Cover 2 CB's (1 Viewer)

[Renegades of Funk]

Found Norton's comments in Antoine Winfield's face off very interesting. He brought up a concept I never really thought about regarding alignment of the CB's in a cover two. Norton commented the strong side CB in the cover 2 is the one that racks up the stats. The example given was Barber and Kelley. Is this a consistent trend? Who are the strong side CB's in all the other cover 2's? I would assume Peanut played on the strong side. This could be very important considering all the teams moving that are moving to the cover 2.

I would guess Winfield would play on the strong side since he is such a good tackler. Bly doesn't seem like a good fit there in Detroit.

 

[Weiner Dog]

Bly doesn't seem like a good fit there in Detroit.

Bly may not be the optimum choice, but he's better than the alternative (ie. Fernando Bryant).

 

[Jene Bramel]

Found Norton's comments in Antoine Winfield's face off very interesting.  He brought up a concept I never really thought about regarding alignment of the CB's in a cover two.  Norton commented the strong side CB in the cover 2 is the one that racks up the stats.  The example given was Barber and Kelley.  Is this a consistent trend?  Who are the strong side CB's in all the other cover 2's?  I would assume Peanut played on the strong side.  This could be very important considering all the teams moving that are moving to the cover 2.

I would guess Winfield would play on the strong side since he is such a good tackler.  Bly doesn't seem like a good fit there in Detroit.

Norton and I have discussed the terminology often because it can get a little confusing. For the most part, offenses are right-handed, that is, the tight end aligns next to the RT. The mirror defensive image then, makes the left side of the defense the strong side and the right side the weak side in most cases. Therefore, your ROLB is your WLB as a default.The Tampa-2 defense is interesting in that it seeks to spill plays toward the weak side of the defense where the pursuit can make the play. It's part of the reason the WLB is more valuable in this scheme.

Both corners should have value in this defense. Both have short zone and run support responsibility. The strong side (LCB) may see more plays start to his side of the field, but due to the increased blockers he'll see and the design of the defense to force things to the weak side, his opportunity isn't significantly higher than the weak side corner (RCB). That corner, like the WLB, is primed to make plays in pursuit and in plays that have been forced back in his general direction.

For frame of reference:

Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2yr avg)

RCB Ronde Barber -- 80 solo tackles/96 total

LCB Brian Kelly -- 47 solos/55 total

Indianapolis Colts (2 yr avg)

RCB Jason David -- 38 solos/46 total

LCB Nick Harper -- 59 solos (82 in 2003)/71 total

Chicago Bears (2005)

RCB Nathan Vasher -- 41 solos/48 total

LCB Charles Tillman -- 85 solos/96 total (proj 71 solos 2004, 74 2003)

IMO, there's no discernible pattern here with regard to RCB vs LCB. I think the player to target is the player who's aggressive and willing in run support. If the corner can't play run support, he won't make the plays no matter what opportunity is afforded him. Barber and Tillman have clearly been well thought of in run support over time. The Colt corners (and Vasher) have not.

That's why I've got Nate Clements (RCB) and Antoine Winfield (LCB) ranked so highly, with McGee close behind. Those guys are proven run support corners. I liked Dre' Bly (RCB) early on after looking at his raw tackle numbers but have since read that his run support skills are suspect. I still think he'll be successful, but am no longer as high on him as I was. I think I'd watch both Fred Smoot (RCB) and Fernando Bryant (LCB) closely during the preseason. Both have apparently bulked up in the offseason and are healthy. Both have been praised at times for their run support and tackling, but have been inconsistent. I think this year's out-of-nowhere stud corner could well be one of those two.

As I said in our discussion about how the Tampa-2 will affect the safeties, I'm really interested in how this plays out this season. Each of these teams will play a slightly different Tampa-2 scheme, but the sample size we get this year will go a long way to projecting the fantasy output of these guys moving forward.

 

[Renegades of Funk]

Thanks for the clarification Jene. I previously always felt it was all about the CB's willingness to support the run in the cover 2, but Norton's comments got me thinking I was missing something.

As far as Bly is concerned I don't know if he can hold up to a whole lot of run support. He is more of a finese player and he has missed several games each of the past three seasons due to injuries.

None of the Colts CB's are solid in run support and that is why I have been so high on Marlin Jackson. If he can get on the field he fits the mold as a potential stud in the cover 2.

 

[Jene Bramel]

None of the Colts CB's are solid in run support and that is why I have been so high on Marlin Jackson.  If he can get on the field he fits the mold as a potential stud in the cover 2.

BTW, Norton may be 100% correct here. I'm just reading the tea leaves as I see them. We're really still in the infant stages of seeing how the Tampa-2 is going to affect the IDP world. Tampa and Indy and Chicago each have their own unique forms of the Tampa-2. Herm Edwards was totally schizo with it. Buffalo's version should follow the Lovie Smith model, but it remains to be seen how much they use it. Both the Vikes and the Lions should fall closer to the Tampa/Indy versions, but their personnel is so shady that the stats that result may confuse the issue further.

It'll be fun for us IDP to watch and analyze though.