Attacking 3rd Down With Multiple Fronts

Using packages & “problem” fronts to attack the Spread on 3rd Down.

Though 3rd Down is probably one of the more overrated downs in football (in terms of importance), being able to get off the field is an important concept for any defensive coach (yes, I’m being dense). Any series is won on 1st Down. Win that down and now the offense becomes more predictable on each subsequent play. By winning 2nd Down and forcing the offense into an obvious passing situation, the defense can now attack the offense. This is why looking at efficiency stats are important.

Looking at BCfToys.com’s DEff, you will only find two teams in the Top 25 with losing records against FBS teams, Northwestern and Miami (N’western’s OEff is 124 and Miami’s is #76 which explains their 6-6 record). Winning early downs is key to winning 3rd. That being said, defenses need to have a plan for 3rd Down and it’s variations (short, medium, long). The ultimate goal is to get off the field. Understanding how your opponent attacks 3rd should reflect your gameplan too. If a DC regularly goes to the same pool for 3rd Down, an OC will learn your rules and beat you at your own game.

Predictability in football is the holy grail. It is why coaches spend hours diagnosing film and coming up with a plan. Wining the base downs (1st and 2nd) is key to a successful defense. 3rd Down efficiency is a decent metric and does, to an extent, help with win probability. T. Tony Russell of Blue Stampede wrote an interesting article on the topic of 3rd Downs and win probability. Russell found that “3-and-Outs” doesn’t necessarily correlate to win probability. Yes, defensive coaches love to get off the field, especially if you have a dominant offense, but this stat over time doesn’t directly correlate to wins.

As Russell explains, the use of 3rd Down Efficiency (the percent of 3rd downs that a team is able to convert into a first down) ignores about 71% of all other plays. 1st Down conversion rate or just passing down efficiency are better stats to use when looking at win probability. So what does this have to do with winning 3rd and Long?

First, there is always a point at which a team chooses to pass at a high rate. This means a defense needs to win its passing downs. In the NFL, any yardage mark is a throwing down, but generally, if the yards to gain is around 4+, most NFL teams are throwing. In College, that mark moves to around 6+, which is probably similar at the High School level. Second, defensive coaches need a plan for passing downs, especially on 3rd Down. Finally, not all schemes are created equal when it comes to pressuring the QB. A defense needs options. A DC needs to consider several things:

  • Is the QB a runner? Is he a thrower?
  • Do they have a dominant WR?
  • Do they slide, Big-on-Big, or Combo their pass-pro?
  • What is the RB doing, or who is he responsible for?

All these questions need to be answered as a plan for 3rd Down is developed. This particular article gives you several ideas and ways to attack an offense in obvious passing downs, especially 3rd Down. As Russell pointed, winning passing downs is a better metric for win probability. Win your passing downs, or get a sack/turnover, and you have a higher chance of winning the game, which at the end of the day, is the only thing that matters.


1) The Overload Front

1 Overload

One of my favorite ways to attack an offense on 3rd Down is the Overload Front. In an Overload Front, the defense will put all its numbers to one side. This front mainly runs from a four-down look, otherwise, you have something completely different. Above, the Georgia Bulldogs align three linemen to one side. The boundary side only has a DE and a LB that is responsible for the “B” gap and RB. Versus a nub-set, as shown above, the CB will be over there as well.

Continue reading “Attacking 3rd Down With Multiple Fronts”

MQ Quick Hits Ep. 19 – Blitzing From the Tite Front

How do you blitz from the Tite Front? MQ answers.

In this episode of Quick Hits, Coach A. discusses an oft-asked question, “What are some good blitzes from the Tite Front?”

MQ answers with 3 pressures to think about. The main theme? Find a way to get to a Bear Front. Coach A. walks you through each blitz, even giving you details on how to teach your coverages (with several options).

 

 

Find more clinics like this on MatchQuarters YouTube Channel.

 

Want more Tite Front resources? MQ has you covered:

  1. The Tite Front (303/404)
  2. How Offenses Attack the Tite Front (2017/2018 Texas Longhorns)
  3. The Modern Bear Front (Georgia vs Notre Dame – 2017)

© 2019 MatchQuarters.com | Cody Alexander | All rights reserved.


Go deeper than just X’s and O’s. Have a philosophy. MQ’s books are available on Amazon and Kindle:

Cautious Aggression: Defending Modern Football

Hybrids: The Making of a Modern Defense

As always, support the site by following me on Twitter (@The_Coach_A) and spreading the word to your coaching friends by liking and retweeting the articles you read (even sharing them via Facebook and LinkedIn).

Do not hesitate to contact me with questions through the site’s CONTACT page or through my DM on Twitter. I enjoy speaking with you guys (iron sharpens iron).

– Coach A. | #ArtofX

The Modern Bear Front – Georgia vs Notre Dame (2017)

Georgia used a Bear variation in thier Tite Front to help combat Notre Dame’s Pro Style offense.

The Modern Bear Front

Though the Georgia Bulldogs are known primarily for their three-down Nickel package known as Mint, their base package reflects a traditional 3-4 package. In their game versus Notre Dame in 2017, the Bulldogs featured two hybrid OLBs (not including their Jack ‘backer who is similar in every package) versus the various 12 pers. formations the Irish chose to run against them. One a true Sam linebacker (Base), the other a Nickelback (referred to as the Star/* – seen in the Mint package). When Notre Dame would switch to their 11 pers. package, Georgia could opt to sub in their Nickel package (in comes the Star). Even though new players come on, the packages function in similar ways. The pressures and fits many times only need minor tweaking.

01 Base Tite Fits

The natural alignment of the Tite Front (above) lends itself to multiplicity. The ability to gap out the box allows a defense to stay in lighter packages versus heavier formations like 12 pers. When defending offenses like Oklahoma that feature a hybrid (flex) TE and a traditional inline/H-back TE (blocker), the ability to keep a Ni on the field while still being able to match the size in the box is critical. Modern offenses with the addition of hybrid TEs have made it difficult for defenses to match sub-packages with offensive personnel. Add tempo, and it’s next to impossible.

When a defense wants to match the size of an offense, it can take it’s Ni off the field and sub a traditional OLB or another hybrid DE. Georgia bases out of a traditional 3-4 with two hybrid OLB/DEs with the Sam usually being more athletic and having the ability to play to the field. The Jack and Sam versus a 12 pers. formation will function similarly. In Georgia’s case, the Sam in 2017 was #7 Lorenzo Carter, who currently plays for the NY Giants (3rd Round).

The main difference, as illustrated below, is the Sam aligns in a true 9 tech. and will relate to the TE. He can even be used in coverage, working the vertical Hook or taking the 1st player to the flat (called a ‘Backer 9). This type of thinking is what helped Georgia match up with Notre Dames multiple formations and sub-packages. The ability to get into a Bear Front in multiple ways also factored in against the Irish’s Zone heavy scheme.

01 BS vs 12p [ND]

In a traditional Bear Front, the defense will align in two 9s, two 3s, and a “zero” Nose. The ILBs will be in 30s or stacking the DTs (the ILBs can align wider depending on where the back is set). Coverage variations can stem from a multitude of two-high or single-high coverages. Obvious adjustments need to be made with the overhangs attached to the box, but most coverages can easily be modified to fit a defense’s needs. Plus, this package is mainly used versus 21 or 12 personnel, which in modern football are basically the same grouping.

If a team isn’t inserting the OLBs as contain, the overhangs can be used to cut the flat versus a two-back set or press and carry a TE in 12 pers. Below, the Jack and Sam could be “first-to-flat” players allowing them to sit next to the LOS, which is more natural, and carry the first back into their zone. Essentially, the Bear Front clogs all interior gaps and creates free-flowing ILBs with two contain players to funnel runs inside. Drop a SS or Rover on a TE and the defense has something that resembles the old Bear 46 (below).

04 Bear Str Roll

The “modern” Bear Front aligns similar to it’s older counterpart but uses 4i techniques instead of 3s (to align with the Tite Front). The Nose can play similarly as well from a “zero.” The overhangs, like their traditional counterparts, can play contain or assist in coverage. The beauty of the Tite Front is that the defense can get to a Bear alignment in a multitude of ways, even stemming to it (moving to it pre-snap) on the QB’s indicator. It really boils down to a DC’s imagination. A defense can even blitz to a Bear Front.

The Bear Front is a great front against Zone schemes for the same reason the Tite Front is so popular, it clogs all interior the gaps and forces runs to go East and West. The two edge players create natural walls and inhibit Zone Reads (hybrid on the QB – match speed with speed). The front constricts the offenses space, funneling everything inside to free-flowing ILBs. In 2017, with Notre Dame featuring a heavy Zone Pro Style Spread scheme, it is no wonder Georgia used this front in numerous ways to defeat the Irish in South Bend. Watch any Georgia game, and this front will be used in one way or another. It is versatile and adaptive. Exactly what a modern defense needs in its toolbox. Continue reading “The Modern Bear Front – Georgia vs Notre Dame (2017)”