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)”

MQ Film Study: Baylor vs Boise St. (2016)

Adapting to multiple formations from a hybrid 3-4 defense.

To say 2016 was a rough season for the Baylor Bears football team is an understatement. Despite national scrutiny facing the program prior to the season and a roller coaster offseason, the Bears were able to end the season with a big win. Despite the turmoil off the field, Baylor Football surprised many and finished with a winning record, going 7-6 with a huge bowl victory over a 10-win Boise St. team. 2016 started fast for the Bears, racing out to 6-0 before a close loss to Texas (34-35) would lead to a 0-6 slide. Many around the country and outside the program called for the Bears to stay at home during bowl season. Needless to say, Baylor chose to play.

The 2016 Motel 6 Cactus Bowl was a highlight win for a program in turmoil. Boise St. was a seven-point favorite going into the game and Baylor had not won since beating Kansas in mid-October. Baylor’s switch to the Okie Front in 2016 came with mixed results (the Bears would finish 49th in BCfToys Defensive Efficiency in 2016 – a four-year low mark), but the Bears held the Broncos to 83 yards rushing (they averaged 174 for the year). The Bears were also able to hold Boise’s eventual 5th round draft pick Jeremy McNichols to only 49 yards on 19 carries (He would finish the year with 1,709 yards). Boise would play behind the eightball for much of the game behind then-sophomore QB Brett Rypien‘s two interceptions (would throw a season-high 51 passes as well).

The Bears performance in the Cactus Bowl was a high water mark in an otherwise forgettable season. In regards to football schematics, the Catus Bowl was a demonstration of how a hybrid 3-4 defense could match up versus a multiple TE formation offense and find success. Boise used multiple personnel groupings, shifts, and even tempo to try and get the Bears off balance, but to no avail. This type of Pro-Style offense is becoming the weapon of choice for many programs at all level.

Baylor’s Hybrid Defense

Boise’s offense under Bryan Harsin (former Texas OC and Arkansas St. Head Coach) and his predecessor Chris Peterson (now at Washington) uses a Pro-Style offense with multiple TEs. This can be a hard offense to defend when utilizing a hybrid scheme. Baylor’s base defense in 2016 was a 3-4 Okie scheme that used a Nickel Sam and a Jack or Joker LB away. In 2015, Baylor’s best LB, Taylor Young, was utilized as the Jack LB (weakside “wide-9”). The total transition to the 3-4 was completed in 2016. Young moved back to his natural position as an ILB and Clay Johnston, a 6-1 226 lbs Junior, was inserted as the Jack. The diagram below shows Baylor’s base Okie Front versus Boise’s base offense – 11 Pers. 2×2.

[BUvBSU] 00 Base Def

Baylor had two packages in their 2016 3-4 scheme. The base used a hybrid LB/DE playing the Jack (#44 – Johnston), while the other was a “Dime” look with two safeties at either OLB position. The Nickel Sam was speedy #48 Travon Blanchard (6-2/205). When Baylor wanted to go “small,” #21 Pat Levels (5-11/195), another Nickelback, would come in as the Jack. In Baylor’s terms, Levels was the “Buck” ‘backer.

The flexibility of having a “heavy” and “light” package allowed Baylor to sub if the offense checked into their other packages. Baylor’s “Okie Light” is demonstrated below. The major difference is in the play of the Jack who is now a true Nickelback. Instead of lining up on the line, the Buck ‘backer will loosen up off the TE but still maintain the edge. This package is primarily used against 10 pers. or on heavy pass downs.

[BUvBSU] 01 Okie Light Continue reading “MQ Film Study: Baylor vs Boise St. (2016)”

Defending 11 Personnel from a 3-4

How to adjust to TE sets without a natural adjuster.

Spread and Pro-Style offenses utilize a Tight End versus three-down defenses because the defense lacks a natural adjuster. Unlike a four-down defense that can distribute their anchor points evenly across the formation, the 3-4 lacks the extra lineman to defend the extra gap (hence the name “Odd Front”). When faced with an 11 personnel formation, many 3-4 defensive coordinators choose to spin to single-high coverage to gain an extra man in the box. Another adjustment for many DCs in this situation is to attach the outside linebacker to the TE’s side. With the loss of a coverage man and overhang, the DC is forced to spin. When defending an 11 pers. offense from a 4-2-5 or 4-3, these little adjustments aren’t needed because the anchor points are evenly distributed and don’t need to be created.

In a four-down scheme, the defensive ends act as the walls of the box. When a TE is introduced into the formation, the DE to the TE’s side moves to a 9 technique (unless it is Trey and then he is in a 7 or 6i). The four defensive linemen allow the defense to stay even and adjust with the linebackers and secondary. The evenness of the four-down is why many spread teams attack 4-2-5 and 4-3 defenses from 20 pers., utilizing an H-back. In 20 pers., the offense can use the “H” to attack either side of the defense, reading the overhangs to determine what play to run. If the “H” was attached to the formation (TE) he would lose his two-way go.

Defending 11 pers. formations from a 3-4 boil down to understanding how certain fronts react to the extra gap. From a single-gap fit 3-4, a defense can easily adjust to TE sets and stay within a two-shell scheme. The lack of an adjuster is an issue, which is why many 3-4 teams that face the spread, and Pro-Style spread, choose to defend from an Okie Front because it reacts much like the four-down Under Front. Using the offense’s formations as a guide, it is easy to build simple rules within the defense, setting the strength and when to attach the OLBs, to alleviate the issues seen in many 3-4 defenses. Combining an Okie Front with a match quarters scheme can adapt and flex with any formation an offense throws out, it just boils down to how a DC chooses to line up.

Continue reading “Defending 11 Personnel from a 3-4”