re: Unfortunate consequence of changing DC is having to learn a different scheme

quote:

---

This is a byproduct of running a read and react scheme that isn’t fully understood or properly run by the players. One of the most difficult things with this style, especially with younger players, is maintaining physicality and aggressiveness. It is very easy for them to become passive just by the nature of the scheme.

Run perfectly, the defense reads the play in an instant and have the system down to the level that they immediately know exactly what to do and aggressively attack the offense. However, if the defense doesn’t have the scheme down to that degree, players are left hanging back, standing in place or hovering in their small zone “thinking” about what to do. That is the worst thing possible in modern football. Thinking about what to do rather than 100% KNOWING what to do will kill any defense. If you are one second late on a read, even if you make the right one, the play is already over and you got beat by the offense.

We all know this year’s defense has never had a good grasp on House’s scheme. You could see it on display last night against an inferior opponent. How many times did our CBs break late on a ball, even when playing well off the line? How often were the LBs and Safeties late to a gap? Now, the LBs are also bad about filling the wrong gaps, but when you get beat because you are slow to make the right read, it’s just as bad.

My point is this- if you don’t run a read and react defense the right way, it will make players who might be perfectly willing to hit hard and play aggressive in a more attacking scheme look slow and soft. I really hope whoever the next hire is, they bring an attacking mindset, no matter what base formation they prefer or whether they use more man or zone. A straightforward scheme with an attacking mindset will be easier for players to master and will encourage aggressive play, harder hitting, and hopefully better tackling will be a positive byproduct.

---