Tampa 2, cover 3 and cover 4, depending on down and distance, what the opponent likes to do, etc.
 
Texsker said:
You can play 4-3 under with cover 2 principles. Cover 2 is primarily about what the back-end players are doing, though the MLB is also involved in covering the deep middle.
Click to expand...
actually that is a cover3 you are talking about. The mike linbacker covers the deep middle in the tampa2 just like in the cover 3. In a cover 2 defense the mike doesn't take those long exaggerated drops since there are 2 guys covering the back end instead of the two S's.
 
Vinny said:
actually that is a cover3 you are talking about. The mike linbacker covers the deep middle in the tampa2 just like in the cover 3. In a cover 2 defense the mike doesn't take those long exaggerated drops since there are 2 guys covering the back end instead of the two S's.
Click to expand...

I know. I meant to say Tampa 2. I know that the distinction between cover 2 and Tampa 2 involves the Mike's coverage responsibilities.
 
painekiller said:
OK I am not did not read the entire thread, so I apologize upfront if this was posted already.

Instead of the Texans switching to the Tampa 2, I believe we are going to more of 4-3 Under defense. That is the defense that Pete Carroll runs at USC, it also the defense that comes from Monty Kiffin. They are brothers so to speak.

Read more here

I have included some a brief history of the defense from Pete Carroll.


When you look at the team attempted hire of Marinelli, and the actually signing and drafting of Cushing, this all makes sense.
Click to expand...

The 43 Under is a defensive alignment and scheme. The Tampa 2 is a coverage shell. You can run both at the same time.

USC's defense uses the Tampa 2 significantly for a college team. The only FCS team that uses it more often is Auburn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top