In my last post (http://bearinsider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74034) I discussed Cal's “Under” front and went through the basic ways that it adjusts to different offensive formations. In that post I noted that our ability to study Buh's defense up to this point has been extremely limited because of the simple nature of our offense. We don't know how Buh will defend lots of things because our offense doesn't show many different looks. In terms of coverage, we were far more limited in the spring game than we will be this fall. Nonetheless, we can use that footage to study something that people should be interested in: How will Cal defend the spread?

As far as I could tell, for the entire spring game Cal was in “quarters” coverage. It's possible that we saw a few subtly different coverages, but there was certainly nothing drastically different. In it's most recognizable form quarters is a coverage where the CB's and safeties divide the deep field into, you guessed it, quarters. The three linebackers than divide the underneath area into three zones. Here's a picture of Cal's DB's in the classic 4-deep look (in this picture there's a blitz going on, so the LB's don't do exactly what I've drawn):



At first glance, the big concern is that the LB's won't be able to cover short outside routes if they're lined up in the box, and they won't get much help from the CB's because they're playing a passive off-coverage in their deep quarter. In fact, a big weakness of quarters coverage can be short passes to the flats. This only describes the situation when all four DB's line up like they do in the picture above, in basically a straight line 8-10 yards off the line of scrimmage. Most of the time we don't do that, and I've only started the post with this picture because it illustrates the 4-deep principal effectively. In reality, we mainly line up in this look for certain blitz situations. To get a little deeper into what the coverage will actually look like, we should start by talking about alignment and responsibility.

In talking about coverage responsibilities, the defense is going to number eligible receivers from the outside in. On each side of the formation the receiver closest to the sidelines will be labelled #1. The next receiver inside will be labelled #2, and so on. If the RB's line up in an I-formation so that they aren't to one side or the other before the snap, they get labelled as soon as they run a route to one side or the other. So, if the WR and TE are #1 and #2 and a RB releases to the same side as them, he becomes #3 to that side. Here's the same picture with the receivers numbered:



In quarters coverage the CB's will line up over #1 to each side of the field and the safeties will line up over #2 to each side. If #1 and #2 both run straight down the field, then coverage will be really straightforward. The CB and safety each cover the guy they're lined up over. Similarly, if only #1 goes deep then the coverage will look a lot like some versions of Cover-2 to that side of the field, with the CB playing #1 and the safety providing deep help on that side of the field.

It gets a little bit more complicated for short routes, however. Here's a diagram that shows quarters coverage against 21-personnel with split backs:



Here, we can see that the LB's will be unable to cover #1 to the outside simply because of their alignment. To deal with this, even though the CB's are technically responsible for a deep quarter of the field they will also aggressively play any outs or curls by #1. The LB's only need to be able to cover the #2 receivers to the flats, therefore. In the diagram above, because both #2 receivers are in the box this is not a problem. The LB's will read that it's a pass play, they'll look to the #2 receivers, and they'll widen with them. The MLB would be responsible for widening with #3, whichever side he happens to go to.

This fact of quarters coverage helps to explain some of the front adjustments that we saw in my last post:



In my last post I mentioned that the SLB is no longer needed in the box as a contain player if the #2 receiver widens. That was mostly a discussion about run defense, but here's the corollary in the passing game. In the picture above we see that there are two WR's at the top of the screen, and they are covered by a CB, a safety, and a LB in the “apex” position just inside #2. The LB has to make this adjustment because he is responsible for any outside route by #2. If #2 goes deep the safety will cover him in accordance with what we've already said, and the LB will look for stragglers moving into his zone either out of the backfield or on a shallow cross from the other side of the formation. If #2 goes wide, the LB covers him. Here are some route combinations and the coverage responsibilities against them:



In the above picture #1 and #2 go vertical and are covered by the CB and safety. The LB is covering from the curl zone to the flat zone, and so when the RB widens to the flat the LB covers him.



In this picture #2 doesn't go vertical, so the safety is free to help with #1. The LB covers #2's out, and the MLB picks up #3.



In this picture #1 and #2 both run curls. #2 can't cover the curl by #1, and so the CB has to come down aggressively to stop it. The LB is in a fine position to cover the curl by #2, and does so. In fact, the LB is lined up inside of him and so is in a great position to defend any inside route by either #2 or #1. This brings us to another part of the LB's job in this coverage: Because the LB's are the only players technically responsible for the underneath zones, there is a lot of space for receivers to sit in. We've already seen how quarters will cover routes to the outside. On routes to the inside, on the other hand, the LB's will be responsible for “walling off” any short in-breaking route. Because defenders can make contact with receivers up to a certain depth, if a receiver runs a shallow-cross or something similar the LB can actually get in his way and disrupt the timing of the route. Here's a picture of Broussard walling off Boehm (the two on the 25 yard line):



Boehm was originally the #3 receiver to the offense's left, and Broussard was the LB inside of him. Boehm runs a shallow cross, and Broussard initiates a collision so he can't keep running across the field. You can see all the space to the defense's left if Broussard doesn't get a good collision in here. This assignment for the LB's is a pretty important part of our ability to defend underneath passes.

Those are the absolute basics of quarters coverage. In reality, we won't often see Cal line up with all 4 DB's playing off. This picture explains why:



This is the post-snap look for the first picture in this post. Both receivers at the bottom of the screen drove hard downfield for several yards and then ran out routes. Because the CB and safety were responsible for covering those guys deep, they were in their back-pedal and couldn't even come close to covering the outs. Fortunately, our coverage has some built-in answers to this problem.

Above I mentioned that we will almost never line up with 4 DB's off the line of scrimmage. The only reason we did in the picture above is because we were blitzing. Whenever possible, we'll put our CB's on the line of scrimmage to disrupt short routes like the ones shown above. But what do I mean by “whenever possible”?



Here, we see that the CB at the top of the screen is aligned off the line of scrimmage while the CB at the bottom of the screen is lined up on it. There are a few reasons for each of these choices. At the top of the screen the out by #1 is not a major threat. First, that's a really far throw for the QB considering that it probably won't even go for a first down before the CB can make the tackle. Some college QB's can beat you by throwing a bunch of outs to the far side of the field, but they are few and far between. Second, #1 is lined up all the way at the middle of the numbers, meaning that an out breaking route is especially unlikely because he has no space to run it. Given everyone's responsibilities in quarters, the CB needs to be much more worried about a skinny post by #1 here, and he is lined up accordingly. To really see this, compare #1 at the top of the screen in this picture to #1 at the bottom of the screen in the first picture of this post (the one where we were blitzing): In that picture #1 is lined up several yards inside the numbers, making the out more of a threat.

In general, the closer #1 is to the QB the more the CB has to worry about a quick out or something similar. This explains why, in the picture above, the CB at the bottom of the screen is lined up as if he's going to press the WR. That CB is still in quarters coverage. If #1 takes off down the field the CB is going to cover him man on man, the safety will still take #2 vertical, and the LB will cover #2 to the flat. Because quick short routes by #1 are a bigger threat when he's close to the QB, however, the CB is going to line up on the line of scrimmage to disrupt those routes. In the spring game we almost always put the boundary-side CB on the line of scrimmage for this reason. Interestingly he didn't always press the WR. Sometimes he bailed straight back to his deep quarter at the snap. The point is that by lining up on the LOS he can discourage the QB from looking to that side of the field, and any time that he actually does press he's in great position to throw off the play's timing.

When quarters is called, all of these are considerations that the players will make when they see the offensive formation. The DC isn't necessarily telling the CB's to line up on or off the line of scrimmage on any given play. Rather, on each side of the field the safety, CB, and LB are in communication with each other. They have a bunch of things that they're looking for in terms of the offensive personnel, formation, and alignment as well as other tendencies that they've gotten from film study of their opponent, and they're responsible for making the right adjustments on the field. This is one way that quarters is good for defending the spread. Imagine that we're playing against Oregon, and they're running a play every 13 seconds. Instead of trying to get a specific coverage in from the sidelines they'll line up in their standard quarters look, the players will make adjustments on the field based on what the offense shows them, and they'll use quick signals to each other without having to look to the sidelines.

Aside from putting the CB on or off the line of scrimmage there are several different calls that the defense can make out of quarters to account for various things. We didn't see many of them in the spring game, but here's one that we know Buh is aware because the Wisconsin defense ran it against Stanford last season. Here is the first pre-snap look:



Here we see Wisconsin in a quarters shell much like what we just saw from the spring game. At the top of the screen the CB and safety are lined up over #1 and #2. At the bottom of the screen, the CB is lined up in position to press #1. At the top of the screen #1 is lined up pretty wide, roughly at the bottom of the numbers, and so an out isn't as big of a threat. Even if that is the call, the CB will have time to break on the ball. But then Hogan motions him in:



#1 is now stacked behind #2. As you might guess based on the discussion so far, there is a good chance one of those receivers will be running an out-breaking route. You can't see it as well from this picture as from the video, but when #1 motions inside the CB over him crosses his arms in front of him and yells something. He's making an adjustment to the coverage. Specifically, he's making a “robber” call:



On this play the WR on the line of scrimmage will run a vertical route to try and clear out the CB while the WR behind him will delay a little bit and run an out into the space vacated by the CB. When the defense is in quarters and makes a robber call, however, the CB will essentially become a Cover-2 safety, meaning that he'll drop deep no matter what and play a deep half of the field. The safety, on the other hand, is going to drop down into an underneath zone to cover the space vacated by the CB. He's “robbing” routes that are designed to take advantage of the CB running deep with one of the WR's. This creates the following picture, where the receiver running the out is bracketed by the safety underneath and the linebacker over the top/partially behind, which resulted in a bad throw and an incompletion:



Alternatively, the CB could have made a “flat” call, which would have turned the safety into a deep defender and would have had the CB play the short outside zone. The point is, there are a bunch of calls that the defense can make off of quarters to account for the coverage's inherent weaknesses.

The play above really sums up a lot of what will go on in our quarters coverage. The defense will line up based on the offensive formation and will have a series of adjustments that they can make. Some of them will be automatic checks for specific formations, some will be based on the gameplan for a specific opponent, and some will be based on what individual players feel like they can and can not cover on any given play. The defense will be split in half with the safety, CB, and LB to each side communicating and making adjustments without having to look to the sideline (or to the rest of the defense).

That's how quarters coverage works. A major question you might be asking is “Why are we using this to defend the spread?” To answer this let's consider two families of coverage. Quarters, along with Cover-2, is a split-safety coverage. We can also call it a MOFO (Middle Of the Field Open) coverage. This means that both of your safeties are playing at the same level (in the deep zones), with one on each side of the field and no defender playing the deep middle. This contrasts with MOFC (Middle Of the Field Closed) coverages, where one safety will be playing in the deep middle and the other safety will be playing somewhere else, normally in underneath coverage. MOFC coverages are things like Cover-1 (man coverage with one safety deep) or Cover-3 (zone coverage with two CB's and a safety dividing the deep field into thirds).

Let's look at MOFC coverages first. Here's a diagram of Cover-3:



In this coverage the CB's will be lined up deep and over #1, just like they are in quarters. The difference is in how the safeties line up. In MOFO coverages like quarters (and Cover-2), both safeties will be deep and aligned to #2 on each side. In MOFC coverages like Cover-3, however, one of the safeties will drop down into the box (against pro-sets) to cover the TE or other shallow routes to the curl or flat zones. Unlike quarters, which had a LB over #2 and covering the outside zone, Cover-3 will put a safety in that role and will therefore leave less space for the LB's to cover. If you look at the Cover-3 diagram above, you'll see that this also gets the defense 8 guys in the box to stop the run (4 DL, 3 LB's, 1 SS). Cover-1 works in much the same way but is a man-coverage instead of a zone coverage. MOFC coverages, therefore, can get you 8 men in the box, and are strong against the run.

MOFO coverages are better against teams that like to send a lot of receivers into their pass-patterns. In the Cover-3 diagram above, we see that the DB's are shifted to the TE side of the formation. This means that if you look at the three DB's other than the safety in the deep middle, two of them are to the TE side of the field and only one is to the other side. Against a pro-style team with 2-backs and 1 TE this isn't a huge problem and can actually be desirable, because (as in the diagram) there'll often only be a single receiver on the backside. Against spread teams, however, you could easily face 2x2 sets, and so you want something more balanced. MOFO coverages give you this balance by splitting the safeties. They are also good against the pass because they often let you double cover a receiver deep on each side of the ball; As long as #2 doesn't run vertical, the safety is free to provide deep help on the other receiver.

So, MOFO coverages have definite advantages against the spread. Why quarters instead of Cover-2? Here's a diagram of Cover-2:



In this coverage the safeties divide the deep field into halves, and the CB's and LB's divide the underneath zones into fifths. On the face of it, this coverage has a lot of advantages. If you're worried about the short outside zones that quarters is weak against, you might notice that in Cover-2 the CB's take these away. Cover-2 will be good against short passes in general, because it has five defenders playing the underneath zones. There are also versions of Cover-2 that will let you cover three or four receivers running vertically down the field. For example, 2-read is just like Cover-2, but if #1 goes deep the CB stays with him, giving you more deep defenders than just the two safeties. There's also 2-man, which puts the CB's and LB's in man coverage against the five eligible receivers and leaves the two safeties as deep help.

Cover-2 does have one major disadvantage, however: It is notoriously problematic against the run. Because of the alignments of the CB's and safeties, you can have no more than seven men in the box. Against a pro-set this is a big disadvantage, because the offense has 5 OL, 1 TE, and 1 FB, giving them seven blockers. If all those blockers do their job, there will be no one left to tackle the ball-carrier. If you're playing Cover-2, you're relying on the ability of some of your defenders to beat some of their blockers, or else you're looking at a solid gain on the ground.

This problem becomes compounded if the QB is a running threat. Teams like Oregon and Ohio St. will check to a run every single time against a 2-high coverage, and they'll be massively successful. Imagine that a team has a mobile quarterback. Now, in addition to having only seven defenders to deal with seven blockers, you also have two potential ball-carriers. You really can't cover a running QB out of this coverage.

Enter quarters. The reason that the CB's play a deep quarter of the field is that it cuts the amount of space the safeties have to cover in half. In Cover-2, the safeties are supposed to provide deep help on anything to their half of the field, including stuff to the outside. Remember, in some ways this was an advantage of Cover-2, because it meant that you could double #1 deep to each side of the formation. To accomplish this, however, they have to align relatively wide and deep. Here's a picture of Mississippi State running Cover-2 against Northwestern:



The safeties are lined up about 15 yards off the line of scrimmage. They have to be, because they're responsible for a lot of field and the more depth they have, the longer they'll have to adjust to whatever deep routes Northwestern happens to be running. Compare this to a picture of Cal's quarters coverage:



Here our safeties are roughly 10 yards off the line of scrimmage. This is possible in quarters because the safeties aren't responsible for helping the CB's in the outside zones. As a result, they only need to make sure #2 doesn't run straight by them. This allows them to be closer to the line of scrimmage, and so makes them much more able to help in the run game. Although neither safety is a box-defender like the strong safety in Cover-3 would be, they are both in position to make plays in the run game, giving you a whopping nine defenders close to the line of scrimmage. We can see how this plays out against the zone read in the following play from the spring game:



Here's the pre-snap look. First thing's first: A little review. Before reading on, ask yourself why both CB's are on the line of scrimmage. Have your answer? If you said that it's because of the close splits of the WR's, you are correct. We're still in quarters, but the CB's are lined up in position to disrupt short out-breaking routes, curls, and the like.

The next thing to notice is that our safeties are, once again, about 10 yards off the line of scrimmage. This is because we're in quarters, so the safeties don't have to cover #1 deep and outside. They only need to make sure that #2 doesn't run straight past them. Here's the mesh-point of the zone read:



The end on the defense's right side is the one being read. He has stepped down toward the playside (the side that the RB is going to), and so Hinder keeps the ball and runs to the offense's left:



In this picture you can see that Avery is still on the 35, which was exactly where he was pre-snap. Because #2 to his side is blocking, he's reading that this is a run and is holding still until he sees the play. He doesn't have to worry about the fact that #1 is going deep and outside, because this is quarters and that guy is the CB's responsibility. In the picture above he is barely starting to move toward the line of scrimmage.



Last but not least, we see that Hinder is trying to take the ball all the way to the edge and Avery is right with him. He ends up making the tackle after only a short gain.

The really important thing to note is that using safeties in run-support against the zone read causes major problems for the QB. As we all surely know, on the zone read the QB is almost always reading a box defender, usually a defensive end or an outside linebacker. By using a safety to provide outside run support, it really doesn't matter what that end or linebacker does. Even if the QB makes the right read, he'll find a safety in his face. This is a major advantage to using quarters to defend the zone read.

In conclusion, we're using a MOFO coverage against the spread because of the advantages that those coverages give us against sets with lots of receivers. Within the MOFO family of coverages, we're using quarters because it lets our safeties play aggressively against the run. This choice is actually nothing new or creative. Some of the best game-plans against the spread in recent years have been based out of quarters coverage. This was Monte Kiffin's game-plan against Florida when he was at Tennessee, for instance. This is also how Wisconsin defended Ohio State last year in their 21-14 OT loss, so we know Buh's familiar with the idea. In that game Braxton Miller's average was 2.1 ypc and Ohio State as a whole had 139 yards rushing, their lowest of the season. In fact, based on my review of our early opponents I'd put good money on seeing quarters used against us by Northwestern and Ohio State to start the season, but I'll have more on the specifics of those teams when we get to game week.

Quarters does have its own draw-backs. Despite the adjustments we can make to cover short outside routes, those routes can still be problematic. Furthermore, we lose the deep help that we would have had in Cover-2 because our safeties aren't worried about what #1 is doing. This leaves the CB's isolated to the outside like they were much of last year. There's also a threat of play-action sucking the safeties up to defend against the run. Every coverage has strengths and weaknesses, however, and so as we evaluate our defense's performance this season we'll have to ask (1) whether we're defending the things that the coverage is meant to defend, and (2) when other things start to kill us, do we go to something else to take them away? Now you know what quarters brings to the table, and so you can be on the look-out for it and for adjustments out of it as the season progresses.

Great stuff berk18! Thanks for posting.

Thanks berk18. Love these kind of posts that now seem to be buried under all the other slapfights that we seem to be having. I miss our days of football strategy, burritos, and hotties.

... in the interest of continuing good discussion:

[URL="http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Breaking-down-the-top-Cover-4-beater.html"][U]Breaking Down The Top Cover 4-Beater (LINK)[/U][/URL]

Quote:

---

How do you beat Cover 4 (quarters)? Run the “Pin” route and set some bait for the SS to the closed side of the formation. A curl-post combo designed to get a deep inside breaking route vs. a CB playing with outside leverage.

---

Quote:

---

CB in trouble: When we talk about "quarters," think man-coverage technique vs. vertical concepts. The closed side CB will play from an off-position (outside shade), pedal and turn once the WR gets on his cushion (distance between DB and WR). But with no safety help (because of the inside curl route), this is trouble. Not easy to play the post when you are in a trail position vs. a route breaking back to the middle of the field.

---

Cal_Fan2;842145006 said:

---

---

Yeah, this.

EchoOfSilence;842145011 said:

---

... in the interest of continuing good discussion:

[URL="http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Breaking-down-the-top-Cover-4-beater.html"][U]Breaking Down The Top Cover 4-Beater (LINK)[/U][/URL]

---

The one advantage the defense has (in any coverage IMO) is that if the DL > OL plays like the PIN will be difficult to pull off considering it would take a good 2-3 seconds from snap to throw

ducktilldeath;842145005 said:

---

What is "the spread", exactly? Quarters vs Oregon? Good grief no. Quarters vs WSU, okay. Be prepared to be bubble screen and inside zone read to death.

---

Good points. I'm stoked that one of these threads might get some real football discussion, and I'm excited to learn from other peoples experiences with these things.

I can see what you're saying, but the inside zone and bubble screen are also staples of Meyer's offense, and quarters seems to be the way teams are trending in defending that. Not to mention, the bubble screen was used by us in the spring game, so it's not impossible to defend it with quarters. I'm going to watch a bunch of Oregon games over the next few weeks to see how teams have actually approached them, but I haven't thought as much about the Ducks yet since we play you guys later.

Regarding the bubble screen, the math isn't necessarily as bad as it looks, although the inside zone could be more problematic. If the #1 receiver on each side of the field is very far inside the numbers, we'll be in a read call with the CB playing press-man and the LB's moving out with any additional WR's:



I think those numbers are about as good as it gets for defending the bubble screen. To address your question I quickly looked at this video:
You guys are mostly running the bubble screen to the field when the defense doesn't move a defender out to cover #2 (or #3). Stanford was definitely playing off with their CB's in situations where Cal didn't in the spring game, especially into the boundary, and they were leaving their LB's in the box, making the bubble screen effective. Cal's approach will be different, which gets us to...

The inside zone is where the problem really is with the adjustments we saw in the spring game. We didn't see a ton of that in the spring, so I'm not sure what our approach to that problem will be. I imagine we'll have the option to spin one of the safeties down late if we need an extra box defender. Against 10 personnel that'll give us a 6-man box with a seventh defender (the other safety) in position to defend the alley to the opposite side of the spin. In the limited KSU-OU game film I saw they did a good job of mixing that kind of thing in, although obviously their gameplan wasn't flawless, so we'll see.

Bear Insider should seriously be paying you for this.

EchoOfSilence;842145011 said:

---

... in the interest of continuing good discussion:

[URL="http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Breaking-down-the-top-Cover-4-beater.html"][U]Breaking Down The Top Cover 4-Beater (LINK)[/U][/URL]

---

I'd need to rewatch the spring game with an eye for CB leverage, but we definitely played the CB's with inside leverage on at least some occassions (including one of the pictures in my main post), which will help against that post route. You only want your CB playing outside leverage if you have a good reason to believe he'll get post help from the safety. Otherwise, you can line him up inside and have him use the sideline as his help.

I'd also point out that the safety shouldn't be biting on that curl by the TE, because he's only carrying the TE vertical. He shouldn't even be thinking about the curl, although maybe that's hard to do in reality as the author of that post says (he obviously knows much better than I do). The LB is responsible for covering that, so it takes some pressure off the safety.

I should add to my above post about defending the pin. Remember that we're playing an under front, which means that our SLB will be lined up over the TE against this formation (see my previous post for the details). One of the advantages of the Under is that you get the opportunity to bump the TE off the line of scrimmage, disrupting the timing of routes like this curl.

grandmastapoop;842145034 said:

---

Bear Insider should seriously be paying you for this.

---

+1 to this and get you a private talk with the coaches to "verify but not reveal" some of their thinking.

NVGolfingBear;842145075 said:

---

+1 to this and get you a private talk with the coaches to "verify but not reveal" some of their thinking.

---

This would be amazing.

berk18;842144809 said:

---

---

Where's Lawler going (#4 offense)? Was he responsible for sealing off a back-end defender, or was this a Read-Option?

Very clear explanation.
Kinda gives more clarity for the BearRaid to make former TEs as inside receivers putting extra pressure on the safeties as the inside receivers, who can all catch well and are fairly big, can also be in position to block and/or screen defenders.

EchoOfSilence;842145085 said:

---

Where's Lawler going (#4 offense)? Was he responsible for sealing off a back-end defender, or was this a Read-Option?

---

I think that he's on reverse motion. I don't think we ever handed off a reverse in the spring game, but theoretically if Hinder would've handed off to the RB, the RB could then hand off to Lawler who would then have Hinder as a lead blocker. He's definitely not blocking anyone.

berk18;842145090 said:

---

I think that he's on reverse motion. I don't think we ever handed off a reverse in the spring game, but theoretically if Hinder would've handed off to the RB, the RB could then hand off to Lawler who would then have Hinder as a lead blocker. He's definitely not blocking anyone.

---

That would've been fun. In order for that to happen though, Hinder would have to have 1) read his DE as staying put, 2) hand off to RB, 3) RB sees a defender in front of him, and 4) tosses to Lawler?

If Lawler gets it and Avery covers him, then we'd basically be in the same situation, right? Unless Avery or the other safety bit on the RB handoff?

EchoOfSilence;842145098 said:

---

That would've been fun. In order for that to happen though, Hinder would have to have 1) read his DE as staying put, 2) hand off to RB, 3) RB sees a defender in front of him, and 4) tosses to Lawler?

If Lawler gets it and Avery covers him, then we'd basically be in the same situation, right? Unless Avery or the other safety bit on the RB handoff?

---

Dude, thanks for following this up because it's actually really interesting and I didn't catch the blocking scheme. Watch the offensive line in the successive pictures. If this is a normal outside zone read, then the line should be zone blocking in the direction the RB is going, meaning that they should be moving to their right all the way. Now look at the last picture you posted, where Hinder has just decided to keep it. Three offensive linemen have turned back to the direction of the QB run and have their backs to the camera. You can see it on the video, but the LT and LG chipped the guys inside of them and then immediately turned back to the QB run. The C worked to the side of the QB run from the beginning. One of those linemen actually blocks the DE that the QB was reading and makes him stumble.

If the DE had stayed put, Hinder would've handed off the ball. The DE would've confirmed the hand-off and then started working toward the RB, watching for a reverse. The RB then would've handed off to Lawler. At this point, the DE to the side of the QB run would've run straight into the OL working back toward Hinder, the OL would drive him to the sidelines, and the rest of the DL is pinned inside by the initial chips from the LG and LT. Hinder then blocks the safety, and you have a shot at a big play. You can see in that last picture that if Lawler had the ball instead of Hinder, there are linemen in between the DE and Lawler, so he has a nice seam to cut up-field.

berk18;842145104 said:

---

Dude, thanks for following this up because it's actually really interesting and I didn't catch the blocking scheme. Watch the offensive line in the successive pictures. If this is a normal outside zone read, then the line should be zone blocking in the direction the RB is going, meaning that they should be moving to their right all the way. Now look at the last picture you posted, where Hinder has just decided to keep it. Three offensive linemen have turned back to the direction of the QB run and have their backs to the camera. You can see it on the video, but the LT and LG chipped the guys inside of them and then immediately turned back to the QB run. The C worked to the side of the QB run from the beginning. One of those linemen actually blocks the DE that the QB was reading and makes him stumble.

If the DE had stayed put, Hinder would've handed off the ball. The DE would've confirmed the hand-off and then started working toward the RB, watching for a reverse. The RB then would've handed off to Lawler. At this point, the DE to the side of the QB run would've run straight into the OL working back toward Hinder, the OL would drive him to the sidelines, and the rest of the DL is pinned inside by the initial chips from the LG and LT. Hinder then blocks the safety, and you have a shot at a big play. You can see in that last picture that if Lawler had the ball instead of Hinder, there are linemen in between the DE and Lawler, so he has a nice seam to cut up-field.

---

Good catch!

Ho Lee Fuk!

Football stuff on the football board. Almost missed it.

Great posts berk18.

:beer:

Great post. I'm the head coach of a team in Europe, and I have gone with quarters this year. I've been very happy with it. It is one reason why my team has gone from 2-8 last year to 5-2 so far this year. In our last game before the break (the season is weird over there, we stop playing during July while everyone is on vacation), we played a no huddle spread team that beat us last year 20-0 and 43-0, and in our first game this year 28-0. We were running cover two in that 28-0 game. We transitioned first to cover 42/6 (cover 4 strongside, cover 2 weakside) and finally to straight up quarters. Running quarters, we beat that team 14-10.

Some observations about quarters:

Absolutely correct that the flats are a weak spot. But it is by design. There is always a weak spot in any defense. We'd rather force the QBs in our league to consistently complete throws to the flats. We'll make tackles for short gains - the CB is reacting when the ball is in the air (and a D1 DB can cover some ground) and the LB shouldn't be far behind - sandwich. There will be hard hits. There will be incompletions. One overthrow and our CB will take it to the house...

And the flat isn't quite as weak as you think, especially if a defense is pattern matching. We play our corners 5-7 yards. If that receiver pushes deep, he stays with him. If he stays in the flat, the CB doesn't need to bail unless #2 is running a corner or wheel. So it plays a bit like cover 2 man. Very versatile in that way. As diagrammed, if only #1 goes deep, you should have a double team on that man, which is good.

I also love it because you get that man feel a little bit, but the players can still be aggressive in the run game because it is zone. As a player and coach I always thought it was too difficult as a linebacker to respect the run and cover someone in man. This way they can be aggressive and have some leeway without getting killed in play action.

Quarters keeps everything in front of the defense. That play against Ohio State last year? Doesn't happen against a team that executes a cover 4 (I've said before, but I believe the main problem on that play was the zillions of coverages Cal was running last year preventing players from playing with second nature).

Great point about the safeties. Its another advantage. The safeties don't need to cover as much ground. They can play a bit more aggressive. If they aren't being challenged down the seams of the field, its almost like 9 men in the box. I teach my safeties that when the run is to you, you fly to the alley, giving us an 8th player in the box (even if he doesn't start there). The other safety can flow over the top for cutback and as a touchdown saver. This is great for play action - the first safety can get out of position, and you've basically got cover 3 over the top with the other safety flowing to the middle of the field.

I can't say if that is how Buh coaches it though.

Another team to look at is Michigan State. They've been a quarters team for years and have been great on defense. They don't have as much talent as other teams, but they are always near the top of national defensive statistics. This is because they force the offense to drive the length of the field on them, play aggressive yet disciplined defense. They don't do a million different things but what they do they do well. They execute. Cal hasn't executed on defense for a few years aside from the random game here or there when things clicked and the good statistics were accumulated. They could put up a nice game here or there and some nice statistics, but they were susceptible to big plays at the wrong times.

Quarters should prevent that - I hope it is a large part of their identity.

Great post.

90sBear;842145275 said:

---

Great post.

I think good quarterbacks with a halfway decent play caller eat quarters up. The seems and middle of the field would be very vulnerable, especially against trips formation.

Gruden broke down the quarters zone I believe a year or so ago, LBs need to be athletic and DBs, particularly the safeties, need to be disciplined.

---

It's interesting because as I'm reviewing our OOC opponents I'm finding that quarters is more ubiquitous in college than I'd thought, although it's not a coverage of choice in the PAC-12, which might indirectly support your point since the QB's and offensive play-calling are generally at a higher level in our conference. Northwestern played a very similar coverage to the one I've outlined plus some basic 3-deep fire zones against Mississippi State, and Tyler Russell played worse against them than he did against Alabama, LSU, Texas A&M, and every other SEC team he played. For that matter, Clemson also ran a lot of quarters against Florida State, not that that's a gameplan to emulate. I would also add that this notion of split field coverages is catching on more and more as teams go up-tempo, and that you can see a lot of the same principles in TCU's defense, for example. I think a lot of the innovation happening on the defensive side of the ball is headed in this direction in college, although I don't think Buh is at the forefront of the revolution.

That said, I'd agree that we'll need to play more than quarters this year, especially against pro-style teams. A good mix of the various calls we can make off of quarters can get us into de facto Cover-0, a few varieties of Cover-2, and the quarter-quarter-half coverages. If we spin one of the safeties down for some Cover-3 we'll actually have decent versatility. We'll also presumably have a nickle package, which was non-existent in the spring game. The main stuff I don't think we'll see is a lot of man coverage.

kad02002;842145310 said:

---

Great post. I'm the head coach of a team in Europe, and I have gone with quarters this year. I've been very happy with it. It is one reason why my team has gone from 2-8 last year to 5-2 so far this year. In our last game before the break (the season is weird over there, we stop playing during July while everyone is on vacation), we played a no huddle spread team that beat us last year 20-0 and 43-0, and in our first game this year 28-0. We were running cover two in that 28-0 game. We transitioned first to cover 42/6 (cover 4 strongside, cover 2 weakside) and finally to straight up quarters. Running quarters, we beat that team 14-10.

Some observations about quarters:

Absolutely correct that the flats are a weak spot. But it is by design. There is always a weak spot in any defense. We'd rather force the QBs in our league to consistently complete throws to the flats. We'll make tackles for short gains - the CB is reacting when the ball is in the air (and a D1 DB can cover some ground) and the LB shouldn't be far behind - sandwich. There will be hard hits. There will be incompletions. One overthrow and our CB will take it to the house...

And the flat isn't quite as weak as you think, especially if a defense is pattern matching. We play our corners 5-7 yards. If that receiver pushes deep, he stays with him. If he stays in the flat, the CB doesn't need to bail unless #2 is running a corner or wheel. So it plays a bit like cover 2 man. Very versatile in that way. As diagrammed, if only #1 goes deep, you should have a double team on that man, which is good.

I also love it because you get that man feel a little bit, but the players can still be aggressive in the run game because it is zone. As a player and coach I always thought it was too difficult as a linebacker to respect the run and cover someone in man. This way they can be aggressive and have some leeway without getting killed in play action.

Quarters keeps everything in front of the defense. That play against Ohio State last year? Doesn't happen against a team that executes a cover 4 (I've said before, but I believe the main problem on that play was the zillions of coverages Cal was running last year preventing players from playing with second nature).

Great point about the safeties. Its another advantage. The safeties don't need to cover as much ground. They can play a bit more aggressive. If they aren't being challenged down the seams of the field, its almost like 9 men in the box. I teach my safeties that when the run is to you, you fly to the alley, giving us an 8th player in the box (even if he doesn't start there). The other safety can flow over the top for cutback and as a touchdown saver. This is great for play action - the first safety can get out of position, and you've basically got cover 3 over the top with the other safety flowing to the middle of the field.

I can't say if that is how Buh coaches it though.

Another team to look at is Michigan State. They've been a quarters team for years and have been great on defense. They don't have as much talent as other teams, but they are always near the top of national defensive statistics. This is because they force the offense to drive the length of the field on them, play aggressive yet disciplined defense. They don't do a million different things but what they do they do well. They execute. Cal hasn't executed on defense for a few years aside from the random game here or there when things clicked and the good statistics were accumulated. They could put up a nice game here or there and some nice statistics, but they were susceptible to big plays at the wrong times.

Quarters should prevent that - I hope it is a large part of their identity.

Great post.

---

Thanks, coach. This is some great stuff. Now that you mention MSU, I see that they also limited tOSU to 17 points last year. Here's hoping we can follow the lead of them and Wisconsin.

90sBear;842145377 said:

---

I'm hoping this is just our basic set for typical downs and yards to go (I'm hoping 2nd and longs, 3rd and longs).

I feel like overloaded formations will cause some trouble. And ultimately the CBs are going to be 1-on-1 with no help down the field because a decent play caller will call for verticals on the edge with slot receivers sent middle deep, like a skinny post. I just never liked soft zones, even though it's more like a zone-read that ends up more like a man-to-man.

Personnel matters, but I've always liked the principle of man-under press, which is basically man to man in on the edge and the slots, sometimes bump and run aggressive coverage, with 2 deep safeties being able to provide deep help to all CBs, nickle backs or LBs. I know man to man is not all that common unless your blitzing.

And if the safeties are occupied by the slot receiver or tight end in the middle of the field, CBs are going to be susceptible to the up-and-go if they bite on out routes or flag routes. Since they are retreating, if they protect too much against the deep route, a decent QB will be able to pick up healthy yards on quick stop routes for 5-10 yards all day.

Basically this seems like a bend-don't break defense, which means we will be giving up yardage galore and hope for opponents offense to grow impatient or make mistakes during their long 10-12 play drives. Maybe it is the smart play in today's college football landscape, I don't know.

---

I like a man press, 2 deep against a pro style offense. But against a zone read where the QB is a running threat, you're at an even bigger disadvantage in the box. That will be a big problem against Northwestern, Ohio State, Oregon, UCLA and Arizona this season. It's also one of the reasons Nevada routinely torched us under Pendergast.

berk18;842145326 said:

---

Thanks, coach. This is some great stuff. Now that you mention MSU, I see that they also limited tOSU to 17 points last year. Here's hoping we can follow the lead of them and Wisconsin.

---

Thanks Berk! You are doing great work.

Another thing I failed to mention: cover 4 is great against hurry up teams because it is so versatile. It is easy to adjust to any formation and you don't need much communication to make it work. So a defense won't get caught off guard.

90sbear, I understand what you are saying, but I agree with slider643 that man coverages are weak against the run, specifically option games. In college (we were a speed option team) we loved to face man teams because one missed assignment and its game over. This is how Pendergast's defenses were often designed against Oregon. It worked very well for 3 quarters of one close game against Oregon which pumped many people up about the approach, but lets not forget that Oregon salted that game away with a 7+ minute (longer? I can't remember) drive to end it - we could not stop the run at the key moment. And last year, even when the game was close, it was so apparent that things were wide open for Oregon. I saw them go to some kind of trips or overload formation, and the Cal CBs went with those receivers because of man. Only the DE was left for contain on that side of the field. Oregon must have been drooling. Sure enough, they went back to that formation, broke contain, and that is it, touchdown, game over and good night. It may have happened twice, can't remember.

Quarters gives much of the same benefit as man press. Think of it this way: the CB is in man press if the WR challenges him vertical, or in a number of other situations. If the WR runs inside, the CB doesn't chase, looks for something coming back outside and locks onto that. So the corners can be aggressive and in your face, knowing that they have to bail if the WR goes vertical. Much easier than having to cover EVERYTHING in man, as well as the run.

Check out Michigan State, their corners are really aggressive, it often looks like bump and run coverage...until the receiver breaks inside.

And because the corner doesn't have to chase a receiver inside, there is no excuse for not setting the edge and forcing the run game inside. The whole defense becomes more sound, in my opinion.

I just think it is good, sound defense. I'm sure some people would label it bend but not break. But you can blitz like hell in that defense. I just think the soundness of the defense means it doesn't break as often, which is a good thing...

Great post Berk! Curious, do you have access to Huddle? Is that where you are getting your screen captures from? Pretty good stuff!

90sBear;842145599 said:

---

You and Slider make good points, and you're probably right: quarters is the safer, more stable defense at this level.

But the positive of CBs only manning up if the WR stays "wide" that you point out is also its downfall: if the outside WR turns in (for, say, a skinny post or an in-route) the CB backs off and doesn't even realize that the safety on his side is busy covering someone else and that WR the CB left to roam free towards the middle of the field is WIDE OPEN for BIG YARDS.

It actually plays out the same way in Madden. I play quarters D when it's an obvious passing down against the CPU to take away the sidelines and vertical route. Sometimes the CPU is too dumb to exploit the middle of the field on it, but when I face a human being, I get torched down the seems and in the middle of the field in front of the safeties and behind the linebacks.

Also, when offenses overload one side and the LBs or nickel backs don't shift, it is no longer a match up zone, but rather you have a LB having to decide which guy to take: the 3rd WR or the RB coming out of the backfield.

---

I see your points, but the response is that playing defense should be like playing offense: you need to execute. To address some of the specific points (not trying to argue, just a discussion):

In the first scenario, you have a skinny post or in route by #1. What is #2 running (or someone else) to occupy the safety? This is important because the safety should be locked on the seam. If #2 and #1 are both on the seam, we don't care, because that is bad spacing and the S can cover both routes when the ball is in the air. If it is a short in route, this is LB territory, again depending on the pattern match. If it is a deep skinny post, that CB is likely to stay with him, again depending on the specific pattern match rules. And again, we aren't concerned if there is a post and seem to the same spot on the field - the safety is there. Offenses try not to space that way, anyways. If it is a seam/dig combination, the CB most likely stays on the dig (again, I'm not sure of their specific pattern matching rules).

You are correct though that the middle of the field - over the LB and between the safeties - can be a weak spot without proper execution and communication. This is why I'm excited for simpler schemes this year, as I think execution will improve. You have definitely hit on weak spots in the defense - but I'll find you a weak spot in ANY defense. The key is how the defense executes.

As far as trips to one side of the field, you are correct that this changes rules for most teams. But the LB isn't choosing who to cover at random - he has rules. There really isn't much of a problem vs trips, for the following reason:

In this defense you are looking for a 4 on 3 advantage to the strong side and a 3 on 2 advantage to the weak side. Against trips, you've got the CB, the S, the strongside OLB, and the MLB v those 3 WRs. 4 on 3. Same play, you've got the CB, S, and weakside OLB backside. 3 on 2. No one has to swap sides. It will always be that way. Assuming all 5 WRs are in patterns, the only possibilities are 5 strong 0 weak (almost never happens), 4 strong 1 weak (rare but happens), or 3 strong 2 weak (overwhelming majority). So you are always looking for 4 on 3 and 3 on 2.

There isn't much more to it. If the offense sends 4 routes to the strongside, I teach a 5-7 yard no cover rule (I always teach it, common thing). That means we aren't chasing anything under 5-7 yards until the ball is in the air. Chances are that 4th route to the same side is near or behind the line of scrimmage. Thats okay. They can have it. We'll react up and stop it for a 2 yard gain. If they are sending 4 players to the same side of the field, all on routes deeper than 7 yards, they cannot possibly have good spacing.

Hope this clarifies a few things...love the conversation.

DLSbear;842145576 said:

---

Great post Berk! Curious, do you have access to Huddle? Is that where you are getting your screen captures from? Pretty good stuff!

---

Unfortunately I don't have a Hudl account. The accounts that can do the cool stuff are way out of my price range, hah. I just watch the game in full-screen and take a screen shot, then draw on that photo with a photo editor. If anybody knows of a cheap way to do it better, I'd be VERY interested.

90sBear;842145599 said:

---

You and Slider make good points, and you're probably right: quarters is the safer, more stable defense at this level.

But the positive of CBs only manning up if the WR stays "wide" that you point out is also its downfall: if the outside WR turns in (for, say, a skinny post or an in-route) the CB backs off and doesn't even realize that the safety on his side is busy covering someone else and that WR the CB left to roam free towards the middle of the field is WIDE OPEN for BIG YARDS.

It actually plays out the same way in Madden. I play quarters D when it's an obvious passing down against the CPU to take away the sidelines and vertical route. Sometimes the CPU is too dumb to exploit the middle of the field on it, but when I face a human being, I get torched down the seems and in the middle of the field in front of the safeties and behind the linebacks.

Also, when offenses overload one side and the LBs or nickel backs don't shift, it is no longer a match up zone, but rather you have a LB having to decide which guy to take: the 3rd WR or the RB coming out of the backfield.

---

kad covered a lot of what I would've said about those specific routes. I can add a few broader conceptual things that we might also do, although as we keep mentioning we don't know the specifics of how Buh will coach it. Basically, as kad indicates when he says that the CB will follow a dig or a skinny post, quarters defenders can lock onto their receiver any time they go deeper than about 12 yards. This can happen in a few ways resulting from different calls by that safety-CB-LB trio.

Something you have to think about when you're defending quarters is what to do with a wheel route by #2. The CB will be occupied by #1 down the field and the safety won't follow #2 out, so everybody needs to know whether or not the LB to that side can cover the wheel based on his alignment and athleticism. If he can (probably meaning that he's covering a TE or a RB), then the defense to that side of the field can make a "read" call. In a read call, the CB will play #1 man-to-man unless he takes a shallow inside release (if he does take a shallow inside release, then that's the LB's assignment). If #1 doesn't take a shallow inside release, the CB will play him over the top and with inside leverage, which will actually help against the pin that was brought up earlier in the thread, and will be advantageous against any kind of post route no matter what the other receivers are running.

If the LB can't cover the wheel you can make an "alert" call. This will often be the case against spread or slot formations where the LB would be covering a second WR who's split out wide. In this case, the CB will play much the same as in a read call. The difference is that he'll only play man on #1 until #2 crosses his face. This puts responsibility for the wheel on the CB. In the scenario you're talking about, though, if #2 runs a seam and #1 runs underneath him, then the CB would never have to leave #1.

There are a ton of other calls that the defense could potentially make, but you see that in all of them there technically isn't any route combination that isn't accounted for by a well-defined set of rules. What OC's want to do is throw out route combinations that confuse the defenders in following their rules. If the defense is disciplined, there won't be a lot of route combinations that will do that.