Article Analyzing & Explaining Wide9

[Mark Long Beach]

I didn't see this posted here, and enjoyed this article and learned a bunch. Even though it's very long, and gets hung up in details that we don't care about (Vikings personnel) it's got some really good stuff on it's theory and it's strengths/weaknesses, and how players can fit into it.

 

http://www.dailynorseman.com/2013/5/16/4316146/should-the-vikings-switch-to-the-wide-9

 

One of the bottom line quotes:

In pressures produced (a much more consistent statistic from year-to-year than sacks and a better predictor), they were impressive. They ranked 8th on average in pressures produced, and 5th when you remove outliers (basically, before the Lions had personnel up front). In three years of the five years I have data for, a Wide 9 defense ranked first in quarterback pressures three times and once ranked second.

 

To me, there's no question that they can make hell for quarterbacks with a fairly vanilla pass rush. The question largely has to do with run defense for the Wide 9. Generally, it seems that the Wide 9 gets a lot of flak for producing bad defenses, when statistically, it looks like it does what it's asked to do.

 

 

After reading this, I feel better about using it, as long as it's not the only thing that you do. Creativity and adjustments out of it is still required, and supposedly Schwartz has it:

 

A post in Buffalo Rumblings also addresses use of adjustments to the wide9 by Schwartz:

 

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/buffalo-bills-analysis-all-22/2014/2/13/5407624/jim-schwartz-defense-wide-9-43-under-adrian-peterson

[Mr. WEO]

How did it work out in Detroit?

[Max997]

The wide 9 is not good vs the run which is already a problem for the Bills

[C.Biscuit97]

The wide 9 is not good vs the run which is already a problem for the Bills

 

The Lions had the 6th best run defense in the NFL.

[thewildrabbit]

The Lions had the 6th best run defense in the NFL.

Yea, because they started focusing on defending the run because they were so bad at it.

 

Look up the stats for their recent pass rush, and pass defense...

 

 

 

 

OK I'll tell ya, they were 26th against the pass, 30th in sacks. IMHO the wide-nine also got the DC canned in Philly where he tried to run it. Putting it bluntly, IT SUCKS! I'm hoping Schwartz goes back to his roots with Buddy Ryan's 46 defense.

[jr1]

I'm more worried about kick coverage and EJ staying healthy than Schwartz

[mattsox]

I'm more worried about kick coverage and EJ staying healthy than Schwartz

 

Those are valid concerns! Because it won't mean **** if our Special Teams Unit and QB are useless.

[White Linen]

I'm more worried about kick coverage and EJ staying healthy than Schwartz

 

Yep

[RealityCheck]

Very cool article. Thank you.

[Mark Long Beach]

Yea, because they started focusing on defending the run because they were so bad at it.

 

Look up the stats for their recent pass rush, and pass defense...

 

OK I'll tell ya, they were 26th against the pass, 30th in sacks. IMHO the wide-nine also got the DC canned in Philly where he tried to run it. Putting it bluntly, IT SUCKS! I'm hoping Schwartz goes back to his roots with Buddy Ryan's 46 defense.

 

Well, I think you are vastly oversimplifying this. The Wide 9 trades off a weaker up-the-gut run defense for stronger pass pressure (not necessarily sacks which are a little more randomized). It's biggest run defense weakness is actually draw plays and QB runs up the middle. But I'm happy to let the QB run up the middle if I can take his head off.

 

Modern NFL yardage is gained 2 to 1 via the pass, so it's not unreasonable idea. The _actual_ pass defense is much more independent of wide9. It's designed to give more pressure faster on the QB and make him make decisions faster and therefore more error prone.

 

But if your corners suck, they suck. Defensive lineman can't run fast enough at the QB if you can't cover.

 

As for Philly? If you're a sucky Defensive Coordinator, it doesn't matter what scheme you're trying to implement. Schwartz has shown he's not a sucky DC. Unlike our Special teams Coordinator.

[The Big Cat]

The Lions had the 6th best run defense in the NFL.

 

And the Bills had the second best rushing attack in the NFL. If you were to ask a Bills fan off the street how the rush attack was, I DOUBT they'd start gushing.

 

Meanwhile, the Lions scored less than 20 points only three times last year, hung 40 twice, and scored 24 or more in half their games. May be teams had to abandon the run to keep up with Stafford/Megatron/Bush. After all, only three teams faced fewer rushes than Detroit's 377: San Diego (376), Arizona (370) and Carolina (352).

 

The stats very much bear this out since:

 

Their YPC (4.2) was just three notches better than Buffalo's at 20th.

 

And while they saw 36 fewer rushing attempts than Buffalo, they gave up the same number of rushing touchdowns.

 

So, whichever stat ranks their "run defense" as sixth should be tossed out.

Edited February 13, 2014 by The Big Cat

[thewildrabbit]

Well, I think you are vastly oversimplifying this. The Wide 9 trades off a weaker up-the-gut run defense for stronger pass pressure (not necessarily sacks which are a little more randomized). It's biggest run defense weakness is actually draw plays and QB runs up the middle. But I'm happy to let the QB run up the middle if I can take his head off.

 

Modern NFL yardage is gained 2 to 1 via the pass, so it's not unreasonable idea. The _actual_ pass defense is much more independent of wide9. It's designed to give more pressure faster on the QB and make him make decisions faster and therefore more error prone.

 

But if your corners suck, they suck. Defensive lineman can't run fast enough at the QB if you can't cover.

 

As for Philly? If you're a sucky Defensive Coordinator, it doesn't matter what scheme you're trying to implement. Schwartz has shown he's not a sucky DC. Unlike our Special teams Coordinator.

Not really, look at the stats for the Lions pass defense, and pass rush. Which is exactly what the "wide-nine" defense is supposed to improve. If that is the case then why did the Lions defense suck so bad at both?

 

Afaik teams were running at the C & D gaps between the tackle and DE, as the DE stance is out over the TE. Which IMO is sort of moronic, and I'll tell ya why I think that.

 

Think about something for a min. Teams run a spread offense for what purpose? To spread the defense out over the length of the field in order to open up vertical seems for both passing and running that the offense can exploit, as the defense is spread more thin.

 

Doesn't the "wide-nine" do that for the offense? By spreading the DE out further from the QB. To me all this defense does is allow the O linemen a quicker path to the second level defenders.

 

2009 Lions defense 32-32 pts-yds

2010 Lions defense 19-21

2011 Lions defense 23-23

2012 Lions defense 27-13

2013 Lions defense 15-16

 

All I gotta say is, this board will explode by week 5 if the Bills defense stinks as bad as the Lions have stunk under Schwartz.

Edited February 14, 2014 by FeartheLosing

[Doc]

The "wide 9" is a scheme to manufacture pressure from the DL. The Bills' DL is fine at doing that without resorting to it more than they did last year.

[TPS]

After reading that, it looks like we need to draft a MLB because it sounds like kiko is better suited to play the will in that alignment.

Edited February 14, 2014 by TPS

[Doc]

After reading that, it looks like we need to draft a MLB because it sounds like kiko is better suited to play the will in that alignment.

The Bills need at least one more stud LB and the defense will be good. And I pray that Gilmore looks better in season 3.

[boyst]

I am not a fan of the Wide9, at least for our team. If I get a chance I will do a 3,000 word sermon on it some time later.

[Taro T]

I am not a fan of the Wide9, at least for our team. If I get a chance I will do a 3,000 word sermon on it some time later.

Could you make it 2,980 words? Those extra 20 will make it unbearable.

[NoSaint]

 

 

And the Bills had the second best rushing attack in the NFL. If you were to ask a Bills fan off the street how the rush attack was, I DOUBT they'd start gushing.

 

Meanwhile, the Lions scored less than 20 points only three times last year, hung 40 twice, and scored 24 or more in half their games. May be teams had to abandon the run to keep up with Stafford/Megatron/Bush. After all, only three teams faced fewer rushes than Detroit's 377: San Diego (376), Arizona (370) and Carolina (352).

 

The stats very much bear this out since:

 

Their YPC (4.2) was just three notches better than Buffalo's at 20th.

 

And while they saw 36 fewer rushing attempts than Buffalo, they gave up the same number of rushing touchdowns.

 

So, whichever stat ranks their "run defense" as sixth should be tossed out.

 

 

From catching some more content from Schwartzs interviews, and hearing a little more about the defense two things come to mind immediately....

 

1) Their corners werent very good, which as you point out coupled with some shootout games, means teams were passing against them. Very few rush attempts not because it was an overpowering run defense but because running the ball didnt make sense for other reasons.

 

2) On the flip side of that, Ive noticed schwartz in interviews seems to often chalk up his yardage issues (in this case you point out YPC) to situational things, like giving up a 10 yard run on 3rd and 11, or giving up a long run when the game was out of reach. I dont know if he is effected by it more than other coaches (ie is he better at playing the situation and giving up trash yards that help him win than other coaches are - his record doesnt seem to point that way, but...) or if he likes to make excuses (would obviously worry me). i havent watched his seasons straight through, only chunks of games here and there, so its hard for me to comment there but may be a relevant piece of info.

[K-9]

From catching some more content from Schwartzs interviews, and hearing a little more about the defense two things come to mind immediately....

 

1) Their corners werent very good, which as you point out coupled with some shootout games, means teams were passing against them. Very few rush attempts not because it was an overpowering run defense but because running the ball didnt make sense for other reasons.

 

2) 1On the flip side of that, Ive noticed schwartz in interviews seems to often chalk up his yardage issues (in this case you point out YPC) to situational things, like giving up a0 yard run on 3rd and 11, or giving up a long run when the game was out of reach. I dont know if he is effected by it more than other coaches (ie is he better at playing the situation and giving up trash yards that help him win than other coaches are - his record doesnt seem to point that way, but...) or if he likes to make excuses (would obviously worry me). i havent watched his seasons straight through, only chunks of games here and there, so its hard for me to comment there but may be a relevant piece of info.

 

I don't like the sound of any of that coming from any coach. Excuse making at it's finest.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[NoSaint]

 

 

I don't like the sound of any of that coming from any coach. Excuse making at it's finest.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

i noticed it a handful of times when he discussed rankings throughout the years. its not an every interview kind of thing, but its stood out a few times that "yea we gave up a lot of yards but situationally......."

 

it almost rubbed me as a "go ahead and question the numbers but im smart and doing it right" which can be true, or could be terrible. if hes smart enough to know where he can bend vs where he cant break, i dont mind if he bends a lot.... but... well... im not sure thats the case. and it can go either way in interviews, an astute break down of how the game went or excuse making/arrogance... and its hard to judge the written word and i admittedly think hes got a bit of an ego.

Edited February 14, 2014 by NoSaint