Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

We are moving back to a 4-3 zone defense


BlueShoe
 Share

Recommended Posts

Matt Eberflus is staying. He is our DC moving forward. 

 

Ballard confirmed this in his conference. It was a detail that I think went overlooked by many. 

 

Matt Eberflus (Rod Marinelli - Tony Dungy tree).

 

Marinelli has morphed his style of zone defense (his version of the Tampa 2) over the years. This defense is not exactly what we saw in Indy under Tony Dungy, but it has some sprinkles of what we used to run. Marinelli has done a good job of mixing in some single high safety looks and man-to-man packages. Obviously we will see some cover 2 as well.

 

Matt Eberflus is bringing the Rod Marinelli defense with him to Indy. 

 

The defense will be built on speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 minute ago, BlueShoe said:

Matt Eberflus is staying. He is our DC moving forward. 

 

Ballard confirmed this in his conference. It was a detail that I think went overlooked by many. 

 

Matt Eberflus (Rod Marinelli - Tony Dungy tree).

 

Marinelli has morphed his style of zone defense (his version of the Tampa 2) over the years. This defense is not exactly what we saw in Indy under Tony Dungy, but it has some sprinkles of what we used to run. Marinelli has done a good job of mixing in some single high safety looks and man-to-man packages. Obviously we will see some cover 2 as well.

 

Matt Eberflus is bringing the Rod Marinelli defense with him to Indy. 

 

We will be built on speed. 

I think we have mirrored posts.  Nice thinking!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I prefer man coverage in the secondary.  That's the one thing I liked about the Pagano D over the Dungy D. 

 

The front 7 alignment is of lesser concern.

 

I think you have to be able to do both. 

 

My reasoning is simple. IF we play the Steelers (or a team with multiple good receivers) then I want to have the ability to play zone, especially early in the game. 

 

If we are playing a team with only 1 threat at wide receiver then I want to play man, at least on the primary receiver. We can roll double coverage to accommodate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

I'm almost certain of that.

 

1 minute ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I think it would make sense. 

 

I hope so. Coming back to the 4-3, why not have one of the best ever to do it help teach it? Guy bleeds blue and can relate to the players. Draft us some Chubb and let's see what they can bring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I think you have to be able to do both. 

 

My reasoning is simple. IF we play the Steelers (or a team with multiple good receivers) then I want to have the ability to play zone, especially early in the game. 

 

If we are playing a team with only 1 threat at wide receiver then I want to play man, at least on the primary receiver. We can roll double coverage to accommodate. 

True, but the Dungy D didn't ever do man coverage,AFAIK.  If our new DC is truly off the Dungy tree, that has some concern for me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice to scheme some blitzes, no more Ron Meeks cushions, please!!! :) 

 

I'd prefer the Seahawks 4-3 version with good man CBs and mixing up Cover 0 through 3, plus the most important piece, excellent rugby style tackling that they teach in Seattle out there so that no one goes east-west and gains yards.

 

Need the LBs though, regardless of scheme.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, chad72 said:

It would be nice to scheme some blitzes, no more Ron Meeks cushions, please!!! :) 

 

I'd prefer the Seahawks 4-3 version with good man CBs and mixing up Cover 0 through 3, plus the most important piece, excellent rugby style tackling that they teach in Seattle out there so that no one goes east-west and gains yards.

 

Need the LBs though, regardless of scheme.

 

 

He learned what he's doing from Monte Kiffin/Dungy/Lovie Smith/Marinelli disciples so you know it's probably going to like like what we used to have.  Only a little bit different in terms of the coverages.    So I guess we are looking at a sharp reduction in the blitzes.  I just hope we don't go back to all those small players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, krunk said:

He learned what he's doing from Monte Kiffin/Dungy/Lovie Smith/Marinelli disciples so you know it's probably going to like like what we used to have.  Only a little bit different in terms of the coverages.    So I guess we are looking at a sharp reduction in the blitzes.  I just hope we don't go back to all those small players.

 

I don’t think you have to worry about that, Ballard has stated that he like big and fast, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, krunk said:

He learned what he's doing from Monte Kiffin/Dungy/Lovie Smith/Marinelli disciples so you know it's probably going to like like what we used to have.  Only a little bit different in terms of the coverages.    So I guess we are looking at a sharp reduction in the blitzes.  I just hope we don't go back to all those small players.

 

Fortunately it was only Dungy that went to the extreme with those small players.  Marinelli and Kiffin ran that defense much better and didn't use 265 lb DTs and 220 lb LBs.

 

However Superman I believe  pointed out in another thread and it was alluded to in this one, that for the past couple of years Dallas has been incorporating more and more of the same concepts that Seattle uses.  Plus Eberflus worked under Rob Ryan for a while so he has experience in both a 3-4 and 4-3.  I think it's a bit early to say what our defense will look like under him.  Hopefully the experience in multiple systems means he'll cater the system to his players and not the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

True, but the Dungy D didn't ever do man coverage,AFAIK.  If our new DC is truly off the Dungy tree, that has some concern for me.  

 

With the Cowboys, Rod Marinelli, has mixed some man coverage in, but the defense is primarily a zone defense. 

 

3 hours ago, chad72 said:

It would be nice to scheme some blitzes, no more Ron Meeks cushions, please!!! :) 

 

I'd prefer the Seahawks 4-3 version with good man CBs and mixing up Cover 0 through 3, plus the most important piece, excellent rugby style tackling that they teach in Seattle out there so that no one goes east-west and gains yards.

 

Need the LBs though, regardless of scheme.

 

 

 

I am watching some tape of the Cowboys defense right now, and the corners are giving a lot of cushion on several plays. At times they do go bump and run though. 

 

I would like to see them play a tighter press man with safety help over the top more often (like Seattle).

 

They're often in the nickel and they often use the classic cover 2 shell. 

 

We will definitely give away the over-the-middle stuff (again), and we must tackle extremely well to succeed. So I agree we need linebackers who can ball out. 

 

We will also need studs in the middle of the line or teams will run all over us. Hankins should perform very well in this defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

Matt Eberflus is staying. He is our DC moving forward. 

 

Ballard confirmed this in his conference. It was a detail that I think went overlooked by many. 

 

Matt Eberflus (Rod Marinelli - Tony Dungy tree).

 

Marinelli has morphed his style of zone defense (his version of the Tampa 2) over the years. This defense is not exactly what we saw in Indy under Tony Dungy, but it has some sprinkles of what we used to run. Marinelli has done a good job of mixing in some single high safety looks and man-to-man packages. Obviously we will see some cover 2 as well.

 

Matt Eberflus is bringing the Rod Marinelli defense with him to Indy. 

 

The defense will be built on speed.

Ugh... the very defenses the Patriots picked apart :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

Ugh... the very defenses the Patriots picked apart :(

 

I have been watching a lot of Dallas tape today, and it looks extremely familiar. The classic cover 2 shell is alive in most defensive plays. However, it is a little different. The Cowboys do at times play bump and run (Meeks defense rarely did). I would like for us to at times incorporate tighter press coverage with safety help over the top.

 

The opposing Dallas receivers are getting a lot of free releases. A lot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

 

I don’t think you have to worry about that, Ballard has stated that he like big and fast, right?

 

Bill Polian said he loved Big and Fast.  Problem was, when you draft 26-32 every year, those are gone.  You then have to choose between Big OR Fast.  In Dungy's Tampa 2, fast was a better fit than big. Thus...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, krunk said:

If it's going to be like Jacksonville or Philly I'm down with it.

 

It would be nice if Matt Eberflus chose to incorporate the 43 under, but that is not his forte. For the past 4 years he has been a linebackers coach in a 43 zone defense. 

 

That said, it is possible to play a 4-3 under with a number of coverage schemes. 

 

He has experience in other schemes, but I think Ballard spelled it out today. We will run some form of a 43 zone defense. 

 

1 hour ago, krunk said:

My gut says the HC is going to be Frank Reich.  Irsay and Ballard are bringing the old Indy back.

 

 I think that would be a great move. :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

It would be nice if Matt Eberflus chose to incorporate the 43 under, but that is not his forte. For the past 4 years he has been a linebackers coach in a 43 zone defense. 

 

He has experience in other schemes, but I think Ballard spelled it out today. We will run a 43 zone defense. 

 

 

 I think that would be a great move. :thmup:

Yeah I'm sure they have Lovie Smiths old Bears teams in mind.

That's really what his vision has been the whole time.   It's why he kept on stressing the ability of the defender to create turnovers. Sit back in the zone, read and react.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, krunk said:

He learned what he's doing from Monte Kiffin/Dungy/Lovie Smith/Marinelli disciples so you know it's probably going to like like what we used to have.  Only a little bit different in terms of the coverages.    So I guess we are looking at a sharp reduction in the blitzes.  I just hope we don't go back to all those small players.

 

Agreed. It is hard to keep 5'10", 180 pound corners healthy in this style of defense. 

 

And if we don't have the size on the defensive line and quickness from our linebackers then our safety's will take a beating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Bill Polian said he loved Big and Fast.  Problem was, when you draft 26-32 every year, those are gone.  You then have to choose between Big OR Fast.  In Dungy's Tampa 2, fast was a better fit than big. Thus...

 

I agree! Drafting later is the exact reason we ended up with undersized players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, krunk said:

He learned what he's doing from Monte Kiffin/Dungy/Lovie Smith/Marinelli disciples so you know it's probably going to like like what we used to have.  Only a little bit different in terms of the coverages.    So I guess we are looking at a sharp reduction in the blitzes.  I just hope we don't go back to all those small players.

Don't you have to "blitz" in the first place in order to have a "sharp reduction in the blitzes"? Just saying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, compuls1v3 said:

Don't you have to "blitz" in the first place in order to have a "sharp reduction in the blitzes"? Just saying...

We did blitz.   Now it will be even less unless Eberflus has a bit of a different outlook than Monte kiffin/Lovie Smith/Dungy/Marinelli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I have been watching a lot of Dallas tape today, and it looks extremely familiar. The classic cover 2 shell is alive in most defensive plays. However, it is a little different. The Cowboys do at times play bump and run (Meeks defense rarely did). I would like for us to at times incorporate tighter press coverage with safety help over the top.

 

The opposing Dallas receivers are getting a lot of free releases. A lot!

And that's gonna be a HUGE problem 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are jumping to conclusions.  Make no mistake, Eberflus was McDaniels' guy, and months ago was rumored to be Patricia's replacement in New England, so I'm having a hard time seeing some sort of conscious effort to return to "old Indy" here.  Nothing Ballard has said since arriving has led me to believe that.  His pursuit of McDaniels would suggest otherwise.  

 

As far as what Dallas did on D, Eberflus wasn't the DC. Who knows what he'll do as a DC, and the next HC and management will have plenty of influence on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see Geathers doing really well at the WILL position in a Tampa2 type D.  I also think a line of  Woods, Hankins at DT with Anderson and Chubb(hopefully) at DE could really hold the POA in the run game with Anderson, Chubb and Hankins being able to provide consistent pressure in the pass game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...