Multiplicity But Simplicity | Establish a Pressure Package
Way back in 1997, as a defensive coordinator for New Mexico under head coach Dennis Franchione, Gary Patterson wrote a paper about the 4-2-5 defense, Multiplicity But Simplicity: Why the 4-2-5 Defense. This is a seven-part look at the 4-2-5 defense and trying to figure out how it all works. Patterson wrote a second paper, The 4-2 Defensive Package that goes into greater detail of the mechanics of the 4-2-5 defense.
Part I: Introduction.
Part II: Sizing up the defenses.
Part III: Create offensive confusion at the line of scrimmage.
Part IV: Play with great leverage.
Part V: Establish the eight man front.
Part VI: Establish a pressure package.
Part VII: The five spoke secondary.
When I think of a team establishing a pressure package I think of Texas Tech vs. TCU in 2006. It was one of Graham Harrell's first starts as a sophomore and the game was on the road. I was at this game and it was incredibly disappointing to see how confused Harrell was during this game. I don't fault Harrell too much for that game. Yes, it was awful to watch, but the reason I don't blame Harrell is that it was one of his first starts and TCU threw a ton of looks at a inexperienced quarterback.
Let's start with Patterson's first paper and what he says about establishing a pressure package:
Establishing a pressure package may be the most important principle for us to accomplish within our philosophy. This principle alone sets up the disguise movement thought process that we need for multiplicity. We feel as a staff that the threat of the blitz to an offense is oftentimes worse than the blitz itself. The possibility must exist that we can bring five to eight defensive players on any given down. This thought process makes an offense account for all eight players on all run and pass plays. This part of our package is designed to frustrate offenses and make them use their audible game plan.
If you remember the above-referenced game, the blockquote above sticks out in my mind as to what happened, at least in terms of a vague memory. What also stuck out in the memory banks was that the TCU secondary were just hitting the snot out of the Texas Tech receivers. I think that in the game, Harrell wasn't sure where the stunt or twist was going to come from along the line and he wasn't sure where the blitz was going to come from in regards to the rest of the defense. If anything, it was a learning process for Harrell.
Back to Patterson:
If possible, we would like to cause offenses to change from what they like to do best on game day. Many staffs do a great job with pressure within their schemes. Usually, the better the athlete, the more pressure that can be applied. We, as a defense, can’t assume that we will line up with better athletes. What we must do is find ways to bring more players to create mismatches. This is the only way, year in and year out, we can be consistent and successful. Our blitz package must be simple enough to handle all the different formations used in a game. Yet, we must be multiple enough to take advantage of an opponent’s weakness.
Isn't this the key? This sentence: "What we must do is find ways to bring more players to create mismatches." Maybe I'm reading too much into all of this simplicity and all of the other things I've read, but Patterson has a system that's easy to teach, that is easy to teach the linemen and linebackers and the secondary how and where to blitz.
Patterson also mentions being "multiple enough" to take advantage of an opponent's weakness. You hear Tuberville talk about being multiple last year and it's true from the standpoint that Tuberville liked to have multiple looks defensively and from what I've been able to learn about the 4-2-5 thus far, it's something that I think Patterson, and hopefully Glasgow, also believe in.
We've already talked quite a bit about how Patterson likes to keep things simple in Part III of the series, especially in the defensive line. Simple to learn doesn't always mean simple to defend. From the second paper, here's what Patterson said about game planning for TCU:
When an offense has to game plan for TCU, they must handle the twist game, slide game, and the double-blitzing scheme. The offense has to go to slide protection in their passing game. We don't play teams that try to man protect against us. If they try to man protect, they are going to be in a lot of trouble. The offense cannot grasp all those schemes. It is easy for us because we taught all those things in the first three days of practice.
After six practices we have put in everything that we are going to use. On the seventh day we go back to the beginning and re-teach the schemes again. That also includes our offensive line.
And Patterson isn't lying. I mentioned this early in this series, but much was made during the offseason about how now, West Virginia head coach Dana Holgorsen, installed his offense in three days. A lot of bloggers, writers, and fans raved about how Holgorsen can install his entire offensive system in three days. I haven't researched what other defensive coordinators are capable of doing, but apparently Patterson and Glasgow are capable of doing the same thing.
Visual proof . . . after the jump.

Click here for the full size.
That's six practices, two practices a day, and three days of installation of the entire defense.
Going back to the first paper, Patterson specifies why he likes blitzing out of the 4-2-5 and after looking at the 4-2-5 for so many weeks, it all makes sense.
There are many reasons that we like using the 4-2-5 scheme to blitz. Below are a few of the major reasons:
1. The simplicity of naming personnel (Mirrored players).
2. Natural alignment positions. The easy alignment against two-back or no-back sets (seven off-the-line coverage players).
3. Coverage simplicityMirror Alignment: Simple count system for the free safety versus the variety of formations we play against.
Item #1, when Patterson says that there are mirrored personnel, he's talking about the defense. If you were to split the field down the center, on one half, you'd have a cornerback, a safety, a defensive end, a defensive tackle and a linebacker. You'd have the same thing on the other side and to emphasize, the simplicity in the scheme is the fact that the calls are easily made to one side or another and theoretically, won't affect the other side.
Item #2, although it's painful, and yes, I realize that Texas Tech typially lines up with at least one running back, stop and start the film on what I think is one of the toughest offenses to stop. Spread offenses and Leach's offenses almost always had someone open, but whether it be pressure from a blitz or a stunt or some other method, watching this clip 10 times or so, those three things above make complete sense.
Item #3, not knowing what the coverage call actually is, it's tough for me to comment on this, but this has been a running theme throughout Patterson's two papers.
Up next: The five spoke secondary.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
awesome reading
I too was at that game, and yes, it was really disappointing and hot! I think a lot of us were expecting Graham to pick up where he left off in high school. Also, the d-backs in purple were (as you pointed out) intimidating our guys that day! Anyway, this was really good reading, (as usual).
Yeah Seth that’s exactly why I wrote my earlier post to try to codify the how you defeat an offense versus the means and schemes employed to do so.
I just happened to pick two weaknesses "systemic" Red Zone efficiency and Passes defended to illustrate it. I think the 4-2-5 is going to mask a lot of the Raiders weakness i.e. inexperienced linebackers and enhance some strengths like corner back and safety speed for example. When the 4 x Tech down linemen routinely get a free shot at the running back and the QB the disruption factor will simply build upon itself. Ultimately frustrating our opponent’s scheme. What I would expect for a system wide defensive improvement is that it – the 4-2-5 indeed can erase 2 or 3 scoring (red zone) opportunities per game. At least that’s what I hope we see from Coaches Glasgow, Prunty, McElmore and the rest of the defensive coaching company.
"do routine things routinely"
It will be interesting to see how much Glasgow has learned. I’ve maintained from the beginning that my biggest fear about Glasgow is that he’s never been a coordinator and he’s only been a position coach. Granted, he’s done well as that position coach, but that’s my biggest fear. Can Glasgow translate what he learned from Patterson and Bumpas to Texas Tech?
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Very excited....
to see what our D will look like in 2-3 years with these amazing recruits and Russian coffee coaching!
"A job well done is better than a job well said."
by I bleed Red and Black on Jul 6, 2011 10:58 AM CDT reply actions
Man what a painful video
I know it’s meant to illustrate the effectiveness of the 4-2-5, but it makes our spread offense look inept and weak. The thing I noticed that it indeed seemed to overload someone on every play, one too many defenders coming on nearly every play. Funny a draw screen combo never seemed to fool them. In fact it looked like they stuffed the short throw or tackled the receiver before they made the first down marker. Then clustered in the middle sort of expecting a some such offensive call which they then smacked down. One more observation they tipped a lot of passed by LB’s and linemen. Also a couple of safety separations of receiver from the ball. Me like that.
"do routine things routinely"
People Can Coach Up a Defense, Too!
TCU’s defense at home against Tech is noted. I saw Tech torch them 70-35 in Lubbock. All things being considered, I’d like to think Tech’s talent and coaching will improve the team on both sides of the ball moving forward. I think TCU is going to experience that effect going forward as a benefit of its recent success (although TCU’s record may suffer from playing consistently better competition.).
Coaching on both sides of the ball affects the outcome of every game. Not only scheme, but game preparation. We’ll see what impact Glasgow has on Tech’s defense pretty quickly. Hopefully the players stay healthy and eligible to take advantage of whatever talent is available. I hope they’re bustng their humps this summer to get ready. With no NFL a real possibility, every Division 1 college football game is going to be a huge deal this season.
Absolutely, Texas Tech got TCU back a bit in that win, but I really wanted to focus on what TCU does defensively. I too hope that all the players are busting their rears to get back.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
The home win against TCU came 1st
And in that game we fell behind 28-0. We were watching it at a Chilis in Austin & gave up on it & headed over to the ACL music festival. By the time we got to Zilker Park Tech had tied it before going all the way to 70. The following year I’m at the same concert & get an angry call from a friend who went to Ft Worth to see the game & it’s 6-3 or 6-0, I can’t remember. I tell him that any score less than 7 points can be erased at any moment. That game and the Cotton Bowl loss to Alabama were the biggest head scratchers of the Leach era. They just shut down the Air Raid for an entire game. Nobody ever expected that to happen.
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows
I keep getting more and more excited
as I read each of these write-ups. I know it’s going to take time, and I’m willing to give the team time, but man if our defense could be that aggressive and keep a fairly prolific offense on the sidelines, this team is going to begin soaring.
59 days gentleman . . . 59 days . . .
I watched the video
Biggest difference to me? Witness the one on one battles that are being lost by the TCU players. Poor tackling, bad coverage by DB’s. That 2004 TCU defense looks as bad as our 2010 defense at times in that game. Scheme can’t overcome bad fundamentals and unless I missed it, Chad is one of a very few new coaches on that side of the ball. What worries me is that the bad fundamentals we witnessed last year had better improve, “coaching them up”, or our new 4-2-5 might look like the TCU 4-2-5 of 2004 at our place. Kids have got to learn how to tackle and how to cover or we can line them up any way we want and it won’t matter.
I do have hope that lessons have been learned from last year and that coaching will improve…Don’t you all?
"Hope is the raw material of losers." -- Fernando Flores
The anticipation of the coming season may drive me to drink...I mean more drink.
Living large in Texas...Texas forever.
Patterson is one of the best
defensive coaches in the country. You can argue all day whether he or Saban are better. Will be interesting to see how much your DC learned from Patterson. Were a bunch of your CBs injured last year?
Yes mike we played russian roullette acros the secondary..
I think Tech started 8 different cornerback combo’s…
"do routine things routinely"
Fort Worth
I was at this gm in Fort Worth. I was the typical drunk over confident fan making a fool of himself. I was 1000% confident that Tech would win. I’m from the FW & I told all of my TCU friends that Tech would win by 3 TD’s. I talked more smack that day BEFORE the game then I ever have in my life. After the game, I left with my head down….since this game, I never talk smack. I’m still reminded by my friends how much smack I talked…Not one of my better moments..lesson learned…

by 




















