- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What's So Wrong With Playing Man to Man
Posted on 9/9/09 at 2:26 pm to Tiger4
Posted on 9/9/09 at 2:26 pm to Tiger4
quote:
We have the talent and the ablity to get the talent we need to play Man to Man, and thats why we should. Its the best way to play d.
this
our defense should dictate what they do, not their offense dictating what our defense does.
it's college football.
force the college QB to make a quick play.
this philosophy works for maineri in taking extra bases fwiw.
you have to force the QB into making a smart quick throw.
1
Posted on 9/9/09 at 2:30 pm to TheDoc
quote:
this philosophy works for maineri in taking extra bases fwiw.
and yet most of the fans on here had a big problem with this during baseball season.......anyone open minded on this subject will realize these are 2 different philosophies and they both work given the right players and that they buy into the philosophy.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 2:34 pm to josh336
+1
I wasn't open to maineri's philosophy when he first got here, and sometimes it doesn't work out, but I am on board 100% with him now.
I like the agressiveness.
I wish we had the agressiveness that we used to have on defense and offense in football.
a sense of urgency in pressuring the QB in trying to force him to make a bad play.
I wasn't open to maineri's philosophy when he first got here, and sometimes it doesn't work out, but I am on board 100% with him now.
I like the agressiveness.
I wish we had the agressiveness that we used to have on defense and offense in football.
a sense of urgency in pressuring the QB in trying to force him to make a bad play.
This post was edited on 9/9/09 at 2:35 pm
Posted on 9/9/09 at 2:56 pm to Green Ram 2
quote:I think ther are a lot of guys that don't understand the technique and scheme differences between playing man to man or zone. Here you go...
What's So Wrong With Playing Man to Man
Man to Man Coverage: The DB has responsibility for a single receiver and follows him everywhere he goes. The DB lines up much closer to the line and plays in the receivers "hip pocket" with his back to the QB. The key to playing this coverage is being physical at the LOS and not letting the receiver get a clean release to throw off timing routes and be able to anticipate when the ball is coming and look back to find it. When playing a man coverage a DB does not see the QB throw the ball and has to read the eyes of the receiver to look back and find the ball. Also, since the technique is to play behind or in the hip pocket of the receiver, a perfectly thrwon ball to the outside shoulder will beat you every time.(see LSU v. UGA 2004) Also, if a receiver gets a clean release, a timing fade will beat you every time. This is a high risk coverage and is predicated on pressure getting to the QB.
Zone Coverage: A DB is responsible for a zone of the field. A player usually lines up further away from the LOS as to see the field better and anticipate when an offensive player is entering his zone. The technique is to play facing the QB and offense (opposed to man coverage and playing with your back to the offense and QB) so you can read the QB's eyes and see players entering your zone at the same time. Once a player enters your zone, he is your responsibility. It is still a version of man coverage without knowing which man is yours pre-snap. You have the man that comes into your zone. The biggest fundamental difference is in a zone coverage you keep the receiver in front of you and can read the QB. This should lead to more interceptions if the players understand their reads and anticipate a receivers route. Our DB's should see the ball leave the QB's hand while in zone coverage and be able to use their speed to make a play on the ball. The key to playing a effective zone is seeing the field and anticipating which receiver is coming into your zone and picking him up early. Among NFL coaches it is widely believed this type of coverage produces more interceptions than a man coverage because DB see the QB's read and release.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 3:55 pm to manwich
quote:True, I could understand if what I said was off the wall and unfounded.
manwich
Posted on 9/9/09 at 4:15 pm to Tiger4
quote:
quote:
I think alot of it depends on the team we are playing.
You can always have the s help.
Yes you can. There are limits though. In Man coverage, your objectives are to to take away the quick passes, lock down the receivers, and force the QB to throw the ball away, have your rushers get a sack or force the QB to run.
If you go man-to-man, the defense will probably keep on safety in cover 1. If the offense spreads out with 3 receivers/TE or 4 receivers, then both of your corners are busy, the other safety and your WLB are accounted for. That is five.
You are rushing AT LEAST four and, probably, want to get a fifth rusher to accomplish your objectives.
So, you flushed the QB out. Now, if the offense knows you are trying to do this, it will run its receivers in certain patterns to clear running lanes, ESPECIALLY for the scrambling type 4.4-4.6 QBs with LB size. Your coverage crew (CB, one safety, and one LB) have their backs turned in man OR out of position to make the play. SO, your cover one safety is the one to make the play. Depending how large the area he is covering and if he has to help out a coverage crew, will determine how fast he can get the QB before he gains too much yardage.
Man coverage can really let a big play happen.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 4:22 pm to bayoubengal225
quote:
suseptable to the big play.
Weren't we hit up for big plays while zoning it practically the entire game against UW?
Posted on 9/9/09 at 4:24 pm to Green Ram 2
The zone defense was created to stop the late Dallas Cowboys' receiver, Bob Hayes, from having his way with slower DBs in the 1960s. LSU's DBs are better athletes than most all receivers they will see this year. With that is time to go man to man!
Posted on 9/9/09 at 4:37 pm to GatorTrunk
I don't mind the zone play I just wish they would play tighter to the LOS.
We have PP on one he should knock the hell out of every WR he faces right off the line.
We have PP on one he should knock the hell out of every WR he faces right off the line.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 4:55 pm to GallatinTiger
quote:
Weren't we hit up for big plays while zoning it practically the entire game against UW?
i know at LEAST 2 of the 5 plays we were playing man to man coverage in
Posted on 9/9/09 at 4:56 pm to GatorTrunk
quote:
The zone defense was created to stop the late Dallas Cowboys' receiver, Bob Hayes, from having his way with slower DBs in the 1960s. LSU's DBs are better athletes than most all receivers they will see this year. With that is time to go man to man!
the steelers do pretty well playing lots of zone, and the game has changed since the 60's especially with the dawn of the spread offense. You have a pretty limited way of viewing things
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:01 pm to Green Ram 2
This game was used as a coaching tool to get our defense up to SEC speed.
The coaching staff concentrated on zone coverages this game. This week they will be able to use this game as a teaching tool to learn who performed correctly and who needs futher instruction.
Hopefully by the third or fourth game, the defense will have most of the wrinkles worked out. Winning ugly if needed is the way to go during the first four games.
Miles and staff are pointing to the Georgia game. Until then, we have the luxury of coaching to teach and get better. Against Georgia, we will start coaching to win big.
The coaching staff concentrated on zone coverages this game. This week they will be able to use this game as a teaching tool to learn who performed correctly and who needs futher instruction.
Hopefully by the third or fourth game, the defense will have most of the wrinkles worked out. Winning ugly if needed is the way to go during the first four games.
Miles and staff are pointing to the Georgia game. Until then, we have the luxury of coaching to teach and get better. Against Georgia, we will start coaching to win big.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:04 pm to Bad Cat
quote:
Against Georgia, we will start coaching to win big.
we'll see
what about those college geeks?
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:05 pm to Green Ram 2
I remember when we played so much man-to-man with Saban, people were questioning whether we should play more zone.
Playing man cost us some games late in the game with our guys getting beat deep.
Me, I like to see a mix. I personally prefer man-to-man, but maybe because I haven't seen much zone at LSU.
Some how I think I'll get schooled in zone this year.
Is that a zone when I see, what, 4 players stretched across the field between the linebackers and the safety. I saw that against Washington and it look like it could be easy pickin's for the slant and tightend cutting up over the middle straight out.
Playing man cost us some games late in the game with our guys getting beat deep.
Me, I like to see a mix. I personally prefer man-to-man, but maybe because I haven't seen much zone at LSU.
Some how I think I'll get schooled in zone this year.
Is that a zone when I see, what, 4 players stretched across the field between the linebackers and the safety. I saw that against Washington and it look like it could be easy pickin's for the slant and tightend cutting up over the middle straight out.
This post was edited on 9/9/09 at 5:48 pm
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:08 pm to mrbayoublu
quote:
easy pickin's for the slant and tightend cutting up over the middle straight out.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:13 pm to TheDoc
When I said easy pickin's, I didn't mean interceptions, but rather easy throw and catch for the offense.
Heck, I confuse myself, so what do I know.
Heck, I confuse myself, so what do I know.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:23 pm to mrbayoublu
Usually, it isn't the idea of zone vs man but trying to disguise which coverage you will be in and where the seams in the zone will be. An experienced quarterback can tell pretty easily what type of coverage you will have. But if you fill the zones right, he has trouble knowing what areas will have a defender and what areas will not. The coach who shall not be named was very good at fooling quarterbacks into misreading coverages.
This post was edited on 9/9/09 at 5:24 pm
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:32 pm to dinosaur
The following is my humble opinion:
Big fan of man to man. But man and zone are those kind of things where "there's a time and place" and it's the coaches job to know. I dont know Chavis' tract record, but im guessing he is more of a zone coach. Whether we play zone or man is largely up to the coach. With Saban i felt like we played man a lot because he was a DB and that was his highest priority. Miles is offensive so its different. We've won championships with both so its hard to argue. Like i said... its situational.
Big fan of man to man. But man and zone are those kind of things where "there's a time and place" and it's the coaches job to know. I dont know Chavis' tract record, but im guessing he is more of a zone coach. Whether we play zone or man is largely up to the coach. With Saban i felt like we played man a lot because he was a DB and that was his highest priority. Miles is offensive so its different. We've won championships with both so its hard to argue. Like i said... its situational.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:35 pm to bayoubengal225
quote:
suseptable to the big play.
This begs the question, Have we prevented the big play for the past two years?
Seems soft zone gives up huge play after huge play.
Posted on 9/9/09 at 5:39 pm to Green Ram 2
It worked in the NC verse Ohio St.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News