Brooks

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from haldager. Show haldager's posts

    Brooks

    I still dont understand why Pats dont try Derrick Brooks as an ILB....it sounds like they could need an upgrade. Besides Mayo our ILBs are bade - and yes I dont think Bruschi is a top ILB anymore.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Brooks

    as much as i like brooks,i dont see him doing well at the inside LB spot,but i am surprised no team has contacted him yet.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from siestafiesta. Show siestafiesta's posts

    Re: Brooks

    Because he played OLB in a cover 2 defense.  Inside LB's in the 3/4 are expected to take on blockers and need some size.  Brooks would get killed in there.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from haldager. Show haldager's posts

    Re: Brooks

    Can anyone briefly explain what the difference is between a 3-4 defense and a cover 2 defense??
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from patpscyho. Show patpscyho's posts

    Re: Brooks

    The cover two is an entirely zone defense (no man to man) that works out of the basic 4-3 set. It concerns basically the backfield, dividing it into two zones played by one safety, assigned to each zone. Four defensemen rush the quarterback, with three linebackers and two cornerbacks dividing the slot into five zones. Beyond those five zones, are the two zones that make the "cover 2"

    However, you don't see cover 2 so much anymore, because it has been supplanted by the Tampa 2 Dungy came up with, when he was in Tampa. It pushes the MLB back into the deep field, which essentially divides it into 3 zones (technically should be called a cover 3). In this scenario, the CB's job is to funnel the receiver towards the middle to the thicker coverage.

    In the 3-4, you have 3 line defensemen, and with four linebackers clogging the middle, you can then release the cornerbacks to line up opposite the other team's receiver to play one-on-one. The safeties in a 3-4 have to be elite, intelligent, athletic players because they do a bit of everything, from helping to stuff the run, help with cover, or blitz. In the 3-4 when you predict that the next down is a pass play, you deploy either a nickel (five defensive backs) or the dime (six) and in rare circumstances, a quarter (seven = 5CB, 1SS, 1FS, or 4CB, 2SS, 1FS). I personally will not be suprised if we have multiple fronts with 1FS and 2SS sub packages because of Chung's ability to rover (he was rover SS in college).

    However it is a misnomer to say that the Patriots are a 3-4 defense. They don't really adhere to any format, and change from week to week, and from play to play. A year or two ago, they surprised the Colts by using a 5-2-2 front, and against Miami, they pulled a front that had no linemen, seven linebackers and two defensive backs.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: Brooks

    Psycho,

    Your ideas intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.  But seriously, tell us more about NFL defenses.  There is nothing else interesting on this board, unless anyone wants to discuss the health care bill. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Brooks

    the watchmen dont have health care.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from haldager. Show haldager's posts

    Re: Brooks

    In Response to Re: Brooks:
    [QUOTE]The cover two is an entirely zone defense (no man to man) that works out of the basic 4-3 set. It concerns basically the backfield, dividing it into two zones played by one safety, assigned to each zone. Four defensemen rush the quarterback, with three linebackers and two cornerbacks dividing the slot into five zones. Beyond those five zones, are the two zones that make the "cover 2" However, you don't see cover 2 so much anymore, because it has been supplanted by the Tampa 2 Dungy came up with, when he was in Tampa. It pushes the MLB back into the deep field, which essentially divides it into 3 zones (technically should be called a cover 3). In this scenario, the CB's job is to funnel the receiver towards the middle to the thicker coverage. In the 3-4, you have 3 line defensemen, and with four linebackers clogging the middle, you can then release the cornerbacks to line up opposite the other team's receiver to play one-on-one. The safeties in a 3-4 have to be elite, intelligent, athletic players because they do a bit of everything, from helping to stuff the run, help with cover, or blitz. In the 3-4 when you predict that the next down is a pass play, you deploy either a nickel (five defensive backs) or the dime (six) and in rare circumstances, a quarter (seven = 5CB, 1SS, 1FS, or 4CB, 2SS, 1FS). I personally will not be suprised if we have multiple fronts with 1FS and 2SS sub packages because of Chung's ability to rover (he was rover SS in college). However it is a misnomer to say that the Patriots are a 3-4 defense. They don't really adhere to any format, and change from week to week, and from play to play. A year or two ago, they surprised the Colts by using a 5-2-2 front, and against Miami, they pulled a front that had no linemen, seven linebackers and two defensive backs.
    Posted by patpscyho[/QUOTE]

    Thanks for the info psycho. You are very good at writing it, so anyone can understand. Thanks again.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from joe81b. Show joe81b's posts

    Re: Brooks

    BB has been using Tank Williams at ILB in sub packages.  He is a similar size to Brooks but with much better coverage skills.  Guyton or Bruschi will be in on the base defense and BB had obviously chosen to bring in Paris Lenon over Brooks.  I dont see how he would get any playing time. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Brooks

    In Response to Re: Brooks:
    [QUOTE]Psycho, Your ideas intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.  But seriously, tell us more about NFL defenses.  There is nothing else interesting on this board, unless anyone wants to discuss the health care bill. 
    Posted by themightypatriots[/QUOTE]

    nice simpsons reference!
    ixnay on the omarmay.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Brooks

    as for ILB's, i have a good feeling about guyton. don't forget that the guy had the fastest 40 time of any LB at last year's combine, and he looked pretty good when he played last year. i think his "second year leap" will be a significant factor this year. i hope. cause it sounds like paris isn't looking so good. do the raiders have a good ILB they can hand us?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from patpscyho. Show patpscyho's posts

    Re: Brooks

    Thanks all- no newsletter here.. too lazy. Any questions, I'll answer them. And correct, no universal health care for Watchmen or for anyone else; I killed any hope of that in 1964.

    My bet is Guyton and Mayo in the middle, bookended by AD and Wood (or Burgess, if he transitions back to the 3-4 quickly).


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share