Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
4 - 2 - 5 defense
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
emu steve Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,475
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 83
I Root For: EMU / MAC
Location: DMV - D.C. area
Post: #1
Exclamation 4 - 2 - 5 defense
I would like to see a good thorough discussion of this defense. Sure it is nice to discuss players and recruits, but without discussing the defense they will be playing in, a lot is missing...

Couple thoughts of mine:

1). A 4 -2 encourages teams to run rather than throw.

2). I would think blitzing is harder from this base defense as there are only two LBs, not three.

3). This defense mandates that the front four be very good.

4). Do you need a player like Hoying to make this defense work well?

5). How well does our personnel match the defense?
12-29-2020 06:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


emu79 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,694
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation: 36
I Root For: emu
Location:
Post: #2
RE: 4 - 2 - 5 defense
(12-29-2020 06:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  I would like to see a good thorough discussion of this defense. Sure it is nice to discuss players and recruits, but without discussing the defense they will be playing in, a lot is missing...

Couple thoughts of mine:

1). A 4 -2 encourages teams to run rather than throw.

2). I would think blitzing is harder from this base defense as there are only two LBs, not three.

3). This defense mandates that the front four be very good.

4). Do you need a player like Hoying to make this defense work well?

5). How well does our personnel match the defense?

Just a reminder under CC our first def corr used a 3-4 and the defense was horrible. We improved moving to the 4-2-5
(This post was last modified: 12-29-2020 06:52 AM by emu79.)
12-29-2020 06:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sellers dweller Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,005
Joined: Nov 2019
Reputation: 15
I Root For: EMU
Location:
Post: #3
RE: 4 - 2 - 5 defense
(12-29-2020 06:41 AM)emu steve Wrote:  I would like to see a good thorough discussion of this defense. Sure it is nice to discuss players and recruits, but without discussing the defense they will be playing in, a lot is missing...

Couple thoughts of mine:

1). A 4 -2 encourages teams to run rather than throw.

2). I would think blitzing is harder from this base defense as there are only two LBs, not three.

3). This defense mandates that the front four be very good.

4). Do you need a player like Hoying to make this defense work well?

5). How well does our personnel match the defense?

Good topic! I'm not a coach, but I would assume your first two points are spot on, and one of the main reasons teams have had so much success running against us in the past. As you point out though, as a whole the D has been much better than the 3-4. At this point in time though I think the personnel (in terms of numbers) fits best for the 4-2-5, we have a ton of DBs and are thin at LB. It doesn't seem to fit in terms of the actual players though (in my opinion) and that has to do with 3rd point, frankly our front four isn't good enough. It was when you had guys like POC, Maxx, etc. Now, they just don't quite have the talent. However, there are a few young guys (Ramirez, Swindle, Crawford, Evans, Gaines, Merritt, Coleman) who COULD form a front four good enough to control the line of scrimmage and help out the DBs, but that is all based on potential and might be a year or two away. Based on that it might make some sense to go to a 4-3, but we just don't have a ton at LB so that leaves us in this catch-22.

That leads to your last point, as great as some of the guys have been on D the last 5ish years, Brody might have actually been the most valuable. He could do so many different things and was such a smart player. I'm hoping maybe Greg Kelley could play that role.
12-29-2020 06:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jerry Weaver Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,688
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 36
I Root For: EMU
Location: Ann Arbor
Post: #4
RE: 4 - 2 - 5 defense
The 4-2-5 is by design a "bend don't break" defense and truthfully is a great concept for most of the air-oriented offenses you see today in NCAA football. Neathery is an admitted "film junkie" and his concepts seem to work. We allow deep passes only because our DB's get athletically beaten, not because of schematic issues. We are very easy to run against but we usually meet a ball carrier soon enough, we just cannot get him to the ground.

Neathery's problems in the past two years are not due to alignment or strategy. Our defensive poor performance can be summed up in three words, WE DON'T TACKLE. I've seen far too many situations where we had a guy in the right place at the right time to make the stop and we simply did not. A tackle for loss or at the line of scrimmage, as a result became a 5-10 yard gain.

The 4-2-5 was indeed an improvement over the previous 3-4 defense. One might wonder, however, if the 4-2-5 was dependent on the superior tackling abilities of Rachwal, Hoying and Calhoun, athletes that Neathery inherited. I just think Neil needs to spend less time on strategy and more on the basics of tackling.
12-29-2020 06:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Sellers dweller Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,005
Joined: Nov 2019
Reputation: 15
I Root For: EMU
Location:
Post: #5
RE: 4 - 2 - 5 defense
(12-29-2020 06:51 PM)Jerry Weaver Wrote:  The 4-2-5 is by design a "bend don't break" defense and truthfully is a great concept for most of the air-oriented offenses you see today in NCAA football. Neathery is an admitted "film junkie" and his concepts seem to work. We allow deep passes only because our DB's get athletically beaten, not because of schematic issues. We are very easy to run against but we usually meet a ball carrier soon enough, we just cannot get him to the ground.

Neathery's problems in the past two years are not due to alignment or strategy. Our defensive poor performance can be summed up in three words, WE DON'T TACKLE. I've seen far too many situations where we had a guy in the right place at the right time to make the stop and we simply did not. A tackle for loss or at the line of scrimmage, as a result became a 5-10 yard gain.

The 4-2-5 was indeed an improvement over the previous 3-4 defense. One might wonder, however, if the 4-2-5 was dependent on the superior tackling abilities of Rachwal, Hoying and Calhoun, athletes that Neathery inherited. I just think Neil needs to spend less time on strategy and more on the basics of tackling.

Great point, Jerry. I didn't think of that, but have noticed the bad tackling. Did you notice it being worse this season that the past few years? It seemed worst to me this season.

Another issue I've notice is the corners playing too soft at times. It seems on a 3rd and short they'll play 5+ yards off the WR, I'd like to see them be a little more aggressive in those situations. Even on a third a long they seem to play too soft, for example the Ball State game this year they had that 3rd and 19 in their own territory and we seemed to give them way too much of a cushion and they picked it up and won the game.
(This post was last modified: 12-30-2020 09:27 AM by Sellers dweller.)
12-30-2020 09:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cidbearit Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 901
Joined: Jan 2018
Reputation: 20
I Root For: MSU
Location:
Post: #6
RE: 4 - 2 - 5 defense
(12-29-2020 06:51 PM)Jerry Weaver Wrote:  The 4-2-5 is by design a "bend don't break" defense and truthfully is a great concept for most of the air-oriented offenses you see today in NCAA football. Neathery is an admitted "film junkie" and his concepts seem to work. We allow deep passes only because our DB's get athletically beaten, not because of schematic issues. We are very easy to run against but we usually meet a ball carrier soon enough, we just cannot get him to the ground.

Neathery's problems in the past two years are not due to alignment or strategy. Our defensive poor performance can be summed up in three words, WE DON'T TACKLE. I've seen far too many situations where we had a guy in the right place at the right time to make the stop and we simply did not. A tackle for loss or at the line of scrimmage, as a result became a 5-10 yard gain.

The 4-2-5 was indeed an improvement over the previous 3-4 defense. One might wonder, however, if the 4-2-5 was dependent on the superior tackling abilities of Rachwal, Hoying and Calhoun, athletes that Neathery inherited. I just think Neil needs to spend less time on strategy and more on the basics of tackling.

I agree tackling was a big issue this year. Too many times guys were in the position to make a play and whiffed on the tackle. Tackling fundamentals have changed some with regards to concussion sensitivity. The old "get your head across his body" and as Keith Jackson always espoused, "getting your headgear on the ball" are now considered dangerous techniques. Using shoulders and rolling into tackles to knock a guy down are "safer" techniques, but in my opinion, not as effective as the old "head across, wrap up, and drive through your man" was.

Years ago when Alex was playing junior ball, I was one of the defensive coaches. We taught the young guys how to break down on your approach, bull your neck, set your eyes across your target, wrap up, and drive through the tackle. The basics included keeping your feet on the ground and drive, and dive at a tackle only as a last resort. Now they have the large rolling donuts that teach diving low into tackles. And that's where you see guys in games grabbing at air and ending up on the ground while the running back or receiver slips away from them. Yes, you have fewer concussions and neck injuries, but a lot more missed tackles.

And don't even get me started on the whole ESPN highlight mentality. Too many guys just want to make highlight-reel tackles, not the boring old school stuff that works but doesn't get you on television.
12-30-2020 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ken Barna Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,980
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 19
I Root For: EMU
Location:
Post: #7
RE: 4 - 2 - 5 defense
Dear cidbearit,
You are so correct about the way to tackle. When you watch replays on television, if the tackler would have put his head in front of the ball carrier, and wrapped his arms, the ball carrier would be down.
It's a shame that what is called tackling today, is as you said, whiffing for the most part.
12-30-2020 01:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.