An "X's and O's" question

[Whites Bay]

I'm throwing this one out to those on this forum who have played, or - more specifically - those who have coached.

 

We're all enjoying the training camp reports on Shawne Merriman's progress. Imagine - a pass-rushing linebacker. I'm still trying to get my mind around it. In addition, it sounds like Dareus has potential. I'm not going to say he's "The Real Deal" yet, because he hasn't played a real down. Call me an embittered realist. But the potential exists on the defensive side of the ball this year for the Bills to really cause some problems from the outside for the first time in a long, long, long time.

 

Here's the question. What makes more sense...putting both of these guys on the same side (I'm assuming QBs blind side), or does the coaching staff break them up so as to bring heat from both directions? I know the pat answer is "it depends on the play/the opponent/blahblahblah". What is a rule-of-thumb?

 

And, from an historical perspective, someone tell me what the Bills did during the Smith/Bennett era? I was too naive, and drank way too much back then, to really understand the strategy behind it. Thanks in advance, guys.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

I'm throwing this one out to those on this forum who have played, or - more specifically - those who have coached.

 

We're all enjoying the training camp reports on Shawne Merriman's progress. Imagine - a pass-rushing linebacker. I'm still trying to get my mind around it. In addition, it sounds like Dareus has potential. I'm not going to say he's "The Real Deal" yet, because he hasn't played a real down. Call me an embittered realist. But the potential exists on the defensive side of the ball this year for the Bills to really cause some problems from the outside for the first time in a long, long, long time.

 

Here's the question. What makes more sense...putting both of these guys on the same side (I'm assuming QBs blind side), or does the coaching staff break them up so as to bring heat from both directions? I know the pat answer is "it depends on the play/the opponent/blahblahblah". What is a rule-of-thumb?

 

And, from an historical perspective, someone tell me what the Bills did during the Smith/Bennett era? I was too naive, and drank way too much back then, to really understand the strategy behind it. Thanks in advance, guys.

 

 

Excellent question. I do know that Bruce and Paup played on opposite sides in 1995, to great effect.

 

Bennett did the same, I believe, though he also moved around.

[eSJayDee]

I'd say you put them on opposite sides, at least in most situations. Primarily, if the offense opts for a predominantly quick passing attack (typical against a fierce rush) you can assign only 1 other blocker to help pick up whoever gets beat the worse allowing your QB to get the pass off if they rush from the same side. If they're coming from opposite sides, that becomes more difficult to cover in that fashion & the onus is more on the QB thereby at the very least messing w/ the timing of plays.

[K-9]

You won't want to hear this but the rule of thumb is there is no rule of thumb. All depends on what your philosophy is.

 

Ideally you would want to be able to bring pressure from both sides. Being able to pressure both edges forces the offense to stay honest in their blocking schemes and that allows you much more flexibility from a schematics standpoint. The less resources you have to commit to a particular task (in this case rushing the passer) the more you can dedicate to other areas of the field.

 

I haven't seen enough of Dareus to know if he is that kind of DE. If he is, great, line him and Merriman up on opposite sides and let the O pick their poison. If he isn't then the next best thing would be for him and Merriman to line up next to each other and let either one exploit the mismatch at the POA that they create.

 

If anyone has been to most of the practices I'd be interested in knowing how they are currently being lined up most of the time and in what personnel packages.

 

As to what the Bills did with Smith/Bennett they were used on opposite ends the vast majority of their time together.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Edited August 12, 2011 by K-9

[jonramz]

I would think that you would want your best pass rusher to be coming from the weak side and your best run defender on the strong side. So I would think they would be separated.

 

But of course this totally depends on the overall scheme that is being run, will it be a more attacking 3-4 1-gap DL or a more traditional 3-4 2-gap DL. I believe they will be much more 1-gap than 2-gap mainly b/c of Kyle Williams, but of course that can change according to the call.

 

Sorry I can't help on the historical stuff

[Haplo848]

You won't want to hear this but the rule of thumb is there is no rule of thumb. All depends on what your philosophy is.

 

Ideally you would want to be able to bring pressure from both sides. Being able to pressure both edges forces the offense to stay honest in their blocking schemes and that allows you much more flexibility from a schematics standpoint. The less resources you have to commit to a particular task (in this case rushing the passer) the more you can dedicate to other areas of the field.

 

I haven't seen enough of Dareus to know if he is that kind of DE. If he is, great, line him and Merriman up on opposite sides and let the O pick their poison. If he isn't then the next best thing would be for him and Merriman to line up next to each other and let either one exploit the mismatch at the POA that they create.

 

If anyone has been to most of the practices I'd be interested in knowing how they are currently being lined up most of the time and in what personnel packages.

 

As to what the Bills did with Smith/Bennett they were used on opposite ends the vast majority of their time together.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

I haven't been to practices, but on BB.com, the highlights show Dareus as the LE, while Merriman was the ROLB, so opposite sides.