If everyone finds out that the Tampa-2 is so good they’ll start playing it then the easy to access talent advantage is gone.

I agree on most of your points. I do see the future negative that shake mentions. Much liek Moneyball in baseball, it takes advantage of a style of player not valued by other teams. As more teams go to that system (Moneyball in baseball, Cover 2 in football) the system becomes less effictive. It’s still good, but the chances of getting that awesome player for cheap go down a bit.

My biggest disagreement is your “ultimate doom” comment. the more expensive (currently) 3-4 system would be bad for a team looking to build long term success with an explosive high dollar offense. But for teams that want to build a dominating defense and a ball control offense built around a heavy running attack and a cheap but effective QB, it’s not necessarily doom. Also, I think the Patriots’ run of success showed that “ultimate doom” is perhaps a bit strong o fa phrase.

But a good overview of Cover 2’s advantages, either way.

Great job on explaining the Dungy-2 (my preferred name for it) defensive scheme and explaining its advantages. It is obviously an excellent way to build a defense when a franchise is looking to plug in players year after to year who can “fit the scheme.”

One thing that’s missing from this article though is the weaknesses of the Dungy-2 system.

In a passing situation, two areas are very vulnerable. The first and most common is the deep out. Because the two safeties are covering their respective deep halves and corners are covering the flat, the area between them (usually somewhere 8-15 yds) is very difficult to cover.

The other hole that the Dungy-2 tries to comepnsate for is the deep middle. In a conventional Cover 2 scheme, this area is wide open. All a team would have to do is send one receiver deep and another on a post to that same side for an easy completion. In Dungy’s system, the middle linebacker drops deeper than normal to try and better cover that zone, which can create another soft zone in the middle 5 or 6 yards past the line of scrimmage.

All in all, the defense is tremendous and no one drafts better than Bill Polian when it comes to getting the guys that best fit his team’s needs. I am surprised at times though, that teams don’t take better advantage of the weaknesses in the system and throw the deep out over and over.

While I agree that the development of the Tampa-2 (and it should really be called that, as Monte Kiffen and Lovie Smith had a lot to do with developing the defense, despite Tony’s brilliance), there’s something to be said about building a defense around players, rather than plays. The Tampa 2 works very well for Indianapolis because it typically frees up money to spend on the offense and allows “lesser” players to do well in the system.

But most defensive coordinators, and I’d bet Dungy would agree, build their system around their players, not the system. If Indianapolis had a Ray Lewis type linebacker (meaning that he was a run stuffing/pass rushing) MLB, you’d more than likely see the Tampa 2 discarded and a more wide open 4-3 used in its place. (or perhaps the regular cover 2) No coach, especially one as smart as Dungy, would ever shoehorn a player into a position that does not maximize their skills.

This is where again, I’ll give lots of credit to Indianapolis. They find players that work for what they do. Because of how late the Colts typically draft, you’re not faced with the questions of drafting players that might not fit. But I’d still take a different take on connecting the Colt’s use of the Tampa 2 and Tony Dungy. He’s much smarter than a system guy, if Tampa had an outstanding nose tackle and a couple of smaller, faster defensive ends (which you sort of have), he’d run the 3-4 and still do an outstanding job.

It’s players, not plays, and it takes the best sort of coach to recognize that and make it work. Tony deserves the credit, not the system. (Also, Bill Polian, for feeding the system with the right players)

But that is my point; cover 2 works well with an explosive offense whereas 3-4 works well with a ball control offense.

Teams such as the Pats, Steelers and Cowboys are operating a system that does not work best with what their offense is doing.

I have a hard time, however, saying that those three teams are operating a system that does not work best with their offense. Last I checked, they all have been successful franchises lately; and excluding Dallas, they have enjoyed all the post season success that we have in recent years.

Btw, do you know if Tomlin is or will be switching the Steelers to the Tampa 2 system, or are they going to stay 3-4?

I agree that they had success last year, but its going to be difficult to maintain effectiveness on both sides of the football. You can already see this starting to happen with New England.

This was a great post, MasterRWayne. The comments have been good additions. Work like this is why I enjoy this site so much.

It seems to me another flaw of the Cover 2 is its vulnerability to good inside running attacks. Unlike the 3-4, with emphasis on a big run stopper in the middle and aggressive up-field-directed LBs, the Cover 2 emphasizes pass rushing by its relatively smaller DTs and DEs. As we have seen over and over-I’m thinking specifically but not exclusively of the 2nd Jacksonville game in ‘06-the Colts can be attacked by good, straight-ahead backs going right up the gut. Many in the MSM claim no one runs outside on the Colts much because they can have success running inside. Actually, I think the Colts aren’t gashed outside too much because the LBs, the CBs and Sanders are so fast in lateral pursuit and tackle very well. But all Colts fans have nightmares of MJD, Fred Taylor and, sad to say, Ron Dayne, Travis Henry and LenWhale White literally running over our DL and backers.

The Colts’ ‘07 run D was much better than ‘06, and not just because #21 played at a DPOY level all year. The young DTs, especially Johnson, had success stopping the interior run. I am resigned to the Colts giving up the occasional big run up the middle. It’s probably the nature of the Cover 2 (I bet even Tony’s really good Tampa teams had this flaw to some extent). It’s a flaw that’s worth enduring in order to get the otherwise excellent defense the Colts now have.

BTW, this is a first in a series of articles that I FINALLY convinced MasterRWayne to write. He does such a good job articulating exactly why certain schemes work for certain teams. For example, and this is no disrespect to the Steelers because we like Bruce Arians and many of the team’s offensive players, but the Colts-like system the Steelers run does not work well with their defense nor their playing surface. You’ll notice that the Patriots, when they got rid of that pathetic excuse for a playing surface at Gillette and replaced it with field turf, that their offensive philosophy shifted. They went out and grabbed Moss, Stallworth, and Welker. They then implemented a Colts-style offense and ranked up a ton of points in 2007.

That offense would not have worked as well on their old surface.

The Steelers, meanwhile, are still playing on that sloppy Heinz Field grass (remember the Miami game last year). If they still had their power running offense, it would work on that grass, but a timing offense will struggle on such a surface, as Pittsburgh did last year despite Roethlisberger having a stellar year.

Things like playing surface, salary cap, coaching personalities, and ego all play into what kind of scheme your team runs, and MasterRWayne does a fine job isolating those factors and breaking them down.

Weather is another huge impact. The Colts are guaranteed to play 9 games indoor because of their 8 home games and 1 game at Houston. In addition, they are guaranteed to play games at Tennessee and at Jacksonville so, in short, the Colts have the best weather conditions you could ask for.

Now a team like Chicago could just never run the same type of offense that the Colts and Pats run because the windy conditions in Chicago make a timing offense almost impossible.

is that if you exploit them well with power running or 15 yard outs, you only get a first down, then you still have 50 some yards to go. You have to execute perfectly all game to beat a good Tampa-2, because they don’t give up big gains. They just sit back and wait for someone on offense to make a mistake. Whether it’s the WR tipping a route, the QB missing on the throw, an O-lineman getting beat. Then it’s a big play for the D by INT, sack, or stuffed run.

When you pair a D that forces great execution with a offense that scores it ups the pressure on the opposing offense. Every time they can’t get it done the hole gets deeper and they are forced to run less and throw deeper which goes right into the scheme’s strength. The opposing offense pretty much has to score and to do so it has to execute perfectly. Most can’t.

In since you can’t score fast against cover 2 that ups your chances for fumbles and other mistakes to happen which the high powered offense can score on with good field position.

This basic core philosophy of a high powered offense coupled with a conservative (in terms of blitzing and coverage) defense is the best combination in the league. There is a perfect synergy between those two areas.

This is an excellent article, with some actual insight into the system beyond “big zone + aggressive line = good defense,” and great job factoring in the financial advantages of the tampa-2, something I personally wouldn’t have caught onto alone. Very, very solid article throughout.

Even if a bunch of other teams install the Dungy/Tampa 2 D, idiot GMs like Carl Peterson and Al Davis still won’t draft Cover 2 players, so we will still get the same late round steals.