3ypc-(wk 13 - Dolphins 21 Bills 17) Episode 1.48

[Section126]

In this Episode, the guys recap the Miami Dolphins week 13 Victory over the Buffalo Bills, assess the anger of Dolphin fans on social media, talk making a splash signing in the offseason, and revisit the rookie QB class.

https://threeyardspercarry.podbean.com/e/3ypc-wk-13-dolphins-21-bills-17-episode-148/

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/3-yards-per-carry-miami-dolphins/id1363764781?mt=2

 

[Birdmond]

Good stuff.

 

[Birdmond]

So you mentioned that the Wide 9 is the reason we don’t blitz more but why did we blitz Baker so much against the Bengals and since it worked so well WTF did we stop?

 

[TraderJoe]

So you mentioned that the Wide 9 is the reason we don’t blitz more but why did we blitz Baker so much against the Bengals and since it worked so well WTF did we stop?

I am by no means an expert and would default to Alf or Chris on this one by here is my two cents.


The Wide Nine puts the DE in the 9 technique which technically doesn’t exist. For example the widest technique in a traditional defense is the 7 which is outside the TE so imagine there is another player outside the TE, that would 8 technique. As you can see the 9 is way outside of the TE.


The DE’s sole job is to rush the passer although some have argued that the wide path of the DE into the backfield should cut off any outside runs.


The positioning of the DT’s can be just as radical. The gap between the center and the guard is the “A” Gap, guard and tackle the “B” Gap and so on. Traditional 4-3 defense put the tackles closer to the “A” Gap whereas the Wide Nine puts them in the “B” Gap and in passing situations even further out.


All this is positioning is supposed to put an enormous amount of pressure on the QB and, as I understand it, eliminate the need for blitzing allowing for more coverage. So I believe that is the reason that you traditionally do not see a lot of blitzing from the Wide Nine.


I have seen some say that it is the better defense to stop today’s wide open Offense’s but you really need a dominate DL to run it as lesser players can easily be isolated.


Furthermore with the DL so wide it is prone to being gashed up the middle because the center and or guards can easily get to the second level.


Hope that helps answer your question but again I could just be talking out of my....

 

[Geordie]

Did Clancy really say "Parker's toughing it out", really :)

I enjoyed the debate though, think you missed the clear message though from those folks you ripped that aren't doing cartwheels because we got a lucky win. Does it really fing matter ? At the end of the season when it's all over a win at home to the Bills will only hurt ourselves. This team is not going to the playoffs, it's simply not, just adding a lucky win in the win column only serves us to drop further down in the draft order. I understand the whole pro sportsmen don't tank thing, but that's really not the issue it's the fact that these meaningless, dull wins only protect those folks who are putting this show on for us week on week. It's supposed to be an entertainment business, the odd ugly win is great but when it appears to be you only way to get a W, then that's a big problem as it's simply not sustainable.

Something has to change, bringing in Bell as was suggested here isn't the answer, it would cripple us financially when we are already paying $27 million next year for mediocrity at the game's most important position, have to plan for paying big time for our two genuine stars Tunsil and X. And still have a bunch of holes to fill on both sides of the ball. We need to make some ruthless decisions, some decision that outsiders will scratch their heads at and wonder what the Dolphins are thinking doing that. Endure some short term pain in order to roll the dice and try to bring a brighter future to this franchise a future that's not shrouded in this soul destroying mediocrity.

 

[malok]

I am by no means an expert and would default to Alf or Chris on this one by here is my two cents.


The Wide Nine puts the DE in the 9 technique which technically doesn’t exist. For example the widest technique in a traditional defense is the 7 which is outside the TE so imagine there is another player outside the TE, that would 8 technique. As you can see the 9 is way outside of the TE.


The DE’s sole job is to rush the passer although some have argued that the wide path of the DE into the backfield should cut off any outside runs.


The positioning of the DT’s can be just as radical. The gap between the center and the guard is the “A” Gap, guard and tackle the “B” Gap and so on. Traditional 4-3 defense put the tackles closer to the “A” Gap whereas the Wide Nine puts them in the “B” Gap and in passing situations even further out.


All this is positioning is supposed to put an enormous amount of pressure on the QB and, as I understand it, eliminate the need for blitzing allowing for more coverage. So I believe that is the reason that you traditionally do not see a lot of blitzing from the Wide Nine.


I have seen some say that it is the better defense to stop today’s wide open Offense’s but you really need a dominate DL to run it as lesser players can easily be isolated.


Furthermore with the DL so wide it is prone to being gashed up the middle because the center and or guards can easily get to the second level.


Hope that helps answer your question but again I could just be talking out of my....

Just FYI, 7 is inside the TE, 6 is head up in the TE and 9 is outside the TE. It's a messed up numbering system once you get outside the tackle.

 

[TraderJoe]

Just FYI, 7 is inside the TE, 6 is head up in the TE and 9 is outside the TE. It's a messed up numbering system once you get outside the tackle.

Thank you for the correction.

http://insidethepylon.com/football-101/glossary-football-101/2016/02/16/itp-glossary-7-technique/

I ran some variation of the Wide 9 for a number of years in Pop Warner but it was to prevent fast teams from getting outside on sweeps.

 

[Crump]

Just FYI, 7 is inside the TE, 6 is head up in the TE and 9 is outside the TE. It's a messed up numbering system once you get outside the tackle.

I was always thinking we called it 7 when I played D-Line in HS, that's why the concept of wide-9 took me a minute to figure out the first time I ever heard it. cause our base D was 1-5, 3-7 and if you were one of the two DT's in base youre ass better sure as **** require two blockers. might be a little tougher now than it was then since grabbing a handful of jersey from the guy on your outside shoulder while you attacked the guy on the inside shoulder was highly recommended. so maybe they just need to go back to allowing defensive holding on the D Line and the wide 9 will gain popularity again.

another thing I noticed and I think I brought up on in game chat, I cant remember what game it was because real life has caused me to miss some but fairly recently, I saw them actually running around the edge even in the wide 9. I my thoughts were how the hell can we still allow runs outside of the DE when he's 50 yards wide of the center. I'd just like to see how some of our players would be in a dif system. I bet Bakes would be a helluva blitzing LB, I'm a Kiko fan but when he blitzes it seems like a lot of times he'd just run up to the line and play pattycake with the OL, don't know if this is cause the gap isn't open or he's just a horrible blitzer, but blitzing the wrong gap is worse than pattycake I guess. Harris hasn't shown us anything yet, but ive always felt the spin moved worked best with quick engagement, I would think that a stellar rip move would be the best for a wide 9 and we know harris doesn't have that in his arsenal.

im not going to right anything else, im turning the post into a wide-9 defense debate and I don't even get to listen to CK's podcast til Saturday. so I shouldn't be commented on a podcast post without even having listened first I reccons

 

[Birdmond]

Okay cool. But if blitzing Baker worked so well against Cincinnati why stop? I don’t think I’ve seen Baker blitz since then.

 

[Crump]

Okay cool. But if blitzing Baker worked so well against Cincinnati why stop? I don’t think I’ve seen Baker blitz since then.

because it would be smart defense that made sense

 

[TraderJoe]

because it would be smart defense that made sense

:good:

 

[Pachyderm_Wave]

Thank you for the correction.

http://insidethepylon.com/football-101/glossary-football-101/2016/02/16/itp-glossary-7-technique/

I ran some variation of the Wide 9 for a number of years in Pop Warner but it was to prevent fast teams from getting outside on sweeps.

Did you run a 5-3 or 4-4? And did you have your ends playing from a 2pt or 3pt stance? I imagine helping them make sure they keep their shoulders square to the LOS is critical to stop that sweep by fast teams. Do you still coach the youngsters?

 

[ckparrothead]

To be fair, Jerome Baker rushed the passer 6 times against the Bengals and has rushed the passer 4 times and 5 times in each of the last two games, respectively. Against Cincinnati he dropped back 17 times and rushed 6 times. Against Buffalo he dropped back 19 times and rushed 5 times. Virtually the same.

What I felt was missing IMO was the overall commitment to the blitz...not just Jerome Baker.

Against the Bengals we blitzed on 44% of the passing snaps. Against the Bills we blitzed on about 26%. But my gripe isn't even that 18% margin (which would equate to blitzing on about 7 or 8 more pass plays), because I think this would've been prime opportunity to do even better than we did against Dalton and the Bengals.

I just felt like against Josh Allen, you want to send a bunch of bodies at the line of scrimmage on 1st and 2nd downs, which has the benefit of also defeating the run, and then you also tempt him into being his absolute worst self.

 

[TraderJoe]

Did you run a 5-3 or 4-4? And did you have your ends playing from a 2pt or 3pt stance? I imagine helping them make sure they keep their shoulders square to the LOS is critical to stop that sweep by fast teams. Do you still coach the youngsters?

I ran a version of the 6-2 most of the time that was developed by “Dumcoach” called the Killer Bee.

http://www.dumcoach.com/even-fronts/dc-killer-bee/

That was freaking dominate to the point I had an opposing coach stop a game to question if that defense was legal. At a league meeting later on it was decided that it wasn’t 100% according to Pop Warner rules so I morphed it into a 4-4. The whole key was cross reads and strong safety play.

As far as stance, once the league pushed my OLB’s off the line I had no choice but to play them in a 2 point. Basically my DE’s played outside shade on widest lineman and their only job was to crash down and tie up linemen, nobody could ever pull. My OLB’s would play like a Wide Nine and force everything back inside where my Safety’s were waiting.

At DT I played one oversized (strong side) and one undersized but quick (weak side) kid.

I coached for a number of years even when I didn’t have a kid on a team and loved every minute of it. Unfortunately we were victims of our own success to some degree and when the stakes got higher and fair playing time went out the window I realized it was time for me to go. One day when I have more time I plan on returning.