Cover 2?

[WFColonel56]

Quote: Originally Posted by steelers1

Do you honestly believe that if you ran 4 receivers on streaks against a cover 2 zone defense, that you would have 4 receivers against the 2 safeties and that the 2 CBs would just be sitting there defending their zone against nobody? If the CB doesn't have any imminent threat to that zone, he will be playing the receiver. The deep middle is the major weakness (which is the reason for the Tampa 2 which has the MLB play the deep middle and makes it a pseudo-cover 2 and more of a cover 3). Streaks aren't the best way to beat the cover 2 like you are so caught up with. Sending a streak up the seam can split the safeties, but you're not going to run all streaks and only have the 2 safeties covering you. The area behind the corners is soft, like you said, but that's why corner routes/deep outs can be effective. That and the deep post is the way you exploit the cover 2. Sending them all deep shouldn't fool anybody. In Madden the CB will stay with the receiver for about 3 yards and just let him go even with no other threat to enter their zone, and that is just dumb.

I agree but.......But you expect a CB in cover 2 to run down the field with the WR is BS I agree he should play deeper but no deeper than 10-13 yards...... The way you discribe it all I would do on defense is call a cover 2 all game long and dare someone to put together a master plan to stop it

(oh and in 09 they play around 5 yards deep)

[steelers1]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

I agree but.......But you expect a CB in cover 2 to run down the field with the WR is BS I agree he should play deeper but no deeper than 10-13 yards...... The way you discribe it all I would do on defense is call a cover 2 all game long and dare someone to put together a master plan to stop it (oh and in 09 they play around 5 yards deep)

10-13 yards instead of 3-5 would make all the difference in the world, and when a CB would go to pass the defender out of his zone, he would only retreat off the receiver if he saw someone as a threat in his zone. The way they have it makes almost any passes to the outside a weakness against the cover 2 zone, and that's not the way it should be. And this is all made worse by the defenders in zone not 'attacking' the receivers enough in the first place.

[WFColonel56]

Quote: Originally Posted by steelers1

10-13 yards instead of 3-5 would make all the difference in the world, and when a CB would go to pass the defender out of his zone, he would only retreat off the receiver if he saw someone as a threat in his zone. The way they have it makes almost any passes to the outside a weakness against the cover 2 zone, and that's not the way it should be. And this is all made worse by the defenders in zone not 'attacking' the receivers enough in the first place.

Ok I think we are on the same page but where the other guy loses me is when he says it should almost play like a cover 4.....To me that implys that he wants the Cbs around 20 yards deep or deeper if nobody is in there zone and I just dont agree with that

[strickzilla]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

Ok I think we are on the same page but where the other guy loses me is when he says it should almost play like a cover 4.....To me that implys that he wants the Cbs around 20 yards deep or deeper if nobody is in there zone and I just dont agree with that

the cover 4 thing is kind of right if the play is that long and the cb zone is empty he job is to read/drop. if the play is running long enough for the cb to get 10-15 yds back its either a broken play or a coverage sack.


on another note if the cover 2 played correctly then i would make playcalling more important. things like flooding the zone and making those post pattern throws all the more important

[reyes the roof]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

Ok I think we are on the same page but where the other guy loses me is when he says it should almost play like a cover 4.....To me that implys that he wants the Cbs around 20 yards deep or deeper if nobody is in there zone and I just dont agree with that

So if you send 4 guys on fly patterns, what are the CBs supposed to do when the receivers all pass through their zones? There would only be one other possible guy to cover, so at least one of the corners would be just standing around doing nothing, there is no reason for him to stay in his zone, and that's assuming you aren't keeping a RB or TE in for protection

[GrnEyedBanditTN]

Actually, the way Cover 2 was taught to us in college (see my signature) was this... all reads were made off of the #2 receiver to your side (slot, TE, RB, etc.). To make this illustration "easier", I will use the 4 WR, 1 RB set (inside WR #2 outside #1). If the #2 runs any vertical route, the CB takes #1 man to man. There are holes on the outside between the CB and S... the smash route was designed to exploit it. Smash (#1 runs a hitch #2 runs a corner). I am a Bears fan, so I am extremely familiar with their version of the Tampa 2. I also am a UT Vols fan and have seen Monte Kiffin up close teaching the defense as well.

[Sven Draconian]

Cover 2 (along with 4) will be broken untill Ian and co. are able to install pattern reading logic into defensive back AI.

The easiest work around is switching the corner backs zone coverage into the purple curl/flat zone instead of the blue flats zone.

[Cutler2Hester23]

Quote: Originally Posted by WFColonel56

Read the part that is underlined I understand what both of you mean but come on... a cover 2 basicly turns in to a cover 4 ???..? So you are telling me that if I run 4 verts vs your cover 2 you want your cover 2 to basicly turn into a cover 4......Thats not right IMO.... You cant have the best of both worlds here you picked cover 2 thus giving u 5 underneath defenders and 2 over the top....You picked that to stop the WCO (west coast offense) quick passes (dink and dunks) and you want it to turn basicly into a cover 4 when my guys go 4 verts.....Thats not fair to the offense at all.....its a no win situation Also this is not universal for the entire NFL...This "may" just be how 1 or 2 teams run their cover 2...But this is giving the CPU of the defense too much power....By doing it the way he wants to you take away the weakness of the cover 2 He says he is talking more about the Tampa 2 wich is more like a cover 3 and by his statement "if" the outside wrs run verts he wants the CBs to cover that to making a cover 2 (5 underneath defenders) A cover 5 (with 5 over the top defenders) Am I the only one who is understanding this.....The weakness of the regular cover 2 is deep (seams and attacking the safties and the area behind the CBs) and the Tampa 2 covers the "post" or "seam" barely that is how those coverages are suposed to work Guys I understand what he wants and everything but It would be better if he gave some diagram to better discribe how he would want the cover 2 to play something like the 4 verts becuz in not seeing it at all (sorry for the spelling) dont think im trying to bash you its just that If you want to cover deep you call cover 4/ if you want to cover short you call cover 2/ and if you want to cover in between you call cover 3....but you cnt expect a cover 2 to be a cover 4 that isnt fair to the oiffense that 1 play can cover soo many areas on the field..

The thing about it is if you ran 2 fades and a seam the safety to the seam's side would read that and play him.

You don't seem to understand that the tampa 2 is NOT made to stop short stuff. Its is made to stop everything deep and force the O to pass under pressure by a speedy front 4, they must be able to slowly work their way downfield and the D is hoping the pressure can create a mistake due to only the short passes being available making scoring drives very long. Longer drives give more oppertunities for mistakes, hence why the bears D is a consistent top 5 turnover team.

They are also rank very well in YPPA (yards per pass attempt). They were the #1 lowest in the NFL in 05 and 06 and top 10 in every year except 07 since Smith became coach. With teams like the Bills, Bucs, Panthers, and Colts consistently making top 10 and top 5 apperances during their years using the cover 2 since it was introduced with a few #1 appearances as well. Showing that the cover 2 stops anything deep.

Believe me, if it was so easy as throwing a pass down the seam the cover 2 would have never seen multiple superbowl showings. If the proper players are in place the cover 2 can't be beat. There are no holes that can be exploited for enough yards to make a defference. The only thing it gives up is the short hitch between the LB and CB (not enough yards if the D does its job), the quick slant (again if the OLB gets there its shorter than the average run and he should always get there), and the deep out or corner with a decoy in the flat (if the Dline does its job the QB won't have the time and thats if the safety is not able to get over in time, which is rareky the case).

I'm not saying the D should hold up like a cover 4 all the way down field, but in a real Tampa 2 the CBs will pass the WRs off to the safety around 12 yards down field. If they could have them do that it would not only be realistic but also not the "perfect D" you think I want. I want it to be what it is, if its in the game its in the game you know? If you use a 3-4 you get the benifit of confusing the O with who is rushing just like real 3-4 defenses do. If you use a nickel D you get the ability to have more speed, just like in real life. So why not be able to hold a team to small gains and force turnovers while holding deep passes to a minimum with a tampa 2 like in real life? If you don't have the right pass rush it won't work, same with a MLB that isn't great in coverage, or good cover safeties, or CBs that can't press well enough to give the safeties time to get over the top.

If you have the players you should be able to run the scheme. If the O has the right scheme they can beat it just as real teams do. On top of that it would be weak against the run so it won't be an every down D, but if a team is in 3rd and 10 a cover 2 should be able to do what it does in RL, not get beat by a streak down the sideline while the CB sits in the flat instead of taking him 10-12 yards then releasing him to the safety. Thats the way it works in the real world so why can't it in the game?

[Cutler2Hester23]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sven Draconian

Cover 2 (along with 4) will be broken untill Ian and co. are able to install pattern reading logic into defensive back AI. The easiest work around is switching the corner backs zone coverage into the purple curl/flat zone instead of the blue flats zone.

The issue with that is it leaves the flat wide open.

[steelers1]

Cutler2Hester is right about the Tampa 2. It is designed to mask the weaknesses of the regular cover 2 (which I've been talking about) with the deep middle zone being covered by a fast MLB. It is a defense that forces teams to throw passes of about 1-5 yards down the field. Also like he said, although that deep middle is no longer a big weakness, the soft spots behind the corners still are weaknesses with the flat/deep outside routes that he spoke of.

The original cover 2 was made to defend the WCO, but with the right people in place, it too is very difficult to exploit. Although those soft spots are deep outside and deep middle, these are not that easy to hit. The cover 2 relies very heavily on getting pressure with the front 4, and getting pressure takes away those deeper routes. That's why it is such a tough defense.