This can be misconstrued as you want adjustments for the sake of adjustments. QB scampers for 16 yards, so now you dedicate a LB to Spy. Now the TE is always finding holes in the zone coverage. So go more man coverage. Now the WR's are getting open via crossers and double moves. You could be constantly making adjustments and being one step behind the offense.
I dunno. At some point, you have to have confidence in your scheme and what you have practiced. You also have to realize that after three drives of them getting points, you might wanna adjust. I guess this is why there's only 32 of those positions available in the world.Â
A defense that I would like to see is one that is constantly getting after the QB. Make him uncomfortable. When so many were slamming Rashan Gary, I was repeatedly saying, but he is getting in the QB face. That is huge. Make that QB know you are coming. You might not have got to him that play, but guess what biotch, I am gonna be back in 40 seconds.Â
I'll take sound tackling, CB's that play more press coverage than off coverage (situationally speaking) and schemed up blitzes. And just a take no prisoners mentality defense. I miss guys like Wayne Simmons and even Desmond Bishop. Straight up thumpers. I think the defense is missing that guy that puts fear into offenses.Â
You also have to choose what you're willing to give up. You will not stop everything. It's impossible. The Packers deploy a scheme that is susceptible to getting run on, but doesn't give up big play passing yards. This works amazing when your offense is putting up points. And that there is why I worry we'll have Joe Barry next year. The defense is schemed to protect a lead, not play from behind while the offense chews up clock by dinking and dunking and running the ball for small/big chunks.
Â
Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool
You make a great argument.
Just to be clear, my background is Accounting, and I'm conservative anti-risk when it comes to defensive play calling and I absolutely worry about too much change and as you talked about, you have to set up a base and trust your base to some degree.
I certainly don't want change for change nor adjustment for adjustments sake... quote the opposite, the Seahawks set up a great scheme that basically needed no adjustments during their legion of boom run on defense.
That being said, this is not that scheme, this is Vic Fangio's scheme which is designed to often be switching between cover 2 and cover 3 zone concepts and mixing some other stuff in as surprise change-ups.
And while I'm more conservative and want less chance and adjustment and to usually stick to the base... Barry is on the ultra extreme of that... delaying the adjustments,. waiting to see if they switch back or not for two more drives...
I agree with what you're suggesting should happen... but Barry adjustments are just way too late. And usually I'm the one suggesting they not make big changes...
Also, on a side note... since we drafted ILB Walker and he's basically a LB coverage specialist... I was absolutely sure they would throw in a couple of Tampa 2 Coverage... just as a change up. Maybe only run it 10 to 50 snaps all season... but still we would see it pop up some... I'm sad to say I haven't seen it once ...Â
But I feel like Joe Barry play calling and Vic Fangio's system, do not match at all... Joe Barry needs to make adjustments faster in almost any system... but especially a system that's based on making more adjustments, is an extra bad fit for him.