I don't understand!

[willievic]

I have never understood why a coach goes to a "Prevent Defense" when they have a lead. If their defense give them the lead, why change it? I keep seeing coaches do it, and I have seen teams walk right down the field, and score. It almost happened against UK yesterday.
I have often said, "If a QB has any talent at passing, the only difference between a good QB and a poor QB is 1.5 to 2 seconds." If a QB only has 2 seconds to get rid of the ball, he probably won't look to good. However, if he has 3.5 to 4 seconds to get rid of the ball, someone will get open. It's hard for any defensive man, to prevent his man from getting space if he has 3 to 4 seconds.
When you rush only 3 players, as we did on most snaps, when Vandy had the ball, on their last possession, as they marched down the field, the QB had way to much time to find a receiver, especially for 8 to 12 yards.
I know coaches won't change, but I would love to hear what some of you think. I may be way off base in my thinking, and maybe a prevent defense is the best option. I've always thought it was harder for a QB to throw, if we had pressure on him. I never played QB, but I did play Linebacker in the Air Force.


OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!

 

[GridCats]

I agree, I don't like the prevent when you hold the team for most of the game. Feel the same way. Better watch out though by saying this you may be called a negative poster. :smiley:

 

[DCFseattle]

The theory is not to give up huge chunks. Make them burn clock by dinking and dunking.

It almost never works.

 

[GridCats]

You let them dink and dunk to the ten yard line and then have four shots to the end zone. I know they don't want to give up the big play, but holding them for the entire game and giving them this easy yardage has never made any sense to me.

 

[ArtSmass]

One big reason why teams go to prevent is to "prevent" something like this from happening as is more likely in a traditional pattern-reading scheme.
STEVIE GOT LOOSE

Another example is the TD UK gave up right before the half against So. Miss. If they'd been in a Cover 4 or even a Cover 3 (# refers to how many DB's are told to stay deeper than everyone in their vertical zone) someone would've been behind the receiver to make the tackle instead of giving him an easy path to the endzone when one of them CAME UP on a short receiver route using regular pattern-reading rules.

 

[Adolph Rollingover]

Did you see UT give up an easy TD over the CB head in the UGA game? Coaches would rather a team have to move down field than give up the home run. Our prevent was not good on 2 of the crossing routes where the field olb alllowed crosser to get to his outside and out of bounds. Goal is to play deep and to outside and make tackles in bounds. UK failed on that. Scheme vs execution.

 

[willievic]

Even in a Cover 4, we should be able to get a push on the OL, and put some pressure on the QB. You don't have to bring all the LB's but at least bring one in the gap. When the opposing QB knows your only going to rush 3, he has a great advantage. You have 5 guys blocking three.

OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!

 

[Adolph Rollingover]

We flushed the QB twice. Once he escaped downfield and OOB, the other he got outside and threw it away.