Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

The Mirage of Missed Tackles?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Detroit Lions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TL-TwoWinsAway


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 25771
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 10:05 pm    Post subject: The Mirage of Missed Tackles? Reply with quote

After watching the TEN game, a thought came to me: is it possible that some missed tackles are actually great defensive plays?

A lot of times, we see missed tackles by linebackers who appear to be over-pursuing the ball-carrier. It doesn't look good... we'd all rather they just bring the ball-carrier down... but these missed tackles seem to always happen to the outside of the field. As a result the ball-carrier has no choice but to either get tackled or turn the ball inside, right into the teeth of the trailing defensive players.

It's actually very smart: this is a league where receivers and running backs ofter have tremendous quickness and ability. Taking those players head-on with a less agile defensive linemen or linebacker is a clear advantage for the offense. If they break it to the outside, they often have a ton of room, minimal pursuit and a much larger gain available to them.

Taking away the outside, and forcing this player inside, is a wise choice. It's something I'm seeing quite a bit of, and I'm beginning to think it's by design.

For clarity: I am strictly talking about instances where a defensive player over-pursues to the outside, forcing the ball-carrier back inside.
_________________


Team Stylish


Last edited by TL-TwoWinsAway on Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
X_Factor_40


Moderator
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 18518
Location: Hockeytown
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When I coach soccer we use a similar principal. The 3 D's of defense. Delay, Deny, Destroy. In football it's the same basic idea. Delay the ball carrier's forward progress, deny them the ability to bounce the ball outside on the edge where they can turn it into a track race, and destroy the play. By delaying the ball carrier and forcing in back inside you give your teammates an opportunity to continue their pursuit to the ball and destroy the play. Instead of making it a 1 on 1 play on the outside where the defense may not physically match up with the ball carrier they're forced to turn the ball inside where they don't have the room to do what they want with the ball.
_________________
Team Stylish313
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
TL-TwoWinsAway


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 25771
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

X_Factor_40 wrote:
When I coach soccer we use a similar principal. The 3 D's of defense. Delay, Deny, Destroy. In football it's the same basic idea. Delay the ball carrier's forward progress, deny them the ability to bounce the ball outside on the edge where they can turn it into a track race, and destroy the play. By delaying the ball carrier and forcing in back inside you give your teammates an opportunity to continue their pursuit to the ball and destroy the play. Instead of making it a 1 on 1 play on the outside where the defense may not physically match up with the ball carrier they're forced to turn the ball inside where they don't have the room to do what they want with the ball.

Absolutely. Great post... makes a lot of sense.

There was a play in the Tennessee game where both Levy and Houston over-pursued to the outside on a short pass, forcing Chris Johnson to turn it back inside... and get smacked by a number of waiting Lions.

It really sounds like the right way to coach situations like that.
_________________


Team Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jrugges


Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 9016
Location: White Lake, Mi.
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This "idea" doesn't support plays where blown tackles/coverage I guess, could of saved TD's. John Wendling blew many tackles deep one caused a deep TD.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TL-TwoWinsAway


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 25771
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jrugges wrote:
This "idea" doesn't support plays where blown tackles/coverage I guess, could of saved TD's. John Wendling blew many tackles deep one caused a deep TD.

Actually, those plays are completely separate from the scenario explained in the OP. I am strictly talking about instances where a defensive player over-pursues to the outside, forcing the ball-carrier back inside. It happens quite a bit, and fans criticize the defensive player for missing a tackle, but I'm beginning to wonder if it's by design.

"Over-pursing and forcing the ball-carrier inside" is very much different from "taking a bad angle, being late to the play and jumping and flailing, missing everything in the process". There is no defense for that.

EDIT: I adjusted the OP for clarity.
_________________


Team Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
detfan782004


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 48892
Location: Montana
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is actually a principle that is highly preached among some of best coaches. When our staff went to USC coaches camp it was covered.

However when I watch Det I don't see it! I see poor tackling being saved by it.

It's more of a system save then intentional with these guys. Just like when we evaluate at work. Sometimes teams screw up and end result is they get by. However we still fail them because they are not allowed to use system saves where they get bailed out not because they did it on purpose.

While I see how someone can see it I simply think they are just getting luck in this aspect
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
detroitroar


Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Posts: 4338
Location: USA
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.
_________________
Team Stylish

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
detfan782004


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 48892
Location: Montana
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TL-TwoWinsAway


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 25771
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

detfan782004 wrote:
detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see

Uh, no. Not overlooking anything. I noticed on a number of occasions that players would miss tackles due to over-pursuit, refusing to give the outside. Fans often criticize these plays, when they're probably being made for a reason.
_________________


Team Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FootballPhreak


Joined: 09 Oct 2007
Posts: 34994
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

detfan782004 wrote:
detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see

Double concur. Of course you want to force them towards the rest of your defense. You still don't want to whiff.
_________________
Draft_FanAddict wrote:
If that doesn't concern you, I don't know what would...a missing head?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
TL-TwoWinsAway


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 25771
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FootballPhreak wrote:
detfan782004 wrote:
detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see

Double concur. Of course you want to force them towards the rest of your defense. You still don't want to whiff.

If the emphasis of forcing them inside is the reason that you whiff, but you're coached to keep them inside at all costs, isn't it more than just "poor defense"?
_________________


Team Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LionsFTW


Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Posts: 18075
Location: Rock City, Arkansas
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TL-TwoWinsAway wrote:
FootballPhreak wrote:
detfan782004 wrote:
detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see

Double concur. Of course you want to force them towards the rest of your defense. You still don't want to whiff.

If the emphasis of forcing them inside is the reason that you whiff, but you're coached to keep them inside at all costs, isn't it more than just "poor defense"?


You're taught to take an angle towards the outside shoulder. Not far enough to where you whiff and have no chance at all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
detfan782004


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 48892
Location: Montana
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LionsFTW wrote:
TL-TwoWinsAway wrote:
FootballPhreak wrote:
detfan782004 wrote:
detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see

Double concur. Of course you want to force them towards the rest of your defense. You still don't want to whiff.

If the emphasis of forcing them inside is the reason that you whiff, but you're coached to keep them inside at all costs, isn't it more than just "poor defense"?


You're taught to take an angle towards the outside shoulder. Not far enough to where you whiff and have no chance at all.


Exactly.

The concept is simple. Force them in but maintain a position where you can make a play too. The inside shoulder of defender should still be in front of the offensive player when forcing them in. This is something the Lions are not doing when they WHIFF.

Its the same concept as contain really. You go parallel with the play and force it in but you do not give up position to make the play.

There is no reason to believe they are whiffing by design. If that is case all these coaches need fired.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LionsFTW


Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Posts: 18075
Location: Rock City, Arkansas
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TL-TwoWinsAway wrote:
FootballPhreak wrote:
detfan782004 wrote:
detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see

Double concur. Of course you want to force them towards the rest of your defense. You still don't want to whiff.

If the emphasis of forcing them inside is the reason that you whiff, but you're coached to keep them inside at all costs, isn't it more than just "poor defense"?


You're taught to take an angle towards the outside shoulder. Not far enough to where you whiff and have no chance at all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TL-TwoWinsAway


Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 25771
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LionsFTW wrote:
TL-TwoWinsAway wrote:
FootballPhreak wrote:
detfan782004 wrote:
detroitroar wrote:
Misleading title, if you are indeed serious. Theres a big difference between missing a tackle, and not letting a guy get outside, which is defensive football 101.


Concur. Think this is attempt to overlook poor defense by making it seem intentional which I simply don't see

Double concur. Of course you want to force them towards the rest of your defense. You still don't want to whiff.

If the emphasis of forcing them inside is the reason that you whiff, but you're coached to keep them inside at all costs, isn't it more than just "poor defense"?


You're taught to take an angle towards the outside shoulder. Not far enough to where you whiff and have no chance at all.

Well, of course. In this league, with the weapons on the field, that outside shoulder moves. And that's my point: I have the feeling that pushing them back inside is more important than making the tackle, which is why they'd coach them to target the outside shoulder over doing what would best lead to a tackle (but expose them to possibly losing contain).

detfan782004 wrote:
There is no reason to believe they are whiffing by design. If that is case all these coaches need fired.

Nowhere am I suggesting that they're "whiffing by design". That's nonsensical. I am, however, suggesting that they're coached to approaching the tackle in a way that gives them a greater chance to miss, but pushes the ball-carrier inside.
_________________


Team Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Detroit Lions All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group