Quick Question for Defensive Alignment Enthusiasts :-)

[Surge89]

I'm not too big on knowing Defensive schemes (offensive player) but why is it that Mathis has been confined to a role that resembles a 4-3 DE?  From what I see he is being repeatedly stuck in the same position that he has played since he started in the league and while I know he has had awesome results and it is familiar to him I'm just trying to understand why wouldn't we play him standing up a bit more.  

 

I think putting him in that "niche" takes away scheme opportunity and also either:

 

1. Delays his drop into coverage

 

2. Telegraphs his rush spot

 

If he stood up a bit more and maybe crossed over the Gaurd he might be even more effective.  Just a thought and question.  You never know I might be blind and not see them doing this already :-). 

[OffensivelyPC]

The reason for that is because of his familiarity with being a 4-3 DE with us in years past.  If it ain't broke, then don't fix it, you know?  And while he is "delayed" in his drop to coverage, which occurs with very little frequency (you'll see Walden in coverage more than Mathis), his initial responsibility is going to be the TE and second on any crossing routes.  But those will come later in the play so he'll have some time to recover and limit the play.  Keep in mind that the CB will stay on this slant (if not in man) until the exchange between the CB and DE.  May not have many knockdowns or interceptions, but its more about playing the odds. 

 

As for #2, that's really not much of a concern.  The OL knows where you are at all times during the pre-snap, or they should at least.  What they don't know until the ball is snapped is what matters.  They won't know if you'll rush off the edge or do some stunt where lineman and/or linebackers cross gap coverage (forgive me, I'm spacing on all the terms).  The idea is to confuse the OL into screwing up protection and get a free lane to the QB.

[Danfish98]

The scheme has helped him to leading the league in sacks and having a shot at the single season sack record, so I'd say it's working well for him.

[Tark The Shark]

I think we kept Mathis in the 3 point stance because of his familiarity with it. Pagano knows that this is a wily older vet who knows how to play DE in a 3 point stance. Why fix it when it isn't broke, especially with his career year this year in sacks. For which I think it contributes to the bigger guys up front giving Mathis more 1 on 1 opportunities against the LT, which he will win half the time.

[RomanianColtsFan]

I saw RJF dropping in coverage in the Houston game. I thought that was hilarious.

[CS Colts Fan]

I would have liked them to have switched him to the right side more against Houstan... he couldn't get past Brown... 

[Superman]

I'm not too big on knowing Defensive schemes (offensive player) but why is it that Mathis has been confined to a role that resembles a 4-3 DE?  From what I see he is being repeatedly stuck in the same position that he has played since he started in the league and while I know he has had awesome results and it is familiar to him I'm just trying to understand why wouldn't we play him standing up a bit more.  

 

I think putting him in that "niche" takes away scheme opportunity and also either:

 

1. Delays his drop into coverage

 

2. Telegraphs his rush spot

 

If he stood up a bit more and maybe crossed over the Gaurd he might be even more effective.  Just a thought and question.  You never know I might be blind and not see them doing this already :-). 

 

Mathis is the Rush backer. By design, he lines up on the weakside of the formation 95% of the time. That frees him up to go one on one with an offensive tackle without being double teamed. The offense can kind of dictate which side he lines up on if they prefer a particular matchup. The Texans liked Brown vs. Mathis, so they mostly went strong right, especially in passing situations. 

 

If we wanted, we could put Mathis on the strongside, but the responsibilities are different. He needs to take on the outside blocker on run downs, he's more likely to be double teamed on passing downs, and his pass rush is going to be slowed because he has to pay more attention to reading the flow of the play. 

 

I believe he is free to choose his stance most of the time. If he wants to stay in a two point stance, he can. But he's better at beating tackles from a three point stance, especially on passing downs.

 

What happened on Sunday is that the Texans slowed our defensive front with the bootlegs and the counters, and then Duane Brown had a great game pass blocking. You don't fix that by putting Mathis on the strongside. I think they should have shifted to an under, kept Mathis in a two point on the weakside, and forced the Texans to counter by using an extra tight end or putting the fullback on the weakside. Then their run game is affected, you get some better matchups along the interior of the line, and you can make some plays. 

[Surge89]

The reason for that is because of his familiarity with being a 4-3 DE with us in years past.  If it ain't broke, then don't fix it, you know?  And while he is "delayed" in his drop to coverage, which occurs with very little frequency (you'll see Walden in coverage more than Mathis), his initial responsibility is going to be the TE and second on any crossing routes.  But those will come later in the play so he'll have some time to recover and limit the play.  Keep in mind that the CB will stay on this slant (if not in man) until the exchange between the CB and DE.  May not have many knockdowns or interceptions, but its more about playing the odds. 

 

As for #2, that's really not much of a concern.  The OL knows where you are at all times during the pre-snap, or they should at least.  What they don't know until the ball is snapped is what matters.  They won't know if you'll rush off the edge or do some stunt where lineman and/or linebackers cross gap coverage (forgive me, I'm spacing on all the terms).  The idea is to confuse the OL into screwing up protection and get a free lane to the QB.

 

Thanks! good points.  I do see the logic I was just wondering if utilizing him in more places would improve his chances even more.  I think of the situation in comparison to Reggie.  When he was on the Left all those years he put up great numbers, but when he got moved around everywhere last year he really showed he can play any aspect of the receiver position.  Maybe not the fairest analogy but that is where my initial thought came from.

[Surge89]

Mathis is the Rush backer. By design, he lines up on the weakside of the formation 95% of the time. That frees him up to go one on one with an offensive tackle without being double teamed. The offense can kind of dictate which side he lines up on if they prefer a particular matchup. The Texans liked Brown vs. Mathis, so they mostly went strong right, especially in passing situations. 

 

If we wanted, we could put Mathis on the strongside, but the responsibilities are different. He needs to take on the outside blocker on run downs, he's more likely to be double teamed on passing downs, and his pass rush is going to be slowed because he has to pay more attention to reading the flow of the play. 

 

I believe he is free to choose his stance most of the time. If he wants to stay in a two point stance, he can. But he's better at beating tackles from a three point stance, especially on passing downs.

 

What happened on Sunday is that the Texans slowed our defensive front with the bootlegs and the counters, and then Duane Brown had a great game pass blocking. You don't fix that by putting Mathis on the strongside. I think they should have shifted to an under, kept Mathis in a two point on the weakside, and forced the Texans to counter by using an extra tight end or putting the fullback on the weakside. Then their run game is affected, you get some better matchups along the interior of the line, and you can make some plays. 

 

Got ya!

 

It makes sense, I was just wondering if moving him would improve play like I mentioned in my comment above :-).

[Superman]

Got ya!

 

It makes sense, I was just wondering if moving him would improve play like I mentioned in my comment above :-).

 

We do move him, and I think we will continue to do so as Werner gets back in the mix. I think we'll see Werner playing Rush and Mathis playing Sam on predictable passing downs. But that takes Walden off the field, and he's actually been rushing the passer well the past three games or so. Using Werner and Mathis will be a good strategy against teams that spread their receivers out with no tight end, because it will allow both of them to go one on one against tackles.

[BOTT]

The Ravens, where Pagano comes from, pretty much does the same thing with Suggs.