The USA Today preview below mentioned we will run "a 3-4 front with a rush outside linebacker." Then, in the section on linebackers, they only list 3 positions: "The likely scenario: Challenger takes over in the middle, Ganus on the weak side and junior Derek Slaughter on the strong side – or some variation thereof." It also mentions 2 defensive tackle positions.
So if we only have 3 set linebacker positions (Will, Mike, Sam), is the 4th a hybrid DT/LB that we can move around (a la Jadeveon Clowney)? I assume not a true Rover-type since that's more of a LB/DB position (unless I'm wrong...very, very possible). Also, since this position is most important for its pass-rush skills, who comes off in a Nickel/Dime package?
(05-08-2014 06:36 PM)blazr Wrote: The USA Today preview below mentioned we will run "a 3-4 front with a rush outside linebacker." Then, in the section on linebackers, they only list 3 positions: "The likely scenario: Challenger takes over in the middle, Ganus on the weak side and junior Derek Slaughter on the strong side – or some variation thereof." It also mentions 2 defensive tackle positions.
So if we only have 3 set linebacker positions (Will, Mike, Sam), is the 4th a hybrid DT/LB that we can move around (a la Jadeveon Clowney)? I assume not a true Rover-type since that's more of a LB/DB position (unless I'm wrong...very, very possible). Also, since this position is most important for its pass-rush skills, who comes off in a Nickel/Dime package?
I remember reading that Clark liked to use 3 safeties against spread offenses. probably why we have signed so many
So Slaughter comes off for a 3rd safety? Leaving our pass-rush specialist, 2 CBs, 2 FS, and a SS (or 3 FS since it's a Nickel/Dime)?
Surely we wouldn't run a base package with 3 safeties. Need some serious CBs for that especially if we are really, in effect, running a 3-3 inside with a end-rush specialist.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
(This post was last modified: 05-09-2014 12:05 AM by blazr.)
I may be wrong but i remember him saying something to the effect that he played a lot of hybrid LB/SAF against spread teams at Jax St. Not sure if it would be the base defense but we have signed a lot of DB/SAF this year so it seems we would be a possibility (maybe a 3-3-5 with a bigger safety/LB that could cover slot receivers, blitz from different angles, etc.
I don't see Clark settling for 1 type defense. I would guess that he will adjust during the season as well as during games to create an advantage over the opposing offense.
With UAB having had only 11 or so full equipment practices this spring and so many JUCOs and frosh coming in this summer, FBHC Clark is probably not entirely set yet on offense or defense for his first season. A general design, yes, but final decision on exactly who, what and where will probably wait for the fall. Everything will be much more specific by this time next year.
(05-09-2014 09:52 AM)82blazer Wrote: I may be wrong but i remember him saying something to the effect that he played a lot of hybrid LB/SAF against spread teams at Jax St. Not sure if it would be the base defense but we have signed a lot of DB/SAF this year so it seems we would be a possibility (maybe a 3-3-5 with a bigger safety/LB that could cover slot receivers, blitz from different angles, etc.
That is correct........used the hybrid Jack LB/DE a lot too.
There's some youtube vids he did for teaching D that might give you an idea what he has in mind. This is just 1 but there some other longer ones that go into more detail
(This post was last modified: 05-09-2014 06:03 PM by blazerwkr.)
/
Technical scheme Q for defense
