Just a heads up. There is practice today. But I won’t be there due to personal reasons. So we’re going I have to skip one practice report. Sorry y’all! I’ll work twice as hard to get you the goods the rest of Spring Football!
I think the secondary will be fine and this Star position sounds really interesting. I recall a few years back that ASU had a position known as "devilback" which was kind of a hybrid safety/linebacker position.
Mar 7, 2020Liked by Rob Hwang, Christopher Helling, Berkelium97
The "Star" position is really interesting to me. That terminology is straight-up Belichik/Saban, so it seems that our defensive coaches have been meeting with somebody this off-season (it could be anyone from the Saban/Belichik tree, though, not necessarily the founders themselves).
Basically, in the Saban/Belichik terminology, the Star is your strongside OLB. If you're playing against an I-formation, then that guy will line up to the TE side (the strongside), and he'll be playing on the line of scrimmage as an edge defender outside of the TE. If the offense replaces that TE with a Slot WR to go spread, though, then the Star will walk out of the box toward that second receiver. So far, these are just alignment adjustments based on the offense's formation.
The whole point behind calling that guy the "Star" instead of just calling him a strongside OLB, is that the defense might want a different guy at that spot depending on the personnel that the offense has on the field. So, you might want a big OLB at Star if they have a TE in the game, but you might want more of a DB at Star if they're in the spread. Either way, it's the same position with the same assignments, and so you teach all of those guys the same stuff. This means that the Star position is really a group of guys who might have very different body types, but who do the same thing functionally within the structure of the defense. It's basically a way to maintain a base 3-4 while acknowledging that you might want different people in the game against different offensive personnel groupings. This contrasts with a true nickel package, where you might run completely different stuff in substituted personnel. In a more traditional Nickel system, your NB would be a unique position that does entirely different things from your SLB, and so you wouldn't really train them together or think of them as fulfilling the same kind of role.
Putting a DB at Star is something that I'll often refer to as a "Nickel 3-4," because it plays like a normal 3-4 in terms of alignment and assignment, but you've really got a DB playing at strongside OLB. The emphasis on this position in the Spring suggests that we're changing our primary Nickel package. In previous seasons we've gotten into Nickel personnel by taking the NT off the field and playing a de facto 4-2, with the DE's sliding inside to play like "DT's" while the OLB's play on the edges as DE's. With this new emphasis on the Star position, we'll probably leave all three DL on the field, but substitute a NB for our strongside OLB. In general this kind of defense is stronger against runs up the middle (because you have three DL between the tackles instead of two), but may be more susceptible to RPO's on the edges. This'll put more pressure on our CB's and Safeties to stop the passing component of RPO's. Going with more of a Nickel 3-4 is in line with a lot of the anti-spread trends seen in the Big-12, though, and it's a great way to pull coverage defenders out of the box while still being able to steal additional numbers in the run game.
A "Nickel 3-4" as I've called it can also contrast with a base 3-3-5. In a Nickel 3-4, your NB (the Star) is integrated into the run fit, and so you're playing with 7-man front principles. A 3-3-5 might have the exact same personnel (3 DL + 3 LB's + 5 DB's), but in a 3-3-5 you're playing with a true 6-man front, with your NB divorced from the front and the run fit. This change leads to significant differences in alignment, coverage, and run fits. So, although we might play a lot of Nickel personnel with 3 DL on the field, we won't really look like 3-3-5 team.
Love the Berk18 posts. I’ve been subscribing to Berk18’s premium posts at https://www.patreon.com/berk18/posts for a while and it’s made me so much deeper of a football fan. There is so much more to watch for in the game when you geek out to stuff like the difference between 3-3–5 and nickel 3-4. Thanks Berk18 for breaking it down
Substituted packages have been around for a long time, but generally Base Nickel defenses and DB/LB hybrids come from a combination of two sources: (1) The need for smaller programs to compete with bigger ones, and (2) the need for everybody to defend the spread. Basically, base 4-2 and 3-3 fronts were developed or refined by guys like Gary Patterson and Rocky Long in the 90's. They didn't have the talent to field traditional defenses, but they found that they could cause problems for bigger programs by going small and scheming to take advantage of that speed, rather than lining up and trying to attack them head-on. Then, when the Spread revolution happened and offenses started going smaller, these base Nickel guys found that their systems were really well set-up to defend them, and so a lot of bigger programs turned to guys like Patterson and Long to learn how to use these more multiple, smaller defensive sets. This took off in the mainstream more like 10 years ago, but remember that Rocky Long was battling it out with Urban Meyer back in the early 2000's when they were at New Mexico and Utah (respectively), so in this case the battles going on in the mid-majors were a preview of what was to come for everybody. All that it took was for a few big-time programs (Florida, Oregon) to start having success with the spread. Once big-time DC's got humbled by a few spread offenses, they realized that they had a lot to learn from guys at smaller programs, and it changed defensive football across the board.
QB's definitely are aware of whether defenders are looking at them or not, and that can factor into whether or not they throw, and where they put the ball. Ultimately, though, avoiding an INT just comes down to making sure that no defender can get to the ball, either because they're too far from the reception point, or because they have their back to you. The more accurate the QB, the greater his arm strength, and the quicker his release, the closer a DB can be to the reception point. If the QB reads all of that correctly and throws it accurately then there won't be an interception, so there's not really such a thing as a perfect read/throw where you shouldn't pull the trigger. When a DB jumps a route, it's usually either because the QB didn't see him, or because he mis-interpreted the coverage structure and so expected the defender to do something different. Both of those can happen more when the QB gets a little too comfortable/lazy in his reads (meaning that he's made the same throw successfully a few times, and so he's not as vigilant the next time that he goes to make it, meaning that he assumes that the defender will do one thing without actually reading to confirm it).
" The second by Craig Woodson, a player who we should be watching out for according to Ashtyn Davis. Woodson’s INT was impressive, he tracked the ball perfectly and caught it in traffic along the sideline." - upperclass or outgoing players telling us to watch out for young players is one of my favorite things. I remember Hydro telling a story about the senior DL guys talking about how good Tyson Alualu was going to be . . . and they were right.
Just a heads up. There is practice today. But I won’t be there due to personal reasons. So we’re going I have to skip one practice report. Sorry y’all! I’ll work twice as hard to get you the goods the rest of Spring Football!
I think the secondary will be fine and this Star position sounds really interesting. I recall a few years back that ASU had a position known as "devilback" which was kind of a hybrid safety/linebacker position.
Love the vibe Coach Musgrave has...cool, calm, confident and “I’ve seen it all”... has to be great for the guys...
The "Star" position is really interesting to me. That terminology is straight-up Belichik/Saban, so it seems that our defensive coaches have been meeting with somebody this off-season (it could be anyone from the Saban/Belichik tree, though, not necessarily the founders themselves).
Basically, in the Saban/Belichik terminology, the Star is your strongside OLB. If you're playing against an I-formation, then that guy will line up to the TE side (the strongside), and he'll be playing on the line of scrimmage as an edge defender outside of the TE. If the offense replaces that TE with a Slot WR to go spread, though, then the Star will walk out of the box toward that second receiver. So far, these are just alignment adjustments based on the offense's formation.
The whole point behind calling that guy the "Star" instead of just calling him a strongside OLB, is that the defense might want a different guy at that spot depending on the personnel that the offense has on the field. So, you might want a big OLB at Star if they have a TE in the game, but you might want more of a DB at Star if they're in the spread. Either way, it's the same position with the same assignments, and so you teach all of those guys the same stuff. This means that the Star position is really a group of guys who might have very different body types, but who do the same thing functionally within the structure of the defense. It's basically a way to maintain a base 3-4 while acknowledging that you might want different people in the game against different offensive personnel groupings. This contrasts with a true nickel package, where you might run completely different stuff in substituted personnel. In a more traditional Nickel system, your NB would be a unique position that does entirely different things from your SLB, and so you wouldn't really train them together or think of them as fulfilling the same kind of role.
:) I love you so much hahahaha So I got something right in my reads if I’m reading your post correctly. Yay!
Maybe “star” is a shorter way to say “strong side OLB, with an asterisk(*), depending on what the offense is doing ...”
Yeah, star sounds good.
Putting a DB at Star is something that I'll often refer to as a "Nickel 3-4," because it plays like a normal 3-4 in terms of alignment and assignment, but you've really got a DB playing at strongside OLB. The emphasis on this position in the Spring suggests that we're changing our primary Nickel package. In previous seasons we've gotten into Nickel personnel by taking the NT off the field and playing a de facto 4-2, with the DE's sliding inside to play like "DT's" while the OLB's play on the edges as DE's. With this new emphasis on the Star position, we'll probably leave all three DL on the field, but substitute a NB for our strongside OLB. In general this kind of defense is stronger against runs up the middle (because you have three DL between the tackles instead of two), but may be more susceptible to RPO's on the edges. This'll put more pressure on our CB's and Safeties to stop the passing component of RPO's. Going with more of a Nickel 3-4 is in line with a lot of the anti-spread trends seen in the Big-12, though, and it's a great way to pull coverage defenders out of the box while still being able to steal additional numbers in the run game.
A "Nickel 3-4" as I've called it can also contrast with a base 3-3-5. In a Nickel 3-4, your NB (the Star) is integrated into the run fit, and so you're playing with 7-man front principles. A 3-3-5 might have the exact same personnel (3 DL + 3 LB's + 5 DB's), but in a 3-3-5 you're playing with a true 6-man front, with your NB divorced from the front and the run fit. This change leads to significant differences in alignment, coverage, and run fits. So, although we might play a lot of Nickel personnel with 3 DL on the field, we won't really look like 3-3-5 team.
Love the Berk18 posts. I’ve been subscribing to Berk18’s premium posts at https://www.patreon.com/berk18/posts for a while and it’s made me so much deeper of a football fan. There is so much more to watch for in the game when you geek out to stuff like the difference between 3-3–5 and nickel 3-4. Thanks Berk18 for breaking it down
Substituted packages have been around for a long time, but generally Base Nickel defenses and DB/LB hybrids come from a combination of two sources: (1) The need for smaller programs to compete with bigger ones, and (2) the need for everybody to defend the spread. Basically, base 4-2 and 3-3 fronts were developed or refined by guys like Gary Patterson and Rocky Long in the 90's. They didn't have the talent to field traditional defenses, but they found that they could cause problems for bigger programs by going small and scheming to take advantage of that speed, rather than lining up and trying to attack them head-on. Then, when the Spread revolution happened and offenses started going smaller, these base Nickel guys found that their systems were really well set-up to defend them, and so a lot of bigger programs turned to guys like Patterson and Long to learn how to use these more multiple, smaller defensive sets. This took off in the mainstream more like 10 years ago, but remember that Rocky Long was battling it out with Urban Meyer back in the early 2000's when they were at New Mexico and Utah (respectively), so in this case the battles going on in the mid-majors were a preview of what was to come for everybody. All that it took was for a few big-time programs (Florida, Oregon) to start having success with the spread. Once big-time DC's got humbled by a few spread offenses, they realized that they had a lot to learn from guys at smaller programs, and it changed defensive football across the board.
QB's definitely are aware of whether defenders are looking at them or not, and that can factor into whether or not they throw, and where they put the ball. Ultimately, though, avoiding an INT just comes down to making sure that no defender can get to the ball, either because they're too far from the reception point, or because they have their back to you. The more accurate the QB, the greater his arm strength, and the quicker his release, the closer a DB can be to the reception point. If the QB reads all of that correctly and throws it accurately then there won't be an interception, so there's not really such a thing as a perfect read/throw where you shouldn't pull the trigger. When a DB jumps a route, it's usually either because the QB didn't see him, or because he mis-interpreted the coverage structure and so expected the defender to do something different. Both of those can happen more when the QB gets a little too comfortable/lazy in his reads (meaning that he's made the same throw successfully a few times, and so he's not as vigilant the next time that he goes to make it, meaning that he assumes that the defender will do one thing without actually reading to confirm it).
" The second by Craig Woodson, a player who we should be watching out for according to Ashtyn Davis. Woodson’s INT was impressive, he tracked the ball perfectly and caught it in traffic along the sideline." - upperclass or outgoing players telling us to watch out for young players is one of my favorite things. I remember Hydro telling a story about the senior DL guys talking about how good Tyson Alualu was going to be . . . and they were right.
Love stories like that. And esp when they turn into pretty ridiculously talented players.