Custom Defensive Books

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by Archie Griffin, Jun 28, 2011.

  1. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    Thought it might be a good idea to discuss this. Anyone planning to do anything funky? Should anything be out of bounds?

    Personally, if things play well, and one defense isn't terribly overpowered, I'll probably run a 4-3 again, only this time, I can see myself adding the 4-6 set. I'll want to stay true to a book for the most part, since I see a book with 3-4, 4-3, 4-2-5, and 3-3-5 stack sets in the same book as cheese, but I could see replacing that crappy 4-6 bear set with a normal 4-6, and I could see a few other similar changes. Again, I'll want to see how it plays, but there will likely be a couple defensive swaps in my book.
     
  2. bdub

    bdub Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    This year I really want to try to stay more true to the team I am coaching. For me it feels more sim and I can get into it more that way. With that in mind if I play is Utah then I will be working the 4-3.
     
  3. jca312

    jca312 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,832
    I agree that we probably shouldn't be able to use the multiple d. I hate that 4-6 Bear and would replace it, but other than that, I don't see myself making too many changes.
     
  4. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    Multiple defenses is going to be tricky to keep sim. I don't yet know what I want to do with it, but I know I want to prevent guys from lining up in wildly different sets each play. We'll figure something out.
     
  5. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    Now that we've had some time, I think it's time to revisit this. Here is what I want (which means this is where the discussions starts - I am not laying down the law):

    I think we should choose a base set (4-3, 3-4, 4-2-5, 3-3-5) and stick with it, not allowing any of the other base sets into our book. I can see some leeway given to nickel and dime coverages, but I'd like our base sets to be consistent. So, no multiple D. Any issues with this?
     
  6. egofailure

    egofailure Sim habits die hard!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    3,309
    Arch',

    I feel the same way about base sets. Some leagues, for instance, are allowing the 4-3 to be paired with the 4-2-5, but I think that takes away from the challenge of running a true defensive scheme.

    I was planning on going with the 4-2-5 and adding the 4-4, which I like using in the redzone. As for the funky nickle packages, shouldn't they all be game? I see them only being effective when used intelligently anyhow, and I don't see how any one system would be more apt to include them.
     
  7. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    I thought the 4-2-5 already had the 4-4 in it. As for the nickel stiff, I could see a guy swapping a nickel for a 2-4-5 or something. I was thinking of getting rid of the 3-3-5 and replacing it with a 2-4-5 myself, but I think the non-base sets are more fluid than the core sets. However we decide to regulate that is fine with me.

    Anyone know if the 3-4 is still overpowered? I know the new zone coverages make the 4-3 much stronger, but if the 3-4 base sets can still stone the run, that will suck. Some teams with superior talent can hold up against a strong run game (Bama comes to mind) but average schools should not be able to pull off that D. I hope there has been a fix.
     
  8. egofailure

    egofailure Sim habits die hard!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    3,309
    No, the 4-4 is not included in this year's 4-2-5. You have to add it.
     
  9. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    Since it was there last year, I don't think anyone will object.
     
  10. soxandgators

    soxandgators The Gator Nation

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,713
    Sorry i hadn't found this earlier.....Since we are going by a scheme driven defensive set for a consistent feel. What about doing it by similar defensive fronts.

    Example :

    4 defensive line would have

    4-3
    4-4
    4-6
    4-2-5
    Dime normal
    Nickle normal/strong
    Quarters

    3 defensive line would have

    3-4
    3-2-6
    1-5-5
    1-5-5 prowl
    2-4-5
    3-3-5
    Quarters

    * And we could toss 5-2 or allow it in both *

    Archie Griffin
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    This is how I was gouing to go about it in my own book, but I don't want to take away any sets that are already in a book. My 4-3 book hs two 3-man fronts (3-2-6 and 3-3-5). I don't see myself using these much, but I'm keeping them in just in case.
     
  12. bdub

    bdub Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    I havent even messed with a custom playbook for my defense. The 4-3 book seems to have all the sets I need at least for now.
     
  13. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    I thought about adding a 3-4 set just to practice against, but then it hit me ...

    Wouldn't that change your recruiting needs, maybe even force you to take a walk-on where you don't really need one?
     

Share This Page