Help me understand "bracketing" (1 Viewer)

[Sweet Love]

Been on the boards for years and follow the NFL pretty closely. Up until about 3-4 weeks ago, I never heard of the term "bracketing". From what I gather (and likely this or somewhat of this is incorrect), but from what I have pieced together, it basically is done to a WR when a CB and a Safety literally enclose a WR on his route and make him rendered useless.

Now I ask this question for another reason, because I am curious how this differs from 'double coverage" or a Tampa 2 type defense. Any help would be appreciated, but all I know is that I do not like when this happens to my FF WR.

 

[jurb26]

Bracket coverage is basically the same as double coverage. The term "bracket" simply refers to how it is done. There are two types of bracket coverage: high/low and in/out.

High/low coverage involves one defensive player staying between the line of scrimmage and the receiver, protecting against short passes, and another defender playing behind the receiver to protect from deep routes. This is basically the same as a CB knowing he has over the top help and he breaks underneath a WR to go for the pick or cut off his short route.

In/out coverage is a scheme where one defender protects against routes run to the inside and another protects against routes to the outside. In this scheme the CB is normally responsible for forcing the WR to take an inside release towards the inside help. Getting beat by an outside release will result in you finding a warm spot on the bench. I should ad that most cover 2 zone systems will also ask their CBs to force inside releases as well. This helps create a better angle for the S to roll over the top when the WR goes deep. The CB will run with the WR in bracket coverage though.

 

[glong989]

Double coverage. High/low; In/out.

So basically you have two guys covering a WRs whole route tree - or that's the goal. If you are covering in/out and don't forsee a deep threat then a vertical route can beat the coverage and vice versa..

 

[jurb26]

Double coverage. High/low; In/out. So basically you have two guys covering a WRs whole route tree - or that's the goal. If you are covering in/out and don't forsee a deep threat then a vertical route can beat the coverage and vice versa..

Yeah, I suppose so. R. Moss for instance would see high low bracket coverage most of the time which would support your statement.Yes, bracket coverage is meant to allow the D to take away that WR's route tree or at least 90% of the routes they assume he will run and runs best. It allows the defenders to play more aggressively because their risk is reduced.

 

[Country Boy]

Double coverage. High/low; In/out. So basically you have two guys covering a WRs whole route tree - or that's the goal. If you are covering in/out and don't forsee a deep threat then a vertical route can beat the coverage and vice versa..

Yeah, I suppose so. R. Moss for instance would see high low bracket coverage most of the time which would support your statement.Yes, bracket coverage is meant to allow the D to take away that WR's route tree or at least 90% of the routes they assume he will run and runs best. It allows the defenders to play more aggressively because their risk is reduced.

Most of the time teams will deploy "bracket coverage" from a 2 man scheme. Man coverage under with 2 safeties on top. Defensive backs are taught to try to redirect receivers to a certain area and stay between the receiver and the QB, realizing they have safety help over the top. When I was a high school coach 2 man was lethal. A pro QB with precision accuracy (Rogers, Brady, Brees) can defeat the coverage because there is a small window to throw it in.

 

[jurb26]

Double coverage. High/low; In/out. So basically you have two guys covering a WRs whole route tree - or that's the goal. If you are covering in/out and don't forsee a deep threat then a vertical route can beat the coverage and vice versa..

Yeah, I suppose so. R. Moss for instance would see high low bracket coverage most of the time which would support your statement.Yes, bracket coverage is meant to allow the D to take away that WR's route tree or at least 90% of the routes they assume he will run and runs best. It allows the defenders to play more aggressively because their risk is reduced.

Most of the time teams will deploy "bracket coverage" from a 2 man scheme. Man coverage under with 2 safeties on top. Defensive backs are taught to try to redirect receivers to a certain area and stay between the receiver and the QB, realizing they have safety help over the top. When I was a high school coach 2 man was lethal. A pro QB with precision accuracy (Rogers, Brady, Brees) can defeat the coverage because there is a small window to throw it in.

You're right. In that scheme the jam at the LOS is critical to success. If the jam is able to disrupt the timing enough or allow the over the top guy and extra step that window is either closed or the ball thrown too late to use it.

 

[Country Boy]

Double coverage. High/low; In/out. So basically you have two guys covering a WRs whole route tree - or that's the goal. If you are covering in/out and don't forsee a deep threat then a vertical route can beat the coverage and vice versa..

Yeah, I suppose so. R. Moss for instance would see high low bracket coverage most of the time which would support your statement.Yes, bracket coverage is meant to allow the D to take away that WR's route tree or at least 90% of the routes they assume he will run and runs best. It allows the defenders to play more aggressively because their risk is reduced.

Most of the time teams will deploy "bracket coverage" from a 2 man scheme. Man coverage under with 2 safeties on top. Defensive backs are taught to try to redirect receivers to a certain area and stay between the receiver and the QB, realizing they have safety help over the top. When I was a high school coach 2 man was lethal. A pro QB with precision accuracy (Rogers, Brady, Brees) can defeat the coverage because there is a small window to throw it in.

You're right. In that scheme the jam at the LOS is critical to success. If the jam is able to disrupt the timing enough or allow the over the top guy and extra step that window is either closed or the ball thrown too late to use it.

Did you ever coach for a living or are you just pretty football savy?

 

[jurb26]

Double coverage. High/low; In/out. So basically you have two guys covering a WRs whole route tree - or that's the goal. If you are covering in/out and don't forsee a deep threat then a vertical route can beat the coverage and vice versa..

Yeah, I suppose so. R. Moss for instance would see high low bracket coverage most of the time which would support your statement.Yes, bracket coverage is meant to allow the D to take away that WR's route tree or at least 90% of the routes they assume he will run and runs best. It allows the defenders to play more aggressively because their risk is reduced.

Most of the time teams will deploy "bracket coverage" from a 2 man scheme. Man coverage under with 2 safeties on top. Defensive backs are taught to try to redirect receivers to a certain area and stay between the receiver and the QB, realizing they have safety help over the top. When I was a high school coach 2 man was lethal. A pro QB with precision accuracy (Rogers, Brady, Brees) can defeat the coverage because there is a small window to throw it in.

You're right. In that scheme the jam at the LOS is critical to success. If the jam is able to disrupt the timing enough or allow the over the top guy and extra step that window is either closed or the ball thrown too late to use it.

Did you ever coach for a living or are you just pretty football savy?

I've coached. Not saying where, but it was defensive backs. I also started 4 years in college as a CB.

 

[Country Boy]

Double coverage. High/low; In/out. So basically you have two guys covering a WRs whole route tree - or that's the goal. If you are covering in/out and don't forsee a deep threat then a vertical route can beat the coverage and vice versa..

Yeah, I suppose so. R. Moss for instance would see high low bracket coverage most of the time which would support your statement.Yes, bracket coverage is meant to allow the D to take away that WR's route tree or at least 90% of the routes they assume he will run and runs best. It allows the defenders to play more aggressively because their risk is reduced.

Most of the time teams will deploy "bracket coverage" from a 2 man scheme. Man coverage under with 2 safeties on top. Defensive backs are taught to try to redirect receivers to a certain area and stay between the receiver and the QB, realizing they have safety help over the top. When I was a high school coach 2 man was lethal. A pro QB with precision accuracy (Rogers, Brady, Brees) can defeat the coverage because there is a small window to throw it in.

You're right. In that scheme the jam at the LOS is critical to success. If the jam is able to disrupt the timing enough or allow the over the top guy and extra step that window is either closed or the ball thrown too late to use it.

Did you ever coach for a living or are you just pretty football savy?

I've coached. Not saying where, but it was defensive backs.

So what was the route combination that gave 2 man the most trouble. We would run a switch combination with the slot running a wheel and the wide out running a read off the safety. Skinny if the safety vacated, dig if he stayed vertical.

 

[Country Boy]

Been on the boards for years and follow the NFL pretty closely. Up until about 3-4 weeks ago, I never heard of the term "bracketing". From what I gather (and likely this or somewhat of this is incorrect), but from what I have pieced together, it basically is done to a WR when a CB and a Safety literally enclose a WR on his route and make him rendered useless.Now I ask this question for another reason, because I am curious how this differs from 'double coverage" or a Tampa 2 type defense. Any help would be appreciated, but all I know is that I do not like when this happens to my FF WR.

What makes the Tampa 2 different is the linebacker play. Most Cover 2 looks you try to exploit by getting an inside receiver in the void between the hashes. Tampa 2 has linebackers collision that receiver and try to stay close enough under them that makes the throw to the TE / slot between the hashes more difficult. Got to have inside linebackers that can run. To me that's why the Colts were always suspect against the run because the ILBers were fast but not very big. Tampa would have had the same problem but Sapp was a beast.

 

[jurb26]

So what was the route combination that gave 2 man the most trouble. We would run a switch combination with the slot running a wheel and the wide out running a read off the safety. Skinny if the safety vacated, dig if he stayed vertical.

Depending on alignment we would check out of the man coverage in that instance and go to either a cover 2 or 3 zone. The switch can create too many natural picks and WRs are basically allowed to get away with murder any more so you almost have no choice. I'd say probably a go route with a quick flat option by either a TE or RB is the toughest match for that coverage. You are for sure leaving a LB singled up vs. what you assume is a more athletic player as the CB and S end up bailing. If you have a very good WR who can beat the jam then the quick slant works well too as the CB is more than likely taking an outside shoulder technique and the inside release will be rather easy. The Safety is supposed to read that 3 step drop and immediately come "down hill" but if the jam is beat clean it's an easy catch... depending on what the LBs are doing. I'd say those are the best options.

 

[Country Boy]

So what was the route combination that gave 2 man the most trouble. We would run a switch combination with the slot running a wheel and the wide out running a read off the safety. Skinny if the safety vacated, dig if he stayed vertical.

Depending on alignment we would check out of the man coverage in that instance and go to either a cover 2 or 3 zone. The switch can create too many natural picks and WRs are basically allowed to get away with murder any more so you almost have no choice. I'd say probably a go route with a quick flat option by either a TE or RB is the toughest match for that coverage. You are for sure leaving a LB singled up vs. what you assume is a more athletic player as the CB and S end up bailing. If you have a very good WR who can beat the jam then the quick slant works well too as the CB is more than likely taking an outside shoulder technique and the inside release will be rather easy. The Safety is supposed to read that 3 step drop and immediately come "down hill" but if the jam is beat clean it's an easy catch... depending on what the LBs are doing. I'd say those are the best options.

Love the option route by the player in the slot in general. We made a living throwing that on 1st down. Not as much as Brady and Welker but we did pretty good.Thanks for the football talk. This board is great for Fantasy, but I don't get my strategy fix as much any more. Went into school administration so its mostly budget and policy talk for me.