It wasn't the loss that disappointed me...

[kansasCowboy]

Point3. I can see the potential for the Tampa 2 if run correctly. I've never coached against it, so I'm not super familiar with it. But what I have seen on it, when it is set with talent it can be pretty brutal. We are set with youth trying to put it all together right now. I do think in a few years a lot of these younger guys will make this scheme look pretty good.

Kansas...I am not a coach, so would love your insights on this statement. I always appreciate your informed view and very much want to hear more on this point. I seldom hear coaches mention that the Tampa 2 can be brutal. Absent big mad mean defensive linemen, which we seldom get, and significant upgrades at linebacker, I am not so sure. What do you see with the Tampa 2 that leads to a sense that it can be a tough defense? Also, what talent is needed to make it so?

As for Yarborough, I don't want to bag on the guy, but I thought he had one of his poorest games yesterday. He never sealed his end, took poor angles and struggled to get off blocks. Was he double teamed? Was I missing something?

From what I gather. You need a solid LB group. We don't have that. They don't need to be big but fast, we're getting there. The corners need to be solid at one on one coverage and jamming. We definitely don't have that yet. Preister and Wingard are our best at this and they need more time. The jamming and lbs dropping back in coverage is what is supposed to keep all offensive threats in front of us at all times. We have blunder on this in every game so far. When we do our coverage goes very soft and we basically fall out of a Tampa 2 and run a basic cover 2 or cover 3.
The DL and DE are critical in Tampa 2, and we do not have that ability yet. We seem to try to start a game in Tampa 2, but after we a blasted by long passes or big runs we tends to look more like a typical 4-3 zone read.
I agree with some of the things I've seen on Tampa 2, that if run correctly you are a bend but don't break D. Our best game was WSU. Other than a couple of long balls over our heads, our CBs and S's and LB's kept almost every play in front of them. Hence why Falk (taking out two long balls) had a average of 4.9 yards per pass catch. We made him look to quick out routes or quick inside slant hits. The D was doing its job and then one blown assignment and you had an 35 yard td pass.
In looking at it as an overall package (not wyoming D personally) if I had an average O at the college level I think I could come up with a Pistol package that would exploit the D. But it would have to take multiple sets and reads to confuse the D enough to get the D to bite on something for me to have the opportunity for a big play down field. If the T2 is run correctly it can definitely have the potential to be a headache for an Offense and an OC.

All that said, I hope I answered your question. If you want something a little more specific try me again. I'm running on 5 hrs of sleep in the last two days. I may have blundered, myself here.

Thanks for the thorough response. I appreciate your perspectives and analysis. At this point, there is a lot of emotion...none of it wrong really and to be expected (if we didn't get upset, we would be in a very very bad spot)...but it seems the anger and bile needs to be tinged with some sense of why Bohl and Stanard might be doing what they are doing. Thanks again.

No problem!

Anytime.

 

[stymeman]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

 

[McPeachy]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

Absolutely true. I am not a fan, never have been, of that shit-assed defense. I think it was "made up" by old man Kiffin - so that says it all.

 

[kansasCowboy]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

We don't run it enough to know if eventually it will or not.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

We don't run it enough to know if eventually it will or not.

What am I missing? It looks Tampa 2 to me most of the time. The only "wrinkle" is that we don't jam the WR and force things inside. It looks like the corners are already moving to their zone at the snap, but the MLB is dropping in most of the plays that I've watched.

Not bashing, but maybe I'm missing something. To me it looks like a Tampa 2 without the jam.

 

[kansasCowboy]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

We don't run it enough to know if eventually it will or not.

What am I missing? It looks Tampa 2 to me most of the time. The only "wrinkle" is that we don't jam the WR and force things inside. It looks like the corners are already moving to their zone at the snap, but the MLB is dropping in most of the plays that I've watched.

Not bashing, but maybe I'm missing something. To me it looks like a Tampa 2 without the jam.

Which means you are no longer running T2. You are running 4-3 Cover. I've explained this. Just like our Offense who might come out in an I Formation but on occasion runs a Maryland I Formation or play, did you notice the difference?

If the corners are not jamming and the MLB is not going back in coverage or roaming then you are NOT running T2. You are running 4-3. And multiple plays within the 4-3. I've seen the T2 twice so far, WSU which was affective and against EMU and we got out of it really quickly.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

We don't run it enough to know if eventually it will or not.

What am I missing? It looks Tampa 2 to me most of the time. The only "wrinkle" is that we don't jam the WR and force things inside. It looks like the corners are already moving to their zone at the snap, but the MLB is dropping in most of the plays that I've watched.

Not bashing, but maybe I'm missing something. To me it looks like a Tampa 2 without the jam.

Which means you are no longer running T2. You are running 4-3 Cover. I've explained this. Just like our Offense who might come out in an I Formation but on occasion runs a Maryland I Formation or play, did you notice the difference?

If the corners are not jamming and the MLB is not going back in coverage or roaming then you are NOT running T2. You are running 4-3. And multiple plays within the 4-3. I've seen the T2 twice so far, WSU which was affective and against EMU and we got out of it really quickly.

I thought I saw the MLB dropping zone most plays but we did not jam the corners which is an odd scenario for the T2. I could be mistaken, but we've looked T2 to me most of the time just without the jam.

 

[WestWYOPoke]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

We don't run it enough to know if eventually it will or not.

What am I missing? It looks Tampa 2 to me most of the time. The only "wrinkle" is that we don't jam the WR and force things inside. It looks like the corners are already moving to their zone at the snap, but the MLB is dropping in most of the plays that I've watched.

Not bashing, but maybe I'm missing something. To me it looks like a Tampa 2 without the jam.

Which means you are no longer running T2. You are running 4-3 Cover. I've explained this. Just like our Offense who might come out in an I Formation but on occasion runs a Maryland I Formation or play, did you notice the difference?

If the corners are not jamming and the MLB is not going back in coverage or roaming then you are NOT running T2. You are running 4-3. And multiple plays within the 4-3. I've seen the T2 twice so far, WSU which was affective and against EMU and we got out of it really quickly.

I thought I saw the MLB dropping zone most plays but we did not jam the corners which is an odd scenario for the T2. I could be mistaken, but we've looked T2 to me most of the time just without the jam.

I think the point that Kansas is trying to make is that to be considered Tampa 2, the corners HAVE to jam. If they do not jam the WR, then it is not a Tampa 2 scheme.

 

[TSpoke]

Tampa 2 isn't working for us, hands down

We don't run it enough to know if eventually it will or not.

What am I missing? It looks Tampa 2 to me most of the time. The only "wrinkle" is that we don't jam the WR and force things inside. It looks like the corners are already moving to their zone at the snap, but the MLB is dropping in most of the plays that I've watched.

Not bashing, but maybe I'm missing something. To me it looks like a Tampa 2 without the jam.

Which means you are no longer running T2. You are running 4-3 Cover. I've explained this. Just like our Offense who might come out in an I Formation but on occasion runs a Maryland I Formation or play, did you notice the difference?

If the corners are not jamming and the MLB is not going back in coverage or roaming then you are NOT running T2. You are running 4-3. And multiple plays within the 4-3. I've seen the T2 twice so far, WSU which was affective and against EMU and we got out of it really quickly.

I thought I saw the MLB dropping zone most plays but we did not jam the corners which is an odd scenario for the T2. I could be mistaken, but we've looked T2 to me most of the time just without the jam.

I think the point that Kansas is trying to make is that to be considered Tampa 2, the corners HAVE to jam. If they do not jam the WR, then it is not a Tampa 2 scheme.

He said the MLB goes back in coverage and the CB jam. Rag said he has seen the MLB dropping back most of the time just with no jam. Which makes it a T2? I don't know. I was always under the impression the MLB dropping back was the main thing the made it the T2.

Whatever we are running it isn't working. We are so passive just letting things happen and trying to adjust. We need to start attacking. Start blitzing from all over. Force some turnovers. I would rather get burned deep from playing aggresively than play passively and let them get 10 yards a time or give up the long play anyway due to terrible assignments or terrible angles. Its pathetic we only have one takeaway in 4 games. It doesn't even seem like we try to get any.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I think the point that Kansas is trying to make is that to be considered Tampa 2, the corners HAVE to jam. If they do not jam the WR, then it is not a Tampa 2 scheme.

TSPoke said what I was getting at. I haven't slowed every play down by any means and I'm going off of memory, but I thought the MLB is moving to a zone almost every play which is the hallmark of the T2.

The fact we don't jam is a weird twist on it. I haven't heard of other 4-3 defenses with the MLB dropping into zone and the corners not jamming. Whatever you call that is what we are doing. To me, it most closely resembles the base T2.

 

[kansasCowboy]

I think the point that Kansas is trying to make is that to be considered Tampa 2, the corners HAVE to jam. If they do not jam the WR, then it is not a Tampa 2 scheme.

TSPoke said what I was getting at. I haven't slowed every play down by any means and I'm going off of memory, but I thought the MLB is moving to a zone almost every play which is the hallmark of the T2.

The fact we don't jam is a weird twist on it. I haven't heard of other 4-3 defenses with the MLB dropping into zone and the corners not jamming. Whatever you call that is what we are doing. To me, it most closely resembles the base T2.

Wacha generally drops back in coverage or roams. That would be a 4-3 Cover. Watch safeties as well. Are they more centered to the field or are the across the field from one another. T2 splits the field right down the middle one safety cover a right the other the left. Lately I've noticed the safeties setting up more in the middle of the field.
T2 is technically the 4-3, but what makes it T2 is how certain positions are played. Just like I Formation and Maryland I Formation. They look real similar but certain positions run different assignments, blocking schemes have changed so much that it makes it just that much more different even though they look identical.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I think the point that Kansas is trying to make is that to be considered Tampa 2, the corners HAVE to jam. If they do not jam the WR, then it is not a Tampa 2 scheme.

TSPoke said what I was getting at. I haven't slowed every play down by any means and I'm going off of memory, but I thought the MLB is moving to a zone almost every play which is the hallmark of the T2.

The fact we don't jam is a weird twist on it. I haven't heard of other 4-3 defenses with the MLB dropping into zone and the corners not jamming. Whatever you call that is what we are doing. To me, it most closely resembles the base T2.

Wacha generally drops back in coverage or roams. That would be a 4-3 Cover. Watch safeties as well. Are they more centered to the field or are the across the field from one another. T2 splits the field right down the middle one safety cover a right the other the left. Lately I've noticed the safeties setting up more in the middle of the field.
T2 is technically the 4-3, but what makes it T2 is how certain positions are played. Just like I Formation and Maryland I Formation. They look real similar but certain positions run different assignments, blocking schemes have changed so much that it makes it just that much more different even though they look identical.

I thought the safety adjustment was more for the offense overloading one side and the T2 base adjusts accordingly. I understand the difference between 4-3 man, 4-3 cover 1, 4-3 cover 2, 4-3 cover 3, etc. etc. It still looks to me like the LBs take the curl and center. The safeties deep over the top and the corners the edges/flats (they just drop deeper on the flat rather than jam).

I'm kind of with Coach Leach who thinks our D looks more like the T2 than anything. Like I said, I'm going from memory more than re-watching each play so I could be wrong.