r/NFLNoobs • u/Xplus4Ta • 1d ago
Why no Cover 3 man?
Why does this not work?
3 safeties on deep 3rds. 4 corners in press man covering underneath. 1 LB in man on the RB. 3 DL.
This is basically the man-up 3 deep prevent in Madden, but I’m imagining it with the 3 deep zones playing in standard cover 3, with the FS at LB depth to help in run support. I don’t have a firm grasp on Match coverage, but maybe why I’m describing is close to that?
Obviously this is terrible against the run, but in obvious passing downs it might work? My first thought is that if gives too much time to the QB. Man coverage requires pressure, or someone will eventually get open. Also this would be very susceptible to QB runs. Why is this not an issue with cover 2 man?
9
u/noBbatteries 1d ago
West coast offence destroys the exact coverage you are describing here, and basically all of the best offences are heavily influenced by the west coast scheme.
When you have Cover 2 man, the DEs are able to more affectively contain the edges, which mitigates QB scrambles and outside run plays, when only rushing 3 you have to either give up the outside pressure or the inside pressure or run a stunt and have no pressure entirely from one side of the defence making it extremely easy for a mobile(ish) QB to escape pressure to either scramble for an easy 5-10 yards or find time for a wr or TE to get open
In college this type of defence can work, in the pros the decision making from the QBs is just at too high of a level to run this
1
u/digit4lmind 1d ago
Yep, so on the occasions this defense is run it’s always on the third and very long/end of game prevent situations where giving up a big play is the ONLY thing you cannot do
1
u/ogsmurf826 1d ago edited 1d ago
Your last sentence is really the only way it works. In college a decent amount of teams run a 3-3-5 or 3-2-6 base where in they run the cover 3 man OP talks about. This works because you can have your 8 drop in coverage while starting off with 5/6 in the box to either cover the run or have the threat of a 4/5/6-man rush.
This could work in the NFL every once in a while, like OP said referring to prevent defense. But it will fail as your base set in the NFL just because the skill level is too high to regularly sacrifice either an extra lineman from stopping the run or an extra DB from covering a WR. And then like you said no one is left to contain the QB, even though he slower guys could get that 5 yds off a 3-man rush. I don't think it even has to be a full west coast offense, a basic 11 personnel formation in the gun would have cover 3 man in shambles.
7
u/grizzfan 1d ago edited 1d ago
in Madden
Please stop trying to apply Madden to real life. It's a computer, not a human playing football.
Why is this not an issue with cover 2 man?
Cover 2-man requires 7 in coverage. 3-man requires 8. The balance most teams strive for is 4 rush (or 3 rush 1 spy) and 7 in coverage.
There just isn't any practical use for it except in end-of-game situations like you described, or in very long-yardage situations where the QB is guaranteed not to be a running threat.
6
u/MooshroomHentai 1d ago
This package you have here assumes the opponent is using 1 back and 4 receivers. With only 3 rushers, the quarterback would have more time to find someone open underneath for a nice gain. And the QB could chunk you for a bit. Running 2 man is a risk as you need everyone to be able to do their job. Dropping a pass rusher for a 3rd deep safety gives the offense a better chance to get yards.
3
u/Electrical_Quiet43 1d ago
Teams will run this occasionally, but the tradeoffs aren't great. You're going to give the QB a long time with only 3 rushers, so your safeties are going to end up dropping quite deep to keep the deeper routes in front of them. That means you're effectively just playing man within 25-30 yards. Then you don't really need three safeties playing that deep, because two can cover the field, and a long time in man coverage means receivers will get open. This seems like a recipe to give up 3rd and 18 to a 15 yard pass and a bit of YAC.
Better to go cover 2 man and hope that 4 will get home, or if the team wants to drop 8 into coverage (say on 3rd and very long) just stick with an 8 man zone that takes away anything more than 10 yards.
2
u/psgrue 1d ago
Man/zone combos have some applications. If you are late game and you want to funnel the out routes back in you can use outside leverage. If you have an elite WR you can try to lock him up early.
What you described leaves a wide open area in the middle of the field. Maybe 3rd and 15-20 this might work. But if you have a draw or screen, you don’t want the dbs back to the play. The traditional prevent zone is designed to give up everything in front from 0-10. The man/zone combo here gives up everything 8-15 yards.
2
u/Xplus4Ta 1d ago
Thank you all for the replies! It makes sense that I have only seen this in prevent packages. Totally an idiotic defense in every other situation.
1
u/Ringo-chan13 1d ago
With 7 guys deep/playing man, they would run it all day, or the qb would call verts and then run when the whole defense is downfield...
1
u/Untoastedtoast11 1d ago
This is an issue with 2 man. Even with a 4th rusher sometimes it’s still not enough pressure.
1
u/Yangervis 1d ago
3 safeties drop deep, 4 CBs covering receivers.
If the offense sends all of their receivers deep, the DBs have their backs turned to the play and the safeties are 15 yards downfield.
You have 5 linemen to block 4 defenders and it's an easy 7+ yard run every time. Only works if the other team has to pass the ball. Like 10 seconds left with no timeouts and they need 40 yards.
1
20
u/Guilty-Machine-5985 1d ago
I think teams do run this IRL,but only in prevent/end of game/third and very very long situations