1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

4-5-2 defenses

Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by rodrigo, May 19, 2009.

  1. rodrigo

    rodrigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    96
    So, having learned my lesson and taken Sackman to heart, I forthwith aspire to be part of the solution (hopefully) to the problem (at least in my mind) of droning posts.

    What do folks think of the trend toward 4-2-5 defenses in the Big XII? Gimmicks? While they might help slow down pass-happy TTech and force spread offenses out of their comfort zones, could they prove susceptible to teams - we all know who - that feature down-hill running attacks?
     
  2. KingPants

    KingPants Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,416
    Likes Received:
    153
    I think that you mean a 2-5-4 d. I don't want to play with on ly 2 in the secondary. (I might have that backwards, but I don't think so)
     
  3. BuffaloScott

    BuffaloScott Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Messages:
    637
    Likes Received:
    16
    I'm pretty sure he means 4-2-5. 4 linemen, 2 linebackers, 5 in the secondary.
     
  4. rodrigo

    rodrigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    96
    Sorry, my f-up. BuffScott is correct: 4 linemen, 2 backers, five in the secondary = as I write in the post.
     
  5. El Gringo

    El Gringo Pura Vida Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    5,162
    Likes Received:
    576
    If memory serves me right, the Buffs tried that in 2003 under the tutelage of Vince Okruch, and it didn't turn out so well. He was fired at the end of the season.

    By default, you have to have a nickle back on the field against offenses that put 4 receivers out there, and you often see dime packages as well. Hawk is doing this already.

    I think Hawk is building towards a modified 4-2-5 system. He has recruited several "tweeners" on defense - fast LBs who are on the smaller side. Guys like Derreck Webb, Paul Vigo, Josh Hartigan, Nate Vaiomounga (before he got kicked off the team). These guys are fast and athletic enough to go into coverage, and strong and agressive enough to mix it up against the run.

    I don't think we'll see a true 4-2-5 defense anytime soon. Anyway, we're moving to more 3-4 sets on D, again with fast coverage OLBs and a hearty dose of nickel backs.

    As an aside, I hope I never see the 2-0-9 defense again - like the one we put up against Baylor in 2006 on the 4th & 25 in OT - and they SCORED!
     
  6. rodrigo

    rodrigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    96
    Actually, I meant other teams employing it, not the Buffs.

    You all know I hate the guy but this comes from ESPN's Griffen:

    "A more interesting trend to me has been the rash of 4-2-5 defenses that teams are tinkering with around the conference. Kansas, Kansas State and Texas all appeared to be happy with using a nickel package as their base defense. And it makes sense in the Big 12 because of all of the high-powered offenses those teams regularly face. The best way to shackle the Big 12's aerial circuses will be to play five and sometimes six defensive backs in coverage."
     
  7. Junction

    Junction Moderator Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    47,534
    Likes Received:
    1,000,005
    I think it's something teams have to be able to do, with the number of teams like TT, Mizzou, KU, and even OU employing more sets with huge numbers of wide receivers/shotgun sets, etc. in the Big XII these days. Teams are having to recruit guys who fit the scheme, and spend more and more time in that defense. Which is exactly why, aside from the fact that it is real football the way real men play it, I want to see the Buffs offense be able to line up and run the ball down the throats of opposing defenses and the Buffs o-line in particular be able to dominate in the trenches. The more teams are used to chasing around after finesse offenses the more effective a true power running game is going to be against them.... :thumbsup:
     
  8. rodrigo

    rodrigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    96
    :thumbsup:
     
  9. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,401
    Likes Received:
    4,420
    It should create matchup problems for opposing defenses. From a pure numbers perspective, five OL, one TE and one FB against 4 DL and 2 LB should create a lot of running opportunities.

    Even if teams change up their scheme to specifically try to stop the power running game, it would take them out of their base and their personnel wouldn't be as well equipped to handle the offense.

    As for CU running it, as mentioned, Okruch tried it once and it was an unmitigated disaster. I think you structure your defense around the talent you have. The talent on this roster is suited for a 3-4, IMO. Good, strong, athletic linebackers and fundamentally sound safeties and cornerbacks. Not a ton of depth on the DL.
     
  10. rodrigo

    rodrigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    96
    The thing I like about this is the potential to pull the dbs toward the line. Just my opinion, but one of the plays I'll never tire of is Geer running free down the middle of the field circa TTech 2006, Nebraska 2008.
     
  11. Mick Ronson

    Mick Ronson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    9,854
    Likes Received:
    266
    that's what we are telling ourselves....but unless Cody can make some throws, teams will stack the line. if we're one-dimensional, all this smashmouth, downhill run game stuff doesn't mean a lot.

    now, what i'm optimistic about is that with an improved run game, we'll be a lot more versatile and Cody more effective on 3rd and 4 than the steady diets of 3rd and 8 or 11 we saw last year. long down and distance was not a positive for us last year....no pass protection, way behind the chains, QB with average mobility and arm strength....bad combo.
     
  12. Duff Man

    Duff Man Moderator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    39,577
    Likes Received:
    4,546
    I just hope Kiesau has a better flow to playcalling than Helfrich did. Lack of talent certainly dug us into those third and longs, but playcalling also played a role.

    As far as the rest of the thread, good points all around. One thing I am happy to see in our defensive recruiting is an emphasis on bigger/taller DBs. With teams rolling out 3-4 tall WRs at any given time, shorter DBs can really be put on an island. Would not mind seeing some more athleticism at safety though. We have not had great coverage skills out of that unit for a while now.
     
  13. MtnBuff

    MtnBuff Not allowed in Barzil 2 Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    26,380
    Likes Received:
    2,313
    I am always interested in exactly how much like sheep football coaches can be. If a team won a championship having their WRs line up facing the opposite direction from the play then turning and running, the next year we would see at least 25% of the teams trying it even if they had no idea what the purpose, strategy, or reason for doing it was.

    Right now college teams are all going to the spread offense and many are going to 4-2-5 defenses. They are doing it because other teams have had some success and they want to copy the success. They are not worrying about if they have the personel to run these sets, the coaching knowledge to teach them, or how their opponents will react to them.

    I do not want to see us go back to a triple option offense or the old 4-4-3 box defense but I think that the Buffs and other teams would do well to go against the trends. The reasons for this are multiple. One is that when everyone is playing the spread offense, that means that everyone is practicing against it as well, both preparing their own offense that is running it and simulating their other opponents who are also running it. Run a solid run oriented pro-set and you give the opponent something they are not completely ready for. Run a solid 4-3 defense and your opponents will see something that they have not had a lot of time to prepare for and that they are not built to simulate in practice. As an extreem example of this look at how many physically superior teams really struggle against the Air Force option taking a good part of the game just to figure out their assignments.

    Another issue is talent, clearly different players are better suited to play in different systems. When everybody was trying to copy OU and Texas, etc. running triple option, the huge premium was on QBs who could make that offense run. Unfortunately that meant that a lot of teams played with guys who really weren't that good at the offense and more traditional drop-back passers had a hard time finding a place to play. Right now everybody wants QBs with the spread skillset, there aren't that many of them out there and the ones who are are usually going to the same top schools, other teams end up trying to force guys to be something they are not. Defense is the same situation. If the Buffs tried going to a 4-2-5 it would mean that some of our best recruits would have to either sit or play out of position. We are deep at LB, we are not as deep at Safety.

    The 4-2-5 defense and the spread offense will last until somebody starts to dominate using something else, then the hoard will rush to copy that sytem waiting for the next change. My belief is that teams that consistently win know who they are and what they do and do it exceedingly well. Winners are not build on adapting to others, they come from making others adapt to them.

    If CU can move their execution up significantly this year, expecially on offense it won't matter what system they are running. If we have an effective running game that controls the line of scrimmage and an efficient passing game that can move the chains when needed and comand enough respect to keep the pressure off the running game we will win and in bunchs, if not it will be a long season of whining about different systems that would in truth not make much difference without execution.
     
  14. buffs04

    buffs04 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,484
    Likes Received:
    223
    As long as CU isn't "running the spread" - or whatever modified version of it they have been toying around with lately - I will be happy; we just don't have the personnel for it.
     
  15. BehindEnemyLines

    BehindEnemyLines beware the habu Club Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    14,560
    Likes Received:
    913
    When an O takes the field, a d/c, or someone else, in the coaches box (overhead) signals the sidelines what personnel set they will be facing. Hence, if the O runs out a TE and a FB, the opposing D isn't gonna put a 4-2-5 on the field.

    If we move away from the spread offense this year, to a more traditional set, we'll see traditional 4-3 and 3-4 sets from the opposing defenses.
     
  16. zbuff

    zbuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,378
    Likes Received:
    688
    I'm a little concerned that the defenses will think the game has "slowed down" a bit, adjusting to a running game may be easier than a complex passing attack. But if our OL stays healthy and gets the blocks, I like the chances of our 4 RBs to run for daylight. We really need to be able to mix it up. Not the run, run, save us John offense of Dan Reeves, who then drafted, not Carl Pickens who would have torn defenses a new one, but Tommy Maddox - arghh! pull me back... Whew! that was close.
     
  17. rodrigo

    rodrigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    96
    Question would be, as others have pointed out, would they necessarily have the personnel to be effective against the run, especially if they've been recruiting for and spending the bulk of their practice preparing for spreads? It's one thing to run big bodies out on the field; it's quite another for them make plays.
     
  18. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,401
    Likes Received:
    4,420
    This is true, to a point. If a team practices against a spread, and for 10 weeks out of the year is playing against a spread or some variation of it, then when an opponent comes out and lines up in a power I, they won't have the personnel to adequately defend it. They may have the numbers, but not the expertise.
     
  19. HuskerH8tr

    HuskerH8tr Guest

    With our strength at Linebacker and questions on the D-line, I think a 3-3-5 would be a good fit with a steady blitz package on running downs. Our safeties are good enough to step up in run support and the LBs are fast and strong enough to step in to the line on the inside and help contain on the outside. The 5 DBs will serve to plug the holes in the zone/passing lanes that have plagued us in recent years.
     
  20. Highflyer

    Highflyer Moderator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    11,417
    Likes Received:
    442
    Man, I sure hope we get at least two break out DLmen this year. The incoming freshmen are talented but still frosh. We need at least two from this group to step up: Herrod, Cunningham, Goree, Obi, Shields, Pericak and Kaynor. From those guys I'm not sure where a pass rush comes from. :huh:
     
  21. Duff Man

    Duff Man Moderator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    39,577
    Likes Received:
    4,546
    I actually feel pretty good about the DTs. We might be a little undersized, but I think we'll be pretty decent there. The DEs are another story. I don't see any pass rushers from that group either.
     
  22. HuskerH8tr

    HuskerH8tr Guest

    Unfortunately, it appears that a majortiy of our pass rush is going to come out of the LBs on blitz schemes; either by way of the LBs themselves or by virtue of missed assignments by the offense picking up the blitz and letting the lineman in.
     
  23. BuffsRising

    BuffsRising Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,017
    Likes Received:
    113
    I think we need to remember that the 4-2-5 that we played in 2003 was with a 3rd linebacker who was lined up as a safety (Iwuh). That was stupid, even when Iwuh knew where to line up, which wasn't often.

    If we line up with 5 DB's, that 5th DB wouldn't be a lb out of position, it would be a 3rd cb lined up over a wr. From what I've heard, the corners are going to be playing press coverage, and to do that against a spread, we need enough corners to cover all the wr's man to man.
     
  24. HuskerH8tr

    HuskerH8tr Guest

    and 2 good safeties to clean up and help!
     
  25. BuffsRising

    BuffsRising Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,017
    Likes Received:
    113
    Yeah, having Mahnke back there to "clean up" some guy's face sounds good. Actually, though, he is probably spending time with qb's this year. Hope we get a chance to see Sam Bradford get Ganz-ed!
     
  26. HuskerH8tr

    HuskerH8tr Guest

    With our LBs and safeties, I think the D will be pretty aggressive...need to get some picks and sacks this year though, no pressure at all last year!
     
  27. Darth Snow

    Darth Snow Hawaiian Buffalo Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Messages:
    56,878
    Likes Received:
    4,903
    as an aside to all this "opposing defenses won't practice against the Iformation and therefore won't be as good at stopping it..." talk, remember, that goes both ways. If our Defense is practicing against pro style sets all day, it won't get to practice against proficient spread attacks, and should be at something of a disadvantage. However, playing them everyweek should alleviate some of that.
     
  28. SBG

    SBG Formerly known as EFNMB Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    6,826
    Likes Received:
    504
    That's why we have a scout team though. Most other teams' scout teams will be running a spread offense, not a pro-style offense most of the time. That's where the potential advantage lies.
     
  29. Highflyer

    Highflyer Moderator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    11,417
    Likes Received:
    442
    All of this talk about an advantage that the Buffs may have by facing teams that primarily run a 4-2-5 is over looking the Buffs greatest advantage....

    Cody will be wearing a visor.
     
  30. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,401
    Likes Received:
    4,420


    And generate a pass rush. Extremely important when playing man to man. the DB's cannot hold coverage for more than a few seconds. Playing press coverage will work, especially against these spread offenses that depend on WR's being in specific places at specific times. Get them off their routes and you can be effective. If you don't do that, well, you get blown out 58-0. :cry:
     

Share This Page