I was just wondering what you guys think of the TCU 4-2-5 system. I know that a 4-2/4-4 by any name is essentially the same thing & you get the same variety of things you can do with it. However, I have a Gary Patterson article from a Nike Clinic from a couple of years ago and it's a little bit different than the way some of us approach it in that the front and coverage are pretty much completely independent of one another. Of course we know they can never be completely independent, but that's pretty much how they look at it. Further, they split the coverage in half according to the passing strength and call those independent of each other also.

I like the idea, especially as more teams go to the spread, but I'm thinking that it might not be any better for us since we don't face "normal D-1 college offenses" every week. By that I mean we have 3-4 Spread teams, 2 Wing-T teams, 2-3 I/Smokestack I teams, and 1 Split Back Veer team on our schedule and it's probably easier for us to "coordinate" everything together but I don't know? Also, maybe it's just me, but it doesn't "feel" like an 8-man front defensive approach, even thought I know rationally that it is (or at least can be) EXACTLY the same as what we do now. Would approaching it "the TCU way" be more or less difficult or...just another way? Thoughts or opinions? Coach Mountjoy? Coach Easton?

I'm not familiar with TCU's defense.

We feel that Cover 1 handles 3 WR, 4 WR, or Empty teams. Everything else can he handled by our "ROBBER". Cover 1 Man/Free & Robber are easy to check to (from one to the other) & handle ALL the teams we face (if one doesn't - the other will).

-------------------------
Bill Mountjoy

Edited: 7/16/2008 at 12:09 PM by Oneback

Thanks for the reply Coach Mountjoy. I know you are extensively a man team. TCU does use a lot of man in their scheme but they run some zone & zone blitz stuff too

My original post may not be much good if no one is familiar with TCU’s system so below I’ve typed-out SOME of the key points of the article I mentioned. I skipped over their front info, slants, etc. Basically, they normally align their DT’s in a 3 strong and either a Shade or 1-tech weak and their DE’s align in a 6-tech (head-up on TE) if there is a TE and in a loose 5-tech if no TE. I also omitted their way of getting one of the safeties down into the box vs. 21 personnel, which is basically sliding to more of a 4-3 look. What I included was mainly about coverage, alignment, etc. of the secondary.

In a nutshell:

“We divide our packages into attack groups. The 4 DL & 2 LB’s are one segment of our defense. We align the front 6 and they go one direction. The coverage behind them is what we call a double-quarterback system. We play with 3 safeties on the field. We have a strong, weak and free safety. The free and weak safeties are going to control both halves of the field. They are the quarterbacks and they will make all the calls…

…In our coverage scheme we are going to divide the formation at the center every snap. We play with 5 defensive backs in the secondary…

…[If the passing strength is to the defensive left] the FS calls ‘read’ left. The FS is going to talk to the LCB, SS, and the read side LB. The weak safety aligns on the other side and talks to the right corner and right LB…

…Starting in spring practice, the 1st Mon. we teach Cover 2 (Robber). On Tues. we teach our Blue coverage (quarters)….On Wed. we teach squats-&-halves coverage (Cover 5). After that we are done teaching our zone coverages…

…We don’t worry about formations any more. When you divide the formation down the middle, to each side there are only 3 formations the offense can give the secondary. The offense can give you a pro set, which is a tight end and wideout; a twin set, which is 2 wideouts; or some kind of trips set that the defense will have to defend. That is all they can give you.

In 3 days we teach our kids to line up in all 3 coverages against those formations…when we start talking about our game play, we never talk about lining up. All we talk about is what the opponent is going to be doing and how we are going to adjust to it.

Unless the offense lines up in a 3-back wishbone or a no-back set, there are only 3 ways the offense can be aligned and still be sound. Unless we want the coverage to overplay something to one side, we don’t worry about formations….

…(When we blitz) the secondary doesn’t care what is going on with the front and LB’s. All they know is there is going to be a blitz and both LB’s are going to rush. That tells them they have to cover everybody if there is a pass…

…If there is a double smoke being run, the FS knows the SS and WS are blitzing off the edge. He has to talk to the 2 LB’s to get them into coverage…

…In the secondary we have 3 zone coverages. We split the difference in those 3 coverages and it gives us 9 coverages…We can also play cover 25. That means we are playing Cover 2 (Robber) to the FS side and Cover 5 to the weak safety side. The 1st digit in the number is the FS side and the 2nd digit is the weak side…

…If the offense can’t outrun your defense, they may get some big plays, but there is a chance they won’t score. That is our philosophy…”

Edited: 7/9/2008 at 3:00 PM by Johnny Ringo

Sounds good! Just remember - in High School ball - I don't believe you can teach that MANY coverages.

If you can get REAL GOOD at 1 or 2 coverages in High School - you have done a hell of a job (I coached HS, College, & Semi-Pro). I like the idea that "REAL MEN PLAY MAN". I believe that on ALL levels you have to START OUT in man.

It doesn't matter if you believe in man OR zone - when someone splits a WR way out on you - your corner ends up covering him "1 on 1" anyhow (unless you double cover him - then they run the ball down your throat)!


-------------------------
Bill Mountjoy

YO WILD BILL,

IT DOES MY HEART SUPER GOOD TO READ YOUR POST!!! I LOVE A GREAT ATHLETIC CORNER!!! A GOOD FRIEND OF MINE, RONALD LEWIS (49'S, PACKERS, IN THE NFL AND ONE OF THE "FAB FOUR"
RECEIVER'S AT FLA STATE) TOLD ME THAT WHEN DIONE SANDERS WAS IN HIS PRIME NOBODY IN THE NFL COULD COME CLOSE TO BEING A BETTER COVER GUY. WITH THAT 4.21 SPEED HE WAS AWESOME!!! NEVER WAS A STRONG HITTER, BUT HE COULD COVER THE DEVIL HIMSELF!!!

Coach Easton-TIGER ONE

-------------------------
J.C. EASTON<BR>HEAD COACH<BR>GA TIGERS FOOTBALL<BR>PROFESSIONAL MINOR LEAGUE

Coach Mountjoy,
I agree with you 100% on being AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE on the HS level. I've always liked press man/free myselft vs. those teams that chuck it a bunch but I've had to mix it up a lot because I haven't been blessed with super talent by any stretch. However, I thought you might like the concepts of simplicity of alignment/adjustment in that TCU system....but are you saying that you MIGHT mix in some more zone on the college level?

Coach Easton,
I just watched the "Top 10 CB Tandems" on the NFL channel the other day. Deion Sanders + ANYONE YOU WANTED TO PUT OVER THERE was like #7 on the list. I don't want to slight any "old timers" who I never had the privilege to see but in my lifetime there's NO DOUBT, Prime Time is THE BEST in coverage (and maybe returning kicks too)!

"Deion couldn't tackle my wife Emma."

-Chuck Bednarik

-------------------------
Scott Orndoff Varsity Assistant Williamsville East High School Williamsville, NY

Probably true...lots of more "complete" DB's out there. I once saw an interview with Deion where he said someting to the effect of "it's not that I CAN'T tackle, it's just that I DON'T NECESSARILY LIKE to tackle." On this show they quoted him as saying that he "made business decisions" when it came to tackling. You can certainly question his desire to be a physical football player but love him or hate him I don't know of any CB more dangerous to throw at and let's face it, just doing what he did gave his teams a HUGE advantage. But...we digress & go off topic...

CAVEMAN,

CHUCK BEDNARIK IS FAMOUS FOR ALMOST KILLING FRANK GIFFORD. HE COULDN'T CARRY DIONE'S JOCK AS FAR AS BEING A COVER GUY GOES. NOW, DON'T GET ME WRONG, CHUCK WAS A GREAT PLAYER OF PHYSICAL FOOTBALL. DIONE WAS NOT. YOU CAN FIND LOTS OF GUYS WHO CAN HIT, BUT I DARE SAY YOU WILL BE PRESSED TO THE LIMIT TO LOCATE MANY WITH THE COVER TALENT OF DIONE! GREEN OF THE REDSKINS WAS THE ONLY ONE STEP CLOSER I EVER SAW, HIS QUICKNESS WAS AMAZING, BUT IN MY OPINION HE COULDN'T TOUCH DIONE.

Coach Easton-TIGER ONE

-------------------------
J.C. EASTON<BR>HEAD COACH<BR>GA TIGERS FOOTBALL<BR>PROFESSIONAL MINOR LEAGUE

In High School - you CAN play man AND zone if you run basically only ONE variation of EACH & keep it simple. It's hard ENOUGH to teach good technique WITHOUT 1 million adjustments.

I have found zone blitzes to be useless in HS ball, & I don't have time to teach fat-ass DLM to drop into coverage!

-------------------------
Bill Mountjoy

Edited: 7/14/2008 at 12:45 PM by Oneback

Coach Mountjoy,
I totally agree with trying to run zone blitzes with DL dropping in HS ball. We never really seem to find major breakdowns in protections with them and if you're using them to blitz the run you don't want your HS DL thinking "drop" anyway. And even when we DO have a DE with the athleticism to do it, the gain we get out of it is minimal to nothing so we are usually better-off just getting a little "bush league" and simply sending 5 & voiding one of the underneath zones. It's like you said earlier Coach...keep it as simple as you can while being sound & do what you need to do well and you'll usually get the most out of your HS team.

http://multiple7manfront.com.h...ect.com/425Article.htm

this is a link to an article on TCU's defense

Too get pressure on the QB use Bills Tigercat package. Always bringing one more then they can block. We love this vs. the run or pass. Usually run it with in the first 3 plays of the game. If they prove to us they can't handle it we won't stop running it.

Edited: 7/11/2008 at 1:38 PM by newguy

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Oneback
In High School - you CAN play man AND zone if you run basically only ONE variation odf EACH & keep it simple. It's hard ENOUGH to teach good technique WITHOUT 1 million adjustments.

I have found zone blitzes to be useless in HS ball, & I don't have time to teach fat-ass DLM to drop into coverage!

---

I generally AGREE, but one thing that helps us is to have a DE peel off on a RB out of the backfield so our ILB can rush and our FS need not be locked up on that RB. We find this worth the investment in practice time.

For example, this allows us to send 8 vs. a two-back set. If they block with eight, we have 3 on 2 vs the two WRs. If they block with both backs and release the TE, someone is free. The only other thing they can do is release a RB and that is where the "peel" technique can come in handy.

HOPEFULLY, our WSDE is not a total "fat-ass" as Coach Mountjoy artfully puts it.

-------------------------
Scott Orndoff Varsity Assistant Williamsville East High School Williamsville, NY

Caveman,

If you like that type of thing you'd probably like the 46 with it's man-free and "Spy" coverage schemes. If you're not familiar, it's really along the same philosophy - send 5, 6, 7 (or 8 vs. max protection) versus a 21-type of formation, as appropriate - WITHOUT blitz calls. In fact, I'm suprised Coach Mountjoy doesn't use it a lot since it seems to lend itself so well to man-free coverage?

The 46 is a defense that I have really liked a lot but one of the problems you can have with it is it's structure vs. spread teams. For example, versus a 2 WR x 2 WR set you "normally" end-up with 5 DL and only 1 LB in the box. That seems like a decent idea but get that LB to over pursue just a little and you can have some cutback/windback problems. We still use the 46 structure a little but really only if we expect 2 backs.

Johnny Ringo,

I do like the 46. It is great vs 4 WR (2x2 or 3x1) IF the QB is NOT a major threat to run.

-Scott

-------------------------
Scott Orndoff Varsity Assistant Williamsville East High School Williamsville, NY

"EXECUTION ALWAYS BEATS SCHEME"!!! You can do ANYTHING if the kids can executre it well enough. The question always is how much TIME do you have to get enough meaningful reps to get GOOD at something?

When James Madison U. won the Div. IAA National; Championship 2-3 years ago, they quite often played only ONE COVERAGE in a game!

-------------------------
Bill Mountjoy

Edited: 7/14/2008 at 12:50 PM by Oneback

HEY BILL,

What was the one coverage they mastered so well? Ordinarily, I would love to play a team that offers but one coverage most often. Bet it was man straight up, right?

Jerry-TIGER ONE

-------------------------
J.C. EASTON<BR>HEAD COACH<BR>GA TIGERS FOOTBALL<BR>PROFESSIONAL MINOR LEAGUE

Robber vs. 2 back teams (& SOME 1 back teams with 1 or 2 TE's). Man/Free vs. Spread teams - 4 & 5 WR teams! Like everyone else - they also have a "blitz coverage".

The last year U of Delaware ran the Delaware Wing-T - JMU played ROBBER every snap & won!

-------------------------
Bill Mountjoy

Edited: 7/16/2008 at 12:12 PM by Oneback

Guys, I know we're all very busy now...myself included. I just wanted to post on this topic one time to say that, IMHO, while I do like the CONCEPT of the TCU system, after 3 preseason scrimmages I have a renewed reinforcement of the belief (seems to happen every fall) that I have always held and that is that it is most beneificial to BASE our stuff off of an 8-man front (with Robber when we can) and then expand from there as opposed to saying "we are a 4-2-5 team to combat today's spread" and then trying to get get guys back into the box when we NEED it. Just my thoughts, speaking from the HS level, where we face a variation of different types of offensive attacks.

This might should have been a whole new topic but it seems related to my original post about the TCU look...if anyone watched college football this weekend, does it seem that EVERYONE (teams that are a 40-front anyway) is pretty much running this look. Really, what choice do you have when facing so many 3 and 4 WR sets? I am seeing MANY 4-2 fronts with an OLB/SS to the passing strength & two high safeties. Even "4-3 base teams" spend the MAJORITY of the time in a 4-2 box with 5 DB's, whether CB's or Safteies, and on occasion, teams will walk that 2nd ILB out a LITTLE vs. a 2 x 2 look. I guess we may be coming to a point in football where that is the most "basic defense" to run, perhaps as the 50 might have been years ago?

Johnny, I apreciate your desire to find TCU info I am looking for the same typeof stuff. It has been very difficult to find any instalation, video or packages on Bumpas's 4-2-6 that he has runs at TCU.
The multiple coverage schemes can be hard at the HS level Bill hits the nail on the head when he says it comes down to time. For us man cover age (1 or 0) is the first instal for us everything we do is based off of this look our zone coverages always look like man pre snap. If you can not go C-0 properly then you can't bring heat!

If you know of anywhere to find some TCU packages I am very interested, I have searched e-bay and the net but found nothing. There has to be stuff out there, I am going t try and contact TCU in the New Year and see if I can not rustle something up!