The official offseason is here. So before we get into training camp and the news cycle starts again, let’s get into some technical questions that you guys were wondering about or just general opinions from a film guy. There were a lot of questions, so I apologize if I didn’t get to yours.
Are there any plays or developments in CFB that you expect to see in the NFL? — Michael B
Though using three safeties isn’t anything new in college and NFL teams have dabbled with it, I think this year we’ll see teams actually make it a bigger part of their defenses based on how some teams drafted and coach’s comments made afterward. The Ravens drafted Kyle Hamilton with their first pick even though they already had two very good safeties in Chuck Clark and Marcus Wiliams, who they signed in free agency. Though some of that was value-based, their new defensive coordinator Mike Macdonald used three safety packages with the University of Michigan and I can’t imagine they are just going to have quality players sit on the bench.
One of Macdonald’s Michigan safeties, Dax Hill, got drafted in the first round by the Bengals. Like the Ravens, the Bengals already have two good safeties (Jessie Bates and Vonn Bell). In the press conference after the Bengals picked Hill, defensive coordinator Lou Anarumo talked about using three safety packages in the past and expressed his excitement for how they’ll use Hill.
The Chargers have Derwin James and Nasir Adderley. After drafting JT Woods in the third round, head coach Brandon Staley said they drafted him to play deep, which would free James to move around the defense.
Safeties are often more versatile than linebackers or traditional nickels. They can play deep, play underneath zones, fit the run and some have the man-to-man ability. Getting more versatility on the field obviously can be very useful against modern offenses.
In my day, teams deployed defensive ends and outside linebackers. Today it seems the term edge rusher is used often and wondered if it applies to both positions, and why the change in terminology? — T.J.
Even-front teams will have defensive ends as the primary edge defenders, while odd-front teams will have outside linebackers do the same job. In an even-front team, outside linebackers play on the second level so it’s a different position than outside linebackers in an odd front. Odd-front outside linebackers will occasionally have to drop back but they are mostly rushing the quarterback and when the team is in its nickel personnel (five defensive backs), odd-front teams will usually line up in four-man defensive lines with the outside linebacker playing end. So the shift from using edge defender is simply to clear the confusion and group even-front ends with odd-front outside linebackers because they mostly do the same job.
Can you talk about the pros and cons of running a 4-3 vs. 3-4 base defense? 4-3 makes more intuitive sense to me but I know some teams prefer a 3-4 base and have always wondered how these schemes affect the play of the game. — Cody W.
The lines have been blurred between a 4-3 and 3-4 for a while now but usually 4-3 defenses will single-gap, meaning they’ll have their defensive linemen responsible for playing one gap, so they can aggressively come off the ball and play their gap. Traditionally, 3-4 teams will have their defensive linemen come off the ball with control and play offensive linemen, attempting to play two gaps. This is an extremely difficult technique to execute and takes some massive human beings to do.
They may not have been the first team to do this but in 2012, the Patriots were mixing in 4-3 principles into their 3-4, which Chris Brown wrote about brilliantly in his Ode to the War Daddies.
Diagram from Brown’s article
In Brown’s article, he diagrammed how the Patriots lined up in 4-3 with one-gap techniques on one side (right of the diagram) and lined up in 3-4 with two-gap principles on the other. Other teams have different ways of playing both types of fronts and today, defenses have to play so much nickel personnel (five defensive backs) that they end up just playing with four-man lines anyways.
In a single-gap 4-3, you have to have every gap accounted for, which means against certain formations you have to have the strong safety in the box, which can make you susceptible to play-action deep shots.
Today, Vic Fangio and Brandon Staley’s odd-front defense is becoming popularized. Their defensive line will play sort of a mix of one-gap and two-gap techniques known as playing a gap-and-a-half technique. Their job is to slow down ball carriers and make them bounce outside to help. This allows them to play with fewer defenders in the box.
Ted, I’m trying to learn to break down game film. Do you have any recommendations for how to watch tape like an analyst? — John G.
It really depends on what your expertise level is at the moment. For the average viewer, I wrote about how to watch football like an expert from the comfort of your own couch. There are so many great resources available. I used to go to coaching clinics every year but now you can buy some great ones from high-profile coaches on websites like CoachTube. Learning how coaches look at the game and the detail that goes into every play, technique and overall scheme will change the way you watch the game and break down film.
How would an NFL offense perform if they passed EVERY play? Take, say, the 10th to 15th best passing attack, not the Chiefs, how would they perform? We say the league is more pass-heavy in general, so what would happen if a team took that trend to the extreme? — Matt B.
This is an interesting question because the NFL is beginning to answer it. Teams like the Chiefs and Bills have cranked up passing with their demi-god quarterbacks and defenses have responded and had some success in slowing them down by playing more two-high structures (two deep safeties). The increase in passing is why Fangio’s defense that commits to showing two deep safeties as much as possible before the snap is being popularized in the NFL. Mike Sando and I wrote about teams pushing the limits of passing, the defensive response and how it affected the league’s best quarterbacks last season here.
If teams don’t respect the run, defenses become looser, less structured and less predictable. Having to play with an extra defender and strict gap responsibilities forces defenses to align in a certain way that is advantageous to the passing game and creates space downfield. So if a team really starts passing every down, defenses are just going to call exotic pressures with defenders lined up wherever they want which can make calling protections a nightmare. Coverage defenders will likely line up like they do in Fangio-influenced defenses and play everything from the top down and without having to worry about the run they can play even looser and disguise even longer. So basically, there will be no predictable structure for offenses to work off of.
During the last two minutes of a meaningful game, it almost seems inevitable that the two-minute warning will yield decent chunks of yardage (even if they don’t score). Why has this high-paced, pass-driven, hurry-up not been adopted for more non-two-minute warning schemes, even if done periodically? Yes, the defensive mentality for a two-minute warning vs. a full game is different, but there have to be advantages to continually having the defense not establishing itself. — Ethan F.
The offense has a few advantages in two-minute drills. Defenses will play more conservatively because they don’t want to give up a big play so they won’t blitz much, play vanilla schemes and play softer than usual. They’ll give up easy short completions and try to rally up to tackle players inbounds. Also, they are very focused on stopping sideline passes to keep the clock moving or force an offense to burn their timeouts, so this leaves the middle of the field more vulnerable. These two constraints open more space for quarterbacks to attack. A team with a good quarterback and offense that is well-versed in situational football and has its no-huddle/spiking procedures down can maximize its opportunities and get into position to score.
Going no-huddle not only makes defenses more predictable, it could make your offense more predictable because you have a limited menu of formations, pre-snap movements and plays that you can communicate at the line of scrimmage. Peyton Manning seemed to have everything at his disposal at the line of scrimmage but he was constantly tinkering with his signals — not every quarterback and team can do what he and the Colts did. Also, if your offense isn’t clicking and you’re coming off the field without using much time, you’re putting an immense amount of pressure on your defense (see Chip Kelly’s Eagles and 49ers teams).
Many, if not all, teams have a hurry-up mode they can use at any point in the game to give defenses different looks and catch them off guard. Offenses have many types of tempos and pre-snap procedures that they can use in-game. Chris Brown (who I mentioned in an earlier answer) also wrote a fantastic article on the different types of tempos offenses can use.
Aside from the very elite WRs, who would be the best fit to pair with Justin Fields? Who do the Bears need to acquire to help Fields succeed? — Roddie D.
Fields is a big-game hunter — he wants to look for deep opportunities downfield. I love his aggression but the lack of talent on the offensive line and wide receiver room last season led to a lot of negative plays. Still, I think it’s better for a quarterback to play with aggression and have experience temper him down than to try to get a conservative quarterback to play more aggressively. That being said, I think Fields needs receivers who can get open deep and make plays downfield. Receivers can win deep in a variety of ways, not just with speed. They can be exceptional route runners or jump-ball winners. I think Fields is accurate enough to throw to receivers with different body types but I want to see him throw with receivers specializing in winning downfield.
The Lions WR room/outlook looks vastly different this year compared to last year (Amon-Ra St. Brown looking like he might be a dude, Jameson Williams … ). How much of an impact could you see that making when they still have Jared Goff throwing the ball? Could the Lions actually put enough points on the board to make up for their defensive liability? — Michael B.
Goff has shown that he can be a decent quarterback in favorable situations. He’s greatly affected by pressure but luckily for him, the Lions offensive line is a talented group when healthy. When St. Brown began to emerge, Goff started playing a lot better toward the latter part of the season. Williams will be an instant deep threat and although Goff doesn’t have the best arm in the league, he can throw a beautiful deep ball when he has time. Goff looks like he has all the tools to be successful, so it wouldn’t surprise me if he throws 25 to 27 touchdown passes this season. I think the offense will surprise some people but I can also see Detroit struggling against some of the elite defenses this season. We’ve seen Goff’s ceiling, it’s not abundantly high but he’s capable of strong play when the pieces are in place.
(Top photo of Chuck Clark: Patrick Smith / Getty Images)