William Jackson posts cryptic tweet regarding defensive changes

[*bengalfan74*]

I think as much as anything else it means we're going to see a more aggressive defense which in my opinion is badly needed.

[Fullrock]

Play more man. Bring Williams up in the box for run support especially with a severely depleted LB crew. You can't continue to do the same things that have led to being the worst defense in franchise history.

[Bengalitis]

(11-16-2018, 09:52 AM)Rubekahn29 Wrote: Oh please. It would take Baltimore all of 2 plays to realize they are running man to man. He didn’t reveal anything substantial.

I can see Marvin have one on one meetings and asked them their opinion on what is holding the D back, most probably said "we need more man 2 man" bam! Marvin complies.

[Bengalitis]

I'm just hoping somehow, we are the first team in history of any sport that wins the Super Bowl/Championship with the worst Defense ever.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-15-2018, 11:00 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: So... does this mean they still aren't running man to man? Or instead does it mean that Marvin is implementing man to man and WJ3 is pleased?....

I interpret that as Marvin is going to run man-to-man, which I hope is true because I always thought guys like WJ3 and Dennard were better suited for that rather than zone.

[Au165]

(11-16-2018, 10:32 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I interpret that as Marvin is going to run man-to-man, which I hope is true because I always thought guys like WJ3 and Dennard were better suited for that rather than zone.

On the outside it makes sense, but on the inside we are going to be hurting bad. When you go man, you go man across the board which puts your LB's on TE's and HB's. Now this week would be the week to do it as the Ravens don't really scare you with either, but people get so caught up with the man to man thing with the CB's they often forget that it requires your LB's to be able to man up pretty athletic guys too.

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if we were running a lot of pattern matching zones. The issue with that is it can get complex which can result in a lot of blown coverages if all the guys don't see the play the same way. It would make sense when you listen to some of the comments made about Austin wanting to keep changing things and over complicating them.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-16-2018, 10:38 AM)Au165 Wrote: On the outside it makes sense, but on the inside we are going to be hurting bad. When you go man, you go man across the board which puts your LB's on TE's and HB's. Now this week would be the week to do it as the Ravens don't really scare you with either, but people get so caught up with the man to man thing with the CB's they often forget that it requires your LB's to be able to man up pretty athletic guys too.

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if we were running a lot of pattern matching zones. The issue with that is it can get complex which can result in a lot of blown coverages if all the guys don't see the play the same way. It would make sense when you listen to some of the comments made about Austin wanting to keep changing things and over complicating them.

True, but I'm also interested to see how Evans and Jefferson would do in a man scheme, as they are both pretty fast. But I agree that it's a risk.

[*Synric*]

(11-16-2018, 10:38 AM)Au165 Wrote: On the outside it makes sense, but on the inside we are going to be hurting bad. When you go man, you go man across the board which puts your LB's on TE's and HB's. Now this week would be the week to do it as the Ravens don't really scare you with either, but people get so caught up with the man to man thing with the CB's they often forget that it requires your LB's to be able to man up pretty athletic guys too.

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if we were running a lot of pattern matching zones. The issue with that is it can get complex which can result in a lot of blown coverages if all the guys don't see the play the same way. It would make sense when you listen to some of the comments made about Austin wanting to keep changing things and over complicating them.

You can play man on the outside and zones inside. You can play man inside and zones outside. You can play man on one side of the field and zone on the other.

[Fullrock]

(11-16-2018, 10:47 AM)ochocincos Wrote: True, but I'm also interested to see how Evans and Jefferson would do in a man scheme, as they are both pretty fast. But I agree that it's a risk.

A risk vs what? What they've been doing? Giving up the most yards in NFL history? I'll take the risk at doing something different. 

[Au165]

(11-16-2018, 10:54 AM)Synric Wrote: You can play man on the outside and zones inside. You can play man inside and zones outside. You can play man on one side of the field and zone on the other.

The zone concepts turn in to match zone that basically play like man if they leave their zone into an untended area of the field. If you run a back side "lock" with zone on the front side against a trips with a backside wide out you have to be matching if a deep crosser for instance out of the slot works across the field so it ends up man. I have never heard of zone inside man outside, so your going to have to break that one down for me because it doesn't make any sense. Maybe you have a cover 1 where one LB is in zone and the high safety is in zone but at least 1 LB is manned up and you have taken away any help for the CB's on the deep third so they are probably playing 7 yards off now. Man inside and zone out is only happening on some sort of all out blitz with a LB taking the dump off and a single high safety and the outside CB's all taking deep third responsibilities.

To sum it up...no not really. The majority of the time if you go man you are going man across the board (outside of the shell). Like I said in 1 you may get a LB in a hook zone, but you are still exposing LB's to tough match ups.

[XenoMorph]

(11-15-2018, 11:00 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: So... does this mean they still aren't running man to man? Or instead does it mean that Marvin is implementing man to man and WJ3 is pleased?....

I'm guessing marvin is gonna play tight man to man to open up the pass rush...

[*Synric*]

(11-16-2018, 11:20 AM)Au165 Wrote: The zone concepts turn in to match zone that basically play like man if they leave their zone into an untended area of the field. If you run a back side "lock" with zone on the front side against a trips with a backside wide out you have to be matching if a deep crosser for instance out of the slot works across the field so it ends up man. I have never heard of zone inside man outside, so your going to have to break that one down for me because it doesn't make any sense. Maybe you have a cover 1 where one LB is in zone and the high safety is in zone but at least 1 LB is manned up and you have taken away any help for the CB's on the deep third so they are probably playing 7 yards off now. Man inside and zone out is only happening on some sort of all out blitz with a LB taking the dump off and a single high safety and the outside CB's all taking deep third responsibilities.

To sum it up...no not really. The majority of the time if you go man you are going man across the board (outside of the shell). Like I said in 1 you may get a LB in a hook zone, but you are still exposing LB's to tough match ups.

Zimmer used to do it alot with double A gap. Press on the outside then drop 1 or 2 of the linebackers into zone inside. 

And you say it turns into man which is true but they orginally drop into a zone.

[Au165]

(11-16-2018, 10:47 AM)ochocincos Wrote: True, but I'm also interested to see how Evans and Jefferson would do in a man scheme, as they are both pretty fast. But I agree that it's a risk.

In what I have seen from Evans in man I am not looking forward to it. He had Ingram in that wheel route and took too shallow an angle which is why he got picked by Thomas.

[Au165]

(11-16-2018, 11:26 AM)Synric Wrote: Zimmer used to do it alot with double A gap. Press on the outside then drop 1 or 2 of the linebackers into zone inside. 

And you say it turns into man which is true but they orginally drop into a zone.

I'd have to see video specifically of this because schematically that doesn't make sense. My guess is what you thought on the outside was press man was actually zone that had matching concepts that made you think it was man. I'd be curious if maybe it was a double hook with a safety rolled down to take the HB in man? Unless a safety rolled down you have no way to protect from the HB in the flat if you are man outside.

[grampahol]

"Man to man ,that's me!"  What could it possibly mean? Nothing could be more cryptic than that! Maybe he's alluding to how space aliens invaded our blood types to introduce O negative blood type into certain humans! Maybe he's planning to run for president of the world and taking over all political parties! Maybe it's an undicovered recipe for jello infused with pig skins! The possibilities are just endless now.  Roger Goodell needs to investigate immediately !

[impactplaya]

WJ didnt say anything Harbaugh didnt know already.
coaches are well versed on what other
coached scheme up.
what angers me is that Marvin would bring in a DC that took away the strengths of his secondary.

[*Synric*]

(11-16-2018, 11:32 AM)Au165 Wrote: I'd have to see video specifically of this because schematically that doesn't make sense. My guess is what you thought on the outside was press man was actually zone that had matching concepts that made you think it was man. I'd be curious if maybe it was a double hook with a safety rolled down to take the HB in man? Unless a safety rolled down you have no way to protect from the HB in the flat if you are man outside.

This is a good one. Zimmer has 7 guys at the LoS with his 2 outside corners in man coverage. Wentz sees it and goes max protect uses his TE and RB to double the strong side edge. Zim drops out of the blitz and only brings 4.



Not sure how to post Gifs and busy today or id try to figure it out lol.

But here is the play in motion.

https://gfycat.com/briskveneratedabalone




A good example of Zone on one side and Man on the other is a Fire Zone Blitz.

[I_C_DeadPeople]

(11-16-2018, 12:25 PM)Synric Wrote: This is a good one. Zimmer has 7 guys at the LoS with his 2 outside corners in man coverage. Wentz sees it and goes max protect uses his TE and RB to double the strong side edge. Zim drops out of the blitz and only brings 4.



Not sure how to post Gifs and busy today or id try to figure it out lol.

But here is the play in motion.

https://gfycat.com/briskveneratedabalone




A good example of Zone on one side and Man on the other is a Fire Zone Blitz.

Except ML wants to simplify the D so we can't be running any of that fancy stuff! Too complicated for the players on our defense. 

[Au165]

(11-16-2018, 12:25 PM)Synric Wrote: This is a good one. Zimmer has 7 guys at the LoS with his 2 outside corners in man coverage. Wentz sees it and goes max protect uses his TE and RB to double the strong side edge. Zim drops out of the blitz and only brings 4.



Not sure how to post Gifs and busy today or id try to figure it out lol.

That is press cover three, it's zone outside.
But here is the play in motion.

https://gfycat.com/briskveneratedabalone

That is press cover 3. To the fire zone, you do that because you were at minus 1 with the NB blitz. It is similar to the backside "Lock" I talked about on trips. If that top side was trips they would have checked the man to a deep third, so imagine flipping the TE from right to left there.

[fredtoast]

(11-15-2018, 10:47 PM)Trademark Wrote:

Man to man that’s me

— WJ lll (@fantastik_willo) November 15, 2018

Hmmmmm

Me too