Football defense against the flood idea demands a thorough knowledge of defensive covering schemes. Three or more receivers flooding one side of the field to create a mismatch with the defense is known as the “flood concept” and is a typical offensive strategy. Defensive coordinators must be well-versed in their coverage choices, be quick to spot offensive formations, and be able to swiftly adapt in order to counter the flood idea.
The Cover 4 coverage strategy, sometimes referred to as quarters coverage, is a popular way to counter the flood notion. Each of the four defensive backs in Cover 4 is in charge of covering a quarter of the field. Because it enables the defense to place four defenders in the area where the receivers are flooding, this coverage scheme effectively counteracts the flood idea by making it more challenging for the offense to execute deep passes. Nevertheless, Cover 4 can expose the field’s center to crossing and drag routes.
Cover 2 is still another insurance plan that might be utilized to counter the flood theory. In Cover 2, five more defenders cover the designated zones beneath while two safeties are in charge of covering the deep portions of the field. Because the two safeties can cover the long routes and the underneath defenders can cover the shorter routes, Cover 2 is good against the flood idea. Cover 2 can leave the defense open to quick out routes, but it also leaves the sideline routes exposed.
The alignment of the safeties can help defensive players distinguish between Cover 2 and Cover 4. Two deep safeties divide the field in half in Cover 2. The safeties are still deep in Cover 4, but now they each have a quarter of the field to cover. Defenders can also determine the covering strategy by observing how the cornerbacks and linebackers are positioned.
In a variation of Cover 4, called Cover 4 palms, the cornerbacks play with outside leverage and are in charge of defending the flats. The safeties and linebackers still play quarters coverage. Because the cornerbacks can cover outside routes while the safeties and linebackers can cover inside routes, cover 4 palms is an excellent strategy against the flood idea. However, Cover 4 palms exposes the field’s center to crossing paths.
The middle of the field is Cover 4’s weak point. There may be a gap in the middle of the field with four defenders covering the deep areas, which crossing routes and drag routes can take advantage of. Defensive coordinators can use a Cover 6 scheme to cover the middle of the field with both deep and underneath defenders by combining Cover 4 and Cover 2.
The number of defenders tasked with guarding the deep approaches also distinguishes Cover 2 from Cover 3. Two safeties are in charge of covering the deep halves of the field in Cover 2, while three defenders are in charge of each deep third of the field in Cover 3. Because it allows three defenders to cover the deep routes, which makes it harder for the offense to complete long passes, cover 3 is excellent against the flood idea.
In conclusion, a thorough comprehension of defensive coverage systems is necessary to defend the flood notion. Effective coverage plans that can be utilized to counter the flood notion are Cover 2, Cover 3, and Cover 4. Quick recognition of offensive formations is essential for defensive coordinators so they can change their coverage. Defensive coordinators can develop a game plan to counter the flood idea and other offensive strategies by knowing the advantages and disadvantages of each coverage strategy.
The essay does not address the Cover 3 defense’s flaw because it is about fighting the flood concept in football. I am unable to respond to the connected inquiry as a result.
A flood notion might be a successful play to execute when facing Cover 3. One receiver runs a deep route, one runs a medium route, and one receiver runs a short route while using the flood idea. Three receivers are sent to various levels of the field. This can serve to wear down the defense and offer up gaps for the attack to take advantage of. Running a play-action fake can also make the defense more perplexed and open up opportunities for significant gains.