Favre/Packers against Cover 2 defense

[paulpressey25]

There is a great article in the MJS sports today on the cover 2 defense.

Essentially the Bears went to it in the second half of the Sunday night game and the Redskins played it last weekend. It compares Favre's numbers before and after. Passer rating before of 101...after of 35.

Favre's always had problems with this defense and I'm amazed that it hadn't been applied to him earlier this year. The gist of the article is that the Packers will now see a steady diet of this to take away their passing success from the first part of the season.

Two ways to combat it. Either get a running game, or figure out how to throw 15-25 yard passes down the sideline where you have opportunities, since the safeties, corners and linebackers are all working the middle of the field to take away the slants. Noted that the Packers tried those long sideline passes against Washington but that Favre underthrew four of such passes against the Redskins. Not his strength.

It was a good article and really described the scheme well. Essentially stating that McCarthy and Favre have to figure out how to play against this scheme now or the offense could really bog down the second half of the season.

[LUKE23]

This is the one defense a deep threat would really help against. A guy that corners have to play deeper on every play to prevent from the long ball.

Middle of the field is open vs. the Cover 2, but you can't have passes that hang at all, they have to be where they are supposed to be quickly.

[ReasonablySober]

Not even the Skins' or Bears played press coverage against the Packers. Both teams played the safeties deep. Watching the game over again this week it was remarkable how much space the receivers had. You couldn't even find the safeties on screen before the play began. That said they shaded Driver and Jennings to try and take away the inside at least somewhat, and the linebackers were geared to hit whatever came into their zone. Like pp said, the sidelines were where to attack, and Favre looked pretty crummy on Sunday at least.

On the first (or was it the second?) drive, Favre had a wide open James Jones 15 yards up field on a comeback route towards the sideline, not only was Favre late making the throw, he hung a duck. Watching it you'd think that he was hit until you saw in the replay that no one was around him. Taylor had an easy interception but dropped it. That ended up being a big theme of the day...underthrow, dropped interception.

That said, Dr. Z had the following to say in his power rankings. It echoes what I said last week. The passes don't need to be deep and they don't need to be four yard slants. There's an in-between and it can be attacked all day:

I have collected an orgy of analysis from various sources, c/o Scoop McGinn of Green Bay. Favre's audibles make it hard to crowd the box and play run-defense because once he sees a safety sneaking up he changes up to a slant behind him. Favre himself says they have to run the ball to keep the enemy out of Cover Two, which he doesn't like to throw against. To me, it comes down to this -- you have better runners, you run the ball. If they stop it, then you throw, and it doesn't have to be either five yards or 50. Mid-range is OK, too. I am having this report bronzed and sent to Canton.

He hit it right on the stinkin' head.

[El Duderino]

Besides the yards gained by running and getting good down/distance situations,not being able to run allows the linebackers to back up into coverage nearly right after the snap which further clogs up passes in the middle of the field.Linebackers aren't biting at all on play action for obvious reasons,we don't run.

Easy to see why defenses are only playing seven in the box and linebackers slide back into coverage at the snap.If they rarely pay a price for this tactic by us running the ball effectively when they are daring you to do it,this will continue to be be what most defenses do.

The Redskins basically were standing out there and sticking their tongue out at McCarthy and saying,go ahead and try running the ball,we aren't concerned in the slightest that you can do it well.

[Ayt]

This is the one defense a deep threat would really help against. A guy that corners have to play deeper on every play to prevent from the long ball.

Middle of the field is open vs. the Cover 2, but you can't have passes that hang at all, they have to be where they are supposed to be quickly.

We had guys open deep several times against the Skins and Favre made terrible throws. When the WRs are handed off to the safeties and the WRs blow by them, Favre needs to connect. That will make it hard to play a strict cover 2 against us since the other team will pay for playing their corners in a short zone.

Another way to counter the D is to run the ball, but we still haven't had much success doing so.

[BuckFan25226]

I haven't read the article, but I don't understand the huge adjustments they would've made. Chicago has been famous for their cover 2 the past 3 or 4 years. What in the hell adjustments did the make in the 2nd half other then minor ones? I suppose they could have thrown in some different variations of their cover 2 to throw off Brett. But everything they run is based off the cover 2.

As far as the Redskins are concerned, their defense is very good. They held Detroit to 3 points, Philly to 12, Miami to 13. Running a cover 2 for Brett is one thing, having the guys and executing it is another.

Would this article have been written if Favre simply would have seen James Jones earlier rather then having to loft one up for Sean Taylor to go get? Both balls to Jones he was being rushed from the pocket. Both times he saw him late and Taylor recovered.

EDIT : Would this article have been written if the 2 TD's don't get called back because of 2 terrible calls?

[crkone]

The 2nd half of the Bears game was bad for GB on offense because of their conservative play calling, and running it a lot.