In our new defense? Also just how good is Perry Riley, he looked great on man coverage in that pass to the endzone covering a wr. I expect great things form him. He was flying around imo.:geaux:
We'll see more man against traditional style offenses. It's a bad idea to run man against a dual-threat QB.
No, it is not. A good dual threat qb will eat a zone defense up. The only time zone is better than man is if your db's are not able to stay with the receivers. We should never have this problem. However it seems we find a way too sometimes.
If a DB is playing man coverage against a dual-threat QB the receivers will be running routes that turn the DBs back to the line of scrimmage.. and that quarterback is going to eat 10-15 yards per scamper. Now i'm all for mixing up the coverage, you can run zone AND man coverage on the same play. Man on the edges and zone in the middle.. but running JUST man coverage against a dual-threat QB is going to get you burned bad and often. Watch a dual-threat QB.. if he sees the DBs back he's gonna pull the ball down and haul ass.
stole my Thunder...Correct. Man coverage will allow RB's,QB's to run free, and setup mismatches on LBers and DE's.
There are over/under/robber coverages as well where the CBs and LBs or NBs are in man, but the safeties drop into zone. Or there can be a QB spy where a LB (sometimes a safety) drops off in a near zone/spy while mostly everyone else is in man. There are also plays where a capable DE will drop in zone or man to cover a TE, but that doesn't happen that often. A game is rarely played with either pure man or pure zone. I don't mind zone, as long as it's not the only thing being used and not always soft. I hope Chavis mixes it up depending on what Vandy shows us.
I disagree. In man you need to do put a man on the QB too and also the DL has to keep him contained. The RB has to have a man on him too. It's 11 on 11 so you have enough players. You also have to matchup the players by speed, size, ability etc. Your players gotta be able to cover though. Offenses can spread the zone, overload the zone, split the zone, get their fast guy on your slow guy, their tall guy on your short guy, their stud on your weaker guy, etc. I like the idea of mixing things up confusing the QB and the OC. I also think that against teams like Alabama, Georgia etc., the zone may be best, but against the new offenses that we're seeing, man to man as the basic defense is best. That's my opinion. I remember a quote from a pro coach a few years ago and I can't remember his name. He said, we don't use the zone because it don't work
